Marketing Math Blog

“What’ll You Have …?”

By Advertisers, Contract Compliance Auditing, Marketing Accountability No Comments

pabst blue ribbonRead on to learn the answer to this iconic brand jingle lead-in. 

“The Giants are at the Patriots’ six yard line, Manning hands off to Bradshaw who punches it in for a touchdown as the Giants take the lead…”  Time for a beer and bathroom break, or do the assembled masses remain glued to their seats to be regaled by the much anticipated commercials?

The world’s greatest advertising spectacle, the Super Bowl, is rapidly drawing near.  With the prospect of reaching 100 million+ viewers, some 35 to 40 advertisers will line-up to pay on average $3.7 million for a 30 second TV spot… exclusive of production costs. 

After all, everyone remembers Apple’s “Sledgehammer” spot, Coca Cola’s “Mean Joe Green” commercial and the ever popular Budweiser “Frogs” execution.  Maybe so, but are these and a handful of other examples simply the anomalies from 46 years of Super Bowl advertising?  Let’s face it, the Super Bowl is a time to gather with friends and family to enjoy a few libations and perhaps even to watch a little football. 

As much as Madison Avenue would like to think that the event has evolved to be as much about the commercials as the game, practical experience might suggest otherwise.   Fact check time;  Does anyone remember  Miller Lite’s  “Evil Beaver” spot from the 1998 Super Bowl or the 2nd Story Software “TaxAct”  commercial from 2012?  Thought so.  Just because an advertiser coughs up millions of dollars for a 30 second shot at reaching a fraction of the 100 million+ potential viewers or in creating a pop-culture phenomenon doesn’t mean they are guaranteed that their efforts will succeed.

Legalized gambling.  A reference often used in the context of the ever popular state lottery games, is an apt description of Super Bowl advertising.  The house, in this case the network, certainly wins and sure a few advertisers (gamblers) will let their annual budgets roll on one high profile execution that may even pay off.  If you’re GM with a marketing budget of $4.5 billion or Anheuser-Busch Inbev at $1.5 billion, the risks are minimal.  On the other hand, for some of the smaller advertisers such as Master Lock, McIllhenny Co. or Soda Stream who have braved these proverbial waters the potential consequences of failure are substantially greater.

We all recall the Monday at the office water cooler where everyone is re-living the prior evening’s game, the athletic performances, scoring highlights and yes… the commercials.  The conversation typically starts out with “did you see the one with…” and frequently ends with everyone with trying to recall the advertiser’s name.   To suggest that advertising recall is an unattainable goal would be an overstatement to be sure.  However with a viewing environment marked by sensory overload for a sports and entertainment spectacle such as the Super Bowl, breaking through the clutter is damn challenging.   Diligence and luck certainly play a role in realizing this objective.  In the words of the bard of Avon, William Shakespeare:

“Fortune brings in some boats that are not steered. “

Taking calculated risks is a component of every marketing resource allocation decision, precisely because there are no guarantees and the linear relationship between stimulus and response remains so nebulous.  It is for this reason that advertisers should seek to mitigate the risks associated with the performance of their advertising investments on a year-round basis, once resource allocation decisions have been made.  Unfortunately, too many organizations are willing to “roll the dice” when it comes to assessing contract compliance or vetting performance when it comes to their agency network and third-party vendor relationships.   The irony is that the link between cause and effect is more certain when it comes to contract and performance auditing than it is with any other facet of the advertising investment cycle.

Here’s hoping that you enjoy the 2013 Super Bowl and all of the attendant festivities.  But don’t be surprised when your guests or the bar patrons next to you respond to the question of; “What’ll You Have?” with an answer of Pabst Blue Ribbon as they’re being entertained by the spot with the Clydesdales or taking in the Bud Bowl.  And when the Super Bowl has come and gone and the buzz surrounding this year’s “Top Spots” has faded into memory, take a moment to reflect on how your organization can take the requisite steps to boost its chances for marketing success by embracing a comprehensive accountability initiative.  In the end, you will be glad that you played the odds and didn’t “let it ride.”

Interested in learning more about marketing accountability and how to implement the appropriate controls and transparency? Contact Don Parsons, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at dparsons@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation on this topic.

