Can Omnicom & IPG clients resist the itch to pitch?

In one sense, the question is, of course, a little simplistic. After all, pitching decisions are rarely so trigger-happy – thankfully. But it is also true that one of the main red flags for any client/agency relationship is conflict. And with two heavyweight holding companies coming together, there is likely to be plenty of debris flying around.

It’s a scenario that both Omnicom and Interpublic will have war-gamed. After all, this is no one’s first rodeo. Large agency groups are well-versed in managing conflict. They have to be. The demise of the retainer model, replaced by the relative insecurity of the project-by-project mandate, has increasingly required agencies to look beyond the one client-per-category model. Indeed, one notable agency claimed 12 car brands under one roof not so long ago. An unthinkable prospect only a few years prior. But separate teams, locked down floors, tech-powered firewalls, you name it – agencies have become the masters of conflict reassurance.

Nevertheless, it is inevitable that there will be some fallout. Whether it’s due to conflict, new leadership, an altered culture, the departure of key individuals or a legion of other possible reasons, brands will pitch. And should we be surprised? No, of course not. With or without the Omnicom/Interpublic deal, pitching would be a huge part of 2025 for any agency, just as it would be for clients. The lure of a fresh new idea promising glory remains a compelling notion for brands – particularly when growth remains steadfastly anemic across so many sectors. And if proof is needed, I refer you back to this same column last month in which I referenced the recent report by Ingenuity+ (Redefining the Pitch: A new era in agency-brand relationships). It concluded that 98% of senior marketers planned to initiate a pitch next year. It would seem, then, that almost everyone has the itch to pitch.

It’s a prospect that many will rub their hands with glee at. Pitching remains simultaneously one of the most intoxicating, frustrating and exhilarating parts of our industry. Not only that, but the competition that it creates, the lessons that it so bluntly delivers and the sheer Darwinism of all of it forces all of us to be better. Now, as a die-hard fan of the ‘business of new business,’ I acknowledge the bias in that statement. And I also recognize that many will protest, citing the abundance of unregulated pitches, the high cost of participation, the often-uneven playing fields, the burden it places on their people and so on and so on. All fair, too, no doubt.

Another argument against pitching is that brands can often do better through consistency rather than change. In October, the IPA published Compound Creativity, a new report arguing that creative consistency is the key to building stronger brands. The study put forward the view that brands that regularly switch creative agencies create lower-quality ads. Conversely, the brands that maintain the same creative agency within a five-year period produce higher creative quality and grow their advertising distinctiveness. It was also able to point to a correlation between the brands that are most consistent and their ability to achieve ‘+28% more Very Large Business Effects,’ including sales value gain, profit gain, market share gain and more. Compelling stuff.

So, will it be worth scratching that itch in 2025?

Well, for some, it will be. After all, not every brand owner is blessed with either the time or the platform to build success from. To what extent Omnicom and Interpublic feel the effects remains a story to be written. They will hope, of course, that the narrative is less one of defending business but instead of growing one. Now, that’s something that we can all get behind.