Since the pandemic, agencies worldwide have been increasingly vocal about ditching the pitch, and trade media have run headlines and opinion pieces claiming it is broken and even dead.
As Australia’s and APAC’s leading pitch consultancy, we noticed that while there were plenty of opinions, there was very little data on this topic. So, we undertook our own research called The State of the Pitch in Australia. Run from June to December last year, the report makes it interesting to read about what is going on and what is going wrong with pitching.
In this podcast, TrinityP3 Consultants Kylie Ridler-Dutton, Lydia Feely, Ellie Angell, Anton Buchner, and Nathan Hodges join host Darren Woolley to discuss the State of the Pitch in Australia.
You can download your copy of the State of the Pitch Australia Report for free at www.trinityp3.com/state-of-the-pitch/
You can listen to the podcast here:
Follow Managing Marketing on Soundcloud, Podbean, Google Podcasts, TuneIn, Stitcher, Spotify, Apple Podcast and Amazon Podcasts.
Yeah, yeah. I said we’d never say that and I’ve gone and done it straight away, so apologies everybody.
Transcription:
Darren:
Hi, I am Darren Woolley, founder and CEO of TrinityP3 Marketing Management Consultancy. And welcome to Managing Marketing, a weekly podcast where we discuss the issues and opportunities facing marketing, media, and advertising with industry thought leaders and practitioners.
If you’re enjoying the Managing Marketing Podcast, please either like, review, or share this episode to spread the words and wisdom from our guests each week.
Now, since the pandemic, there’s been an increasingly vocal call from agencies around the world to ditch the pitch, and trade media have run headlines and opinion pieces claiming the pitch is broken and even dead.
As Australia and APAC’s leading pitch consultancy, we noticed that while there are plenty of opinions, there was very little data on this topic. So, we undertook our own research called The State of the Pitch in Australia.
Run from June to December last year, the report makes interesting reading about what’s going on and what’s going wrong with pitching.
Well, today, we have many of the TrinityP3 team involved in the pitching process to discuss and share their thoughts and insights on The State of the Pitch in Australia research.
So, please welcome to the managing marketing podcast from TrinityP3, our pitch whiz, Kylie Ridler-Dutton. Hi, Kylie.
Kylie:
Hi. Happy to be joining today.
Darren:
Thank you. General manager, Lydia Feely. Hello, Lydia.
Lydia:
Hello, everyone. Nice to be here.
Darren:
The exceptional Ellie Angell. Hi, Ellie.
Ellie:
Hello. Nice to be here.
Darren:
The ROI guy, Anton Buchner. Hi, Anton.
Anton:
Hi, Darren.
Darren:
And Lord Nathan of Hodges. Nathan Hodges. Hi, Nathan.
Nathan:
Hello. Sorry, I’m just coming off mute there and unbelievably beginning to take-
Darren:
I was about to say, I think you’re on mute, Nathan.
Nathan:
Yeah, yeah. I said we’d never say that and I’ve gone and done it straight away, so apologies everybody. Anyway, hello, glad to be here.
Darren:
Now, there was quite a lot in the research and I thought today would be a good opportunity having so many esteemed pitch consultants here on the podcast to actually talk about some of the insights.
So, the first thing I thought would be worthwhile starting with, what was the most surprising thing you read in the report about The State of the Pitch in Australia? Ellie.
Ellie:
Well, I had a kind of a positive surprise reading that 55% of responses indicated a very communicative pitch, and 65% of responses suggested either open and constructive feedback at some or all stages of the pitch.
Actually, obviously, things could still improve, but I found that relatively encouraging because there’s so much negative noise out there about agencies not getting proper feedback. It’s something that we obviously practice a lot. And I think this part of pitching’s really important.
So, I was kind of positively surprised to see that it got that high and obviously, it’s something that we all need to keep working on with every pitch that we run.
Darren:
Yeah, it was surprising that quite a significant number of pitches seem to be pretty well run. So, I think what it shows is that there’s something triggering this response, particularly from agencies when they go wrong. Anton, what’s your interpretation or what caught your eye?
Anton:
Yeah, I agree with Ellie. Lots of really good numbers and good feedback. But I picked out one of the smaller numbers that was a bit of a concern. 13% of pitchers had no apparent outcome. Now, made me think of a few things.
