Wednesday

ADVERTISING: When Selecting an Agency, Size Doesn't Matter.

In America, the thinking forever has tended to go: bigger is better. But that isn't necessarily true as it relates to selecting an advertising agency, according to a recent issue of Ad Age. In the article, author Eric Webber (formerly of mega agencies and now leading a boutique firm) opines that smaller agencies are by nature more nimble, adaptable and resourceful — which is ultimately good for everyone. He goes on to note that:
  1. Small agencies don't have silos (or if they do, they're not very tall). In mega-agency worlds, billable rates are too sky-high to spend time in collaboration with adjacent groups. In smaller agencies, other departments — media, interactive, PR — can drop in on meetings with creative teams and copywriters to give ideas early on in the process. At NOISE, it's our practice to build a team of multi-disciplinarians to tackle a branding, marketing or imaging challenge, because odds are an integrated approach will be most effective.
  2. The best small agencies adhere to mega-agency disciplines like strategic, goal-driven branding and marketing — but instill their work with passion, creativity, dare and (dare we say it?) risk that most large firms squash. The proof? It’s becoming almost commonplace at awards ceremonies to see "David" agencies sweeping the creative floor with the “Goliaths." (Plug alert: Witness NOISE's dominattion last month of the 2007 Southwest Florida Addy Competition, with 42 awards, plus Best-of-Show. And NOISE's March, 2008 invitation to pitch the California Division of Tourism's Interactive Marketing Division.)
We work in an interesting time. The theoretical critical mass cost efficiencies at larger advertising agencies are clearly being outweighed by the insane amounts of money these firms charge. Many of these firms are rife with safe thinking, wet-upon passions and a me-first mentality. Just a few years ago, merger mania was seeming to threaten the existence of any agency with less than 50 employees. But in the true spirit of Trendspottings, we've spotted a change in that trend — and the boutique agency may be more popular than ever for a variety of service, attention, creativity, passion, cost, results and other factors.

Source: Ad Age, NOISE
Reported by: Kimberley Parker

2 comments:

Tom Nightingale said...

I think the small to mid-size agency is the only way to go. I'm just a $5B company CMO, so I can't afford to have anything less than perfectly integrated communications executed by a team that knows my business, does not turn-over often, and relies on my revenue stream. I have never been able to find that in a mega agency.

NOISE: 25 Years and Rocking said...

Tom:

In my 22 years of owning an agency, I've never employed more than 25 or so people. Maybe that's a management "weakness" on my part, but for me, a smaller, more hands-on, more client-knowledgeable organization is what inspires me. I believe we deliver better service and better creative by being more actively involved and invested in the success of our clients, and I've always felt that you achieve that easier and better in a more "intimate" client relationship. I don't like it when I don't personally know or somehow touch every one of our clients.