Mumbrella’s top 30 creative agencies: the final cut
Tomorrow, we’ll begin the formal process of asking an expert panel of clients, former clients, pitch doctors and recruiters their views on what we think are Australia’s 30 best advertising agencies.
And next week, we will be asking you, Mumbrella readers, the same thing about our final cut of 30.
It’s time now though, to reveal the potentially controversial list of who made it.
You may recall that we announced the process – which we believe will be the most in depth piece of research conducted in Australia into the performance and perceptions of advertising agencies – earlier this month. The findings will be revealed at Mumbrella360 in June. the report will be called The Mumbrella Creative Agency Performance and Perception Study. Or M-CAPP.
Well done to CumminsRoss for being considered after opening their doors the all of about 5mins ago
Stacey – they weren’t considered.
hhahaha Publicis Mojo Melbourne
what have they done recently… bwhahahaha
Congrats 303, you’re killing it.
So everyone is on the shortlist then
Hi anonymous,
You may have awards on the mind…. This isn’t a shortlist. This is a list of the 30 agencies we will be preparing detailed reports on.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Not sure how GPY&R Perth gets a mention, as they don’t exist.
Unless that’s the new name for The Brand Agency (a notable omission) and nobody told me.
GPY&R Perth? Is this a mistake or have I missed an agency launch party?
Spidey, Simon, GPY&R Perth mistakenly crept into the long list, and I’ve now taken them out. Apologies.
I have yet to see a campaign from CumminsRoss?
Please explain?
Hi Fake Pauline Hanson,
Here’s an example of an early Cummins Ross campaign: https://mumbrella.com.au/jeep-ad-forced-off-air-over-bear-grylls-conflict-40913
But just for clarity, in case you’ve misread the above. they’re not on the list of 30 agencies because not much work has gone to market yet.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
What a frightfully outdated concept
GPYR Perth????
And yet again, the smaller but punchy agencies that get results for clients WITHOUT blowing their own trumpets too loudly and who do not think awards are the be all and end all of life, yet still continue to GET RESULTS (did I mention that before perhaps), well yet again they get overlooked.
Why don’t you consider doing something like the top 30 agencies in Australia that actually are not well publicised but do a cracking top job for their clients? And have LIVE campaigns out in the market on a weekly basis, not a “one good campaign a year” basis.
As someone else said, what a seriously outdated concept to publish a top 30 list that just serves to further stroke the ego’s of the overinflated ones.
Hi Curious George,
Thanks for your suggestion. Which agencies do you have in mind, and who do you think that ifnromation would be useful for?
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
As a client of Clems melb I am always stunned by their nominations in these things.
Tim
I’m not the sharpest tool in the box so can you clarify whether this is judging the most creative agency or the best advertising agency, or the best ATL agency as there is a significant difference, Initial thoughts from the the agencies that have made the list it looks like it is the latter, however intially it has been promoted as the most creative agency. Surely if its judging the most creative agency, digital, pr,media and direct response agencies need to be considered and not treated in a seperate poll as the idea is the key to an agency being creative and whether its brand, digital, DR, PR etc etc ……doesn’t matter.
Hi Fraser,
You’re mistaken about it having been initially promoted as being about the most creative agency. Our intention has always been to identify the key traits that make a good advertising agency (of which creativity is but one element – important but not the only thing).
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Hi Mumbrella,
You missed killer agencies like FNUKY and SeeSaw in Adelaide. LOL.
Cheerage
The information could and should be useful for the masses of clients who are sick of paying overinflated prices to pad the pockets of the agency bigwigs. I say “should” but in a lot of cases, clients tend to LIKE the freebies and perks that come with being a client of a larger agency with bigger budgets to spend on client-perks…. the smaller agencies just don’t have the time to go finding out the next best way to spend money on a client who doesn’t appreciate it. They’re too busy getting tangible results using tried and true methods.
