Why isn’t WPP scary in Australia?
I try and avoid the “Everything was better in London,” anecdotes if I can.
For one thing, it’s getting on for five years since I was there now, and for another, I can remember how irritating I used to find it when my Aussie colleague on Media Week in the UK used to tell me that everything was better in Sydney.
But just this once, indulge me.
One thing I do remember was that when I walked into the WPP media agencies in London, they didn’t tend to take themselves too seriously, until it came to winning, and to delivering for their clients. Then there was no sense of humour.
The senior WPP agency people I know are more interested in their own job preservation than job creation. Name me one person with a passion for creativity and ideas running any of their agencies locally. It’s a numbers game and that shows eventually. Three Drunk Monkeys is now bigger than Grey, The Campaign Palace and JWT in Sydney and Droga5 aren’t far behind. Host are way bigger. What does that tell you?
Fair observations Tim. However, from my personal experience of rebuilding an Agency, it takes a lot longer to make things better, than bugger it up. In the case of MEC and Mediacom they’ve taken the first steps in bringing in smart figureheads to revive the brands….After I’d joined OMD in 2002 it was a full 18 months before the pendulum could be described as having truly swung the other way, with genuine momentum in place to build for the future. Because we’d taken the time in the first place to find the right people to establish the foundations for that future. Not short terms fixes for headlines.
As regards Mediacoms client losses this year, well as Robert Morgan said to me after we’d lost Goodman Fielder in 2003, the darkest hour is the one just before dawn.
Good commentary Tim.
Mediacom used to stand for something. The biggest media buyer. But it’s no longer smart to decribe yourself in those terms – unless you’re Mitchells. The big label implies buying efficiently is what you are all about rather than smart stratgey. And that’s so yesterday.
I cant belive this account loss (DJ’s) wont result in staff losses and without doubt is a blow for the credibility of the Baxter/Jenner combo. Having said that it’s early days.
With regard to pitching against Mitchells it probably feels like the pakistani army feels taking on the taliban. You know you are in for a merciless battle and in all likelihood you are going to get your ass handed to you.
The challenge with “cultural change” is losing what made the agency successful in the first place. In the case of MediaCom (old Zenith) success was built on a passion and commitment to the clients business. When a new culture become more focused on there own fame these type of clients recognize they are no longer first.
Tim, As you say, WPP agencies are not as formidable in Australia in the eyes of their competitors as they might be overseas. But that’s because (internationally) bigger isn’t better in this market. There are no such economies of scale: many would allude to the financial constraints of having an (expensive) HQ in New York, Paris, London etc mid-GFC.
So the agency models that thrive in big ol’ New York, Paris, London etc are not the same models that will necessarily work here now.
We live in a meritocracy. And it is fickle. A blue-chip advertiser can and will award projects to agencies outside its roster. And in such an environment it’s much more fun to be flexible and to look for the commercial creativity with which independent agencies are apparently imbued.
Admittedly some great people are in some of the multinational agencies in this market. But en masse, the agencies to watch out for on the pitch list are independent and flexible. Or even if not ‘independent’ they’ll find a way to behave like they are: they will become nimble.
Mediacom and DJs. Let’s not over complicate it:
Totally with James Greet on this one.
This is as much about Mediacom shedding its skin as a buying shop and upgrading itself for the future – a process not without some dark moments.
As for the creative agencies: Jon Steel as part of Patts’ team is a massive coup for them – he will attract serious planning talent if they can bring in a few new clients too.
JayGray rebrand seems a bit random, but again should be applauded. Bold move.
DJs’ Westpac, Nokia – that is alot of skin being shed.
OMD’s success in recent years was built on the faith the team and clients had in the leadership of the last 3 years. Nothing more, nothing less.
Credit where credit is due.
And no, I don’t work for OMD……………
That cold be so but I’m not sure the Mediacom clients or most of the staff have the same faith….not just here but Melbourne also…..time will tell
Anon – re: OMD”s success…it isn’t just the past 3 years. I happened to start working at OMD in 2002 when James Greet came on board and he was quite visionary in what direction he wanted the agency to go in. He hired the right people who are now deservedly getting the credit deserved. I only worked for a couple of years with James before moving on, but he had the courage to actually make a point of difference with OMD and the dividends are being paid now.
Courage can have a cost and JG got a mandate to invest in the business…..back to the original theme…..One of the key reason WPP are not as successful in this market is that this is not an investment market for them. The focus is on BRIC and keeping Euro/US afloat through the GFC. Added to this the fact that the GroupM business globally is a “cash cow” for WPP and you see the problem. People who don’t make money for WPP in OZ have a very short life. So, watch this space. Me suspects a 6 month window for turnaround at Mediacom and then Mr Jenner and Co will find and end of the WPP good will.
@anon did i?