Made me think of, was the pitch still running? Obviously, at the moment we did the survey, that could have been happening.
Was the client actually going to make a decision or was decision just going on and on and on for some unknown reason, or were they actually sticking with the incumbent? And there was all sorts of things behind the scenes that may have been going on.
So, I think when we see numbers like the pitches dragging on and not closed, it just raises some concerns and sets the hairs running. We’ve certainly seen some pitches were facilitated where it’s just gone on and on and the poor agencies have no idea what’s going to happen as the next step.
Darren:
Yeah, Anton, just to add a little bit of illumination, I don’t have the definitive, but it was a combination of all those things.
Sometimes it was that the agency was never informed, they were just left hanging. Others is that they were eliminated in early stage and the pitch was ongoing after they’d been eliminated. So, that’s two of the things that could have been driving that.
Nathan, what was your big call-out?
Nathan:
Well, at the risk of being negative after two positive comments, I was still surprised at the number of organizations that seemed to be lurching into a pitch asked backwards without any planning, any kind of view of what the outcome’s going to be and without any management of the stakeholder group.
Which leads to all sorts of desperate outcomes, like long pitch participation lists, not feeding back to agencies that are taking part, leaving people hanging, announcing the result before you’ve even talked to the agencies that tabled proposals.
And that just seemed to be persisting across the board amazingly to me, even with some consultant-run pitches, which really astonished me.
I mean, God knows we work hard enough to try and stop those outcomes, but it still seems to be out there. So, it was more than the qualitative anecdotal feedback that we constantly get. It was proven in the data. And that for me says we’ve all got work to do.
Darren:
Now, I want to clarify about the consultants because a lot of people think that TrinityP3 got the 15% that were consultant run pitches. When I dug into that, we got about 5% of all pitches.
And interestingly, just from the methodology associated with some of the other consultant run pitches, it seems that there’s quite a few procurement consultants running pitches. So, people that are bought in as consultants to procurement rather than as pitch consultants.
So, in the next round of the research, we’re going to try and call that out a bit more.
Kylie, you manage quite a lot of pitches, so from your firsthand experience, you must have had a perception. Did the research support your perception or were there some things that you thought were surprising?
Kylie:
I think the surprising thing for me was one of the call outs was that agencies were prepared to participate in a pitch that was only for the value of $50,000, and it was a full process pitch that they had to participate in.
Often, we get agencies not complaining, but just verbalizing to us the amount of resources and therefore the cost to the agency to participate in a pitch.
And I know that we’ve written a number of blogs over the years also, on the topic about how much on average it does cost for an agency to participate in the pitch process.
So, it’s a bit scary that agencies have gone full throttle and put the resources and spend behind the agency for an outcome of $50,000.
Darren:
Yeah, absolutely. Lydia, what was your big thing?
Lydia:
I was going to add just slightly to Kylie there and just sort of say, I found that surprising too, which is that the support, it suggested that maybe too many marketers and procurement teams are still using like a one size fits all approach for their pitches.
And I think that’s what’s following on from what Kylie was saying, and like it’s very different process for a $50,000 project compared to like a $10 million retainer account, but sometimes they’re using the same pitch process. So, I found that a bit surprising as well.
Darren:
Absolutely. So, just going back to Kylie, your point, some of the agencies did make comments that the particularly procurement were very hesitant to give any indication about the size of the price.
So, I wouldn’t put it totally on the agencies if you’re thinking that they went into it knowing it was 50,000, I think they probably went into it thinking it was a lot more and ended up like, “Surprise, you won, but it’s only worth 50,000,” which is not a big, pleasant surprise. Yes, Kylie.
Kylie:
Well, I guess therefore that goes back to one of the problems with the pitch process and the data that we’ve seen, that transparency upfront and how much information is given at the get go of a project to get commitment from these agencies.
Going into the dark, not knowing what a budget is, not knowing what the requirements are, it’s pretty scary that agencies have to commit to that sort of process without all of the bedding put in place.
Darren:
Absolutely. Ellie.
Ellie:
I think agencies should decline pitches like that. I really do. And this is a much broader discussion about the general dynamics in the marketplace that lead to some of these problems.
