Agencies told to create a mission statement or ‘you’re going to be the agency for no-one’
(l-r): Camille Alarcon (Publisher, The Source); Nathan Hodges; Rebecca Darley; Nick Williams; Fleur Brown
Agencies which fly under the radar get “clients that fly under the radar” according to one pitch consultant, who said the average client only knows three agencies “their last one, their current one, and one other”.
Speaking this morning at The Source New Biz Breakfast session looking at how to build an agency profile Nathan Hodges, general manager for Trinity P3, said agencies need to create a proposition for the market, and stick to it.
“If you want to be the agency for everyone, you’re going to be the agency for no-one,” he warned.
Nice idea, but let’s face it consultants will do anything to win new biz and will be anything a client wants them to be, as long as they pay the bill.
that’s a rather cynical perspective Scoop and you appear to have missed the point completely.
By ‘standing for something’, distinctive and motivating, agencies don’t need to change themselves to become anything a client wants. The client comes to them
A brands positioning does not need to be different just distinctive – discuss
You’d tell a client not to be the product for everyone – focus on a demographic or an occasion – so why would you try to be the agency for everyone?
There’s plenty of potential customers out there and better to have a small percentage of them think that you are absolutely the agency for them.
The M D of a n agency I worked at many years ago said to me ” ask what they want, then tell them that’s what we do best” .Worked for them for years and they were crap.
Macsmutterings … wow, that’s a deep question. But it’s a fair point, in an industry offering roughly the same product mix we can’t all be different – but we can be distinct. I’ve always found the signature theme for an organisation stems from what that organisation naturally gravitates towards and loves doing. What is it as an agency you most enjoy – and would (almost) do for free if asked. Amplify that and you will be distinct.
I think you’ll find that Todd Sampson’s Leo Burnett had been one of the top agencies in Australia for a long time. Not certain about the logic here.
Not sure what the example of Todd Sampson is trying to prove. All I know is he’s been MD at Leo’s for 6 years and in that time they have went from the perennial bridesmaid at pitches to winning a lot of great clients.
Agencies, have been and always been about people/relationships, it just takes a couple of people to make an agency really tick and they have a great amount of success. The second they leave the agency changes and they go down hill.
From a client prospective I don’t give two hoots about an agencies proposition. I already know what an agency is capable of. I choose to work with agencies because of the people, who I respect/trust and who I know will produce great work.
The Todd Sampson reference seems way off. Leo’s is a successful agency and there’s no doubt their leader is on marketers radar. Their recent wins are testament to that. What an odd quote from someone who markets themselves as an agency procurement expert.
Gosh. There are some sensitive souls out there. When I mentioned Todd Sampson, I was merely pointing out the opportunity that lies between awareness and salience. Todd and LB have done a great job creating huge awareness, and it’s fantastic for them. But if you’re, for instance, a Brisbane agency with events and shopper marketing expertise, then salience among a few clients is your big chance.
I agree with Nathan.
Before they won WWS, Leo Burnett hadn’t won a substantial piece of new business for several years but had lost several including eBay, Subaru, National broadband
Likewise Patts Y&R had very little new business success in Sydney despite Russel H moving up to run the ship.
Nathan’s point isn’t a dig at Todd, it is to say that it is the positioning and output of the agency that is the most important magnet for new clients. A high profile CEO or CD can certainly help that but if their profile is unrelated or only partially related to the positioning or output of the agency, then that profile won’t be overly helpful.
Not sure if mission statements matter all that much.
Nor differentiation, to @macsmutterings point.
Any agency still needs to be clearly ‘in’ the category.
This is why even seemingly sensible labelling (ie we’re a digital agency) isn’t always wise. Its tantamount to giving a client a reason not to buy.
Being distinctively branded while at the same time having enough sameness as the other players is a better strategy.
During a brief spell on the client side I was suspicious of those ‘we’re different from everyone else’ agencies.
A) Because I knew they were probably not
B) If I was wrong, and they were different, then thats not what I ordered. I wanted someone to do advertising.
However, ‘Agencies which fly under the radar get clients that fly under the radar’ is a splendid point.
Likewise the point that the ‘average client only knows three agencies “their last one, their current one, and one other”.
The idea that consumers actually do any evaluation on the things they purchase is vastly overrated and stated, similarly clients want to be making an easy choice.
Who I used last time or who other brands of a similar size and ‘stature’ to mine are doing are bigger drivers than is credited.