Mirren Business Development - 4A's...Search Consultants & Agencies” Download more new business...

The 2009 Mirren Search Consultant Review

Mirren Business Development

© 2009 Mirren Business Development

“A Forum to Improve the Best Practices Between Search Consultants & Agencies”

October 10, 2009Download more new business tools and insight at www.mirren.com


The Mirren Search Consultant Review

IntroductionSearch Consultants play an important role in the world of new business. Part of their goal is to bring order to the process of selecting the best agency to accomplish the objectives at hand.

However, as their influence impacts billions of dollars in new business every year, it also impacts a tremendous amount of agency resources. As agencies attempt to capture some of this shifting business, they invest their hard-earned time, money

© 2009 Mirren Business Development New Business Training & Recruiting Specialists www.mirren.com 2

capture some of this shifting business, they invest their hard-earned time, money and morale.

As an agency, you know this. You've invested resources staying top of mind, completing their database profiles, responding to RFIs, making capabilities presentations and ultimately making final pitch presentations. Each step of the way, you've experienced intense scrutiny and evaluation.

Well, now it's time for you to evaluate the Search Consultants.


The ObjectiveAgencies invest a tremendous amount of their resources in Search Consultant-led reviews. Given this, our objective with this study is to spark the dialog and provide the agency feedback that will ultimately lead to improving how Search Consultants get the best work from the agencies they engage. We are also providing agency feedback to help ensure reviews are being run in a way that is efficient, effective and ethical.

Mirren fully supports the efforts of the ANA/AAAA “Rules of the Road” for Agency



Mirren fully supports the efforts of the ANA/AAAA “Rules of the Road” for Agency Search Consultants. You can read about their work here: http://www2.aaaa.org/pubs/position/Pages/120600_rules.aspx

Let Us Be ClearThis study is not meant to be a forum for agencies to vent. It is instead meant to take a constructive look at an important practice that influences the exhaustive use of agency resources.

Sourcing the RespondentsThrough a marketing campaign that consisted of Twitter, blogging, email marketing and print advertising, we asked industry executives to provide their point of view on those Search Consultants that have engaged them in a competitive review.


Fear of Being Black-ListedIt is worth noting that this study created an element of concern with agency executives. Thirteen people emailed Mirren in advance of completing the review to ensure their names would in fact be kept 100% confidential, all of them indicated a fear of being “black-listed” from receiving any further calls from the Search Consultants.

No agency executives are named in this review.



No agency executives are named in this review.

It is also interesting to note that several Search Consultants emailed Mirren to show their support for improving best practices for everyone in their field.


Type of Agency Number of US Employees:

The RespondentsOne hundred eight agencies completed the online survey. As there is a relatively finite number of agencies that work with Search Consultants, this is a good sample size. Respondents represent agencies that range from top ten global advertising agencies, to mid-size interactive agencies, to smaller PR and integrated boutiques.



Type of Agency

Advertising Brand Strategy/Consulting Design/Corporate ID Direct Response/Marketing Interactive/Digital Media Planning/Buying Multicultural Public Relations Sales Promotion Other

Total Agencies = 108

Number of US Employees:

1000+501-1000 251- 50076 - 25026 - 75Under 26

56.4%2.7%2.7%1.0%5.5%8.2%1.8%7.2%1.8%6.9%

14.5%10.9%10.0%21.8%20.0%22.7%

Key Insights & Trends That Emerged 7

Agencies Must Take Responsibility 15

Favorite Search Consultant 19

TABEL OF

TABEL OF

CONENTENTS

CONENTENTS

6© 2009 Mirren Business Development

Favorite Search Consultant 19

The Eight Evaluation Criteria 21

Ranking Within Each Criteria 25

The Search Consultants, Reviewed 35

About Mirren 86

TABEL OF

TABEL OF

CONENTENTS

CONENTENTS

INSIGHT

INSIGHT


Key Insights & Trends That Emerged

INSIGHT

INSIGHT


While there are a number of good constructive criticisms in the study, there are two Search Consultant practices that agencies reported to be most alarming.

