Ding dong, the pitch is dead
By Pete Martin
Whatâs wrong with pitching these days? Plenty, says Pete Martin, SMARTS’ Creative Director. And here, he explains why the classic âspeculative creative pitchâ is becoming unhelpful for both agencies and clients, and suggesst a simpler, more sensible way for communication partners to come together.
Creative pitches are the most exciting part of the business. Anyway, thatâs what they told me when I first started working in the industry that used to be known simply as Advertising.
And it is true that, when the whole agency is hyped, burning the midnight oil in pursuit of one incredible idea that will blow the clientâs mind, win the account and transform the fortunes of all involved⌠it can seem like fun.
You could even say Iâve managed to hold down a job in advertising for about 25 years precisely because Iâve been able to win more than my fair share of pitches.
Yet, something tells me that for clients the classic âcreative pitchâ has become an outmoded, laborious process which often produces erratic results. But, for the agencies, itâs simply become uneconomic.
I recently gave a couple of talks to the Chartered Institute of Marketing on âhow to run a professional pitchâ. Frankly, if you are determined to run a âpitchâ, thereâs a proper way to do it and itâs described in our book ‘Life’s a Pitch.’ Email us if you want a copy.
However, just talking about the âclassic pitch processâ made me wonder if itâs really applicable to the modern world. When 95% of the marketers present were too young to know what âthe commission systemâ was, it dawns upon you that the old agency business model of âhigh risk/high rewardâ has been well and truly knocked on the head. You could even say that the âad industryâ has let itself be lured into a blind alley by clients, given a good kicking, had its wallet snatched, and is now lying in a heap, slowly waking up from unconsciousness and wondering what happened.
Clients have got us pitching for the back of a postage stamp â with almost infinite demands and expectations laid out in tenders and pitch briefs, and next to no contractual obligation to remunerate the winners, never mind compensate the losers.
Itâs a commercial dilemma for us. And an ethical quagmire for clients.
At my CiM seminar, one of the more senior people present put the client point of view something like this:
My responsibility is to my shareholders: to achieve the lowest costs and make the greatest profit. If agencies are dumb enough to give away their work for free, itâs my right and duty to exploit them for everything I can.
Yep, itâs not illegal to take free pitches from 3, 4, 8 or even 15 agencies for the promise of not necessarily much return for one firm, and no return at all for the rest. But then, in the Victorian era, pushing little boys up chimneys wasnât illegal either, but would you condone such exploitation today?
I do believe that, as Corporate Citizens, every client organisation is obliged to ensure that the basis on which consultant agencies bid is commercially fair and economically productive.
In brief, that the proposed value of the business to be won must be (considerably) greater than the total combined cost of bidding to the agencies.
(Equally, clients must be clear and honest about what they are in the market for: Objectivity and Insight? Or someone to do what they are told? Fresh Ideas and Solutions? Or normative sector experience? Craft Skills and Technical Know-how? Or low budget, fast turn-round? Service and Production Capacity? Or someone to make you feel important? Or, in fact, does your score sheet contain a blend of all of these public and/or private criteria?)
In my experience, the chances of winning a pitch are broadly statistical. The general similarity of agency services and marketability, and the random preferences of clients, mean that if there are 4 agencies in a pitch process, you broadly win 1 in 4. When youâre on a roll, you might win 1 in 3 â then the agency grows fast since acquisition rapidly outruns churn.
(At the end of last year, I was on a bit of a roll, I won three pitches on the trot. I told the audience at the CiM that, statistically speaking, I would probably lose the next 9 pitches. And so far, thatâs how itâs panning out: Iâve lost 3 in a row so farâŚ.)
Anyhoo - hereâs the real question. Imagine you own an agency and a pitch is like the toss of a ÂŁ1 coin - heads or tails - where you have a 50/50 chance of winning every time. In a long run of tosses, youâd win half and lose half.
Suppose, if you win you get the ÂŁ1 coin, how much would you bet to win?
I put this question to a couple of friends of mine who fancy themselves as semi-pro gamblers.
