Bigger may no longer be better: The case for independent agencies in light of transparency debate

Today, the biggest media brands are overly large, lumbering and lacking agility. Some clients would say they lack creativity and innovation as well due to holding company distractions. Meanwhile, many of the smaller agencies have been scooped up by the behemoths, leaving precious few independents—the Davids of the media agency world—in the ecosystem.

Those few Davids that remain, however, find themselves with historic competitive advantages.

Having been on the independent media agency side for 20+ years and counting, I know that size in many cases no longer matters. Just like the big boys, we have seasoned strategic professionals, we negotiate great deals, provide unparalleled service and retain quality staff (many of whom have come from the larger agencies). But we’re also agile and responsive. And when the need for ancillary services arises, we tap into best-in class creative and data analytics partners (among others) that adhere to shared entrepreneurial principles, not sibling companies that don’t always play well together.

With the industry roiling over such subjects as non-transparent practices, media rebates not going back to clients and media agencies taking secret incentives from vendors, independent shops, who operate with full transparency, have become unsung heroes. If there is real trust between agency and client, you will succeed over the long haul and the proof of that can be found in the Davids’ client retention.

So let’s talk about transparency. So much has been written and discussed. In fact, the ANA recently announced that the term “transparency” was voted “Marketing Word of the Year.”

Earlier this year, the ANA’s release of a landmark transparency study conducted by K2 Intelligence established a set of recommendations and caused a firestorm. It encourages change in how clients and agencies partner on media deals.

The 4A’s responded quickly with the statement that “a healthy and constructive debate about media buying can only happen with a bipartisan, engaged, industry-wide approach — and that is precisely the opposite of what the ANA has pursued. The immense shortcomings of the K2 report released today — anonymous, inconclusive, and one-sided — undercut the integrity of its findings.”

Transparency is a core principle and the cornerstone of the agency and client relationship. Also, trust and respect is indispensable to success in our business where relationships must be based on good faith. Coming to a common ground will be crucial for the future of the client/agency relationship. The 4A's recently called on its members to put the association’s principles into practice, not just treat them as recommendations for best practices.

So what is the actual definition of transparent? It is:

a) Free from pretense or deceit

b ) Easily detected or seen through

c ) Readily understood

d ) Characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices

The industry has now been hit by accusations of funneling work to their in-house production units by pressuring independent production companies to bow out of contract bids.

So how can the Goliath agencies regain trust? The straightest route has to be to adhere to the very definitions listed above.

An independent agency isn’t for every marketer. Global clients truly need the biggest media and creative agencies on the planet. But if you’re a mid-sized client or a challenger brand, you should consider an independent resource that will go the extra mile, encourage collaboration, negotiate as well as anyone and can deliver strategic thought leadership, creativity and invention and, all the while, engendering trust.

We’ve reached the proverbial tipping point. Bigger may no longer be better.

You need a David.

Zach Rosenberg is president of full service media agency MBMG