But for an agency not to be told that even the basics about scope of work or size of prize, that’s fundamental flaw and doesn’t allow them any fair opportunity.
Darren:
Yeah. Look, I think we need to move on, but the conversation’s good.
Lydia, going back to you about, one of the things that did surprise me is how many of the pitches, even though it went from 50,000 in a project to a $10 million global media pitch, where largely three quarters of them were using the same methodology that’s been used for the last 30 or 40 years.
So, I’d be interested to know, what did you see, anyone, as the most interesting pitch practice that you’ve heard or seen of outside of this research? Yeah, Nathan.
Nathan:
Well, the most interesting, the most effective pitches always go back to what you’re trying to achieve in terms of your overall roster model. You replace one of your agencies or change out one or two of your agencies and you affect everything that all the other agencies are doing.
It’s particularly true these days where agencies can offer a multitude of services and a multitude of disciplines for any client.
So, for me, the most interesting and the most effective pitches are the ones where you have a model at the beginning, and you tolerate some ambiguity as to who should play what roles in that model during the pitch.
And you end up being very flexible and yet quite clear about what the roles are that those agencies will populate at the end of that pitch.
It’s a hybrid pitch. It does require, of course, some tolerance for ambiguity on the parts of the marketer, which also, means that you need to get your ducks in a row. You need to get things sorted; you need to do the thinking ahead of time before you run into the pitch.
But if you can get that right and you’ve got an organization that’s tight and focused and behind you on that, then that’s always the best way to go.
Remember, we always say every agency that you add to your roster typically costs you between 12 and 15% in inefficiency thereafter.
So, the fewest number, the smallest number of agencies you can have on your roster to do the job, that’s the way to go.
Darren:
But do you think having that set up front should more inform the process going forward? Because what we’re seeing is the same processes being applied.
It’s an RFI slash credentials, or chemistry meetings, then there’s some sort of speculative creative or media buying exercise and then negotiations. It’s like bang, bang, bang, bang, bang.
How do we get people to go from one size fits all to understand that there’s many different ones?
Nathan:
Indeed, because it betrays the lack of understanding of what the outcome needs to be. That’s betrayed by the fact that the same process seems to be applied each time someone picks up a book from his bar or picks up a book from the IPA and goes, “That’s the way we run a pitch.”
Of course, it’s not. One of the most interesting things we’ve been doing recently is looking at all sorts of capability, like management capability, not just creative or strategic or media buying or those things, but account management, business management capability in a pitch. Testing that during a pitch.
And that really does kind of sort out the leaders from the losers.
Darren:
Anton, I’d be really interested your perspective particularly around the rise of technology because a lot of those pitch styles don’t apply themselves very well to the application of technology, do they?
Anton:
Yeah, exactly. And I’ll pick up on Nathan’s point that in the digital realm, what is called digital and technology, it’s absolutely something that needs to be focused on and customized and get into the real issue that the client’s facing.
I saw this on a pitch last year. I mean, going back years ago, digital agencies were relatively easy to put into a bucket. So, you could run a standard process.
But now, it needs to be fully customized. We had a global franchise group and when I mention the word franchise, you can understand technologies, systems, issues, debates, et cetera. There was a global team and local teams, so everyone had different requirements.
The client had fired their current agency, had come to us and said, “We’ve got a caretaker agency at the moment, but they’re on a defined time limit.” So, we must run a pitch within a time limit, that was the first thing. And then I started delving into it with them and say, “Okay, well, what do you actually need?”
So, we had to really refine based on tech requirements to start with, then marketing requirements, and then customer consumer requirements.
And interestingly, as a part of this pitch, we did test capability as Nathan talked about, but the client decided to give access to the backend of their website.
Now, that was interesting because it gave the agencies the chance to look at data, look at issues, run a mini audit, and fully tailor their recommendations to say, “Here’s where you’re exposed, here are issues, I can see you’re being hacked, et cetera.”
So, that raised a whole new kettle of fish in terms of the marketer being able to look at the expertise and the capability of the agencies. And the client is very happy with the outcome.
Darren:
You’re both raising good points, which came out of the research, which is this diversification of disciplines or capabilities required in a pitch. Lydia, do you have a perspective on that?
Lydia:
I do, yeah. Well, the focus, what I think is interesting is it still seems to be in the trade press either a creative pitch or a media pitch. But what we’ve seen in the market is just the need for a multi-discipline requirement or a pitch.
