Summer is around the corner, fueling my desire to get in touch with you. Blog stats tell me you from 69 different countries (Go Kenya!) but mostly from the US, Turkey, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and Finland (Mitä kuuluu?). Who are you and what do you find interesting about the blog and/or the book? Please get in touch or send in your picture of where you are reading http://www.notsizedata.com/ the above was taken in Antalya, Turkey. Your prize? Fame and a signed copy.
If the picture makes you thirsty, you may want to check out Coke, whose ad agency director Sarah Armstrong has shared more about the metrics by which it judges and pays for ad agency performance (http://adage.com/article/agency-news/coca-cola-hikes-agency-bonuses-cutting-edge-work/293067/?utm_source=cmo_strategy&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=adage&ttl=1400080567) . In its ‘value-based compensation’, ad agencies can earn 30% bonuses for excellent work, and 35% for leading-edge projects. But while agencies can “make bonuses of more than 30% if they’re consistently knocking it out of the park by scoring at the top end of the metrics”, none of them has done so (yet). Instead, the agencies averaged an 18.3% bonus on their projects last year, down from 19.3% in 2012.
Franciso Escobar critiqued Coke’s unilateral definition of value based on items such as “how strategically important the work is to the brand, how strategically important the brand is to the company, and “industry dynamics,” which Sarah Armstrong defined as: “Is this agency uniquely qualified to deliver this work?” These indeed all sound rather subjective to me. Metrics on improvement in volume or sales are optional because “our bottling relationship with the company is not as strong or as healthy as we want it to be, we would not want our agency’s profitability tied to our dysfunction.”
Do you agree with the way Coke evaluates and rewards advertising agencies? How do you do so in your industry? Is there a better way?