YES - Graham Brown, Director, MediaSense
Preparation, preparation, preparation. For many global clients, consolidation is appropriate and the widely publicised pros outweigh the generally well understood cons.
But the only way clients end up being the net beneficiaries is when they are thoroughly prepared, with engaged stakeholders in broad agreement as to what they want to achieve and how they are going to deliver it.
However, not all firms have the brand portfolio, appropriate internal resources and structures to derive the full benefits from consolidation. Where they don't, the à la carte method is likely to be more appropriate, and preparation even more important.
A few words of caution; price "dumping" and fee discounting are real issues that will drive inappropriate behaviours and lead to under-delivery against key performance indicators.
NO - Stuart Pocock, Managing partner, The Observatory International
Inevitably, networks vary in terms of strength in different parts of the world. A global arrangement might make for a compelling rationale financially and structurally - especially when overall costs play a significant role, which invariably they do.
The bigger question in our minds, when we look at fully global remits, is whether clients are genuinely getting the best possible value for money.
The danger is that they may be buying their media in metre lengths, but not looking fully at the depth. All networks, be they media or creative, have countries or even regions around the world where they are incredibly strong and other areas where they are appallingly weak.
Sitting in New York or London, it's difficult for clients to get a true feel for this. Our view would be that it's more likely that, for many, pan-regional activity can probably work quite well, but we would question fully
global deals.
YES - Martin Sambrook, Managing partner, International Media Analytic
The question is not a simple one - it is multifaceted and needs to consider client issues outside the realm of media planning and buying.
If we confine the decision purely to one of media value, it is rarely sensible to go for one agency network. It is rare for one agency to deliver consistent value across a single region, never mind globally.
The wider questions encompass issues of organisational configuration, especially within the global marketing function, and to what extent procurement strategy is a key driving force for consolidation.
So, back to the question of whether it's sensible to consolidate into one agency network. If, as a client, you find that the compromises on media value achievable are acceptable because of wider organisational, commercial and financial benefits - then yes, it is sensible. However, such convergence of benefits and interests is rare.
YES - Charlie Carpenter, Director of agency management, Creative Brief
From a cost perspective, there are few arguments with the sensibility of consolidation and cost is driving the majority of business decisions in today's environment.
However, I would say it entirely depends on what the client is seeking to achieve.
How international is the client's communications strategy? And, within this, how international is its approach to creative output?
Does the brand have a different category positioning and audience by territory? If so, does it deploy a different media strategy by territory too?
And how do internal sign-off processes work within the business? Are these truly international or is there autonomy by country?
A network can still deliver for all clients, regardless of the answer to these questions, but the more complex the client and diverse their needs by market, the less suitable a centralised network approach is for them.