The first concern is the practice of providing services to agencies for a fee. The fear is that this in turn creates financial relationships with agencies, some of which may be considered for a competitive review. As clients (and agencies) expect a completely objective process, this could in fact lead to bias and conflict of interest. One respondent related it to a Wall Street Analyst providing what is expected to be an objective point of view on a company - and that company is also a paying

Key Insights


an objective point of view on a company - and that company is also a paying client. Agencies generally feel obligated to pay for these services to ensure the phone keeps ringing.

The second practice of particular concern to agencies is violation of their confidentiality. Agencies provide Search Consultants with highly confidential information for each review, including elements of proprietary strategy and intellectual property - in other words, their competitive advantage in the marketplace. In some cases, it was reported that the information an agency submits for a review is then being shown to other agencies - and for a fee. While many are upset about this, they generally feel powerless to stop it for fear of being black-listed from future reviews.


Here are some of the additional areas that were reported for improvement, ultimately leading to better work for the prospect:

> Stop the “cattle calls:” be more selective in the agencies that are being invited.

> As competitive reviews consume more resources than most Search Consultants probably realize, agencies want Search Consultants to be more respectful with their requests: stop “process for process sake” and instead better focus the process

Key Insights


their requests: stop “process for process sake” and instead better focus the process on providing client decision-makers with only the information they really need to make informed decisions.

> To better understand the key business/marketing/communications issues, provide more access to the client decision-makers.

> Provide better, more constructive feedback to agencies after reviews.

> Search Consultants themselves must work harder to better understand the real business/marketing issues/problems.

Overall, what do Search Consultants most need to improve in terms of how they work

with agencies?

No Idea

Transparency of Expectations

Managing Client Expectations

More Accurate Brief

True Reason for the Review

Be More Humane

Current on Agency Events/News

SOW to large to Present

Respectful of Agency Time & Money

Changing with the times

Identify Client’s Real Problem

Realistic Timetables

Pay to Play

Stop Being Client Spokesperson

The process, change it

Length/Duration of Reviews

10© 2009 Mirren Business Development New Business Training & Recruiting Specialists www.mirren.com

Access to Client Decision Makers

Communication

FeedbackCattle Call

Current on Agency Events/NewsIdentify Client’s Real Problem

Client-Agency Interaction

More access to decision-makers/agency-client interaction

33.2%

Respect agency resources (time, money) 21.1%Evolve process/decrease review stages/stop “process for process sake” 12.3%

Better, more constructive feedback 11.7%

Overall, what do Search Consultants most need to improve in terms of how they work

with agencies?


Better, more constructive feedback 11.7%

Be more current on agencies 9.7%Understand clients real business/marketing problem(s) 9.7%

Stop the cattle calls/smaller, more selective lists 6.7%

Transparency of expectations 6.7%

More agency communication 5.9%

Stop selecting the same agencies 4.3%


Here are some of the key trends that agencies noted as it relates to Search Consultants and new business:

> There are more client-run reviews (less Search Consultants), particularly with procurement becoming more involved.

> There is more review process, and within shorter timelines: “less respect for agency resources.”

Key Trends


agency resources.”

> There is a growing lack of client boundaries: clients asking for more throughout the pitch process and then ultimately asking for more work for a smaller fee.

> By making everything so process-oriented, Search Consultants are contributing to agency commoditization.

> More agencies feel obligated to pay for Search Consultant services.

> There are more cattle calls: too many agencies invited to each review.

What are one or two of the biggest trends you see taking place with Search Consultants and

their impact on new business?

More client-run/Less Search Consultant reviews 31.0%

More review stages/processes, greater agency expense, but shorter time-line

17.2%

More specialized reviews: by channel/discipline (i.e. digital)

13.8%

Lack of boundaries, budget not realistic, more free work

10.3%


free work

Search Consultant selling services to agencies 10.2%

Search Consultants are becoming commoditized

6.9%

Small agencies ignored more often (unless specialized)

6.9%

Search Consultants using old best practices 6.9%

Contributing to agency commoditization 3.4%

Consultants take clients side vs. being 100 percent balanced

3.4%

The percentages attached to each statement indicate: the percentage of those that responded to this particular open-ended question, who indicated that particular sentiment.


