What is the Intermediaries’ Take on Pay-to-Play Pitches?

Campaign covers an op-ed by VoxComm, the alliance of communications agencies associations. calling out intermediaries operating the model of pay-to-play pitches and highlighted several aspects of the model, which it said undermined fair competition.

The industry body wrote: “Agencies are being asked to pay intermediaries for the privilege of pitching for accounts. This scheme is on the rise and threatens the value and competition our industry delivers.”

Ishan Chatterjee, VP of Global Growth, R3 (A MediaSense Company) comments:

“We need to address the duty of care that consultants owe marketers and agencies in the pitch process. Without that obligation, we put client-agency relationships at a disadvantage from the very start.  

When marketers seek advisory on agency search or review, they are looking for a curation of agencies based on criteria that reflects the needs of their business. It’s not about which agency the consultant thinks is right for the job; it’s ensuring there’s rigour and discipline in a process that includes and will allow the best agency to win. It also needs to be acknowledged that agencies continue to run their businesses to maximise profits, so any fees they need to pay intermediaries will ultimately be passed on to clients. Agency rates in this scenario will simply be higher for clients.

Another point not to dismiss is that agencies are participating in larger competitive sets, more so over longer periods of time. Considering demands on resources, agencies look to consultants for guidance in generating qualified pipelines and opportunities where they genuinely stand a chance to win. Knowing that participation is not necessarily based on merit affects the psychology of teams and their motivation to deliver their best work.”

Read the article in full here.