 

 

 

Deadlines Don’t Make Great Partners When It Comes to Marketing Procurement

By Advertisers, Contract Compliance Auditing, Marketing Procurement No Comments

hThe economic forecast for 2013 can be summed up in one word, “uncertain.”  One of the results of this uncertainty will likely be downward pressure on corporate budgets…. including marketing spend.  Whether this results in budget stagnation or enterprise expense reduction initiatives, companies will be looking to balance their revenue generation efforts with the need to contain expenditures.

Point-in-fact, a recent study released by the UK advertising agency group IPA, found that as of the end of October 2012, marketing budgets “had been reigned in during the third quarter of this year to a greater extent than at any time since 2009.”  Of note, 23% of survey respondents “reported a reduction in marketing spend” with only 18% indicating that their budgets had increased.  According to the group, that -5%+ differential “represented a dramatic fall” when compared to the -1.1% in the second quarter and +1.0% in the first quarter of this year.  

In light of this challenging environment, it is highly probable that corporate procurement will be asked to expand their involvement with marketing to identify potential cost savings for the coming year.  These types of corporate edicts complete with succinct timetables and “hard” cost-reduction targets can create challenges on both sides of the aisle.  If procurement and marketing haven’t already forged a close working relationship and a base level of understanding of the role that each group plays and the expertise that they bring to the task at hand, then the risk exists that the process will be fraught with anxiety and tension.  Clearly Bill Phillips had it right when he intoned:

“Stress should be a powerful driving force, not an obstacle.”

Unfortunately, this is not always the case.  One has to look no further than the political gridlock in Washington D.C. over the “Fiscal Cliff” to see that time-constrained processes designed to address challenging financial issues are difficult, to say the least.  Stakeholders tend to become more entrenched in their views and focus on defending budgetary “sacred cows” or attacking perceived “excesses” rather than working together to map out a balanced approach. 

Marketers, let’s be honest, whether you’re managing a $15 million budget or a $500 million marketing budget, there are always opportunities for improved efficiency’s.  The key to success in working with procurement on a near-term expense reduction initiative is to help identify the “nice to have” budgetary line items versus the “need to have.”  Remember, it is still marketing’s obligation to optimize the organization’s revenue potential during uncertain times.  Prioritizing areas to explore to achieve the organization’s expense reduction goal will be a significant help to the procurement team and will provide the catalyst necessary to jump-start the process.

One area often overlooked by marketing and procurement teams when seeking hard cost savings are the dollars that can be generated from a historical review of the organization’s marketing investment.  Agency contract compliance audits and billing reconciliation reviews can yield significant financial true-up opportunities as well as potential future savings.  In our experience, it is not a-typical for a contract compliance audit to return between 2% – 9% of audited billings in the form of financial returns and or future savings to the advertiser. 

Best of all, by engaging an independent contract compliance auditor this process can take place concurrently with the efforts of marketing and procurement in reviewing the existing/ proposed budget for potential savings.  Further, given the historical, data-driven approach which should be the hallmark of a contract compliance audit, the process requires little time on the part of the marketing and procurement team members and virtually no time on the part of the agency account teams that often play a critical support role in working with the client to identify potential budgetary savings. 

Every dollar’s worth of saving is generated from historical rather than future expenditures and the risk to the organization demand generation efforts are significantly lessened. This is precisely the type of scenario in which all stakeholders can find grounds for agreement.

Interested in learning more about the benefits of compliance auditing and its role in an enterprise expense reduction initiative?  Contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at ccampeau@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation on the topic.

 

When Agencies Become Resellers

By Advertisers, Advertising Agencies, Marketing Accountability, Right to Audit Clauses No Comments

agencies as resellersEase of access, streamlined delivery, cost-efficiency and enhanced profitability are all viable bi-products of vertical integration.  There is no arguing that businesses can realize value by minimizing their own costs, while simultaneously influencing market rates and their competitors’ costs. 

But what if that business is an advertising agency?  Viewed through the eyes of an agency holding company and its shareowners, vertical integration is quite intriguing.  On the other hand, from the perspective of the clients they serve, the concept raises some moral and fiduciary concerns that should be addressed in the context of a client-agency agreement.

