7 Reasons Why Agency Evaluation Programs Commonly Fail

Transcription

1 a Decideware white paper 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet supplier performace experts scorecards.deploymet.service decide ware Sa Fracisco Sydey Lodo

2 May large advertisers claim to have i place some kid of formal evaluatio program to assess their agecy relatioships. The purpose is usually a geuie attempt to improve relatioships ad perhaps cotribute as well to the calculatio of aual icetive compesatio paymets. I practice, however, may evaluatio programs do ot fulfill these goals. Rather tha beig viewed as a valued busiess process producig helpful outcomes, the evaluatio programs are viewed simply as a madatory ritual or a chore. Why is this so? Why is there such a discoect betwee the goals ad the outcomes? Our experiece is that agecy evaluatio programs disappoit for ay umber of reasos but 7 are most commo. At heart is the reality that relatioships with agecies eed to be assessed differetly to other suppliers, with greater emphasis placed o qualitative assessmet criteria. It helps too, if the program is easy to deploy ad maage as this leads to higher rates of participatio from assessors, ad more time spet o the productive tasks of aalysis ad maagemet rather tha simply gettig the iformatio. So, i more detail here are 7 poits to cosider whe developig programs to assess performace ad satisfactio i relatioships with advertisig ad other marketig services agecies. 7 REASONS WHY AGENCY EVALUATION PROGRAMS FAIL The program fails to accommodate the peculiarities of agecy relatioships which i truth are quite ulike most other supplier relatioships! Assessmet criteria fail to strike the right balace betwee the differet types of assessmet measure outcomes, drivers of outcomes ad qualitative relatioship measures; Priorities i the relatioship are ofte poorly defied makig it difficult to accurately assess overall levels of performace ad satisfactio; The views of key players i the relatioship are ot always sought, simply because they are located away from the ceter (yet their impact o the effectiveess of the relatioship ca be huge); Agecies do ot always participate, which udermies the otio of partership i the relatioship ad makes Actio Plaig impossible; Programs are simply difficult to maage ad admiister, for both admiistrators ad assessors. Accordigly, participatio rates remai low ad too much time is spet admiisterig the program rather tha developig actios to optimize sustaied performace. Where required, evaluatio of the cliet performace is ot treated i a equitable ad robust maer. Figure 1 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 2

3 1 Strage Thigs These Agecy Relatioships! Agecy relatioships ted to be differet to early all other supplier relatioships. Obvious differeces iclude:- The widespread characterizatio of the relatioship as a partership ; The multiplicity of touch poits o both sides, the seiority of the executives, ad the frequecy of cotact. (Ievitably close relatioships are formed at seior levels o both sides of the relatioship); The difficult-to-measure ature of the product; The eed to take accout of creative ad artistic sesitivities; The accepted belief that Cliet behavior has a marked impact o the success of the relatioship; The difficulty of calculatig fair levels of compesatio ad reward. For all these reasos advertisers ad agecies alike have foud it difficult to defie what eeds to be measured to determie success i the relatioship. Should it be the performace i the marketplace of the brad or service beig advertised or promoted? Or should it be the perceived performace of the agecy o a day-to-day basis? Or some combiatio of both? (See below for more o this.) Off-the-shelf approaches to agecy evaluatios are ulikely to produce valuable outcomes. Aother cosideratio is whether or ot to iclude i the program evaluatio of the cliet s performace. This recogizes, of course, that cliet performace has a sigificat impact o the effectiveess of the relatioship. Fially, if outcomes from the evaluatio program are goig to cotribute to the calculatio of icetive paymets, there is a eed for the program to be perceived as fair ad trasparet, ad to produce a obvious overall result. Here may advertisers clamor for a sigle score outcome that wraps up all aspects of the evaluatio. I this cotext a off-the-shelf approach to agecy evaluatio is ulikely to work. Program owers eed to thik carefully about the outcomes they require ad the uique eeds of agecy relatioships to develop a program that produces valuable outcomes. 2 Idetifyig Evaluatio Measures As oted above, those resposible for agecy relatioship evaluatios struggle to develop appropriate assessmet criteria. There are usually 3 types of assessmet criteria to choose from:- Outcome measures e.g. sales growth, share gais, etc. Drivers e.g. scores for brad awareess, advertisig recall, etc. Relatioship measures e.g. creative quality, resposiveess, strategic isight, etc. While ANA research idicates that agecies like to iclude outcome measures especially if value compesatio is the goal cliets seem to favor assessmet criteria that skew more towards the relatioship. They wat to evaluate the agecy s performace o with agecy evaluatios success is usually defied i terms of both performace AND satisfactio 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 3