I have a list of at least 5 agencies that would fit the definition of “best agency” – based on getting results for clients, lower cost to client (but less perks to same said client), varied and interesting work, and no egos… but do you really wanna hear them? Or would that just throw a few cats into a very crowded hen house?
BTW: forgive me if I’m wrong – but is it not the client we are all in this game for? Why else would a list be published of the “top 30” agencies … ? Ahhh, my naivety is perhaps showing… maybe it’s just so that the agencies who are on the list can feel good about themselves. 🙂
(Edited by Mumbrella as duplicate comment)
Yadda, Yadda. Cheap, taste-making formula. Predictable, to be kind. Digitally inconsiderate, at best. No insight into very complicated, converging and oblique market, let alone embrace of audience or its preference. Very ‘old media’ of Mumbrella in pretty much every way. Very happy to debate this … any where, any time. But, in their own way, every one responding before me is saying much the same thing …
Hi John,
We had something of a debate about whether digital should be scored separately. Our view was that this would be something of an old school approach, as digital is now clearly part of any decent integrated approach. Separating it out makes about as much sense as individually scoring an agency by its print or radio output. (You’ll note that integration is one of the aspects we do examine.)
As you correctly recognise, this is a “complicated” market. (You’d have to explain what you mean by converged or oblique in this context though.)
And more to the point, how would you set about assessing the abilities of the key agencies? What would your methodology be?
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Well, there you go, here’s the line I missed:
“based on the assumption that the larger the agency, the larger the clients, and the more talented people are needed to service those clients.”
Are you on crack? Seriously??
Some of the smaller “off radar” agencies in Sydney that I personally know of are managing brands like Toshiba, David Jones, Bayer… I won’t go on but in general the client base are household names. Just because YOU have not heard of them, luckily this doesn’t mean that the clients haven’t!
This list is at best naive, and at worst incredibly offensive to the agency’s in the “off radar” bucket, AND to all the really talented people who work at them.
Nuff said.
Hi George,
I can’t immediately tell you who does Toshiba or Bayer (Ursa?), although I’m not sure they’re top 20 above the line spenders but David Jones is done by M&C Saatchi, which is on the list.
If you do want to make your case (which is, what, by the way – to assess Australia’s top small agencies?) then perhaps you should go on.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Well done to Innocean, I’ve never known an agency to work harder, and yes they are ‘tested’ and ‘tested’ again everyday by local clients – they are doing great work and changing the landscape of the auto market in Oz.
My point, Tim, is that when you made your “top 30” list, you made sweeping statements that are blatantly untrue, and that are downright offensive to those of us who choose to work for smaller agencies (where the real results are tested every day), you as much as said that the “talented ones” must work for the larger agency! That’s just wrong.
What you will also find, if you manage to look beyond the agencies that scream “look at me, how wonderful am I”, is that the big name clients like Toshiba, David Jones, Bayer don’t ONLY use the large agency that their international counterparts and MDs choose. This is fact. I’ve worked on the account, and I don’t work for M&C (nor Team Saatchi before you get all smug).
Anyway, this argument isn’t worth it. You won’t ever see that what you say is offensive, and I actually have a campaign to work on (even though I must be talentless).
‘Night!
Quote: ‘The larger the clients the larger the agency’.
Tim, what are you smoking?
Can you also do the 30 best clients?
I have two concerns about Mumbrella readers judging these creative agencies:
1) The bigger creative agencies will have an unfair advantage (as employees will obviously vote for themselves)
2) Are all Mumbrella readers really qualified to judge creative agencies? I’m sure many Mumberlla readers work in completely different areas such as PR, Journalism, Marketing, Media etc
That’s just my two cents
Hi Anon,
To you first point, the survey will go to our whole email database of about 23,000. So that larger group will clearly be much bigger than any individual agency. However, one of the elements we are looking at is agency culture and talent retention. If you think your agency is a good place to work, then that’s a valid piece of info to share in the scoring process.