So, I think people, and it goes back to Nathan’s point in terms of consolidating rosters or what they need, and then what we’re seeing is that clients will try and find one agency that can do the most and then they’ll fill the gaps with best of breed or specialist agencies.
Darren:
Yeah. Thanks, Lydia. Ellie?
Ellie:
I want to pick up on what Anton said about that experience there and to point out that for those kinds of different processes to take place, the client needs to enable that. How many pictures have we been in where the agencies asked for access to any kind of data backend?
I mean, we see it in media with search and performance media, we see it with web UX and design. And the client won’t allow it.
So, I think that they have a role to play as well in enabling these kinds of processes to take place so that you get to a better solution as a result, they need to be a bit freer in the pitch process with their own data.
Darren:
No, look, I think pitching certainly becomes more complex, and so that throws up new challenges, more complex challenges, but it seems that we still do the same thing over and over again hoping for a different outcome.
And perhaps it is time that the pitch process not just change so it becomes another one process, but changes so that we have a lot more different approaches that can be applied for different needs.
I just want to change the focus a bit. Was anyone surprised at the average score of, I think it was 3.1 or 3.2 out of 5? Was that a surprise or was everyone thinking that that was normal, average? Yeah, Nathan.
Nathan:
I thought it was low because when you take out the natural bias of the people who’ve won it, thinking that it was a great process, then the rest of it’s a pretty depressing picture.
And I don’t want to keep wearing the kind of black hat in this conversation, but I kind of looked at it and went, “Yeah, that’s about right.” If you take out that distortion of the ones who gave it five out of five, because to the victor, but on the spoils, I don’t think pitching’s in a great state.
And I think like I say, we’ve put some data around what we all knew anecdotally and qualitatively, but that’s an important thing to do because when you’ve got quant and qual, of course you can decide on what happens next.
Darren:
Okay, so, let’s not black hat this. Let’s look at and talk about what’s the one thing that you think that marketers, procurement, and consultants should be doing (and I’ll go around the room) to try and get a 5 out of 5, not a 3.1 out of 5.
And look, I do know we’re all pitch consultants here, so it can’t be hire a pitch consultant, because even the pitch consultants in the research, got it wrong. Ellie.
Ellie:
I’ve got three of them. First-
Darren:
Three? I did ask for one.
Ellie:
Three. It’s what I do. I don’t know.
Darren:
Overdeliver.
Ellie:
I over deliver and I have a promise. Okay. So, look, very, very briefly, it goes back to what Nathan was saying earlier, but have some clarity. Have some clarity of objectives of process, of methodology before you start the pitch. As opposed to trying to work out as you go along.
I think the second is balance and objectivity. Minimization or removal of any subjective agendas that do happen in pitches. Work that out beforehand so that it’s a clean process.
And finally, respect. Respect for that clarity that you’ve already instigated, respect for the process, and respect for all the participants in the process. Those are the three that I think would really help improve.
Darren:
Very useful. Thanks, Ellie. Nathan.
Nathan:
Well, obviously, I would’ve said everything that Ellie had said there, but she’s already said it, so that’s very annoying. So, I’ll just say one thing, keep to your timing. Just set a time scale and stick to it. If you want one thing, that’s it.
Darren:
Okay. Kylie.
Kylie:
I think this was really covered in Ellie’s points as well, but just be clear or be able to clearly articulate to the participants in the process of your future state.
So, can you share maybe a one pager of what your business strategy is that is linked into your marketing strategy? Because that’s obviously going to have a huge effect on the actual agency partners that will help get to that future state.
Darren:
Yeah, it is interesting because in many ways, you’re choosing an agency hopefully to solve some problem or challenge long term. And not sharing that with the agencies that you’re engaging seems crazy because how can you get to that successful outcome? Anton, what’s your perspective?
Anton:
Yeah, look, I’ve just got the one. I think agreeing who’s decision maker on the marketer’s side. I’ve heard stories of marketing will make the decision and then suddenly the CEO comes in and changes decisions. So, being very clear on the marketing side.
Who needs to be involved? IT might need to be involved, the media lead, brand leads, c-suite, whoever it is.
