In the world of athletics, independent performance assessments are the rule. In baseball, umps call balls and strikes, in tennis linesmen determine whether a ball is in or out, in football referees call out players for rule infractions. Given the competitive nature of athletic competition at all levels and the economic impact performance integrity can have in collegiate and professional sports, it is unfathomable to think that the governing bodies overseeing these entities such as the MLB, USTA, NFL or NCAA would allow athletes to self police their contests.
Is business any less competitive? When companies consider the value of a point of market share, the impact of positive sales on earnings-per-share or the investment level being made in marketing as a percentage of their selling-and-general-administrative expense the answer would most certainly be “No.” So why is it that when it comes to marketing performance integrity, self-assessment is the rule rather than the exception?
In business, as in sports, there are winners and losers. There are several characteristics that impact whether an organization can be categorized as a “winner.” These characteristics include, but are not limited to, a company’s market position, year-over-year sale’s increases, customer loyalty/satisfaction and return on shareholder equity. An organization’s marketing investment and the resulting performance of that investment largely determines an organization’s in-market success. Given the potential impact marketing has on company performance, don’t you believe that stakeholders (i.e. Share Owners, Board of Directors, Senior Management) would want to insure the integrity of that “performance?”
Perhaps it makes sense for business to take a lead from their sporting organization counterparts and commit to the independent performance assessment of their marketing partners as a mechanism for optimizing this important investment. This is certainly not a foreign concept in business – just as public corporations are required to utilize independent auditors to vet the accuracy of their financial statements it would be reasonable, and make good sense, to apply this concept by engaging 3rd party agency contract compliance and performance auditing firms to assist in assessing the efficacy of one’s marketing spend. The learning and any resulting financial reconciliation related to the audit process would yield dividends on multiple fronts well into the future. In the words of one of America’s founding fathers, Thomas Paine:
“Character is much easier kept than recovered.”
The practice of engaging agency compliance auditors to provide a fair and balanced look into the performance of an organization’s marketing agency network is relatively commonplace in Europe. This movement has also been gathering momentum within the world’s largest advertising marketplace… the United States of America. Employing independent auditors is not done to impugn the character of the agencies whose compliance and performance is being evaluated. Rather, it is performed to validate that the advertiser has, in fact, the appropriate legal, financial and governance controls, fraud detection and performance monitoring processes in place and that the reporting and subsequent level of transparency which it affords the company are satisfactory.
Given that we started this article with a sports reference, it is only appropriate that we end with a pearl of wisdom from one of major league baseball’s most accomplished players, Hall of Famer Yogi Berra:
“You can observe a lot by just watching.”
Interested in learning more about the benefits of agency contract compliance and performance audits? Contact Don Parsons, Principal at dparsons@aarmusa.com to schedule a complimentary consultation today.