“I value those consultants who are being more flexible and want to get the two cultures together as soon as possible - because that's where the rubber hits the road. I would challenge those Search Consultants who advise their clients to invite 15 - 20 agencies into an RFI process. To me it speaks volumes about how little the consultant knows about the agency

Key Insights


speaks volumes about how little the consultant knows about the agency landscape."

“The Search Consultants are losing business to procurement. Impact to new business is that procurement is making the decisions and there are now new issues and audiences that need to be addressed - i.e., new compensation models, proving value, etc. Consultants are losing power.”

TAEK RESPONSIBILITY

TAEK RESPONSIBILITY


Agencies Must Take Responsibility As Well

TAEK RESPONSIBILITY

TAEK RESPONSIBILITY


At the same time, we believe that agencies have long been blaming Search Consultants far too much for their pitching woes.

Poor pitch execution is not improved by a better Search Consultant process. Poor pitch choices (ie, avoiding the wrong pitches) are not improved by a more efficient Search Consultant process.

Agencies Must Take Responsibility As Well


improved by a more efficient Search Consultant process.

Agencies continue to enter too many pitches, spread themselves too thin and ultimately make a mediocre impact. They continue to complain about the buffet, but then can't stop shoveling it in.

What do you think is most challenging about being a Search Consultant?

Knowledge of agencies/Agency bombardment 22.6%

Consultant differentiation, value, competition 16.1%

Avoiding bias/Favoritism 12.9%

Understanding client needs/business 12.7%

Consultant new business/Alternative revenue 12.6%


Consultant new business/Alternative revenue 12.6%

Making sure the pairing is a good match/ pleasing both sides

9.8%

Honesty/Understanding relationships 9.7%

Time/Resource constraints 6.6%

Clients moving away from Search Consultants 6.5%

Less sophisticated clients 6.3%The percentages attached to each statement indicate: the percentage of those that responded to this particular open-ended question, who indicated that particular sentiment.

What could you do to improve the effectiveness of how you personally work with

Search Consultants?

Better communication/More focused outreach 47.8%

Spend more time/Establish personal relationship 21.7%

I have no idea 13.0%

Say "no" more often 8.8%

Ask consultants to share evaluation criteria/score 8.7%


Ask consultants to share evaluation criteria/score sheet

8.7%

Confirm client budget up front/Better scale pitch to client budget

8.4%

No Fear/Be frank with Consultants about their process

4.3%

Better measure our agency perceptions with Consultants

4.1%

The percentages attached to each statement indicate: the percentage of those that responded to this particular open-ended question, who indicated that particular sentiment.

YOUR FAVORITE

YOUR FAVORITE


Before We Jump In With The Reviews:

“Who Is Your Favorite

Search Consultant to Work With?”

YOUR FAVORITE

YOUR FAVORITE

Of those you reviewed in this study, who is your overall favorite to work with?

36.3%33.3%

25.0%

Of those respondents that reviewed a particular Search Consultant, this is the percentage that rated them their “overall favorite to work with.”

Here are The Top 8.


13.7%

5.8%9.0%

6.2%

14.2%

THE FRAMWORK

THE FRAMWORK


The Eight Evaluation Criteria

THE FRAMWORK

THE FRAMWORK


Search Consultant Review: Evaluation Criteria

1. Respectful of Agency ResourcesBased on what a client requires to make well-informed decisions, the resources required to complete the review process are reasonable. Consider RFI/questionnaire submissions, RFPs, capabilities sessions and final pitch presentations.

2. Brief Quality & AccuracyProvides you with the depth of information and insight: (1) necessary to understand the core business / marketing / communications issues and resulting objectives; (2) that accurately reflects the client decision-making criteria/process. In the end, the


that accurately reflects the client decision-making criteria/process. In the end, the winning agencies (and their work) are clearly reflected in the brief and selection criteria.

