As readers of this blog will know, I've been ruminating, ok... stewing over the current state of the client/agency RFP process, which is creating tenuous client/agency relationships.
I just read in Mediapost that Comcast has named MediaVest its media "agency of reference." Is this what it's come to? Are clients so unsure of how strong a partner their agency will be that they have to make it clear that the shop is just there for its reference? It's like changing the status on your Facebook profile from "in a relationship" to "it's complicated."
Are the days of the true AOR (agency of record) gone with clients building a roster of various shops they can "reference" as needed? I sure hope not. Methinks, as I outlined in my post on fixing the client/agency RFP process, we need to institute a trial period whereby both client and agency have 90 days to get to know each other before commencing scope and fee negotiations. If after 90 days, the client can't commit to more than a desire to "reference" that firm going forward, it's probably in the best interests of all parties to part ways. Sure seems better than having a client tell a shop, "FYI, you won the RFP, but you're just our A-O-that-other-R."
FLETCHERJONESAUDI.COM/NORTHAVE.HTM - ALL CAPS and /Slashes can be tolerated but what comes after the slash here is unforgivable. North and Ave are 2 words that just don't go well smushed tog...
9 months ago