Traditions and bureaucracy
Posted: December 30th, 2008 | Author: elliot | 1 Comment »I was catching up with some friends on a few drinks. They are marketing managers of some very big and well known brands. I was telling what I have been doing at work. They were telling how much headaches they have been getting working with their agencies on some recent campaigns. So the discussion led us to the question why we don’t work together: they need marketing agencies and I am working in one.
Their answer is “yes but no way, we will not commission you.”
I thought it was about confidence on our competences and experience. And I showed them some stuff we have done and the relevant prices.
“So, are we not good enough?”
“Certainly yes. And you are cheaper. But still no.”
They showed me what one agency has done for them so far.
“The concept is .. ah… lame”
“Yeah, tell us about it!”
“The visuals are kind of fresh, though.”
“Yes, but the UI makes us mad! And we complained about it already in the last campaign.”
“What is the campaign supposed to achieve?”
“Lots of eyeballs from the streets and screens. And win an award.”
I almost choked when they told me how much their agency charges them.
I thought my team and I can do a better job for them.
I asked “So what do these agencies provide you that small agencies like us do not?
“Nothing. Actually, probably even less.”
“Umm .. But still you would not commission us?”
“Nope, that is the painful reality. We are bound by traditions and bureaucracy.”
So, bound by traditions and bureaucracy, marketing agencies sell less results for more money?
It really got me thinking, especially in the context of such an economic downturn.
Shouldn’t marketing be focused on getting results first? Namely sales of a product, instead of winning an award. In bad time like this, I would expect people reflect more on their habits and traditions, be inventive and make changes.
Well, maybe and maybe not.
I used to own a small company in this field and now am delighted that I sold it in 2006. If I had to fight a ‘mediacom’ or ’saatchi & saatchi’ for an account when I had a 5 man business I would lose every time. I had to partner with bigger agencies to get any foothold into the businesses that were our target market. One of the agencies eventually realized that we were a threat to what they wanted to do in Finland and even small as we were and bought our talents.
I personally doubt whether it’s traditional or bureaucratic reasoning that actually stops companies switching agencies though. There are always politics to overcome in the bigger companies and we all know nepotism and friendship gets a lot of business where it shouldn’t be happening if you based it purely on results.
My take is that people in marketing, in companies which are your target market are not educated well enough in the new media, the analytics, the processes and the pull versus push trend we’ve seen develop over the last 5 years. They look at people in our field like we’re all the same. I commented on Eric Peterson’s blog (linked to in my last post) that I believe in what I’m saying, but the skeptics you have to convince will not listen, rather they will say “It’s in your interest to say that”.
My feeling is though that the market is finally starting to grow up and because we can now prove what we’re saying they will only listen to the ‘traditional’ agencies for so long, if they continue to spout the same story that is.