And make sure that they are meeting the agencies. That doesn’t have to be all the way through the process, but I think at least being involved, not coming in right at the end and just putting a bit of a stamp on.
Darren:
Yeah, absolutely. One of the big issues was that while there was a reasonable level of engagement, where it went wrong was where that communication and engagement stopped for some reason.
And what happens in that place is that of course agencies participating in a pitch start to speculate as to what’s going on and what’s going wrong. And in that vacuum, they can be very creative and very cynical.
I think that’s one of the key issues about treating people with respect and keeping them informed. Yes, Lydia.
Lydia:
I was going to say that was one of the key points as well, is that maybe people get caught up a bit in the formality of the process that they forget sort of the basic business etiquette, things like we just talked about like keeping agencies and stakeholders informed of timings and what’s required and then feedback along the way.
So, just the basic table stakes, I found that quite surprising actually. But it could be that they set up this process and almost like keep it so formal that they forget the basics.
Darren:
Well, one of the things that I noticed, and not in the research but just generally, is how often marketers and even procurement people are either unwilling or incredibly uncomfortable with providing honest, constructive feedback.
And I wouldn’t mind exploring that a bit if we could. What is it do you think that stops them giving that feedback? Because I have to say the number of agencies that have said to me, “We’re a close second.” Now, you just know that that many agencies couldn’t be a close second.
So, what is it that people are deferring to a nice brush off to do that. Kylie.
Kylie:
Human nature. Everybody wants to avoid conflict and if they can get out of conflict, they will.
Darren:
You think that’s all it is, human nature? Because obviously, I didn’t get that gene. Maybe I’m not human.
Kylie:
I was going to say there’s a few exceptions of the rule and I wasn’t going to mention names.
Darren:
Well, there you go. I outed myself. Ellie.
Ellie:
Well, look, I totally agree with Kylie that it is human nature to a certain degree, but I think there’s a lack of professional empathy. I mean to Lydia’s point as well, there’s a lack of professional empathy for agencies in a pitch process. That still exists. The master servant mentality.
But I also, think it goes to what we’ve talked about before, if there’s a lack of proper process, which would include lack of proper assessment, that leads to lack of proper feedback.
So, all these issues are intertwined. But I think fundamentally, I don’t like to see those dynamics still exist. But I think they do. Plus, human nature, as Kylie said.
Darren:
It’s interesting, isn’t it, because in many ways the pitch is starting a commercial business relationship.
And the way you start it, should be the way you would want it to continue. And making it quite transactional and even a little unprofessional is never going to set up the relationship for being the highest performing or productive possible. Is it, Ellie?
Ellie:
Yeah. Well, I think that depends on how you define high performing. And I think there are different stakeholders within an organization and the culture of the organization that will define what high performance for an agency means.
And in other words, it could be just cheapest possible cost, highest possible efficiency, greatest possible demand. And very, very different from what we would define as a high value relationship. So, I think those things come to play.
Darren:
Okay. Anton, what’s your perspective?
Anton:
Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head, this whole sort of where does the relationship start? And I think a lot of either procurement or marketing teams start to go, “Well, this process is not the start of the relationship, it’s just a process to get to a start point.” So, I think that’s the problem.
And Ellie, I was going to push it further. It’s disrespect. I think you’re right. If you’re going to choose a partner, it is quite disrespectful not to keep people in the loop, not to give constructive feedback.
And Kylie knows this as well. It takes a lot of time to run and facilitate pitches. I think the admin and time to invest in contacting all the agencies, giving them the right feedback is quite an arduous process.
I’m not pushing our barrow just to say, “Use us as a pitch consultant.” But I think for anyone running a pitch, it’s a huge amount of time. And often people don’t have that time and therefore they default to, “Well, I’m not going to tell the respective agencies.”
Another dimension, too many agencies in the mix. So, they’re looking at too many, too wide, too much to manage, and can’t give the feedback to all of them. So, that adds up to a bit of a train wreck in my books.
Darren:
Lydia, you’ve got a perspective on this, haven’t you?
Lydia:
Yeah, I was going to say, so I think sometimes a lot of CMOs think it’s part of their job to run a pitch so that they feel like they can’t outsource it and they must do it. And there’s two things to that.