To you second point, we’ve deliberately included the word “Perception” in the study’s title. This is about finding out what the industry thinks of the agencies. Agency reputation is what shapes people’s decisions about where they want to work and influences clients in where they put their business.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
In the opinion section. Telling.
Hi Bob,
When we write in the first person – in this case, this is a piece from my colleague explaining the methodology – we put it in the opinion section. When it’s breaking news we put it in the news section. Not that telling really. More, what we always do.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
‘based on the assumption that the larger the agency, the larger the clients, and the more talented people are needed to service those clients’…what was it that Derryn Hinch used to say……
I don’t understand why everyone is so negative and cynical? Why can’t this just be like a guide to the Australian ad agency market and leave it at that? I know as an outsider is that it would have been very handy to know what agencies and accounts people actually liked working at/for instead of just looking at global ones that we have all heard of. I for one have worked at 2 on this list and the one global agency was the worst vibe, mostly young and inexperienced talent and the most unprofessional non team player staff I have ever worked with at an agency and I have worked in the US,UK and Aus. If I would have seen a retention rate so low with AE’s not lasting 6 months and SAD’s walking out and quitting I would have known to stay away! Just because a place is big, global and has big accounts doesn’t mean that that’s where the talent wants to go.
I’m with comment 30.
Clients get the work they deserve.
Great clients get great work. (Where “great” means “effective”… not what the fools here or on CB blog rave about.)
Shite clients get shite work.
Advertising agencies love to think it’s all about them… but it ain’t. It’s about the clients.
Think Chiat is responsible for Apple’s “amazing” advertising? You’re a fool. Same for Nike, Cadbury’s UK, and California Milk Board. The common denominator is the client, not the agency. (Want proof? Look at the shite Goodby’s – one of the best agencies ever – put out for CBA.)
The more meaningful list is what comment 30 suggests.
Is that BMF Sydney or Melbourne, or both combined?
@Tom I do agree that it takes a great client to also allow great work to come to life and that clients are the gatekeepers of what actually is seen. However, i feel that the people in an ad agency can also make or break the clients experience and the relationship. The good that will come out of this list hopefully is to ‘out’ by ranking the best agencies – maybe some who on the outside have the shiny name and a big roster actually are some of the worst to work for and the worst to work with by highlighting which agencies have the highest staff turnover rate, lowest employee satisfaction, and the lowest client satisfaction.
If I were back on the job market I would be far more interested in working for the agencies on the second list, rather than on the first. I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread that big doesn’t automatically mean creative…
A quick skim of a few EFFIE winners lists negates the need for this entire exercise, but ‘cool story bro’.
Agree with the client list. It’s much more valuable as a whole. We have a bazillion ways to rank agencies. Bugger all to rank the clients. You know, the guys who pay the bills and the ones that (usually) sign off the work.
Also, if you desperately want to look at agencies, I’d personally look at the individuals that work on the jobs. Even in the biggest, most creative, most expensive agencies, as a client, you may get junior team who don’t know shit or old team that are too expensive to fire. I’d be pretty pissed if I bought into the agency and got the dregs not the cream.
I know this isn’t a solo sport but rankings like Archive make it pretty bloody easy to see who the kick ass photographers are at the moment in any region and support it with all the work to see.
This list sounds like the Logies last night and wasn’t that just amazing.
It is remarkable how most of these agencies claim among many things that they are experts in digital and social media. For the most, their own performance at promoting themselves using these platforms has been ordinary to say the least. Check out http://tribecount.com.au/socia.....-agencies/
When hiring an agency I couldn’t give a hoot whether they have one awards. In fact, if I were pitched from an agency who referred to the awards they had one it would probably turn me off.
I would be interested in the work they have done and whether it was successful.
I know a lot of niche players nowadays who work hard, smart and create excellent campaigns for their clients. Many of these agencies couldn’t care about telling others about how great they are; they just do what they are great at and keep doing it right.
Boutique all the way I say…
@Niche
‘won’ – doh…
@Anon.. actually CumminsRoss was considered.. perhaps read the rest of the article before you ark up!