Some would argue that it is never appropriate for an agency to become a reseller of goods and or services.  Others might suggest that as long as it allows the agency to deliver better-than-market values or efficiencies, why not, the client is the beneficiary.  Where one stands on the issue is no longer material.  Why?  The proverbial “train has left the station” as agency holding companies have continued to rely on vertical integration strategies as an important means of driving agency revenues and profits. 

From a client perspective, the phrase; Caveat Emptor or Buyer Beware comes to mind.  When an advertiser hires a full-service advertising agency, media, digital or creative services shop or a specialty agency, they do so with the implied understanding that the agency will always act in the client’s best interest.  Is this a realistic expectation for agency holding companies whose acquisition strategies have directly fed vertical integration strategies that often generate significant below-the-line revenue opportunities? 

Unfortunately, too often there is a lack of transparency regarding how an agency holding company deploys certain services, their ownership position in those resources and or the nature of the remuneration they receive from “owned” or independent sellers.  It’s been our experience, that transparency is the fundamental issue when it comes to advertisers’ rights and agencies’ fiduciary responsibilities.  What has been divulged can be discussed.  In turn, these discussions can form the basis for negotiating terms of use and responsibilities that can then be laid out in the client-agency agreement, providing the requisite levels of transparency and control to protect both parties.  In the words of the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who wrote critical texts on morality:

“There are no facts, only interpretations.”

Surprisingly, too few contracts address the reality of agency brand and holding company inter-connectedness or the mode and level of compensation derived from the reselling of goods and services.  At a minimum, the following protections should be built into a letter-of-agreement:

  1. Advertiser “right to audit” clause
  2. Extension of contract terms and obligations beyond the agency brand to include the holding company and its subsidiaries along with wholly and or jointly owned entities
  3. Clear language regarding agency remuneration, sources, amounts and limits
  4. Assertion of advertiser rights to its pro-rata share of any and all discounts, rebates or incentives earned by the agency on the advertiser’s behalf
  5. Require agency to fully-disclose any commitments made to parent/sibling agency resources or to sellers offering agency incentives beyond commission
  6. Assertion of intent with regard to the agency’s obligation to competitively bid all creative, production and or media services
  7. Require agency to fully-disclose when services covered as part of a retainer or commission structure are sub-contracted to a parent/sibling agency or third-party.  To protect an advertiser from paying an agency for services it is not performing or is only partially performing, clear contract language needs to be established to address the circumstances that either reduce agency remuneration or reallocate unearned funds to other areas.

It is important to bear in mind the extent to which agencies have extended their supply chain “reach” with their vertical integration efforts.  These include ownership in: in-house studios, barter firms, broadcast production companies, ad exchanges, ad networks, media rep firms, staffing firms, original content production companies, and the like.

From an advertiser’s perspective, the goal is to establish contractual responsibilities and controls that will shape agency behaviors and performance in a manner that insures a level of objectivity and resource investment desired by the client.  Simple.  Right?  Not so much.  In the words of M.C. Escher one of the most renowned graphic artists of the twentieth-century:

Are you really sure that a floor can’t also be a ceiling?”

Interested in learning more about the benefits of compliance auditing as a means of improving transparency into your marketing investment and control over the stewardship of those funds?  Contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at ccampeau@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation on the topic.

 

Social Media Can Teach Us a Lot

By Advertisers, Contract Compliance Auditing, Media Rebates No Comments

social mediaI’m being polite.  The real point of this article is “Advertisers Beware.”  After serving as an agency account director and client-side marketing executive, I thought I had heard it all. However, after becoming involved in marketing accountability consulting my eyes were opened… or so I thought.  

Recently, a post by an agency media professional on a social media group to which I belong caught my attention.  The two-part question had to do with: 1) Whether or not an agency buyer should request unspent monies back from the media; and 2) If so, was the agency entitled to keep those funds.  What was surprising was not the question per se but some of the responses from group members, largely media buyers and sellers, suggesting it was appropriate for either or both of those parties to retain an advertiser’s unspent funds.     

