It’s a hot topic largely debated throughout present-day adland; is there a better way to pitch for a new business?
With Initiative Global CEO Mat Baxter’s “ditch the pitch” call sparking much debate amongst advertisers and agencies, the question become much more rudimental:
Is pitching a sustainable and effective means for agencies to gain new business?
To answer this, we must first dive into Pitching in its current context in order to understand why some agencies are holding on to this traditional process, and why others are opting to give the pitch, the flick.
Here are a few thoughts on new business pitching that might help settle this debate.
Why do pitches happen in the first place?
Pitches take place when a client or business are seeking a new partnership with a creative agency.
This could be because they have just entered the market and are looking to amp up their advertising sector, or because their current partnership isn’t working out, based one or more circumstances:
a. The client’s existing agency isn’t meeting performance expectations. This could be not meeting certain established K.P.Is or simply not having enough drive to deliver satisfying creative work for the client.
b. The ads their current creative agency partner is producing are not delivering a good enough return on investment – at the end of the day, for the clients it comes down to one simple question: are we generating sales from our ad spend? If the answer is no, then it might be time for a refresh in creative agency.
c. There was a change in personnel - either on the client side or within the agency. This can have a major impact on whether the relationship will continue, as it alters the chemistry, trust and communication between the two businesses. Sometimes, this means that the relationship becomes damaged, tarnished, or simply no longer living up the standards of which was previously established when someone else was working/representing either partner. When the love is lost between the people, clients might try to find that bond elsewhere - or even follow the person they bonded best with to another agency.
d. There may be a conflict of interest - an agency might have to drop a client due to international brand alignment (if they're a global agency). This may be due to one of their global agencies holding a competitors account. In this case, the client will have to look for another agency.
e. It could be financial - perhaps the agency the client were with were becoming too costly, or perhaps they were ripping the client off. In any case, in this industry especially, $$ is a massive driver for clients when looking for a creative partnership.
f. Sometimes, clients get a strong case of FOMO. Maybe there are cool things happening in a niche creative agency space that are achieving some great awards and results. Especially if the client has been with their previous agency partner for a long-term period, this could be a very real reason a client calls for a pitch.
g. Lastly, sometimes it's just bad luck. The agency might not have really done anything to upset or disappoint their client, but maybe the client just wants a refresh. It's possible, and it happens more often than one might assume.
So, we've established that there are some very legitimate reasons why a client might call for a pitch - but is this the right approach for finding a new creative agency?
And from an agency perspective, is this the best way in gaining new business?
Well let's first consider the nature of pitching in the traditional sense.
Pitching is like speed dating
Pitching, in the traditional format, is often likened to speed dating – the chemistry is one of the biggest, most important indicators of whether the relationship would be fruitful, however, a client will never get to truly know an agency in that short period of time, and vice versa.
As DDB MD Pryia Patel argues, good human relationships are the foundations of a great agency/client partnership - without it, the relationship is likely to suffer and hinder the potential creative success of the partnership.
At its core, the partnership must be based on shared intentions and ambitions, shared cultural dynamics within each business, and strong personal connections between the two parties.
A client needs to see real value and ambition from pitching agencies and ask themselves,"can I work with these people?"
Sometimes, the actual nature of the big pitch itself doesn't necessarily reveal this important factor.
Which brings us to my next point...
The presentation superficiality trap (or challenge!)
Now-a-days clients have access to a whole range of data and sources that will help educate them on which agency they might like to give their business to – without asking agencies to walk bare footed over weeks of hot coals, only to realise the result is burnt-out, weathered skin and a sad looking bank account (and no new business!), as a result of an overly extensive pitching process.
Analysing an agency based off the quality of their work, their awards, the tenure and quality of their existing clients and by having a simple conversation with those clients could all be much more sustainable, and much more effective, means for clients to determine which agency is best qualified for their business.
Set presentations are somewhat artificial - they aren't authentic in the fact that they are rehearsed, and sometimes altered to merely impress the client rather than truly reflect the goals, ambitions and capabilities of the agency themselves.
By spending time with the team that would be working on their account, clients would better understand who they feel they could generate a successful partnership with. The value of the people is the biggest indicator of what the agency can do for the business.
New client pressure
Clients are expecting more - but at what cost?
Often it takes agencies months, even a whole year to break even financially after a big global pitch. - with the potential client often not bearing any of the financial burden, and who instead are gaining free work.
The traditional pitching format was used when a strategy was based on less than 10 channels. Now, agencies are expected to generate extensive multi-channel strategies for a client brief, based on more than 70 possible channels and a saturated competitive market analysis.
What does this sound like? Too much work for a non-paying client.
And to make matters worse, agencies can often fall into the trap of agreeing to too small a payment plan out of fear of spending so much money on pitching for the new business, only to return home empty handed, and often at a considerable financial loss.
This very nature of agreement will already cause tensions from day one - and is not a great ground for a strong, fostering partnership.
Clients are losing out, too.
If you're a client asking agencies to pitch, and they do, and THEN you chose to partner with them - you best believe that the agency may very well be pitching again for other businesses while working on your account.
And the people pitching may very likely be the senior, more experienced people the client wanted - or the young, more fresh-ideas man that made the client want to work with that team.
As client tenure is often (in most cases) becoming shorter and shorter, agencies are constantly having to pitch to either retain business or go for other business. This puts many agencies in what Baxter calls "a perpetual state of pitching.”
This often causes employees to go into over-drive and burn out, churning on client accounts and not producing their best work for their existing clients. The whole culture of the agency is impacted - and all without the guarantee of new business.
In short - when a client asks for a pitching process, they agree also to be on the repercussion side of an agency embedded in pitching culture (in other words, run the risk of not getting their best work from the agency they partner with).
So let us re-evaluate - is there better way to pitch?
From this discussion, I believe the answer to be a resounding YES.
If the current pitching climate is leaving creatives overworked, burnt-out and out of pocket, then it's not a sustainable practice.
The one aspect that seems the most important out of the selection process is based on the client determining which agency would they work bets with. And the number one way to figure that out is a chemistry meeting - which shouldn't include big out of pocket expenses, but instead consist of an honest, educated discussion of what the partnership could achieve, and how their goals align.
Perhaps this could be in the form of a client representative shadowing the everyday runnings of an agency. This would give first-hand insight into the resources, capabilities and (most importantly) the culture and work ethic of a considered agency. From an agency stand point, this could also give them a more affordable, authentic way of representing who they are, and what drives them as an agency.
Or perhaps, if the pitching process were to continue via the traditional format, it's time for agencies to share the cost. Paying for their own flights or even presenting a reasonable and agreeable budget to conform all competing agency spend are both simple ways of making the pitching climate more sustainable.
The client already know that the agencies they are considering are of good quality - otherwise, why ask them to pitch?
Agencies should show the same initiative and ask - is this client going to let us produce some great, influential and successful creative work? Answering yes to this question is the only time an agency should consider pitching.
It's not the presentation that makes a successful partnership - it's a shared vision, determination and a like-mindedness that sees the most successful agency-client relationships.
After all, if the golden circle is anything to go by (and it definitely is) - it's not the how that sells, it's why the agencies what they do, and why they want the business that should be the big deciding factor.
So, ladies and gentlemen - the better way to "pitching" for new business could very well be to not "pitch" at all.
Comments