One, they go into it thinking it’s relatively simple, then find it’s complex and it’s taking a lot of time. And that means that they then can’t participate so much in the pitch because they’re so busy facilitating it and all the stakeholders. So, I see that a bit.
I was going to also, touch on the fact that when we run a pitch with someone, I’ve had so many wonderful clients who are conscious of giving feedback and really put some time to giving feedback directly with the agencies that have been successful or unsuccessful throughout the process.
So, it was probably freeing them up to be able to do that as well. So, I wanted to call out the good clients that we see. Yeah.
Darren:
Oh look, I think there are clients that are willing and able to do it and you should do it because it rewards the agency, gives them something as a reward, even if they’re unsuccessful. Getting constructive feedback that they can then take forward and use next time means that they constantly get better.
But you were ‘a close second’ is not very constructive because what the hell am I going to do with that?
Nathan, you and I, and most people would not realize that TrinityP3 also, must tender for work. And its surprising how many agencies grumble to us and we go, “We understand because we go through the same thing, particularly with procurement.”
And that early engagement stage really does give us some insights into how this relationship’s going forward. When you are treated almost like a vendor in quotes, which means lots of demands, but very little given back in return.
Nathan:
Yep. So, there’s two ways it goes typically. That’s one that you feel like a vendor, you’re just form filling. You’re doing lots of compliance work and then you get nothing back. So, that speaks volumes as to what the relationship would be like.
The other one is where people mix personal and business and refuse to kind of split those two things out. It’s not personal, it’s business. If you want to get a friend, get a dog, don’t get an agency.
And from good professional business relationships, that’s where personal relationships can spring. But without that, the personal relationship is nothing. It’s nothing. It’s built on sand.
So, the more people can kind of just toughen up here a bit. As a marketer going into a pitch, if you’re going to run it yourself, toughen up and be ready not just to have lovely kind of meetings with people and great kind of presentations and great chemistry.
But also, to be able to say the hard things because that’s how any good business relationship’s going to work. This is business, it’s not personal.
Darren:
Yeah. Kylie, what’s your perspective on this?
Kylie:
Oh, I think Nathan just took the words out of my mouth. I think that’s another part of why clients are scared to give feedback because they think it is personal and they’re going to be picking on people, too many Ps there.
But it is a business relationship, which doesn’t mean you don’t have respect for people. However, the business will be more grateful or the agency if you do have constructive feedback to give them.
And it doesn’t have to relate to individuals as such. But I think that’s a big part again, of why clients are scared to give the feedback.
Darren:
But Kylie, in your own case, you were in account management for quite a few years in agencies and do you think it’s also because agencies with their clients are inclined to build it on almost personal relationships rather than a professional relationship?
Kylie:
Yeah. And again, I guess that does go back to human nature. By giving empathy to people and building trust with people is how you put a good relationship together, foster a good relationship.
So, yeah, you’re right, I guess a lot of agencies do build their client relationships based on a personal one-on-one sort of relationship. So, perhaps that’s the nature of what clients are used to.
Darren:
Now, I want to throw in a bit of a left field one. And this came out of not the research scoring, but the commentary that we invited the agencies to provide.
And there were quite a few very (and when I say number a handful, four or five) detailed comments, which we didn’t put in the research, but inferred that the agency felt that the pitch process was pre-decided and that they were just being run through a process so that the client could actually then appoint their preferred and pre-decided.
I just want to get a very honest response from each of you. How often have you been aware of that in a pitch that you’ve run? And please be honest. Okay, so, I’ll start with, Ellie. Yeah.
Ellie:
Quite often it starts like that and through council, we’re able to mitigate for that. And sometimes that involves telling an agency that they’re not selected to continue rather than wasting their time. But sometimes these agendas stay right until the end of the pitch. That’s my honest opinion.
Darren:
So, it does happen?
Ellie:
Happens repeatedly. It does happen. Absolutely happens.
Darren:
Lydia, is that your experience?
Lydia:
No, I haven’t really had too many of those. Maybe I’ve been lucky, but I haven’t had where I’ve had a predetermined … during the pitch, there’s often a favorite that becomes clear. But not predetermined for me.
Darren:
Okay, interesting. So, quite a different experience. But to Ellie’s point, the process of a consultant is that, if that is the start point to work through that to make sure they consider everyone equally. Nathan, what’s your perspective?