Either the advertising industry has lost its moral compass or there is an urgent need for training and education in and around agency and media stakeholders’ fiduciary responsibilities to the advertiser.  As British philosopher and social critic Bertrand Russell once said: 

“We have two kinds of morality side by side: one which we preach but do not practice and another which we practice but seldom preach.” 

In our agency contract compliance auditing practice the need for education and a greater level of financial controls on the part of the advertiser is played out on a regular basis.  It is not uncommon to identify aged media credits that are extremely old or to learn that prompt payment discounts, volume discounts or AVB’s that have been earned by the advertiser have not yet been “processed.”  

For too many years the advertiser community has turned a blind eye toward many of the industry’s practices regarding agency and media use of advertiser funds.  These include items such as the interest income earned on float and the retention of compensatory media weight.  However, if there are stakeholders within various facets of the media purchasing cycle that are unclear about the need to return budgeted, but unspent funds to the advertiser than we should all take heed.  

This is obviously a serious issue and importantly one where there should be no debate.  The only answer to the aforementioned question is that media agencies and media owners have a fiduciary responsibility to their clients.  Any unused funds, media credits, compensatory media weight for underdelivery, prompt pay discounts and or rebates should go back to the advertiser, plain and simple.  Let’s remember, it is the advertisers’ money being invested, not the agency’s and not the media properties. 

Further, on the topic of AVBs, policy action is required by the ANA and 4A’s as it relates to the growing use of volume rebates both globally and within the U.S.  Advertisers should be reassured that their agencies are planning and deploying their media budgets in an optimal manner based upon sound, fact-based analysis tied to maximizing the advertiser’s return on media investment.  The faintest specter of allocation decisions being skewed by the presence of an AVB offered by the media to an agency holding company is simply inappropriate. 

However, as we all know, education and the enactment of industry policy takes time.  Consequently, in the short-term the best way for an advertiser to monitor their marketing investment may be through the use of independent contract compliance auditing.  

A good approach would be to begin with upgrading agency contract language to provide the requisite legal and financial safeguards to protect the advertiser’s interest on these topics and to incent all parties to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner.  This would be followed by some combination of contract compliance monitoring, performance assessments, billing reconciliations and time-of-staff/ fee reconciliation reviews.  In the end, this type of accountability program will both protect an advertiser’s interests and clearly communicate its expectations regarding “appropriate” behavior among its agents and 3rd party vendors when it comes to their financial obligations.  

Interested in learning more about the benefits of compliance auditing as a means of improving transparency into your marketing investment and control over the stewardship of those funds?  Contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at ccampeau@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation on the topic.

Marketing Accountability. Who Owns It?

By Marketing, Marketing Accountability No Comments

marketing accountabilitySeems like a straight forward question.  And the answer is vital to the success of an organization’s marketing accountability initiative. 

From a functional perspective, should it be Marketing, Finance, Procurement or Internal Audit?  Should the CMO, CFO, CPO and or their lieutenants take the lead?  And of course the real zinger; “Whose budget will cover the cost of the initiative?”

Simple questions?  Yes, but with answers that have organizational implications that frequently pose significant impediments to fielding a marketing accountability program.  The reasons cited range from “We’re short-staffed” to “We want to do it, but budgetary constraints won’t allow for it this FY.”  Thus, for most advertisers, their marketing accountability initiatives are DOA.  It’s a shame when you consider the hundreds of $millions in marketing spend committed annually with little in the way of contract compliance auditing, financial reconciliation, performance monitoring or independent oversight. 

The obvious question for stakeholders is: “Would you play it so loose if it were your own money?”  Probably not.  Truth be told, accountability is everyone’s responsibility and is a pillar of good corporate governance.  The tone is typically set by the CEO and over time, becomes part and parcel of an organization’s culture. 

From a marketing perspective perhaps the best model to consider is a multi-functional team of internal stakeholders from Procurement, Marketing and Finance with the source of funding being the marketing budget and the CMO serving as the leader of the initiative.  Why Marketing?  Because Marketing will be the primary beneficiary of the resulting process improvements, efficiency gains and financial true-ups that are typically realized as part of an accountability effort.  Further, while business results, brand building, strategy development, analysis and leadership are skills required of the CMO position, accountability and responsible stewardship of the organization’s marketing investment are vitally important elements as well.

