recent clients' move has highlighted another of the key weakness of the current structure of the media agency (as well of the adv and marketing agency overall).
many local branches are open to serve a major client only. you know the big clients ask for an office in borat's country, too.
but when they shift the account into other agency, local branch do normally close the premise and fire the employees: elvis has left the building.
and then?
don't you think that it may be possible to strucure the business in a wiser way?
Technorati Tags:
6 comments:
this is the post of the new century, at least for Italy.
as a matter of fact, at least on this private companies know what to do: keep people hired until they are profitable. most companies feel that they don't owe anything to their employees. is a business relationship that can be stopped at any moment. fairness is just not an issue.
on the other side, most employees expect their company to care for them: their job itself should do for their career improvement, salary increases, etc etc etc. this was the past, maybe. but not the present.
most career advisors today put their finger on the concept of career assessment: every worker is the manager of him/herself and has responsability for his/her own career. From this perspective, everyone is an entrepreneur: you just can't expect your company to satisfy your
career expectations, even if you deserve it. and if the firm you're in is losing money (or not making enough profits to match its business plan, which is worse) and thinks you should be fired, then so will be.
this is pretty usual in other countries, I think. It's more unusual for Italy, but it's unlikely that this trend will not change.
Companies are not human.
Employees are, and it's up to them to approach work in a completely different way from the past.
A revolution of the mind, like someone said in a movie some years ago (the title was Vanilla Sky).
well, vanilla sky was a real shock, wasn't it? pier, thanks for the comment. you are as usual rather advanced for this country. on the other side, what i've found in this time spent through blogs from all over the world is the feeling that something has to change. but probably towards a more human approach. if between a company and its employees there is not satisfaction or no relationship, probably that company will not be so profitable or so good at customer care. there are some significant example about this issue, eg starbucks.
I agree on this. but then, question is: does quality really make a difference between a company and another? especially for media and advertising companies, i'm more and more convinced that the main selection criteria are financial. a company will be chosen as partner because is more convenient - this also because many clients seem convinced that in the end the job will be done in a way or another.
and that's the sad part of the story. as mentioned in the first part of the media agency article, media agency lost the great chance to be a partner and not a commodity. will be able to regain this profile?
only if media agencies will be able to transform themselves into something different. as per today,I think they're too strictly connected to traditional media and an equivalent traditional idea of communication. really, only the future will tell.
right.
Post a Comment