A job estimate is generated. A purchase order is issued. An invoice based upon the estimated job cost is generated by the agency and sent to the client. This part of the advertiser/ advertising agency billing cycle is visible and clear.
However, what happens with client funds once that invoice is paid is often anything but transparent. For instance:
- How much does the agency actually pay third party vendors?
- Which third party vendors are utilized?
- Do any third party vendors pass along prompt pay discounts or agency volume bonification (AVB) rebates to the agency (and is the agency passing these back to the advertiser)?
- Is the agency competitively bidding outside services purchased?
- What percentage of the advertiser investment is being directed to agency owned business units?
- Are jobs being closed and actual costs reconciled to estimate?
- What is the agency vouching process to insure that third party vendors have fully delivered on the products/ services owed for the investment made?
- How much time has the agency invested in the process?
- Did the agency adequately earn their compensation?
- Is the financial process and reporting efficient?
These are not trivial topics, yet strangely it is rare that an advertiser invests the time and or energy to pursue answers to these important financial stewardship questions. Too often, payment of the initial estimate billing from the agency is the end of the client’s review process, rather than the beginning of an important accountability process, when it comes to billing management and contract compliance. Ironically, even when advertisers establish processes, controls and reporting requirements within the client-agency letter-of-agreement these parameters often go unchecked. Perhaps there is some redeeming value in the words of renowned educator, David Starr Jordan:
“Wisdom is knowing what to do next; virtue is doing it.”
If an advertiser cannot readily answer the aforementioned questions, the associated lack of transparency and lax control environment increases an advertiser’s risk quotient… financial, legal and supply chain management related risks. In our agency contract compliance practice, we uncover many recurring reasons as to “Why” advertisers fail to enforce the requisite level of financial accountability within their marketing supplier relationships. These can range from staffing limitation issues (competence, knowledge, turnover, etc…) to organizational process gaps or cultural morays which simply don’t place the requisite value on accountability in this area.
Experience tells us that once advertisers understand the monetary impact of “flying blind” on these key topics, attitudes toward marketing supplier accountability and contract compliance quickly change. The financial impact of limited visibility and or lax controls in this area can put millions of dollars at risk, year in and year out. This doesn’t have to be the case. An in depth independent agency contract compliance review can yield valuable insight into the financial stewardship aspects of a client-agency relationship including industry “Best Practice” standards that can be implemented to enhance visibility, mitigate risks, boost marketing ROI and strengthen the client-agency relationship.
“The time is always right to do what is right.”
~Martin Luther King, Jr.
Interested in exploring the benefits of enhanced transparency when it comes to strategic supplier management in the marketing area? Contact Cliff Campeau, Principal at Advertising Audit & Risk Management at firstname.lastname@example.org for a complimentary consultation.