Bertil Sall
Anders Brandt
Ricki Melchior
Anders Bank Lodahl
Adam Due
Rikke Dragsbæk
Christian Roar Pedersen
John Jensen
Hanni Cramer Hanberg
Mads Emil Sejrbo Lidegaard
Ole Madsen
Søren Lauridsen
Henrik Götke
Lisbeth Armand
Brian Andreasen
Søs Uldall-Ekman
Hanne Vibe
Betina Hansen
Sofie Hviid
Nanna Storebjerg
Louise Ørum-Petersen
Paola Edwards
Camilla Jensen
Nikolaj Henrichsen
Jacob Hagemann
Mette Karlog
Styrk dine kompetencer
onsdag d. 10. februar 2010
4 3 2408
Du har mulighed for at skrive en kommentar til din anbefaling, dette er valgfrit.
Gem Annuller

Gem som link

Anbefalinger (4)

Timme Bisgaard Munk
Maj Pilgaard
Louise Grau
christian f. andersen

No rubbish agencies, only rubbish clients

Christian J. Porter-Schultz
’Kan du anbefale et godt bureau, vores stinker,’ lyder det blandt kunderne. ’Vi har gjort alt, de bad os om, men vores kunde er stadig ikke tilfreds,’ lyder det fra bureauside. Har du hørt disse klager før, så læs denne artikel om det komplekse forhold mellem PR-bureauer og deres kunder. Her er en række råd til, hvordan du undgår at være en skod-kunde. For eksempel: Få bureauet til at arbejde sammen med dig og ikke for dig. Og: Stol på rådene, ligesom du forhåbentlig også stoler på din tandlæge.

As clients we expect and rely on our agencies to have insights, expertise and show commitment. However, years of growth and prosperity and endless amounts of campaigns, we as clients have had a tendency to forget that agencies also rely on us to perform on exactly the same parameters. Hey, if a campaign didn't work, we just changed agency. However, we forgot to look at ourselves. We forgot the basics. We forgot that if we don't share our insights our agencies can't deliver insightful programs. We forgot that if we are not experts on our product/organization/industry, would it then be fair to expect our agencies to be experts? And we forgot that if we are not committed to our cause then how could we expect our agencies to be passionate about any of our initiatives. In other words, we forgot that if our agencies don't perform, then it is more than likely that it is because we are not performing as good clients. And this is what has caused many great PR initiatives to either be just plain rubbish or simply never getting off the ground. So with the financial crisis surrounding us, it is time that we look at ourselves before we start to blame our agencies. We must understand that when it goes wrong, that we are the rubbish ones.

So what can we, as clients, do to avoid being rubbish and what should agencies as a minimum expect from us? Here is a Top Five list on how to avoid being a rubbish client;

1) Know your agencies
With an influx of smaller specialized agencies combined with global all-encompassing agencies life has arguably become a bit more complicated for us clients in regards to picking our agencies. With an array of opportunities to engage with our consumers it has today become critical that we identify the right channel to communicate through in order to communicate to consumers. With the emergence of the 24 hour news cycle there are no longer any second chances. You get one shoot at communicating your message. So just as we carefully select our staff mix depending on our mid-long term strategies, it is also our responsibility as a client to know exactly what type of agency we actually need to assist us in achieving a desired result. We must therefore dedicate time to really get to understand the skills and capabilities of the agencies we want to work with. And here I am not just talking about having a list of agencies sending us updated credentials lists but in fact a thorough research and understanding of the PR agencies operating in the market and their specialties. Agencies differ greatly in expertise, quality and experience. Some agencies know everything about digital and social media and some set and help mould the political landscape. Some are into B2B while others are into fashion. Some are locally inspired, some are globally focused. They are all great in their own way and they would certainly all be eager to work with you, but it is certainly not all of them that would actually provide you with the right solution to your challenge. As clients it is therefore our responsibility to monitor the PR agencies and understand the trends in the marketplace while keeping an eye on the individual "movers and shakers" within the PR industry. In other words, if you keep picking 100 meter runners to run your marathon, you will never win in the long run. It is all about selection.

