How Advertising Agencies Can Brand Themselves
Most advertising agency brands are lacking. This is not an indictment of the talent within agencies or the fact these businesses help others stand out, it is because the number one ingredient is missing. Why does any business seek outside help? Most believe it is specific expertise and experience but it boils down to objectivity. Fresh eyes and honesty are invaluable.
Agencies are notorious for bogging down with too many ideas and getting stuck in their own machinations. Efforts are subjective and myopic. Often I am called in after the fact and arrive to find highly unsuccessful self-surgeries. I have assisted most types of professional service firms and see the job as inspiring clients to break free from the conventions of their category.
Accounting Firms: it took decades but finally accounting firms and the partners who run them, recognized they needed outside help. Unfortunately, most solutions are watered down in a torturous journey through committees and approvals. The net effect is safe brands with zero differentiation. It is tough to discern between KPMG, PwC, Deloitte, Grant Thornton, and BDO.
Architecture Firms: in this realm, it is all about crisp videos and photos of finished edifices. All marketing ends up as a coffee table book. This is usually padded with biographies of the firm’s talent that resonates with no one but the individual described. Even the best firms end up competing on price.
Consulting Firms: regardless of specialties, every consultancy believes they are great marketers. Internally, they get excited when the topic comes up and will prioritize it. They will even spend money but then lose interest and move on. Such is the nature of consulting, there is no sustained effort as it is treated as a project.
Law Firms: these entities operate on precedent allowing little room for marketing innovation or bold moves. The top performers leverage long histories, size and reach. This is a recipe for glacier-like growth.
This brings us to Advertising Agencies. Think of the big traditional players like BBDO, Grey, Leo Burnett, TBWA, Ogilvy and DDB. Then there are influential others comprising Crispin Porter, Mother, Sid Lee, R/GA, and Wieden + Kennedy. Next, add the hot new shops (there are always hot new shops) that currently include Mischief @ No Fixed Address, Acadia, We Believers, Uncommon, and Giant Spoon.
There is no shortage of choice when it comes to agencies and that makes it harder for each to stand out. The giants have had decades to develop brand-name recognition, influencers attempt to balance size with creativity and speed, while the hot shops have very cool names and leverage a mystique stemming from their newness. Regardless of where they are in business maturity and expertise, few agencies do a good job branding themselves.
This is because of a flawed process. Agencies go through a linear, pedantic exercise of identifying strengths and weaknesses. This has them talk about past work, float a tagline and compare the “new” positioning to competitors. This leads to tactical communications covering websites, social media accounts, newsletters and press releases, and hopes for a win at an award show. There should be no surprise when the phone fails to ring.
Clients buy for their reasons, not the agency’s. And clients buy when they have a need and are predisposed to an agency that has marketed exceptionally. Yet, clients are turned off when agencies speak only about themselves. Visit any agency website and it is dominated by “About Us” and “Who We Are”. White papers and videos are vacuous self-promotions and insulting sales pitches. The result is agencies end up being irrelevant experts. They make the mistake of assuming clients are buying “the agency’. Clients are buying a tailored solution.
There are two things to remember when branding an agency.
A single differentiator is nonexistent. Agencies struggle to get that beautiful positioning, succinct statement and cocktail-party explanation of what they do, but what makes anything unique is a mix of attributes, talents and accomplishments. So, while it’s great to be clear and concise, I never recommend oversimplifying or dumbing down the complexity and value of what you provide.
There is a process. Many of my clients start the conversation with tactical queries. Should we be on TikTok? Are sponsoring conferences relevant? Or, they start strategically but the contents are divorced from reality. Those who win at marketing demonstrate a constancy of purpose that allows flexibility in strategy and tactics (it was Benjamin Disraeli who said, “The secret of success is constancy of purpose.”).
I build go-to-market plans for agencies rather than traditional marketing plans. It is a mindset change and has worked wonders for agencies who commit to the process and execution. Nothing is static and go-to-markets take this into account. Rather than being backward-looking like a traditional marketing plan, these are rolling forward and adjusting constantly.
I then layer on an account-based marketing program to direct efforts. This turns out to be roughly 25% awareness building and 75% target account acquisition. It begins with three questions:
What problems do you solve? (provocative claims and evidence of your difference and relevance)
Who wants or needs these solutions? (ideal client fit over the long term)
How do they purchase professional services? (go-to-market plan coupled with account-based marketing will influence the decision)
Each advertising agency needs to be a case study in brand-building. Bill Bernbach of Doyle Dane Bernbach once said, “Dullness won’t sell your product, but neither will irrelevant brilliance.” That applies to advertising agencies. There is far too much irrelevant brilliance when there can be a bold and creative go-to-market and a relevant and valuable account-based marketing program.