Dont you recall the conversations James?
from my years being an agency hack one thing i’ve learnt is they don’t transform overnight … change takes time and there’s lots of external factors a media agency (or a creative agency) that influence operational and directional change.
so all the armchair experts who are canning mediacom/jenner/matt etc should probably question whether they’re really qualified to comment on the validity of what they’re trying to do long term with the agency.
re omd – 6-7 years ago the place was a mess. now it’s the leading agency in the country. it’s naive to attribute their success in the last 3 years specifically to the leadership of only the last 3 years … just like it’s naive to attribute mediacom losing DJs to toby jenner and his team and what he’s trying to do.
I would add that thematically I agree. The current OMD management is rock solid however James did a lot of work to assist with this. He knew what he wanted and he patiently went about getting it.
anon – that seems a fair point – to be able to effect change you need to have a license to make change. If you don’t have that you can’t get very far, and on many occasions it seems to be the way in agency land that the license doesn’t come unless the place is well and truly buggered in the first place.
That is fine if you are in a sh*t position, as OMD were, but the challenge for most agencies is that they are never felt to be broken enough (in the eyes of regional/global management) to make the necessary change. Hence endless tinkering that addresses short term needs rather than long term objectives.
@ anon. No i don’t. I remember many things including creating the funds to invest in young talent through cost management, and improving the unprofitable client arrangements passed down by the creative agencies 18 months prior, and all from the loss making position we inherited.
However I’m getting uncomfortable with dignifying your ignorance when you’re not even bold enough to put your name to your comments.
Tim, when are you going to insist that anyone who wants to rant or have a pop only do so on the basis that they’ve got the balls to do it in their name?
anon – you need to remember that James Greet is a very, very important man.
‘Loss is nothing else but change, and change is nature’s delight.’
— Marcus Aurelius
As businesses we generally contract first before we rebuild and when we rebuild, you’re generally much, much better than ever before. The awesome thing about the GFC is most folks have had to rethink their businesses, including clients. Lets face it, in abundance often comes complacency.
It’s easy to pass comment on business success or failure. But try run one, start one or rebuild one. Then you’re qualified mouth off!
I agree with James Greet.
Hi James,
It’s a fair question you ask. My position so far has been that we remove personal attacks, but do allow anonymous comment on industry issues. It’s for readers to form their own views on the value of those comments.
As it happens, it has been useful to see your response. Anon was repeating what had seemed like a widespread industry perception – that you were given a mandate to spend what it took to turn things around.
It’s interesting to see you point out that you had to create that pool of money by controlling costs. So from that point at least, I’m glad anon raised the issue, because I’ve learned something as a result.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Great point Mandate… the valid issue raised by anon, which seems to have been over shadowed by ego exchanges, is that WPP in Australia are not in investment mode. As an ex WPPer (as many of us are) I can tell you that any “pool” created in any WPP business right now will be sucked back into the mother ship. At the end of the day this is one of the key reason why WPP are not scary in this country.
Well I made the first comment but not the rest. So where is the line drawn for the success of the agency. Coad and co certainly should take full credit for Telstra onwards, the awards, success, staff loyalty and so on. Prevous inroads were helpful but that’s all.
Tim, getting back to your initial point about WPP London agencies being more agressive than those locally, I wonder if your observation is actually one that should not be pinpointed to any one particular agency or group, but is a reflection on the agency/busines culture of the two countries. Having now worked more than a decade in both countries and across several of the agency groups, I believe the difference that you view is not specific to WPP. Locally, business relationships are incredibly important and carry more weight in an agency pitch here than they do in London. Clients want to feel a strong affinity for one of their most important supplier/partner relationships and of course these take time to develop. In a people business, it’s is more often the people that are chosen in a pitch, not the agency. I don’t think being “Scary” works here and it doesn’t impress clients. Trust, good ideas, open minds.. and in some cases, true innovation – these are values that are more likely to resonate.
Having also worked in London and Sydney I agree that “scary” is not a viable position here.
One obvious difference is the greater power of the media here compared to the UK. Intellectual power and creativity are needed to win and grow business.
I agree with James Greet that, anyone who wants to have a dig at someone, should be willing to put their name to it.
Surely the question is ‘why do these people have to re-rwire these agencies in the first place?’ James is absolutely correct in that it takes time and investment to repair the neglect and ‘old world’ thinking that has existed for some time, however the other points are also correct in that the other question is ‘how serious are the regional managers in creating best practice rather than cash generation?”
Sorry, what’s the vision? Best practice over cash generation – surely the two are intrinsically linked. Ah maybe that’s the point, instead of thinking about how to make money, we’re too concerned with how to save it. Constantly looking in the rearview mirror so can’t really move forward.
I know what you mean about WPP ‘frenetic’ in London, it WAS better! Leadership is a big part of this. One thing I was always very clear on is what the company vision was, what our goals were from Clark to Allen, to Glanvill. There was a consensus on what we stood for, common ground even.
No idea what we stand for here. Definitely not the roar in culture you get when walking into any of the GroupM agencies in London.
Not sure what a “cultural roar” sounds like but like the idea. Just musing that any “cultural roar” that might exist now is being downed out by the clatter of calculator and every loss is an amplifier.