2) Clear briefs
Yes, let's get it over with. It is absolutely true that many agencies overpromise in their pitches. I have sat through enough pitches with agencies promising me the moon but when quizzed their promises quickly turned into fluffy dreams with no link to reality. And it is absolutely true that overpromising results in the relationship between agency and client quickly turning sour as expectations are not met. So, am I really that blissfully ignorant that I will stick to my guns and say that overpromising agencies are not rubbish? Absolutely! It is our responsibility as clients to brief and work with agencies with an almost religious precision, depth and insight and thereby ensuring that agencies can't get away with sweet talk and fluffy day dreams. We as clients must align our internal expectations, set clear objectives, specific ROI targets and pinpoint criteria of success. And this is before we even think about consulting agencies. Only then will we be able to present our agencies with straight to the point briefs that doesn't leave room for overpromises of any kind. Should the odd overpromising agency still find its way to our meeting rooms it will then be a simple task to simply thank them for their time while kindly letting them know that we are in fact looking for other qualities. The secret behind any successful campaign lies in a successful brief.

3) "Family ties"
When we appoint agencies, we should always hire agencies to work with us and never hire agencies to work for us. Let me repeat. With us and never for us. Subtle difference? Certainly. Critical difference? Yes. Our agencies should always be treated as part of the family and be hired like you would hire your in-house staff. Once appointed our agencies must be kept just as well informed as your own staff. After all, you are investing your budget in them and any invested Euro, dollar or Yen we as clients spend must be invested with commitment. Having been on the agency side I have first hand experience with clients treating agencies as acquaintances that they choose to update whenever there is a free minute (and as clients we all know there is no such thing as a free minute). It is therefore we must make a conscious decision as clients to treat our agencies as a member of the family who we dedicate our uninterrupted time and commitment to.

4) Trust the advice
When you go to your dentist because you have a challenge with a tooth, the dentist will give his/her recommendations on next steps. And what do you? You nod and let the dentist get on with the task at hand. After all, the dentist is the expect and does this everyday for a living. Not just for you but for a lot of different people with similar challenges as yours. I am therefore puzzled of the mental switch we as clients seem to have when we ask our agencies for advice. We have an amazing ability to disregard brilliant advice from PR agencies. "It is clear that they don't know my company and industry as well as I do" or "The ideas my agency comes up with are far fetched and simply not executionable", are some of the classical comments made behind closed doors when the PR agencies leave our boardrooms. Well, my dentist doesn't know my teeth as well as I do, so I don't expect her to instinctly know which of my teeth that aches. Instead I brief her about which tooth it is that aches, for how long it has been aching, the cause of the tooth ache, etc. In other words I give my dentist a clear and precise brief. Based on that my dentist users all her expertise to get to the root of the problem and fix it. I trust her advice and why shouldn't I. If she doesn't cure the tooth ache but instead focuses on making my front teeth shine, then I will leave with a shiny smile but still having a tooth ache and I would immediately seek another dentist to get it sorted. The same can be said about our agencies. If we don't trust or use the advice we get, then we must ask ourselves why we even went to seek their advice in the first place. Our agencies should have no intentional reason to provide us with wrongful advice and any advice that falls short of expectations can more often than not be traced back to one of two things; an unclear brief or lack of understanding of agency strength.

5) Live it
Complacent and lazy agencies are what we all fear and dread. We all want agencies that are upfront, proactive and eager to perform. But guess what. Behind every complacent agency is a complacent client. A client's lack of clear direction and goals combined with providing information that is "to little, to late" creates an atmosphere of complacency at an agency. And rightly so. If you as a client do not show enthusiasm and strongly believe in your products and campaigns, I will bet my Barbie collection that you within a short period of time would get an agency that loses interest in you. In fact, I would actually go as far as to applaud the agencies who dedicate their resources to the clients who show a contagious enthusiasm and belief in its product/organization.


The recipe
By sticking to the five criteria listed above, of 1) knowing the agencies that operate in our markets, 2) understanding and formulating precise briefs, 3) including and sharing information with our agencies, 4) following trusted advice, and 5) be committed to our causes, we should have a solid foundation that allows us to navigate our way through the treacherous waters of working with agencies. Because it is absolutely treacherous.

