Colossus转发了
A fascinating discussion, thank you?Lindsay Rittenhouse and?Ad Age for the opportunity to pipe in. Agree with?Lindsey Slaby (link below) that there are two debates happening here, and the one about the old school?pitch process is a slightly separate, well worn topic. And I agree with?Rachel Huff (link below) that there's a sweet spot in the middle ground, between cattle call and a million dollar, onerous-for-all pitch. To me, that sweet spot is MATCHMAKING. When the profession we call "pitch consultants" are focused on making the best match they can, they are providing an invaluable service to both client and agency. A service that's well worth their fee and each party's time – because of the higher probability that effort will pay off, yes, BUT ALSO because those that aren't right won't get put through all that effort in the first place. Efficiency! For agencies, I will say this. Look at the resources that a marketer is willing to put against their 'pitch'. If their?effort adds up to a social post consisting of an ill-defined, unbudgeted, free-for-all where the first 300 respondents?get a passing glance before the contest closes, then you have to apply this philosophy to how the relationship with them would be if you "win"?that particular lottery. For marketers, I can't imagine it's worth the time to go through 300+ posts, running a gamut from full service agencies to freelancers to collectives, reviewing capabilities and narrowing the field to 5-10 to call. Any good matchmaker can make a list that is better qualified for your needs off the top of their head. Much less running the matchmaker's process and letting them put their full expertise to work. All that said, I appreciate very much marketers willing to explore new ways to identify an agency partner. And while this particular approach doesn't solve real problems for either agencies or brands, we can commiserate with the notion that there are better ways. https://lnkd.in/exn7Ahhg https://lnkd.in/ekXVQjfh https://lnkd.in/eq26KXqG Colossus