Nathan:
Yeah, I’ve kind of worked for years on the assumption that that is going to be the case. And so, before we even engage as pitch consultants with any marketer, you kind of hold their feet to the fire and you look them in the whites of the eyes and make sure that it’s a legitimate pitch, that the pitch is the best thing to do.
And we haven’t even touched on that, not necessarily on this agenda, but 50% of the time we manage to convince the marketer that the pitch is not the answers to the problem they’re trying to solve.
And certainly, if you get distorted outcomes, like a favorite is going to go through, or it’s cost led and not capability led, or actually it’s a way of making the incumbent sharpen their pencil or any of these other rubbish phrases, that’s a signifier of something that should never have got to a pitch.
So, I hope we sniff them out and I hope we convert them back to something a bit more sensible and commercial, maybe a few slips through.
And well, let’s be honest, sometimes we withdraw from that pitch process if it isn’t legit and it isn’t right because principles aren’t principles till they’re costing money, huh.
Darren:
Yeah. Ellie.
Ellie:
I think the other thing I’d add, as Lydia was talking then, we’ve had maybe different experiences, but and I was thinking of examples. I think it does come back to the mix of business and personal. Interpersonal relationships particularly.
I mean, and I’m not going to name any names obviously, but the biggest example I ran was a significant pitch where the CMO had previously been at one of the agencies for a long time. And surprise, surprise, the agency ended up winning.
And we did everything we could to make that process fair and with integrity. But senior people with longstanding personal relationships are at the top of that, it can be very difficult to prevent those outcomes or to at least drive those outcomes in the best way possible.
Darren:
Yeah. Kylie, you have a particularly refined EQ. Have you sniffed out any of these in any of the pictures you are being involved in?
Kylie:
I think back to Nathan saying, I would hope that we wouldn’t work with a client that has a predetermined result in their head. What a waste of everybody’s time and money.
And I think respect again, is something that is hopefully a moral that I think most people at TrinityP3 try to uphold the morals of the marketing landscape.
Probably through the process that we run, we may have had pretty firm decisions in heads of pitch teams on the client side that we’ve actually managed through our process and our industry knowledge, we’ve been able to persuade them or open their eyes to other options. And there have been different results.
And on the other side of the coin, we’ve also, worked on pictures where the client has had incumbents that they’re ready to throw out and discontinue the relationship with.
However, through the due diligence of the process and allowing the agency to represent themselves in areas that the client probably hasn’t even entertained or questioned before has turned the whole decision process around and managed to retain the business.
Darren:
Yeah, no, thank you. Anton, have you had that experience?
Anton:
I’ve only had it once in what’s it now been? 13, 14 years, luckily. So, I think to Kylie’s point, we’ll sniff out quickly whether anyone’s predetermined or made a pre-decision. But yeah, only once. So, I think it’s a small number.
I think probably another point to add to this is at the end of the day, it’s TrinityP3, we don’t make decisions, the client makes the decisions. So, really, it’s the marketer and their teams that are making decisions.
And back to one of the earlier points, we talked about customizing. It’s really up to the client how they want to act. We are just helping them facilitate to try and find the right match. And the matches are different.
Some want very functional agencies, some want great strategic agencies, some want fully integrated agencies. The needs are all very different.
So, I guess we just must be eyes open to what the clients want and what their level of EQ and IQ and requirements are. But that’s different in every case, isn’t it?
But no, to answer the question, only once, luckily.
Darren:
Well, look, from my own experience, the first thing I think the fact that we ask the client upfront what agencies they would like to see us consider is interesting because I’ve always found most will say if they’re going to nominate, they’ll nominate two or three.
I’m always suspicious when a client comes up with one name and one name only. It means that they’re very focused on the agency that they want to put in there. And I have in the early days had a situation where it was very clear that this was preset.
So, what we actually did was talk them into doing a much smaller pitch process where we only put one other agency in there and made it a credentials only presentation and then financials but told the agency they were doing it and paid a pitch fee for their time.
So, I think if you need to appoint an agency as a CMO, either have the bravery to just appoint them. And if you’re going to have to go to any sort of competitive, make the minimum amount of damage possible was always my go-to position on that. Yes, Ellie.
