ISBA Not Collaborative in Call for Transparency with Latest Agency Contract Launch
On 28 April ISBA (Incorporated Society of British Advertisers) weighed in on the advertiser/agency relationship with the launch of new contract terms for media agency services to promote transparency and update the previous template that was launched almost ten years ago.
ISBA cites the importance, now more than ever, for advertisers to have a clear, strong, and transparent contract with their media agency. It seems a fitting time for ISBA to launch the updated contract. The industry is unrecognisable now, compared with ten years ago; and the previous template focused on outdated media planning and buying methods.
Some of the core changes focused on advertiser protection within the advertiser/agency relationship, such as auditing rights and the rights of brands to choose their own auditors, data ownership, along with explicit definitions of value pots and free inventory.
While the new contract was put together in liaison with ISBA members, in response to their core concerns, based on their existing experiences of agency contracts, it’s bound to leave a sour taste in the mouth of many a media services agency with its allusions to the potential shady deals that agencies are currently able to get away with, when it comes to fees, value pots, and AVBs.
According to Debbie Morrison, director of consultancy and best practice, ISBA: “The advertiser community now needs to pay much more attention to protecting and enhancing their rights in this more complex environment.”
Transparency is, of course, an issue in the digital media industry; but this is not exclusive to brands and advertisers, highlighted by the IAB’s launch of the transparency calculator, to allow for greater fee transparency across the entire digital ecosystem. There is a risk that agencies are being made a scapegoat for an issue that is inherent across the entire value chain.
The irony is not lost on many people that ISBA launch a new contract template designed to navigate the opaque world of the digital ecosystem, calling for more transparent relationships, without consulting the other side of this party – the agencies. So, it’s already off to a great start. Many media services agency representatives were not keen to comment on the record about ISBA’s new contract, in a move that is both understandable and predictable.
ExchangeWire, keen to seek the views of players in the media ecosystem outside of media services agencies, who also rely on direct contracts with brand advertisers, spoke with Media iQ, AudienceScience, and Blackwood Seven to find out what they think this means for improved transparency across the industry.
Not a collaborative approach
“The move by ISBA to provide guidance and structure to their relationships and contracts with media agencies is both predictable and sad, in equal measure. Predictable, in the sense that the complexities of technology and its impact on media, from the meteoric rise of programmatic, the role of data, viewability, and ad blocking have all contributed to a state of nervousness and mistrust between client, media agency, and vendors. It is, therefore, unsurprising that the client community, and its official body, is seeking to garner greater controls and transparency in the wake of rapid disruption and change. That said, to me, there is a sadness in the fact that this doesn’t seem like a collaborative approach, even if the outcome is the right one. It would appear that ISBA has unilaterally decided on these codes of practice and conduct without consultation with their media agency partners. It is hard not to see this as a symbolic act that reflects a broader lack of trust between the two parties, which has been coming for some time.”
Richard Dunmall, Chief Revenue Officer, Media iQ
Entire supply chain must be accountable
“ISBA’s initiative is definitely a positive for the industry as a whole; but advertisers need to go further if they truly want to reverse the industry’s trend towards increasing opacity. Advertisers need to hold their entire advertising supply chains – not just their agencies – accountable for delivering quality and transparency. This includes middlemen technology vendors and preferred publisher partners. Too often the biggest publishers are getting a pass on advertiser hot button issues, like viewability, fraud, and placement transparency. Moreover, advertisers also need to ensure the remuneration models they have for their partners create incentives for more – not less – transparency. In a sense, advertiser procurement teams have almost been too successful in driving down traditional agency margins without focusing enough on value.”
Michael Greene, General Manager, Supply Chain, AudienceScience
Marketers need to be bold
“As the industry has grown, it seems the power has migrated to the media agencies rather than the marketers. The new ISBA contract shows how serious the problem has gotten. Our industry claims to be at the leading edge of technology and creativity; and yet, for years, our media planners and marketers alike have been bogged down with antiquated, opaque, and laborious decision-making processes. This shows the need for marketers to be bold and embrace the platforms that already exist today to give them what they’re looking for: transparency, efficiency, effect, and speed. Emerging technologies, like artificial intelligence, aren’t a threat, rather an opportunity to have our greatest minds come together and impart knowledge to the machines and free our marketers and media planners in order to do the thing clients really value us for – good client service and creativity.”
Carl Erik Kjærsgaard, Executive Chairman & Co-Founder, Blackwood Seven
The post ISBA Not Collaborative in Call for Transparency with Latest Agency Contract Launch appeared first on ExchangeWire.com.
