Bullshit: Short Changed By The Client

From Ad-Every-Other-Week: “Only about a fifth of the client executives polled this month by consultancy Reardon Smith Whittaker actually pay their shops in a way that rewards performance. Asked if their agency compensation arrangement included some element of payment according to results, 81 percent of the execs answered no, and just 19 percent yes.”

Clients want measurable results, so why aren’t agencies paid for their results? AdWeek says it’s because it’s complicated. “Pay-for-performance arrangements can get complicated, particularly given a long list of business goals and multiple ways of measuring them, said consultants. And sometimes the goals change mid-year, making such deals difficult to administer.”

Give us a break. Yes, plans are complicated. The client is demanding web results (easy to measure); results from print, broadcast, outdoor and experiential, too. These outlets can be measured to some extent by the way. Agencies only need to be a little creative with calls to action, mobile phones, games and other devices. IT IS POSSIBLE. The evidence comes by way of the 19 percent of clients who are paying on results.

Respondents also cited many reasons for why they throw their accounts in to review. One was “a lack of proactivity by their incumbent agency (31 percent).” Right. It is up to agencies to enforce this a pay for performance structure and make it a standard part of all contracts on some level. IT IS POSSIBLE. Let’s get proactive, hmm?