Scope “Creep”

It stands to reason that, in a discipline such as marketing communications, communication about it is naturally undisciplined. Everyone is an expert (or at least we all know what we like). Everyone is prepared to contribute to the judgement of what constitutes ‘good copy' and how it should be delivered. These completely natural human behaviours can quickly make a ‘dog's breakfast' out of a working relationship between an advertiser and its agency.

After the excitement of the ‘pitch' is complete - the agency wins the assignment convincing the client that they can handle absolutely anything. Then the work begins. The agency has to staff the assignment (people are 80% of an average agency's business cost), and there is generally just a vague idea of the volume of work to be performed. That is when the agency starts to ask proper questions about ‘scope'.

Scope is meant to describe the client's expectations about the work. Partly this is meant to capture the media being used to reach the users and prospects as well as the number of projects that might be involved in each medium. There may be an historical record of the numbers of advertisements, editorials, and promotions by product, brand or service that could be helpful.

But the bigger picture of ‘account service' must also be developed.

•         Does the client have a clear expectation of ‘strategic thinking' from the agency? This generally means that the agency must plan for senior people to spend speculative time - unrelated to specific projects.

•         Is there an expectation that the agency attend meetings that, again, may not be project related but are instead related to forward planning or business review?

•         Is there a requirement for competitive analysis as part of the client's business planning cycle (or should there be)? Is there an expectation that the agency gather this information and report on it?

•         What are the expectations for reporting - administratively and financially? What are the implications for the agency's staffing and role in budget control?

Even more frightening is the possibility that a defined annual marketing plan that can guide project planning may not exist. Believe it or not, outside the disciplined world of packaged goods, there are retailers, financial institutions, manufacturers and service providers who do a great job of building their operating plans but then allow the Marketing to unfold on a project by project basis - "as needed".

In other words, the ‘scope of work' a year after the successful ‘pitch' may bear little resemblance to the initial assignment. The needs of the business are gradually revealed to the agency as the scope ‘creeps' to meet reality. Some clients may take the view that this is ‘life in the service business' and that agencies should just ‘suck it up' and cope. They could not be more wrong!

If the agency cannot plan for its staffing and be appropriately compensated for it, the client will be disappointed. The lack of clear scope definition - up front - has only one possible outcome. Either the agency desperately assigns staffing as needed to compensate for the changing landscape and loses money on the account. They complain, are seen as ‘whining' and precipitate a search sooner or later. Alternatively they fail to meet expectations and are replaced anyway. A constant pattern of agency review is disruptive to the business and ultimately reduces the participation of good agencies as the client's reputation declines. 

A strong working partnership requires a ‘virtuous circle'. The Agency relies on the Client for direction; the direction emanates from the detailed commercialization plan in a clear scope of work; this allows the Agency to put in place resources and be paid appropriately (usually with some mixture of ‘retainer' and project billing); results of the programs are measured and the plan is refined. Lack of planning and scope definition will lead inevitably to inadequate resources and issues of cost control on both sides.

Add your comment