3. Access to Search ConsultantYou are able to access the Search Consultant: (1) on an on-going basis to keep him/her current on your agency; (2) during the review process to secure additional information as required.

4. Provides Access to Client Decision-MakersUltimately, connecting you directly with the final decision-maker leads to better work. Not only does this access help you understand what it will really take to win the review, it helps you deliver work that best achieves the client's objectives.



5. Provides Constructive/Accurate FeedbackUpon completion of each review, provides you with detailed and constructive feedback on the effectiveness of your pitch performance.

6. No Conflict of InterestThe Search Consultant does not provide any services to agencies for a fee. This in turn creates financial relationships with agencies, some of which may be considered for a competitive review. As clients (and agencies) expect a completely objective process, this could in fact lead to bias and conflict of interest.


completely objective process, this could in fact lead to bias and conflict of interest.

7. Does No Violate Agency ConfidentialityAgencies provide Search Consultants with highly confidential information for each review, including that which covers elements of proprietary strategy and intellectual property (competitive advantage in the marketplace). This information must only be used for the purposes of the review for which it was requested and kept strictly confidential.

If your proprietary information is to be shared with any other party, you must first be notified about that party and your advance written consent then obtained. Bottom line, without your written consent, none of your proprietary information should be shared with any other party outside the review at hand.



8. Gives Back to the IndustryWhile technically not an element of effective performance, we believe that such an important group of influencers should make an effort to give back and help the industry they work so closely with (and ultimately need good performance from). This might range from speaking at industry events, to publishing instructional content, to providing constructive feedback and support - all focused on helping you improve how you work with Search Consultants (for no fee, to avoid conflict of interest).


interest).

Rating OptionsEach survey respondent rated the Search Consultants that engaged them in a competitive review. For each evaluation criteria, there were four rating options:

> Exceptional> Acceptable> Not Acceptable> Need Improvement

FINDINGS

FINDINGS


FINDINGS

FINDINGS

Search Consultant Rankings

Within Each Evaluation Criteria


How This Section Is Structured

To ensure a balanced and representative point of view on each Search Consultant, a minimum of six respondents had to review each Search Consultant.

AAR PartnersABA ConsultingADvice & AdvisorsAlan Krinsky Assoc.Ark AdvisorsThe Bedford GroupBob Wolf Partners/TPG


Here is the final list of 15 that make the cut for analysis:

Bob Wolf Partners/TPGHasan + CoJoanne Davis ConsultingJones Lundin BealsMagiKboxPile & CompanyRojek Consulting GroupRoth AssociatesSelect Resource International (SRI)

Respectful Of Agency Resources

1 Hasan & Co 63%

2 ARK 58%

3 Jones Lundin Beals 48%

4 Joanne Davis 36%

Those Search Consultants that received an “exceptional” rating for this evaluation criteria.


4 Joanne Davis 36%

5 Rojek Consulting 32%

6 Bedford Group 28%

Although the six above received a number of “exceptional“ ratings, one of the key concerns generally reported in this area:

“The Search Consultants are not setting enough boundaries as to what a client can request for spec thinking/work. They are sending out

endless procurement-driven RFI forms that require an unreasonable amount of work to complete.”

Brief Quality & Accuracy

1 ARK 61%

2 Hasan & Co 56%

3 SRI 46%



4 Joanne Davis 32%



Although the six above received a number of “exceptional“ ratings, one of the key concerns generally reported in this area:

“Give more information about the client's situation early on in the process --a better brief. Don't make us guess in any way. This is especially true when we are being asked to produce any kind of videos at the early stages/RFP stage.”

Access To Search Consultant (General & Pitching)

1 ARK 63%

2 SRI 47%

3 Hasan & Co 44%



3 Hasan & Co 44%

4 Pile & Co. 43%

5 Joanne Davis 41%


Provides Access To Client Decision-Maker


2 ARK 22%

3 SRI 19%





5 Hasan & Co. 13%

6 Bedford Group 11%

6 Pile & Co. 11%

Although the six above received a number of “exceptional“ ratings, key concerns generally reported in this area:

“Number one, two and three: give us more access to the decision makers!”“You’ve got to hear about the issues directly from the decision-maker -

early in the process.”