One replied: âÂŁ1.â The other generously suggested: âÂŁ1.20 since the bookie needs a margin.â Which only goes to prove how nutty gamblers are.
Even with a ÂŁ1 stake pitched, say, 100 times, youâd win ÂŁ50 and lose ÂŁ50. And â after all the effort, process and risking potentially ÂŁ100 capital â youâd come out with nothing.
So, whatâs the real answer? 70p, I think, if you work for a plc. (You pitch for ÂŁ100 in income. You win ÂŁ50. You lose ÂŁ35. You make ÂŁ15.) Thatâs a 15% return, which the City likes.
Silly, I know. But, even this simple example, shows how fraught the pitching game is for agencies. If you ran an agency, how much of your time and resources (ie money) would you gamble on, say, a 1 in 5 chance of winning an unspecified sum of money â where the winner takes all, but where the more you gamble, the more free work you do, the more chance you may have of winning?
Itâs sort of mind-boggling - which is why agencies donât like thinking about it, and go for broke even on small projects.
But it does highlight how inefficient, wasteful and unfair the âsystemâ is. And how it disadvantages agenciesâ current clients, eats up the agenciesâ time, focus and energy, and unnecessarily inflates their costs. (Because who pays for every unsuccessful pitch? Other clients do.)
Yes, you say, but modern marketeers â especially in the public sector â use score cards to maintain objectivity to ensure the right agency wins.
Taking aside the question of whether anyone is ever dumb enough to add up a few numbers to get an answer they donât likeâŚ
In factorial analysis, an econemitrician once told me, a model with 6 major factors can achieve 80% predictive accuracy. After that, there are massive diminishing returns in producing even minimal improvements in accuracy.
So, youâre a client with a score cardâŚ
And you factor in:
The location of the agency
The size of the agency
The service offer of the agency
Their robustness as a business
Their âreputationâ
Your potential importance as a client
Their sector experience
The âchemistryâ
Proposed costs
Their strategy
Your confidence in their delivery â and your confidence in your own ability to distinguish between promise, performance and reality, with people who are often charismatic and persuasive for a livingâŚ.
Then, add in a creative presentation, and assume you have the expertise to differentiate between a slick visual or a spellbinding creative idea or something that may actually work in the real worldâŚ
And, since you are part of the mere 11% of the population who work in offices, you also realise that thereâs an 89% chance you are not remotely representative of the target audience and that your own personal taste is almost certainly a highly unreliable compass to public reaction â paradoxically, even more so if you work in public service with its sensitivity to fringe pressuresâŚ
You may feel that the good old-fashioned full-blown creative pitch is perfect for you. Fill in your scorecard with a clear conscience.
But do not be surprised if you appoint an agency but feel a strange reluctance to run the pitch work. Thatâs been a truism since the previous mid-century: the pitch work wonât run.
So why is it still done?
Yes, itâs a kata competition. A simulacrum of the ability to fight.
But only that.
So whatâs the alternative?
Itâs easy. Go speak to a bunch of agencies. Not those you âfancyâ, but those with a record of doing exactly the kind of thing you have in mind. (Why go for beauty queens, when you want some good old home-cooking done?) Youâll get a feel for those you can get along with personally, those you can trust.
Pick one (or two if you are weak-willed). Tell them honestly what your problems are. (If you havenât got any, you donât need an agency.) Work with them closely â on a paid basis â to solve your problem. Tell them whether you want something âin-sectorâ or something iconoclastic. (I always find cheese-strength ratings a good analogy â from a bland 1 like Wensleydale, to a strong but mainstream 5 like mature cheddar or off-the-scale like blue StiltonâŚ)
This way is efficient for you and the agency. Itâs fair, and the agency can invest in your process. Itâs also interactive and more fun, and youâre more likely to get an answer that fits your needs.
What could be easier? Certainly not the old-fashioned erratic pitch.
About the author
Pete Martin. Award-winning 'adman', writer and film director. Founding director of SMARTS, and former Executive Creative Director of The Gate Worldwide in New York.