Network Agencies and Local AgenciesNetwork Agencies and Local Agencies
Networks of agencies were created to satisfy the needs of providing the global service to the global clients by easing the advertisement creation and adaption processes and guaranteeing united standards and strictly defined processes worldwide. Agencies basically globalize along with their clients. As David Ogilvy has described in his book – ‘A client once said he is opening a branch in Germany so I responded we didn’t have an agency in Germany. ‘So open it there!’ he said. Well, that is what I did and never regretted it so far.’
Statement: network agencies provide standardized processes and unified services for their clients in many countries simultaneously hence easing the introducing of global campaigns and their coordination.
Counterargument: nowadays planet has been much more globalized and marketing employs even more localized solutions which are more adapted to the concrete market, hence importance of network agencies has diminished.
Conclusion: today client pays more and more attention for brand new and strong ideas than to standards of global network agencies, hence providing the services of agencies which emphasize the understanding of the local mentalities and market, although it might not be a part of any wide network.
Statement: in the pre-internet age marketing knowledge and unique advertisement creation methods were the special tools of the largest network agencies.
Counterargument: today the internet environment is full of ideas and knowledge – it is no more a secret which would be available only for privileged specialists of network agencies.
Conclusion: network agencies are no more banks of exclusive knowledge - today the information is available for anyone from any place on the worlds where the internet is accessible.
Statement: network agencies are better appropriated to provided service for global brands worldwide.
Counterargument: basically the creative strategy is created only by one agency in one particular country and all of the rest just translate and does the sound records – these are no more marketing agencies if more like lawyer or linguist issue.
Conclusion: it does not have to be a marketing agency to adapt an advertisement of global brand.
Statement: network agencies have unified standards to make it more easy for clients to corporate.
Counterargument: unified standards have a meaning only if they truly correspond to the client’s marketing needs. Basically, every country is different in means of how the marketing is organized and how the client organizes the cooperation with agency. Today it is possible to order a Coca-cola bottle with a unique print on the label – which fixed standards can be even discussed?
Conclusion: unified standards of network agencies largely pertain to past.
Statement: network agencies are more expensive for clients.
Counterargument: being a part of the network is like being a part of an exclusive club which has a comparatively high membership admission, altogether with attending various expensive events while benefits from being a member of this club are unknown. Network demands both profit and detailed reports and organizes various activities (which cost an extra), hence client is the one who is charged for it. Being a part of a great network is more expensive. And how it is said in one advertisement – if the quality of a service does not differ, why pay more?
Conclusion: network agencies are more expensive for clients without adding an extra value.
Statement: network agencies have benefits by being in one network with many other ‘specialized’ agencies.
Counterargument: cooperation among agencies in one network still is cooperation among persons. Hence the quality of cooperation largely depends on the overall humane ability to cooperate. Second, network agencies have to choose partners from their own network, even if network partner offers a lower quality product for a higher price, due to financial aspects. In result – the client becomes the looser.
Conclusion: agency networks actually lower the quality of services based on the ‘consanguinity’ not on the free competition in which the winner is usually not the cognate but the best potential partner. Reasonably incest and marriage among relatives are prohibited.
Statement: middle-sized local agencies are able to create more powerful ideas than large network agencies.
Counterargument: it is not enough to create an idea – it has to be realized and it requires powerful and competent group of coworkers.
Conclusion: nowadays the most effective agencies have a local expertise and wide, talented group of specialists.
— unification, which is provided by network agencies have lost their meaning because the agency networks were created in pre-internet, pre-IT age when a mail was delivered in weeks! Today e-mail is delivered in few seconds and, in result, much more significance is on diversification, not on unification. The most important ability is to make an interesting communication, knowing the local situation and to adapt to it, not to guarantee standardized processes.
— In the battle of competition wins those agencies which not only can attract talented professionals but also build a powerful team which is able to work consequently and realize ideas, provide a high quality client service.
— The understanding of the local market is more important then meeting the requirements or global standard.
— Network agencies will not disappear because of the global clients requiring the network of global agencies which are responsible for the work that has to be done and relieves the client from the necessity to coordinate marketing activities in many countries simultaneously.
— The 'brand new, hot' agencies also have expanded and established branches in other countries during the years.
— Although we live in a global world the local expertise is still an important component.
— The agency for the global clients has to provide more services than just advertisement translations - hence any network agency has to develop their creative competences.
— The firm bonds between global clients and network agencies are no more so firm as they were 10-20-30 years ago, and now global clients are using more often the services of various agencies at the same time, of which some might not even be global network agencies but still provide innovative, interesting and exciting ideas.