Provides Constructive/Accurate Feedback

1 Joanne Davis 40%

2 Hasan & Co. 38%

3 SRI 36%

35%



4 ARK 35%


6 Bedford Group 28%

Although the six above received a number of “exceptional“ ratings, a key concern was generally reported in this area:

“I always feel like there’s more they could be telling me, that they’re holding back some of the truth.”

“I’m tired of coming in ‘second!’”

No Conflict Of Interest(ie, do not sell services to agencies)


2 Hasan & Co. 36%

3 ARK 35%

4 Bedford group 33%



4 Bedford group 33%


6 Joanne Davis 27%

Although the six above received a number of “exceptional“ ratings, a key concern was generally reported in this area:

“I believe that one of the biggest challenges is being unbiased to the agencies with whom they have a relationship and who are possibly their

agency clients (paying for their services).”

Does not Violate Agency Confidentiality

1 ARK 57%


3 Pile & Co. 45%



3 Pile & Co. 45%

4 Bedford Group 39%

5 Hasan & Co. 33%


Gives Back to the Industry

1 Joanne Davis 40%


3 ARK 29%



3 ARK 29%

3 SRI 29%


5 AAR 24%

FINDINGS

FINDINGS


The Search Consultants, Reviewed

FINDINGS

FINDINGS


The Search Consultants, Reviewed

How we selected the open-ended responses that follow the individual consultant evaluation criteria summaries:

While this study clearly hit a nerve, we are looking for a constructive point of view, versus any personal attacks. Therefore we eliminated any feedback that did not “add to the conversation” and kept a sampling of


feedback that did not “add to the conversation” and kept a sampling of comments that represented the key sentiments provided.

AAR Partners

20.7%

68.0%

9.0%

2.0%

Respectful of Agency Resources

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

13.8%

79.3%

6.9%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


38.5%

38.5%

11.5%

11.5%

Access to Search Consultant

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

7.7%

53.8%

30.8%

7.7%

Provides Access to Client

Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

AAR Partners

24.0%

44.0%

20.0%

12.0%

Provides Constructive/Accurate

Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.5%

42.3%19.2%

26.9%

No Conflict of Interest

(No Services To Agencies)

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


24.0%

60.0%

12.0%

4.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

24.0%

72.0%

4.0%

Does Not Violate Agency

Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

AAR

Respondent Comments

“AAR Partners always answers questions and is quick to respond.”

“Leslie and Lisa are approachable, fair and allies for agencies. Absolutely want to help all agencies put on their best showing. Their processes don't require 10K+ investment for RFP submission as do those


processes don't require 10K+ investment for RFP submission as do those requiring video submissions.”

“They gave us a lot of contact with the clients.”

“After I subscribed to their service, the phone started ringing more often.”

“Pay for play (under many different guises) is becoming the norm.”

AAR

“Straight, to the point, responsive, respectful, try to minimize work with prospects.”

“I like AAR because of my personal relationship with the team.”

“Love working with Lisa.”


“I’ve found it difficult to get a meeting with AAR to update them on my agency. Would it would happen more quickly if I subscribed to their service?”

“Leslie was not particularly insightful at the mirren conference. She came across as not liking agencies at all – very condescending.”

“Pay to play consultants must change their practices.”

ABA Consulting

16.7%

41.7%

33.3%

8.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

9.1%

72.7%

18.2%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


28.0%

51.0%

21.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.0%

38.0%31.0%

20.0%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

ABA Consulting

57.0%

43.0%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

9.0%

71.0%

8.0%

12.0%


(No Services To Agencies)

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


13.0%

75.0%

12.0%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

6.0%

51.0%43.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

ABA Consulting

Respondent Comments

“Professional, well organized.”

“ABA wants $500 per year to keep your information on file - why?!”

“I have found them good to work with. However, I don’t


“I have found them good to work with. However, I don’t understand why I have to pay a fee.”

“$500?”

