It’s a strategy embraced by all the other holding companies in the region in which separate media brands are overseen by common management arms.
GroupM and Omnicom Media Group have proven just how essential this structure is to the media business, particularly in an era of increasingly complex and collaborative client service requirements.
GroupM and Omnicom Media Group have proven just how essential this structure is to the media business, particularly in an era of increasingly complex and collaborative client service requirements.
Media Brands is, in comparison, a latecomer to the party. On face value, it’s hard to see the benefits of IPG having two separate brands in Asia, as there is not much conflict from clients at the two agencies. UM and Initiative often share major clients, such as Johnson & Johnson, in some Asia-Pacific markets.
But the reality is that networks need more than one answer for clients. And, from a cost-effectiveness perspective, it makes sense. In some Asian markets, it is clear that the decision to combine back office operations while keeping the client-service teams separate has been the right one.
What Brien is working towards now is to have the eventual branches from each media services unit become the value centre of the Media Brands organisation. IPG is close to signing a mobile/digital acquisition in coming weeks that will begin to make this happen.
Critical to the success of Media Brands will be data systems that eventually bind these units together from an analytic and insight perspective across media.
Yes, it will take time to not only acquire, but to gel these units together. But what UM and Initiative are being given in Asia is a new identity. The agencies have struggled in previous years to grow at the rate of some of their rivals in the region. Each has shown pockets of excellence in important markets such as Japan and Australia that have proved instrumental to winning new clients. It’s replicating that success across the region that’s been challenging.
For Initiative in particular, it must at times seem difficult to turn things around and - despite Brien’s reassurances - persistent rumours circulate in the market that it’s only a matter of time before parent company IPG merges the pair.
With King Lai out of the picture, it is left to Media Brands’ regional president Jeff Cressall to make the structure work in Asia and to address the problems that lie at a local market level.
Perhaps the most notable difference at Media Brands in Asia is how closely aligned the media agencies are with their creative partners — particularly UM with McCann Worldgroup.
For UM, close ties with the McCann powerhouse, which is roaring back to life in Asia, brings obvious new business benefits. Whether the siblings can learn to play nicely remains to be seen.
There is a certain logic to the move. Clients are demanding integration. They want collaboration, not inter-holding company rivalry. Creative agencies in the region are investing to bring media-thinking back in-house, while media agencies are fighting to guard their turf.
However, the risk - which UM will be aware of - is that this new interdependence between creative and media may again relegate the media function to a side player at the creative agency party. Brien is adamant that the new structure will work in Asia, and it’s hard not to get caught up in his enthusiasm.
The challenge will be striking the right balance so that clients get integrated thinking, but they also get strong and cost-effective media brands that can work seamlessly with a range of creative agencies. This won’t be easy to pull off, unless of course UM can stay in charge of its own destiny.
Related article
Got a view?
email feedback@media.asia