4 immediate measures like proactivity, resposiveess or craft skills such as creativity, isightful plaig, etc. This reflects i tur a yearig to measure both performace AND satisfactio i the relatioship. Whe softer qualitative assessmet measures are used, they must be clearly idetified so that all participats i the assessmet program have a shared view of their meaig. (I our experiece, the iclusio of illustrative examples ca help.) A further requiremet is the provisio of a scorig guide to esure that all participats i the program have a shared uderstadig of what costitutes a excellet or poor performace for ay give assessmet measuremet. A robust evaluatio program will likely eed to accommodate all 3 types of evaluatio measure outcomes, drivers ad qualitative relatioship measures. 3 Prioritizatio & Maaged Expectatios Oce idetified the assessmet criteria eed to be prioritized for importace. This is importat to esure that all participats i the relatioship have a shared uderstadig of what s importat ad therefore where best to allocate resources ad effort. This uderstadig must iclude participats at both the cliet ad the agecy how ofte have we heard agecies complai that differet maagers at the cliet had differet priorities? So gettig the priorities clear at the outset is a key cotributor to maagig expectatios i the relatioship. While prioritizatio ca be accomplished i ay umber of ways, at Decideware we use a trade-off algorithm that avoids the problem of all assessmet criteria beig viewed as importat. (Both your home ad your car are very importat, but probably the your home is more importat.) The Decideware process is also participatory, trasparet ad results i immediate outcomes. This meas that the prioritizatio outcome reflects cosesus; it is a shared outcome. 4 Assessor Participatio & Iput Optimized performace i strategic relatioships depeds o all participats beig satisfied. It is ot eough that seior maagers are happy; there are likely to be other key players i the relatioship at all levels ad spread across differet geographic locatios whose cotributios to the whole are crucial. It is essetial therefore to esure that opiios about the relatioship are gathered from as may participats i the relatioship as possible, o matter where they are or their title. If they are importat to the relatioship, their opiios eed to be sought. Whe gatherig iput we have also foud that scores are ot eough. It is ot very useful to kow that a particular aspect of the relatioship has bee assessed as poor without kowig why. Accordigly, participats i the assessmet process should be asked to provide supportig commets for scores, at least where the scores are either particularly good or particularly bad. So gettig the priorities clear at the outset is a key cotributor to maagig expectatios i the relatioship. It is ot very useful to kow that a particular aspect of the relatioship is assessed as beig poor, without kowig why. 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 4

5 5 Agecy Participatio & Actio Plaig As optimized success i agecy relatioships depeds o all participats pullig i the same directio, it is a good idea to seek iput from agecies whe assessig the performace of the relatioship. Most cliets of Decideware accomplish this by havig the agecy complete a self-assessmet of their perceived performace while separately the cliet prepares its exteral assessmet of performace. Some cliets the have seior maagemet o both sides of the relatioship sit together ad compare their respective assessmets, the prepare a Agreed positio alog with a Actio Pla that builds o stregths ad addresses weakesses. We thik it is very importat to develop a Actio Pla after each assessmet (Refer Figure 2.) A commo complait about may relatioship evaluatio programs is that far too much time is spet gatherig iformatio rather tha aalyzig it ad actig o fidigs. The goal of relatioship review programs is ot simply to gather iformatio; this is simply a meas to a ed. The ed goal of the program is to get a iformed view of the relatioship i order to implemet actios that lead to sustaied optimized performace ad satisfactio. As optimized success i agecy relatioships depeds o all participats pullig i the same directio, it is a good idea to seek iput from agecies whe assessig the performace of the relatioship. 4 ESSENTIAL STEPS Successful evaluatio programs for agecies must ecompass 4 essetial steps STEP 1 Set up Idetify ad prioritize assessmet measures STEP 2 Assessmet Oe-way or two-way accordig to eeds STEP 3 Aalysis ad Plaig Aalyze data ad prepare Actio pla STEP 4 Effectiveess Trackig Reviews to esure plas are effective Figure 2 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 5

