P&G is Right to Cut its Agency Roster & Fees

P&G

Today The Wall Street Journal reported that P&G is cutting the number of agencies it uses and the fees it pays. I’m an agency guy. I run an agency. I’m here to tell you P&G is right.

When it comes to producing great marketing communications, less is definitely more.  The agency world has been overrun by specialists, many of whom are real experts at their narrowly defined niche but don’t understand the macro issues that are critical to catapult brand growth — or they intimately understand their client’s needs, but bringing them up to speed, keeping them on track, and coordinating their activities with all the other specialized agencies and suppliers is a herculean, time-consuming, expensive task.  Furthermore, many of these specialized agencies have constructed their own laborious, redundant, implementation processes, which are a barrier to speed-to-market and expensive to use.

In my opinion, P&G brands are best served to have fewer agencies, staffed by more senior people, that can both conceive innovative solutions and implement them quickly across channels with speed and effectiveness.

The challenge for P&G is to find enough savvy marketers with comprehensive, multichannel expertise who can orchestrate marketing campaigns with efficiency and effectiveness.  P&G, I’m happy to report these individuals do exist.  Good luck in your quest for speed, efficiency and effectiveness.  I predict that the P&L at P&G will improve when it applies the rule that less is more.