Ellie:
I think sometimes it’s apparent early on, sometimes it’s much later in the day. It is a relatively small number I guess in the overall scheme of things. But I think, I mean, to Anton’s point, we are not making these decisions.
And so, when these situations arise, you’ve just got to be unshakeable in your objectivity and the job that we must facilitate a strong assessment process. Whether the client chooses to make that decision at the end of the day or not, is ultimately up to them.
I’ve had a couple of examples where I’ve been asked to change assessment marks to make one agency look better than the other. And I refused, obviously.
Darren:
Yeah. Obviously.
Ellie:
I refuse. Now, whether they choose to interpret that or take it away or do something differently with it, okay, fine. And it feels like maybe I’ve just been unlucky with working with some of these organizations.
Anton:
Been thrown the ball.
Ellie:
Please don’t anyone look up on the history with pitches I’ve worked on, you might be able to work it out. But it’s all we can do in that environment is either change the process or refuse the process and walk away, which we have done.
Or be the voice of objectivity in the room and make sure that the rigor of the assessment is true to form. And ultimately, they can then decide on that basis.
Darren:
Now, look, unfortunately we’re rapidly running out of time, so I’m going to do a quick run round the room with what do you think should be the one thing marketers and procurement should take away from this research? What’s the one thing?
Nathan, I think you probably said yours in the previous question, which is about being very focused on why you’re pitching and whether you really need to, but if you want to restate that, please do, or come up with another one. But I think it’s a good point. I’ll start with you.
Nathan:
In the interest of time, Darren, I’ll stick with that, and I’ll yield the time to my colleagues who spend much more time running pitches than I do these days. So, I’m happy with that.
Lydia:
I would say the one thing is that the process you’re running needs to fit the requirements of the brief and the desired outcome. And then if you set up the wrong process, you’re at risk of wasting everyone’s time, money, and effort. If I had to say it in one point.
Darren:
Excellent, thank you. Kylie.
Kylie:
Commitment and direction.
Darren:
Commitment. Commit to it and be very clear on direction. Well, done. Anton.
Anton:
I’ll say one word, three times. Customize, customize, customize. Is that one point? Yeah, I think the thought here is think about the relationship three years down the track.
So, you want to treat the agency and find the right agency as if you’re going to have them three years down the track.
So, that should hopefully highlight some respect, some building of great relationships, open, transparent communication in thinking about it as a long-term great partnership, not just a tick of the box. And we’ve had to go to pitch, and we’ve ticked the box and done that process.
Darren:
Okay. Ellie.
Ellie:
Three words. Can I use one word three times like Anton? Alignment, alignment-
Darren:
No. What’s the one thing they should take away from it? It’s just-
Ellie:
Align before you start on all this stuff. Build the plane before you fly it. Don’t build the plane as you fly it. On all the things we’ve been talking about, alignment upfront is really important.
Darren:
Okay. And we’ll finish with Lord Nathan of Hodges.
Nathan:
I couldn’t resist. I had to come back with one more point. Anton just triggered something in my head.
If you’re going to take anything out of this as a marketer and you’re going to design a pitch process, the core principle to have in your head is that the process needs to allow you to work out and find out as far as is possible within a pitch process, what it would be like for this agency and your team to work together in the long term.
And you need to get as close to that as you possibly can within the artificial confines of a pitch process.
And if you use that as a foundation for every decision you make about how to design process and how to assess agents as you go, then I wouldn’t say you’ll go far wrong, but you’ll go a lot less far wrong than people seem to be now.
Darren:
Less far wrong. It sounds almost like a dish at my local restaurant.
Nathan:
That’s the last thing I’m saying on this podcast, and I’ve come up with a phrase like less far wrong. I’ll hang my head in shame there.
Ellie:
It’s something you hate, Nathan.
Lydia:
So not you.
Nathan:
No coffee required. Thank Jeepers.
Darren:
Well, look, it’s been a great conversation. I want to thank you all for participating. Kylie Ridler-Dutton, Lydia Feely, Nathan Hodges, Ellie Angell, and Anton Buchner. Thank you very much.
Now, get back to work.
And for everyone else, The State of the Pitch in Australia research report is available at trinityp3.com/state-of-the-pitch with hyphens between each one. And thank you very much for joining Managing Marketing.