The buzz word is accountability
With a world in financial turmoil the buzz word at the moment is accountability. Not only are PR budgets across industries and markets being adjusted to the wobbling economies but just as importantly, every approved budget is being heavily scrutinized before, during and after implementation to ensure objectives and criteria of success are being achieved. Basically, after many years of uninterrupted growth and lightning speed to market with wall-to-wall campaigns, we are forced to going back to basics. Getting the foundation right, once again. The financial crisis is allowing us to revisit and review our current agency setups. And perhaps more importantly, the financial crisis is forcing us to reflect on how we approach the way we conduct our PR and treat our agencies because none of us really wants to be the rubbish client and this is our "Get-out-of-jail" card. And what a blessing in disguise this is turning out to be. As clients we are once again being held accountable and excuses such as brushing it off on underperforming agencies no longer flies in the boardrooms and mismanaged campaigns are being punished immediately on the stock exchanges around the world. It is therefore time to get out of our comfort zones and act with determination and accountability and let our agencies do what they do best; making us look good!

Følg Kforum

Login med facebook

Folk, der anbefaler 'No rubbish agencies, only rubbish clients'

Du har mulighed for at skrive en kommentar til din anbefaling, dette er valgfrit.
Gem Annuller

Kommentarer (3)

God tone i debatten

Hjælp os med at sikre en sober debat. Hold dig til saglige argumenter og understøt formålet med Kforum, som er at dele viden og erfaringer om kommunikation.

Læs Kforums takt og tone for god debatkultur her
Christian J. Porter-Schultz

Af: Christian J. Porter-Schultz / onsdag 10. februar 2010

Jeg skrev artiklen på engelsk til et europæisk magasin, men tænkte at Kforum's læsere også skulle have mulighed for at læse den.
Christian J. Porter-Schultz

Af: Christian J. Porter-Schultz / onsdag 10. februar 2010

Jeg tror desværre i din iver på at få sendt dit budskab afsted at du misforstod store dele af teksten.

Artiklen handler ikke om hvordan betaling af bureauer skal finde sted eller hvor meget de skal aflønnes, den handler derimod om at tage ejerskab af ens egne budgetter som kommunikationsansvarlig i en virksomhed. Og det lyder det jo til at Danfoss gør.

"Du siger: "Not only are PR budgets across industries and markets being adjusted to the wobbling economies", jeg siger: I vil slet ikke kunne adjuste priserne, hvis de havde været rimelige fra start."

Det handler som sagt ikke om PR bureauernes budgetter, men derimod om virksomhedernes PR budgetter, dvs. de penge de eksternt bruger på kommunikation. Og som de fleste kommunikationansvarlige derude vil sige, så er kommunikationsbudgetterne blev justeret i 2009, ligesom HR budgetterne er blevet justeret, salgsbudgetterne, logistic budgetter, etc.

Og så er det selvfølgelig ok at du har taget lidt kunstnerisk frihed og skåret halvdelen af en sætning væk , men for de uindviede så her er HELE sætningen

"Not only are PR budgets across industries and markets being adjusted to the wobbling economies but just as importantly, every approved budget is being heavily scrutinized before, during and after implementation to ensure objectives and criteria of success are being achieved."

Og så var jeg forresten ikke bange for at folk ikke ville kunne forstå engelsk, men ville blot forklare hvorfor artiklen var på engelsk. Sorry.
Tom Vilhelm Jensen

Af: Tom Vilhelm Jensen / onsdag 10. februar 2010

Du har muligvis ret, Christian Jeg trækker indlægget tilbage, hvis det falder udenfor, men for mig er der en tydelig sammenhæng.

Når du skriver: "Det handler som sagt ikke om PR bureauernes budgetter, men derimod om virksomhedernes PR budgetter, dvs. de penge de eksternt bruger på kommunikation. Og som de fleste kommunikationansvarlige derude vil sige, så er kommunikationsbudgetterne blev justeret i 2009, ligesom HR budgetterne er blevet justeret, salgsbudgetterne, logistic budgetter, etc", så forstår jeg simpelthen ikke hvad du mener, der skulle være forskellen på det udsagn og mit:
"Du siger: "Not only are PR budgets across industries and markets being adjusted to the wobbling economies", jeg siger: I vil slet ikke kunne adjuste priserne, hvis de havde været rimelige fra start."

Det er muligvis min fejl og jeg er åben overfor en forklaring.
Hvis du vil deltage i debatten skal du have en profil. Du kan oprette en profil på kforum her. Det tager få minutter.
Login med facebook