The indie agency takeover: From flagship to footnote
Shai Luft, chief operations officer and co-founder of Bench Media, explores the problems that arise when independent agencies are swallowed by corporate machines.
The Australian media agency landscape is changing faster than the latest viral TikTok trend.
Independent agencies, once the lifeblood of innovation, agility, and client-first service, are being swallowed by global agency groups at a rapid rate. Recent acquisitions such as Atomic 212° by Publicis Groupe, Sparro by Brainlabs and Hotglue by Havas are likely to follow a well-worn pattern that has played out time and again: an independent powerhouse is absorbed into a corporate machine, its identity slowly diluted, and eventually, it becomes just another line on a balance sheet.
For advertisers, these acquisitions may appear to offer access to global resources and broader expertise. But beneath the surface, there’s a familiar trajectory that raises important concerns: loss of independence, shifting priorities, and a gradual erosion of the qualities that made these agencies successful in the first place.
The corporate playbook: How acquisitions play out
At first, everything seems stable. The acquired agency retains its name, its leadership stays on, and clients are reassured that nothing will change. For the first 12 months, the holding company plays the role of a supportive partner, promising autonomy and continued focus on the agency’s core values.
But behind the scenes, change is already underway. Processes start shifting, financial targets become more aggressive, and the agency is gradually pulled into the holding company’s operational structure. What was once a fast-moving, independent business begins to slow down under layers of approvals, regional reporting lines, and global P&L pressures.
Decisions that were once made based on what’s best for the client are now influenced by what benefits the holding company’s bottom line. Media buying shifts towards preferred partners, legacy publisher deals start to take precedence, and financial performance takes priority over flexibility and service.
Credit: iStock.com/Thurtell
The talent drain: When leaders leave, clients follow
One of the earliest warning signs of an agency’s decline post-acquisition is the loss of its most senior talent. The founders and long-tenured leaders, who built the agency’s culture and client relationships, often find themselves sidelined. Frustrated by increased bureaucracy, they eventually move on—either exiting quietly or making high-profile departures.
Recent acquisitions have shown both the potential benefits and challenges of integration. For example, WPP acquired Bower House Digital in 2022, integrating the agency into Ogilvy’s global structure to strengthen its marketing technology capabilities. While this brings access to broader resources and global expertise, such transitions often come with structural and cultural shifts that can impact the agility and independence that originally made these agencies successful. Similarly, previous acquisitions of independent agencies like Bohemia (bought by M&C Saatchi) have seen senior staff leave as the agency gets folded into a larger network or leaders get promoted into the broader group.
The departure of experienced leaders can often have a domino effect. Clients who valued direct relationships with senior agency staff start questioning whether they’re still getting the same level of service. The personal touch and deep understanding of their business, once a given, in an independent agency, start to fade.
Disillusioned, many clients follow their trusted advisors elsewhere, often to other independent agencies that still operate with flexibility and a true client-first mentality.
Culture shift: From agile to corporate
The culture within independent agencies is one of their greatest strengths. These businesses thrive on entrepreneurial energy, quick decision-making, and a flat hierarchy that fosters creativity. Employees often wear multiple hats, work closely with leadership, and have the freedom to experiment with innovative strategies tailored specifically for their clients.
Once acquired, this culture slowly starts to erode. The decision-making process becomes slower, creativity is stifled by corporate structures, and the hands-on approach is replaced by a more rigid, formulaic way of working. Over time, what was once a close-knit, dynamic environment becomes just another cog in a global machine.
Clients notice these changes. Where they once had direct access to senior talent, they now navigate through multiple layers of account management. The agency’s once-distinctive strategic approach starts looking like every other holding company agency, prioritising scale over specialisation.
The media-agnostic advantage: What advertisers lose
One of the most overlooked consequences of holding company acquisitions is the shift in media buying independence. Independent agencies pride themselves on being media-agnostic, meaning they focus solely on selecting the best media channels for their clients rather than being influenced by longstanding corporate deals.
In contrast, holding companies often have pre-established agreements with major publishers, ad tech vendors and global platforms. This means that rather than choosing media purely based on what’s best for a client’s strategy, agency recommendations may start to align more closely with internal commercial agreements.
Prior to the advent of programmatic and digital media, scale and volume gave the larger agencies buying power that truly benefited advertisers. In today’s world where DSP’s are vying for volume and smaller nimbler agencies can easily hop between platforms, it is the independent agencies that offer a price advantage for brands. Even large publishers will offer enticing deals to lure smaller agencies and their clients in an effort to diversify and grow their market share.
Credit: iStock.com/pixelfit
For advertisers, this raises serious concerns about transparency and objectivity. Are they truly getting the best, most innovative media solutions? Or are their budgets being funnelled into pre-negotiated deals that serve the agency network more than the advertiser?
Independent agencies, by contrast, have the freedom to be more strategic, flexible, and creative in their media planning. They can pivot quickly in response to new trends, test emerging platforms without corporate constraints, and structure deals that are tailored entirely to client needs.
The holding company endgame: Mergers and consolidation
Once an independent agency has been fully absorbed, the final stage of the playbook kicks in. With leadership turnover, client churn, and cultural transformation complete, the acquired agency eventually loses its distinct identity altogether. It gets merged into a larger holding company agency, folded into a global media network, or simply ceases to exist as a standalone brand.
We’ve seen these mergers happen time and again with the likes of Wunderman Thompson and VMLY&R consolidated under VML amongst countless other examples. Agencies that once stood for something unique through nimbleness, creativity and client-first thinking end up as just another name on a corporate roster.
And so, the cycle continues.
Independence still matters
For advertisers, the impact of these acquisitions is clear: fewer choices, less flexibility, and more agencies prioritising shareholder returns over client outcomes. While holding companies bring scale, global buying power, and extensive resources, those benefits come at a cost—less transparency, slower decision-making, and a diluted focus on innovation and service.
Meanwhile, the true value of independent agencies has never been stronger. With no corporate overlords to answer to, they remain agile, strategic, and deeply committed to their clients. They continue to attract top talent looking for a culture of creativity and autonomy. And most importantly, they remain accountable only to their clients, not to shareholders.
As the wave of consolidation continues, CMOs and marketing managers should ask themselves: Does bigger really mean better? Or is independence the last true competitive advantage in a rapidly evolving media landscape?
Shai Luft is the chief operations officer and co-founder of Bench Media.
Keep up to date with the latest in media and marketing
Indie agency independence? Don’t make me laugh, indies are the dodgiest out there when it comes to media arbitrage and rebates.
If you can offer “better service” at the same price as a global agency, then you must be stinging the client in the background.
Shai talks of all the things that happen at a global agency but has never worked at one.
User ID not verified.
Love the idea that indies only make decisions based on what’s best for the clients never the bottom line. Laughable . Also shockingly a lot of indies build themselves up with express intention of selling. Weirdly founders want to make some money. I’m not sure if this constant slew of indies versus networks is a conserted PR push but some of the stuff in these articles is a joke. As Coady said last year there’s room enough for all of us. Also indies “we’re good cos we’re not that lot” isn’t a strategy.
User ID not verified.
You managed to write that whole article and didn’t mention The Monkeys once?
User ID not verified.