6 6 Program Maagemet A fial barrier to implemetig a successful relatioship evaluatio program amog agecies is maagemet ad admiistratio. Istead of utilizig specialist tools, all too ofte compaies utilize a mix of tools ragig from spreadsheets, regular s ad geeralist survey tools. The result is that the program geerates low rates of participatio; time is wasted simply gettig iformatio; reportig becomes complicated; ad back data is lost. So little time is spet o the core objectives of the program which are iformed aalysis ad the preparatio of actios to build o stregths ad address weakesses. To be successful, a relatioship evaluatio program for agecies must be easy to deploy ad the outcomes easy to access. Hallmarks of successful programs iclude:- Built-i capability for easy commuicatio with assessors; Built-i status reportig to eable admiistrators to check easily o the status of both participatio of idividual assessors ad of the overall review itself; Automatic report geeratio, so that fidigs are quick ad easy to idetify; Easy access over time ad from differet locatios so that outcomes are always available whe ad where required. Reiteratig, a commo complait with assessmet review programs is that they are difficult ad time cosumig to deploy ad admiister, resultig i too little time beig spet o aalysis ad plaig. 7 Cliet Performace Fially, may cliets ad agecies these days, recogizig shared resposibility i the partership, demad robust ad equitable evaluatio of the cliet performace as well as that of the agecy. To be both effective ad equitable this caot be accomplished by simply boltig o a few cliet-orieted questios to a much broader evaluatio of the agecy. Robust assessmet of the cliet s performace demads a separate ad dedicated evaluatio. To be successful, a relatioship review program must be easy to deploy ad the outcomes easy to assess Robust evaluatio of the cliet s performace requires more tha just boltig o a few questios to the agecy s assessmet. 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 6

7 Decideware is the world s leadig provider of advertisig agecy maagemet solutios We provide major advertisers with tools to help: Evaluate their agecy relatioships & performace Maage their Agecy Roster program Improve their Scope of Works processes Our cliets iclude leadig advertisers i the US, Australia ad the UK see Cliets at Agecy Evaluatio Our core busiess is agecy evaluatio ad we work with some of the largest advertisers to assess the performace of their agecies. We do t provide a marriage guidace cosultig service. We do provide software & services to esure every deploymet is successful. Cliets buy Decideware because they wat experts who ca geerate meaigful isights ito all their importat agecy relatioships, to help them improve agecy performace ad the quality of the work. See Maagig Advertisig Agecy Performace at Agecy Roster Marketers wat to put the right agecy o the right piece of busiess, every time. But that s ot possible uless you have a database of all the agecies that are curretly workig o your busiess, ad those who wat to. With sigificat directio from cliets, we ve developed a tool which helps advertisers uderstad the capabilities ad past performace of all the agecies iterested i their busiess. See Software at for more iformatio Scope of Works Our advertiser cliets asked us to build a olie Scope of Works module because they re frustrated their paper systems ca t keep up with the fast pace of the advertisig busiess. They asked to make sure the tool was olie, fully featured to accommodate their curret SoW busiess practices - ad fast, stable, reliable, etc. This ew tool, curretly i acceptace testig with a well kow advertiser, will give cliets the ability to work with their agecies to esure the work stays o-time, o-budget ad o-brief. See Software at for more iformatio 7 Reasos Why Agecy Evaluatio Programs Commoly Fail Agecy Relatioship Maagemet 7

8 supplier performace experts scorecards.deploymet.service decide ware Sa Fracisco Sydey Lodo UK Decideware 2d Floor, Berkeley Square House, Berkeley Square, Lodo W1J 6BD Tel: USA Decideware, Ic. Oe Market Street Spear Tower, Suite 3600 Sa Fracisco, CA Tel: Australia Decideware Developmet Pty Ltd Level 3, 53 Walker Street North Sydey NSW 2060 Tel: