A year has passed since Mindshare unveiled its ambitious new global structure. In that time the WPP agency has folded more than 12 business units into a single operation in a bid to transform itself from a media agency to what it terms the ‘lead business partner’ for clients. But after a year of reorganising and restructuring - not all of it painless - the question is, was it worth the hassle?
The restructure put an end to business units such as Mindshare Interaction and merged them into four groups under a single P&L. The goal is to offer clients a seamless service from data analytics and digital through to old-fashioned media buying.
Have clients noticed the difference? Marco Rimini, the leader of Mindshare’s worldwide business planning group and one of the architects of the reorganisation, argues that the reaction from global clients has been “largely positive”. “We did this primarily because clients were asking us. They were seeing different people from Mindshare and were asking how it worked together.”
Rahul Welde, VP of media for Unilever in Asia, vouches for the new structure. “It is promising - in particular the focus on invention [see box]. This has enabled it to deliver some excellent projects for us in content integration.”
Several industry observers argue that the fragmentation of Mindshare’s business into different divisions pre-restructure had gone too far. Ashutosh Srivastava, the Asia-Pacific leader of Mindshare, accepts that it was not always helpful. “When you are organised in those silos, you typically go to a client with an approach based on media you are an expert in. So if you were in Mindshare Interaction, digital would have been your focus.”
Rimini is eager to list the clients that have taken advantage of the restructure. It now leads the planning for Ford Europe and has secured extra content projects from the brand. Mindshare is doing more upstream planning for client Kimberly-Clark, while Unilever in the US has deepened its relationship with the agency.
However, he adds: “We are developing more relationships with existing clients rather than one big hit. New business at global levels is incredibly complicated and driven by price. It’s not as simple as saying new structure means new win.”
That ties with comments from one agency insider who points out that while some clients have been keen to take advantage of a more coherent structure, other clients “still just want a media agency”.
In Asia, Srivastava insists the new structure has made a difference. In China the agency won the Daimler business, and in India Aditya Birla Group consolidated its business with it. In Singapore it has won StarHub while in Australia it has deepened its relationship with Kellogg.
Unsurprisingly, other agencies are less effusive about the change. An agency head at a competing network dismisses it as “old wine in new bottles” and grumbles that other agencies have been making similar changes without making so much noise about it.
“I honestly can’t seem to see anything dramatically different about its work,” he adds.
A source within WPP, moreover, argues that the new structure “threw” Mindshare’s staff as the change was sudden and dramatic.
There is also a feeling that the change has not been easy internally for Mindshare as the agency has had to manage egos and personality clashes while regrouping people. A particular talking point has been a new series of job titles that flattens a lot of the hierarchies and gives staff one of only five titles.
Mark Patterson, Asia-Pacific CEO of GroupM, of which Mindshare is a part, admits that “changing the styles and behaviour of people is the hardest thing”, adding that Mindshare is still rolling out training initiatives around the new structure. He argues that the restructure is an ongoing process that will take different shapes in different markets.
Ultimately, the question is whether Mindshare is doing anything now it could not have done under the old structure. Rimini concedes that some of the group’s more cutting-edge work could have happened before, but “it’s become a lot easier. Now it will happen more often and better.”
Got a view?
Email [email protected]
The restructure put an end to business units such as Mindshare Interaction and merged them into four groups under a single P&L. The goal is to offer clients a seamless service from data analytics and digital through to old-fashioned media buying.
Have clients noticed the difference? Marco Rimini, the leader of Mindshare’s worldwide business planning group and one of the architects of the reorganisation, argues that the reaction from global clients has been “largely positive”. “We did this primarily because clients were asking us. They were seeing different people from Mindshare and were asking how it worked together.”
Rahul Welde, VP of media for Unilever in Asia, vouches for the new structure. “It is promising - in particular the focus on invention [see box]. This has enabled it to deliver some excellent projects for us in content integration.”
Several industry observers argue that the fragmentation of Mindshare’s business into different divisions pre-restructure had gone too far. Ashutosh Srivastava, the Asia-Pacific leader of Mindshare, accepts that it was not always helpful. “When you are organised in those silos, you typically go to a client with an approach based on media you are an expert in. So if you were in Mindshare Interaction, digital would have been your focus.”
Rimini is eager to list the clients that have taken advantage of the restructure. It now leads the planning for Ford Europe and has secured extra content projects from the brand. Mindshare is doing more upstream planning for client Kimberly-Clark, while Unilever in the US has deepened its relationship with the agency.
However, he adds: “We are developing more relationships with existing clients rather than one big hit. New business at global levels is incredibly complicated and driven by price. It’s not as simple as saying new structure means new win.”
That ties with comments from one agency insider who points out that while some clients have been keen to take advantage of a more coherent structure, other clients “still just want a media agency”.
In Asia, Srivastava insists the new structure has made a difference. In China the agency won the Daimler business, and in India Aditya Birla Group consolidated its business with it. In Singapore it has won StarHub while in Australia it has deepened its relationship with Kellogg.
Unsurprisingly, other agencies are less effusive about the change. An agency head at a competing network dismisses it as “old wine in new bottles” and grumbles that other agencies have been making similar changes without making so much noise about it.
“I honestly can’t seem to see anything dramatically different about its work,” he adds.
A source within WPP, moreover, argues that the new structure “threw” Mindshare’s staff as the change was sudden and dramatic.
There is also a feeling that the change has not been easy internally for Mindshare as the agency has had to manage egos and personality clashes while regrouping people. A particular talking point has been a new series of job titles that flattens a lot of the hierarchies and gives staff one of only five titles.
Mark Patterson, Asia-Pacific CEO of GroupM, of which Mindshare is a part, admits that “changing the styles and behaviour of people is the hardest thing”, adding that Mindshare is still rolling out training initiatives around the new structure. He argues that the restructure is an ongoing process that will take different shapes in different markets.
Ultimately, the question is whether Mindshare is doing anything now it could not have done under the old structure. Rimini concedes that some of the group’s more cutting-edge work could have happened before, but “it’s become a lot easier. Now it will happen more often and better.”
Got a view?
Email [email protected]
+(900+x+600+px)+(3).png&h=334&w=500&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
+(900+x+600+px).jpg&h=334&w=500&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
.jpg&h=334&w=500&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
.jpg&h=334&w=500&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
.jpg&h=268&w=401&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
.png&h=268&w=401&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
+(2).jpg&h=268&w=401&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
.jpg&h=268&w=401&q=100&v=20250320&c=1)