In the end, the organization realizes a number of benefits that will improve the efficacy of its marketing spend, boost ROMI and improve the performance of their marketing services agency network:

  • Enhanced agency stewardship systems (i.e. contracts, compensation and evaluation systems)
  • Improved controls, transparency and reporting
  • Efficiency gains
  • Improved financial stewardship practices

So what are the critical components of a marketing accountability program?  At its root, it begins with the clear articulation of the organization’s business objectives, marketing goals and expectations of each stakeholder group involved in the marketing process.  One of the most critical stakeholder groups is the organization’s marketing services agency network.  A well-conceived marketing accountability program will help both advertiser and agency align resources with the organization’s goals.  In turn, these decisions will ultimately drive decisions regarding roles and responsibilities, deliverables, agency staffing, remuneration and the criteria that will be utilized to assess performance. 

Successful accountability management programs are not one-and-done propositions.  They involve implementing and executing a system which has an ongoing monitoring component.  Often times, this may include utilizing independent auditors to help instill the requisite feedback and control processes into the culture of the advertiser and each member of their marketing services agency network. 

Marketing accountability and the attendant activities associated with these initiatives (i.e. performance monitoring, compliance testing, independent auditing) form the basis for organizations to ensure that the millions of dollars spent on marketing are tracked appropriately.  More importantly, these actions will afford an advertiser the opportunity to drive each of the stakeholders that comprise their marketing supply chain to extraordinary performance.

What is the Outlook for 2013

By Advertisers, Marketing Agency Network No Comments

marketing spend forecastAccording to the International Monetary Fund’s world economic outlook, the “risks for a serious global slowdown are alarmingly high” in the coming year.  So how will the economic uncertainty impact the advertising industry? 

Marketing budgets are already under pressure as the U.S. economy plods along at steady, but lackluster growth rates and international markets struggle with the uncertainty surrounding the European Union.  Like it or not, Europe is an important part of the “growth” conversation.  Why? Europe accounts for approximately one-fifth of both the U.S.’ and China’s total exports.  Thus, if the economic situation in Europe takes a downturn, the repercussions on the world’s two largest economies could be significant.

In spite of the challenges posed by the global economic situation, from a marketing perspective, Zenith Optimedia is forecasting a 4.5% spending growth rate in 2013 to $524.7 billion.  Of note, a majority of the growth will occur in the United States.  Zenith’s CEO commented that while marketing spend levels are “solid,” companies are “seeking to ensure that any expenditures are delivering strong return on investment.”

With demand generation a desired, but uncertain outcome for marketers, the role of marketing accountability increases in importance to help keep all stakeholders focused on performance.  Establishing clear marketing KPIs that are aligned with an organization’s business goals, and translating those KPIs into specific performance criteria for each agency in an advertiser’s marketing services agency network, is a critical first step in any accountability program.

Once performance goals have been established, everything will fall in place, right?  Not necessarily.  Advertisers may want to evaluate agency remuneration programs, staffing plans and statements of work to insure that these foundational elements of an agency stewardship system are properly constructed and conducive to aligning their agencies’ resource investments with the desired outcomes.  Layer on a continuous monitoring program which provides all stakeholders with the requisite information for assessing progress and adjusting resource allocations on a timely basis and the chances for improving the efficacy of one’s marketing investment will be significantly enhanced. 

While there are no guarantees when it comes to ROMI, experience has shown that a deliberate systematic approach to marketing resource management can boost results.  In the words of Sir Edward Coke the noted English barrister;

“Precaution is better than cure.”

In a slow growth environment, with budgetary pressures likely for the foreseeable future, this may very well be the “cost of entry.”  In our Agency Contract Compliance & Performance practice, we see the results of marketer commitment to sound accountability practices first hand.

Interested in learning more, contact us for a complimentary consultation on, “Building a High Performance Marketing Agency Network.”  Simply contact Don Parsons, Principal at dparsons@aarmusa.com to schedule a convenient time.