ADvice & ADvisors

91.0%

9.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

16.7%

83.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


23.0%

74.0%

3.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable 58.0%19.0%

23.0%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

ADvice & ADvisors

57.0%21.0%

22.0%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable93.0%

7.0%


(No Services to Agencies)

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


16.0%

84.0%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable73.0%

27.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

ADvice & ADvisors

Respondent Comments

“Linda is good to work with. Wants what’s best for the client in a way that works for agencies.”

“Process is straight forward and not overly complicated.”


“They are an advocate for the agency.”

“Always helpful.”

“Wish they ran more of the reviews.”

Alan Krinsky Associates

63.6%

27.3%

9.1%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable 69.0%

31.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


87.5%

12.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement


25.0%

12.5%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


71.4%

14.3%

14.3%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement


11.1%

11.1%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


87.5%

12.0%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable71.4%

28.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


Respondent Comments

“Wants us to do well in the review, supportive.”

“Alan pops on and off my radar. Whenever I’ve worked with him, its been a smooth process.”


“Alan Krinsky sent me a number of emails offering to conduct a portfolio review for a fee.”

“ I think he’s trying to offer more services to agencies. I think he offers workshops to agencies?”

Ark Advisors

58.3%29.2%

8.3%

4.2%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable60.9%

34.8%

4.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


62.5%

33.3%

4.2%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

21.7%

52.2%

21.7%

4.3%

Provides Access to Client Decision-

Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Ark Advisors

34.8%

56.5%

4.3%4.3%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

34.8%

52.2%

8.7%

4.3%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


56.5%

39.1%

4.3%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

28.6%

47.6%

19.0%

4.8%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Ark Advisors

Respondent Comments

“One of the best vetting/search processes in the business.”

“I believe that Ark is very good to work with and always has time for you before, during and after the review process.”


“Russel, Ann, Ken – All good to work with.”

“Russel Wohlwerth: vested, smart, authentic.”

“They have taken the best ways of working from their days at SRI, and made them better with more thoughtful briefs and more timely and insightful feedback to agencies' questions.”

Ark Advisors

“Ken Robinson is approachable, fair and true allies for agencies. Absolutely wants to help all agencies put on their best showing. Their process doesn’t require huge investments for RFP submission.”

“I would say that Ark is the one that I enjoy working with through the pitch process.”


the pitch process.”

“I particularly like the honesty and insightfulness of Ken Robinson at ARK.”

“Honesty and directness. Lack of game-playing.”

“Russel Wohlwerth of Ark is a really great person.”

The Bedford Group

27.8%

51.0%

16.7%

4.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

27.8%

44.4%

27.8%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


44.4%

28.7%

47.8%

17.7%

5.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.1%

33.3%

27.8%

27.8%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

The Bedford Group

27.8%

22.2%

38.9%

11.1%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

33.3%

61.1%

5.6%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


38.9%

61.1%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

20.0%

53.3%

26.7%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

The Bedford Group

Respondent Comments

“Bedford is very good to work with. They always have time for you.”

“Anne Wittle from The Bedford Group tirelessly works on behalf of the agency and the client. She is always accessible and makes


the agency and the client. She is always accessible and makes sure she finds the answer for you. She gives lots of information so that you can make informed decisions.”

“Completely un-biased.”

“I like that they don’t sell services to agencies!”

“Very reasonable process.”

“Jane is a pro.”

Bob Wolf Partners/TPG

88.9%

11.1%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable77.8%

22.2%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


87.5%

12.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

88.9%

11.1%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


77.8%

22.2%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable66.7%

22.2%

11.1%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


6.3%

93.7%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable72.4%

27.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


Respondent Comments

“Good process… not too complicated.”

“Don’t hear as much about them any more.”

“Mainly west coast oriented?”


“Mainly west coast oriented?”

“Smart.”

Hasan + Co.

62.5%

37.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

56.3%

37.5%

6.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


43.8%

27.0%

23.0%

6.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.5%

51.0%

24.0%

13.5%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Hasan + Co.

38.5%

48.0%

7.3%6.3%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

34.7%

51.0%

14.3%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


33.3%

66.7%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

16.7%

83.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Hasan + Co.

