Retainers kill the creative relationship…

I was very interested to read your article on the agency-client relationship “Rubbing each other up the wrong way?” (MW November 21). I’m on the agency side, and I believe that one of the main problems is that too many agencies rely on retained contracts, and fail to see that working with clients without this can lead to stronger and more effective relationships. First off, it helps reassure the client that its agency is totally committed to delivering service excellence for every project. Being “only as good as your last project” should remain an agency’s main motivation to win more business with a client.

It also helps an agency remember that client is king. The managing director may be acutely aware of this, but when a company’s employees are in the hundreds, the message can soon be lost. But it’s not just the dilution of the company’s founding philosophy that may put client relationships at risk. If a company is on a retainer, there may be the temptation, albeit on a subliminal level, to take the foot off the gas given that the client “is in the bag”. The non-retained contract route is a tangible, constant reminder that agencies must continuously prove to the client they are worth using.

While there are major benefits for clients keeping agencies on retained contracts (such as greater insight and understanding of client issues and corporate objectives), retained contracts are an artificial route in and do not support this model in the long term. Agencies need to work on a project basis, as this is the foundation upon which solid relationships are built. If the agency can prove that it delivers excellence every time, the client will naturally use the agency on a continuous basis. Then an agency would deliver the benefits of greater insight, knowledge and value to the client.

Phil Rushfirth

Head of quantitative research

Nunwood Consulting, Leeds