Incenting Extraordinary Agency Performance

By Advertisers, Agency Compensation, Client Agency Relationship Management No Comments

performance incentive compensationThe ANA’s 2012 “Trends in Agency Compensation” survey found that forty-nine percent of the advertiser’s surveyed utilized “performance based compensation” as part of their agency remuneration programs.  Further, of those advertisers using performance incentives, two-thirds noticed an improvement in agency performance.

However, like most issues, incenting extraordinary agency performance isn’t as simple as throwing more money at it.  A study by the 4A’s found that performance incentives accounted for approximately three percent of agency holding company revenues.  So it is highly unlikely that the implementation of a performance incentive program, in and of itself, will achieve the desired results when it comes to elevating agency performance. 

We believe that there are six keys to incenting extraordinary performance:

  1. Clear delineation of agency roles & responsibilities
  2. Alignment of agency resource investment with client  goals
  3. Establishing performance expectations for each agency
  4. Non-monetary incentives
  5. Incentive compensation
  6. Systematic performance monitoring

Based upon our experience, driving agency performance is a process which requires teamwork within the client organization and between client and agency.  Further, the process is one that relies heavily on non-monetary incentives to balance the relationship.   Non-monetary incentives include intangible relationship attributes such as; stability, communication, access and respect. 

Why are these attributes important to an agency?  For an agency to deliver extraordinary performance, it requires an investment of both strategic and executional resources and a commitment to assembling and retaining the best and brightest account team available within the agency to assist the client in achieving superior results.  An agency is much more willing to make that commitment if it is confident that it can realize a return on their investment.  If agency management senses that their insights and recommendations are desired and valued by the client, that they have access to and the respect of senior client management and that the agency is viewed as a valued partner rather than a vendor this leads to a stable relationship which has the ability to withstand the test of time.

Client-side procurement professionals have access to a number of tools that can aid and abet the organizations desire to generate a greater return on its agency network fee investment.  These include the following instruments and processes:

  • Clear, concise, client-centric contracts and statements of work
  • The inclusion of a “Right to Audit” clause within the LOA
  • Identification of a reporting and control process to monitor performance
  • Utilization of a 360° agency evaluation process
  • Customized agency remuneration programs for each agency

These tools are beneficial to both the client and agency teams in establishing expectations and creating a transparent environment which encourages both parties to discuss progress and address concerns immediately, rather than letting issues fester and become a detriment to the relationship.   

Change in an advertiser’s marketing services network is expensive and can create risks.  Considering the relatively short tenure of a CMO, 23 months according to Spencer Stuart and the decline in the length of client-agency relationships (estimated to be less than 3 years, down from 7+ years in 1984) action must be taken by the client organization to mitigate those risks.  It would certainly appear as though the reduction in CMO tenure is contributory to shorter client-agency relationships.  Too often when we learn about a “changing of the guard” in the marketing C-suite this is followed by the announcement of an agency review.  

In order to break this cycle change for change sake, client organizations should view their marketing services agency networks as a “corporate asset.”   This perspective can positively shape the client’s agency stewardship approach, involving a multi-functional team comprised of representatives from across the organization.  The shared corporate responsibility for nurturing the growth and contribution of the marketing services agencies can elevate the asset value of the network while directly supporting the CMO’s demand generation and brand building efforts. 

A “well-oiled” agency network operates more efficiently.  Combined with a contract compliance and performance monitoring program the approach can lead to extraordinary performance and enterprise savings.  Consider the results of a recent study conducted by the procurement outsourcing group Proxima which surveyed 300 London-listed companies.  Their research found that; “a one percent reduction in non-labor costs could boost average annual earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization by 3.6%.”

If you’re interested in learning more about how your organization can incent extraordinary agency performance, contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at AARM at ccampeau@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation.

The Future of Marketing is Now. How Will You Optimize ROMI?

By Marketing, Marketing Agency Network No Comments

key to marketing futureWe’re all familiar with the key trends that have shaped the last several years within the advertising sector; media convergence, fragmentation, consolidation, data proliferation and emerging media.  Now that it is clear that these are not passing fads, the question faced by marketers across the globe is “How can we focus our efforts and resources in a way that acknowledges the fundamental changes which have occurred and leverages our opportunities?” 