Respondent Comments

“Hasan is very good to work with. He takes the right amount of time with you throughout the entire pitch process.”

“He changed the process to make it more about the relationship than the work.”


“Smart.”

“Hasan + Co. He keeps the process simple, and as a former agency new business head he's respectful of agencies time, talent and needs.”

“Vested.”

“Has sometimes disappeared after the pitch and would not return repeated calls.”

Joanne Davis Consulting

36.4%

51.0%

9.1%

3.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

32.8%

48.0%

13.6%

5.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


40.9%

40.9%

9.1%

9.1%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

4.5%

49.0%27.3%

19.2%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


42.0%

53.0%

7.0%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

27.3%

63.6%

4.5% 4.5%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


31.8%

63.6%

4.5%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

41.0%

40.0%

15.0%

4.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


Respondent Comments

“Joanne Davis has always been a real pro: professionally run reviews, above board with everything, no conflict of interest concerns.”

“Joanne is a consummate professional. Really enjoyed working


“Joanne is a consummate professional. Really enjoyed working with her.”

“Joanne Davis. I respect her integrity.”

“Good process, very accessible.”

“Always has a good relationship with the client.”

Jones Lundin Beals

47.8%

47.8%

4.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

31.8%

54.5%

13.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


39.1%

56.5%

4.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

18.2%

63.6%

13.6%

4.5%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Jones Lundin Beals

28.6%

57.1%

14.3%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

38.1%

47.6%

14.3%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


54.5%

45.5%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

35.0%

50.0%

5.0%10.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Jones Lundin Beals

Respondent Comments

“JLB are some of the nicest, most professional Search Consultants to work with. They are thorough, supportive, accessible and run a good review.”

“The experience with JLB is very much based on the individual. The brand experience is not ubiquitous because the individual experience is


brand experience is not ubiquitous because the individual experience is different. There are some members of their team I prefer to work with over others.”

"Honest, direct.”

“Has always given us good, constructive feedback.”

“Better process, not too unreasonable.”

“Professional, un-biased.”

“Dave and Brian are great!”

Magikbox

17.2%

82.8%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

7.1%

92.9%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


16.7%

66.7%

16.7%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

20.0%

80.0%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Magikbox

2.7%

97.3%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

19.0%

81.0%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


23.0%

77.0%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

2.0%

88.0%

10.0%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Magikbox

Respondent Comments

“Not really on my radar as much this year.”

“Well organized. Accessible.”

“Nice people.”


“Nice people.”

“Process isn’t too intense, as compared to some of the others.”

Pile & Company

11.4%

51.4%

31.4%

5.7%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

28.6%

48.6%

22.9%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


42.9%

45.7%

11.4%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.4%

54.3%

20.0%

14.3%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Pile & Company

15.2%

57.6%

24.2%

3.0%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

16.1%

48.4%

25.8%

9.7%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


45.5%

48.5%

6.1%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

20.7%

69.0%

3.4%

6.9%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Pile & Company

Respondent Comments

“Judy at Pile is also a pro, very straight shooter. I always feel like I know where I stand with her.”

“One of the most professional teams.”

“I struggle with pile. I really enjoy working with them, but I hate the video


“I struggle with pile. I really enjoy working with them, but I hate the video submissions.”

“I like that Pile & Co run a tight ship: well-organized, up front, integrity, well-run review. However, that video is a major pain to produce.”

“I think that Pile requiring agencies to do a video is not responsible. Non-creative agencies do not have access to the same resources and it forces them to invest heavily just for the first round. Additionally, I think it creates a false sense of the agency as video is not the best medium for most non-creatives.”

Pile & Company

“Meghan is good, very helpful, supportive.”

“Good to work with, but a lot of work.”

“To do a video with your senior management team talking about relevant case studies as they apply to the client


about relevant case studies as they apply to the client (too early in the process) does not serve any benefit.”

“Pile & Company video at RFP stage is still considered a drain on agency resources.”

