• by Lisa Seward , December 19, 2005

Here's a question you don't often hear at a time when media people complain of being overworked and undervalued: Why don't clients ask more of media? My premise is that, in this new-media world, clients should hold us to a higher bar and change the way our performance is measured and valued. It's not just in a client's best interest to do so, but also our own, because media can and should be expected to contribute more to the business success of its clients.

This is, as we all know, a time of profound shifts in the media landscape -- and a time in which the importance of how and when brands connect with consumers can hardly be overstated. Yet, everywhere we turn, there continues to be evidence of media being asked to clear the same old (and I do mean old) hurdles.

Imagine for a moment that you're a fly on the wall at the latest big media-agency review. What do you think you'd hear from the clients as they state their agency selection criteria, the burning needs upon which they'll make this monumental decision? Remarkably, you'd hear statements like this:

"Service is key. We need to know you'll pick up the phone when we need you, day or night."

"We want senior attention. We can't be relegated to the junior staff." "We need clout. You've got to make our dollar spend like a buck fifty. Oh, and charge us below your costs to do it."

I wish I were exaggerating, but clients -- not all, but far too many -- really do still hold media to such outdated criteria. (True, some clients list creativity or ideas as media-agency criteria. But when push comes to shove, how many will genuinely stand up for them?)

How refreshing would it be to find a client who was willing to ask more of media? To expect agency partners to generate new, more effective solutions to business problems, or to bring forward consumer insights that are actionable and profitable? What if a client selected its agency based on all new metrics, invented for today's world and encompassing the value of consumer engagement, not just eyeballs?

Occasionally, we do catch wind of a client or an industry coalition working on just this type of stuff. But in truth, too few clients have changed the way they value and choose media providers, and few seem to be gearing up to change in the future. Why? What's behind the reticence to change the media scorecard? I have a few theories:

>> They're afraid to acknowledge that media isn't an exact science. Idea-based valuation of media tiptoes dangerously close to subjectivity; it begins to acknowledge that media is as much art as science. With upwards of 90 percent of their budget going to media (not to mention management and shareholders calling fervently for accountability), clients don't want art. They desperately want a "right answer" in media -- preferably one that spits out of a computer.

>> They don't know the metrics. Even if clients know their tools are outdated, they still want to put numbers against subjective or qualitative judgments. ("If not reach and frequency...what?") Few agencies or media-review consultants are helping them do so.

>> They cling to the life raft of process. Adrift in the vast gray area that is today's media world, some clients hold firmly onto the familiar protocols and processes of old. Yeah, it's lame, but it's comfortable at a time when almost nothing else is.

>> They question their own ability to judge. Many marketers lack confidence in their media knowledge, and memorizing a few thresholds to hold agencies to ("if we don't have a three frequency, it just won't work") is the solution. The idea of chucking those old guidelines, especially in favor of more conceptual, fluid assessments, can be downright scary.

>> Media players -- agencies, vendors, and review consultants -- are all too happy to perpetuate the broken model. Hey, it's easy and it's known. We know how to make money with it. Besides, how many media people will bet their paycheck on their ability to invent powerful ideas?

I don't have all the answers. What I do know is that the marketer who takes the time, and the risk, to reset the media bar and hold agencies to it will reap huge rewards in the form of smarter, more creative, and ultimately more effective media plans.

Lisa Seward is the media director at Fallon, Minneapolis. (lisa.seward@fallon.com). She is a regular contributor to MEDIA magazine. This column is republished from the December issue.