In a recent article in AdAge entitled “Marketing’s Next Five Years: How to Get from Here to There” author Matthew Creamer shares a compelling perspective on how marketers can use the knowledge gleaned in the recent pass to chart a path forward.  When one considers the growth of internet and mobile as a percentage of ad spending, much of it at the expense of traditional media, marketers will need to adjust both their resource allocation decisions as well as their performance expectations with regard to crafting and delivering their brand messages to the intended target audience. 

One of the most intriguing changes is in the area of audience measurement and media attribution and the role it will play in influencing marketing strategy.  Consider for example television, which is and will remain the largest ad spending category.  Today, it is estimated that less than 2% of the advertising on television is “data-denominated with guarantees of GRPs and sales attribution.”  As second-by-second audience ratings data continues to proliferate, the impact on addressable TV will be profound.  The role of TV will shift from a cost-efficient means of reaching the masses to that of a media which has the ability to micro-target specific consumer segments to delivery specific or niche product messages in a very direct manner.  

Needless to say, defining the roles of each medium in an ever evolving media set will require the ability to process and analyze “big data” to generate insights that drive an advertiser’s creative and media delivery decisions.  Data analysis will also factor heavily into the establishment of campaign performance criteria, which will likely be more “outcome” focused and the real-time monitoring of progress toward an advertiser’s demand generation and brand development goals.  

These trends will clearly impact the client-agency relationship and the subject matter expertise that will be required of an advertiser’s marketing services agency network.  The clear delineation of roles and responsibilities, the need to harness technology and tap the services of data and consumer strategy and insight specialist and, yes, how agencies are compensated will be seminal issues that need to be addressed within client-agency letters-of-agreement. 

That being said, it is an exciting time to be in marketing whether on the client-side, at an ad agency or working in the marketing accountability field.  According to Mr. Creamer; “even the worst-case forecasts have our economic malaise nearing an end” and a “true recovery taking shape with low unemployment and revitalized consumers.”   Interested in learning more?  Check out the article in its entirety in AdAge.

Do Performance Incentives Have a Place In Agency Remuneration Systems?

By Advertising Agencies, Agency Compensation, Letter of Agreement Best Practices No Comments

Agency Performance CompensationThe direct answer is “yes” bonus compensation systems can be a viable means of incenting proper resource allocation decisions, behavior and performance among an advertiser’s agency network… just as they are with driving employee performance within an organization.

Perhaps a better question is; “What type of outcomes should be recognized?”  While the answer to that important question will vary by advertiser, as Stephen Covey wisely stated:  “Begin with the end in mind.”

This is clearly the case in designing performance compensation systems for marketing services agencies.  Properly structured, incentive compensation systems are an excellent tool for aligning an advertiser’s agency network partners with the organization’s long-term business goals.  Yes, that’s right, long-term goals.  That is not to minimize the importance of the near-term sales and profit needs of the business and the role that marketing communications can play in successfully realizing those goals, but those outcomes should be the focus of the “base pay” portion of an agency remuneration system.  A solid base compensation program is a requisite first step toward insuring that an agency makes the appropriate investment in staffing, consumer research & analytics, market insights and efficiency enhancing technology tools necessary to achieve next quarter’s demand generation goals. 

Securing agency “buy-in” and participation in supporting the broader strategic objectives of the organization are essential for long-term brand health and market share success.  This is where we believe a performance compensation program should be focused.  Too often we have seen incentive programs focus on tactical or executional outcomes at the expense of tapping into an agency’s strategic reserves as a means of upping the value of their contribution to an organization’s long-term success. 

One of the keys to success in this area is to involve the top management of both the advertiser and the agency.  Bringing senior management together to discuss the client’s vision for success, business goals and the performance criteria that should be put in place to assess progress has a dual benefit.  One, it can elevate the perspective of the agency from “vendor” to “partner” status in the eyes of the client’s management team and gain their appreciation for the agency’s strategic capabilities.  Secondly, the opportunity for a broader level of “strategic engagement” with a client can be an incredibly compelling proposition for senior agency management.  In turn, the combination of the respect exhibited by the client for the agency’s ability to contribute and the corresponding financial reward tied to their mutual success will fuel an agency to make the desired resource investment.