Rojek Consulting Group

31.6%

42.1%

26.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

31.6%

47.4%

15.8%

5.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


31.6%

57.9%

5.3%5.3%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

26.3%

36.8%

31.6%

5.3%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


21.1%

57.9%

21.1%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

27.8%

50.0%

22.2%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


57.9%

33.3%

61.1%

5.6%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

26.7%

60.0%

6.7%6.7%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


Respondent Comments

“Lorraine is another strong Search Consultant. I've appreciated her constructive candor.”

“I think that they are respectful, they offer input and they understand what it takes to win.”


understand what it takes to win.”

“Smart, fair and thorough process. Like her process and style a lot.”

“Lorraine Rojek has been one of the best Search Consultants at the mirren conference: probably the most insightful of the group. Her reviews are well-run and she's very accessible.”

“They care about the agency business!”

Roth Associates

15.4%

53.8%

19.2%

11.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

3.8%

65.4%

23.1%

7.7%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


15.4%

38.5%23.1%

23.1%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

50.0%

34.6%

15.4%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Roth Associates

7.7%

53.8%

26.9%

11.5%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

11.5%

69.2%

19.2%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


23.1%

65.4%

11.5%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

9.1%

63.6%

13.6%

13.6%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

Roth Associates

Respondent Comments

“Process is good compared to some others, but can be very tough to deal with.”

“I think he’s a bit old school in some ways, can still run a good review.”


review.”

“One of the veterans.”

“Seems to have some favorites?”

“At the new business conference a couple of years ago, his advice to agencies was, ‘Just do everything right.’ Thanks.”

Select Resources International

23.7%

42.1%

23.7%

10.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

45.9%

35.1%

13.5%

5.4%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


47.2%

38.9%

11.1%

2.8%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

19.4%

38.9%

27.8%

13.9%


Decision-Makers

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


36.1%

30.6%

30.6%

2.8%


Feedback

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

20.0%

40.0%

17.1%

22.9%



Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


30.6%

30.3%

51.5%

9.1%

9.1%


Confidentiality

Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable

29.0%

58.1%

6.5%6.5%


Exceptional

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Not Acceptable


Respondent Comments

“SRI seems to be extremely hot and responsible for a significant percentage of the dollars changing hands.”

“As busy as they are and slammed as they are - I always get a response or reply or time on their calendar to catch-up for 10 mins. Catherine is


reply or time on their calendar to catch-up for 10 mins. Catherine is delightful as is Kristin and Michelle. They know my business because they've invested in the time to meet with me and my team when we are in Santa Monica. And they give us very direct feedback.”

“SRI has been very accessible and has offered solid critiques on pitches where we did not go forward.”

“With SRI, I feel that the quality of their contribution varies with who from their agency works on the review. Some are very good, others are the opposite.”


“Catherine Bension - smart, fair and hard working! Knows agencies very well and takes the time to get to know them!”

“I have heard that materials I submit at their request for a pitch are then being shown to other agencies. I have no idea how to approach them to stop this – don’t’ want to get black-listed.”


“I think their agency fee, is "tribute money”… everyone begrudgingly pays the tribute to be "in the game.”

“Do their clients know that some agencies are actually clients as well?”

“I worry about which agencies are seeing my pitch materials, but what can I do?”


Mirren is a small team of new business training and recruiting specialists: www.mirren.com

Mirren Training works on-site to train our agency clients how to apply The Mirren MethodTM – a set of five innovative drivers that generate new leads within 90 days and accelerates conversion. By using this contrarian approach to differentiate, pitch and prospect, our clients consistently double and triple their growth rate – despite the current economic turmoil.

Mirren Talent specializes exclusively in placing new business executives. Our expertise allows us to locate the best talent - and help you get the most out of that talent. We are networked deep into the new business community, and bring this select talent pool to bear in every search.

To fuel industry dialog, Mirren also produces: The New Business Conference with Adweek and The Workspace/Marketing Chief Roundtable Series with Harvard Business Review.

Download more new business tools and insight at www.mirren.com.

Date post:	07-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Mirren Business Development - 4A's...Search Consultants & Agencies” Download more new business...

Documents