Old-school agencies, be warned: Your clients want you to put your money where your mouth is.
Pay-for-performance models have moved from throwaway lines at industry conferences to reality as marketers realize the value of tying agency compensation to bottom-line results. The new model is a hot trend, with its own buzzwords and metrics. Inevitably, it’s one that’s a bit like New Year’s resolutions: Many talk about it, but few actually follow through.
Many agencies will trumpet a performance model that, in the eyes of the client, isn’t really one. Risk-sharing in the form of bonuses and small portions of an agency’s overall fees is a step in the right direction for the agency, but it’s an insufficient one. When you peel the layers back, it becomes more about perceived risk share than actual risk share, with very little skin in the game.
We’ve also seen more than a few agencies using the term “pay-for-performance” as a replacement for cost-per-click or cost-per-lead. Though more tied to performance than impression models, leads aren’t sales, and they still represent a cost to the marketer. If you can’t close the loop on that piece of the puzzle, then it’s fair to ask, what kind of performance is really being delivered?
Agencies are being challenged to directly answer the question, “Does a user clicking, calling or filling out a form actually convert to a sale?” Questions like these will only grow in popularity as more and more brands demand true accountability from their agencies, and yet too few agencies are responding with actual, data-driven metrics. Here’s proof: According to a recent report from the CMO Council titled “Optimizing Marketing Partner Performance,” 58 percent of marketers surveyed are unsatisfied with the current process of measuring their agencies’ advertising effectiveness.
That’s a sign that goals are misaligned and valuable marketing dollars are being wasted on expensive advertising that fails to produce sales. As the trend continues, it seems that agencies that decide against true risk-sharing are taking a bigger risk: being left behind.
True goal alignment between the client and its marketing agency means holding each other accountable for the only metrics that really matter: revenue, customers and profits delivered to the business. Risk-sharing based on these metrics represents the best possible relationship between partners. Both are aligned to deliver bottom-line results, and both benefit if the mark is achieved.
As CMOs feel the pressure of added accountability from their organizations, that pressure is rightly being shared with their agencies. The message is clear: If you’re confident in the results you can deliver and you’re looking to build a long-term client relationship, now is the time to share the risk and offer clients true alignment.
This shift is not only happening in the marketing/advertising world. Clients are also driving pay-for-performance models through their other “service-provider” relationships. Both legal and accounting firms, long the bastion of fee-based models regardless of performance, are now moving into performance-based compensation models, driven by the same need to both justify and align investments with outcomes. Sound familiar?
Many agencies may balk at pure performance models because there are many variables beyond their control that make (or fail to make) registers ring. The reality is that as more media formats become digital, there will be better results tracking in place. With better tracking, comes better measurement and data. And once there is better measurement and data, well, you can guess what comes next.
The reality is that this evolution is about far more than how agencies are paid. It’s about how they engage with the brand, entrench themselves in the business and find ways to drive the right outcomes that make those registers ring and not merely highlight the many reasons why they can’t.
The shift here is inevitable. CMOs expect more. They’re looking for internal and external partners who truly understand marketing’s responsibility beyond brand impressions. Those who can build a brand by directly building revenue and share are the ones that will endure as the CMO’s true partner.
Q&A: Tim Armstrong on Web3, data and the ‘bundling’ of consumers
AOL's former chief — now the founder and CEO of Flowcode — discusses how the adoption of blockchain tech compares to earlier internet eras.
‘Social listening is so important’: Hulu adapts social strategy to follow fans’ interest
While Hulu does make social marketing plans for each show, the company keeps tabs on social sentiment -- i.e. what's working and what's not -- and adapts its social strategy accordingly.
Magna research: The do’s and don’ts of native and repurposed advertising on TikTok
Advertisers on TikTok need to follow a few best practices if they're going to succeed on the platform, such as always thinking vertically, and being comfortable with the creator's style they work with.
SponsoredWhat gaming habits reveal about media consumption
Jordan Shlacter, head of research, Activision Blizzard Media Entertainment choices have never been more abundant, and gaming has emerged as one of the biggest winners in the battle for audiences’ attention. While gaming’s exponential growth has been well documented — there are currently nearly 3 billion gamers worldwide spanning a diverse set of demographics, interests […]
Covid and the case for labor movements: The Return podcast, episode 3
In the third episode of Digiday podcast The Return, Fitzco sees its first positive case of Covid-19. While the team is disappointed, there are no active plans of turning back the clock to pandemic lockdown.
How contraceptive brands are increasing online advertising since SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade
Contraceptive brands such as Plan B, Favor and Phexxi have in some cases doubled or even quadrupled their online advertising to reach consumers.