When structuring the performance criteria for an incentive compensation program, the need to blend both quantitative and qualitative measures is very real.  While written in the context of organization’s incenting their employees to take a long-term perspective, we were intrigued with a recent article in the McKinsey Quarterly and its relevancy to this topic.  Entitled; “Encouraging Your People to Take the Long View” authors Gibbs, Heywood and Pettigrew surmised that “over time, traditional hard performance metrics can encourage short-term success at the expense of an organization’s long-term health.”  However, they recognized that both measuring and strengthening the “capabilities that help companies thrive over the long haul” can be challenging.  Their answer?  Structure an evaluation process that effectively assesses contributions to “corporate health” by embracing the following principles:

1) Root-Out Unhealthy Habits 

2) Prioritize Values

3) Keep it Simple

We would certainly echo the notion of “simplicity.”  Too often in our contract compliance auditing practice, we encounter incentive compensation systems that are confusing, overly complex and metric laden to the point that they may incent very little in the way of extraordinary performance.

Finally, we would recommend integrating an annual client-agency 360° evaluation process that involves the same senior managers that were party to constructing the terms of the performance compensation program.  The ability to mutually assess progress and to identify areas for refinement in the coming months can boost the chances for successfully achieving the client’s goals and for building the client-agency relationship. 

Interested in learning more about the role of performance compensation programs in agency remuneration systems?  Contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at ccampeau@aarmusa.com for a complimentary consultation. 

The Flip Side

By Contract Compliance Auditing No Comments

compliance auditingRather than focusing on how the client / agency relationship is out of alignment as the basis for a financial compliance audit… consider this.  Proactive marketers, with highly satisfactory advertising agency / media buying relationships use “best practice” compliance auditing as a mechanism to maintain a good relationship and to support staying with their current marketing partner. 

One AARM client example.  The client’s marketing department recently (together with procurement’s support) initiated an agency media performance and billing compliance audit.  The stated audit objective was to confirm Marketing’s past experience and opinion that their agency has done an exceptional job over the last 6 years.  The audit was an agreed-to preemptive strike.  

The client’s procurement group is required, via corporate policy, to initiate a competitive RFP process every 5 years on each material vendor’s services.  Stakeholders engaged the audit process with full expectations that their agency would be found to be in compliance in all the requisite and important financial / stewardship areas.  Results were then to be used to support an ongoing relationship with the Incumbent, and as a means to avoid the potentially disruptive and costly RFP cycle. 

There was a catch.  The audit could not be a “wand-over” quick-check with sampling or haphazard testing procedures.  And could not be conducted by the company’s internal audit group, or by an external generalist firm.  Management required a specialist firm be engaged, to enable an unbiased assessment as to the health and clarity of the agency’s financial treatment.  A software enabled deep-dive data auditing capability was to be employed, industry best practices were to be compared and all agency billing areas were to be covered; including retainer-fee basis, commission application, labor charging practices, and pass-through costs. 

From a service provider’s perspective, it is refreshing to see the client / agency relationship being considered, in more than a neutral fashion but as a basis to inspect and a rationale to stay the course.  Agency change is disruptive and not guaranteed to meet expectations.  The time (market opportunity and real) it takes to bring any new agency partner up to speed and integrate them into the corporate fold is material.  We always suggest, where possible, an advertiser exhaust all reasonable effort to remedy a relationship with the existing service provider in the marketing area, rather than make a knee-jerk or non-required change. 

Our client in this case is doing it right.  They have set expectations, they are testing against those expectations as a good control practice, they plan to adjust process or control issues that come out of the review, and they will go forward with an even stronger proven relationship.  The agency is on-board, clearly has a vested interest in cooperating with the inspection, and will also benefit from any new level of financial transparency and understanding derived from the work. 

Audit should not be primarily about suspicion, gotcha, cost recovery, or selective issues.  Audit is about consistency, learning, strong financial awareness, compliance and continuous improvement. 

An additional benefit from a consistent / proactive audit program is the ability to challenge any new CMO’s suggested agency changes.  If industry statistics serve, it is likely that any given large advertiser will have a new CMO within the next 12 to 18 months, and they may want to change agency partners – what can you do? 

Go audit, stay happy!