|
Recent WPP middle
man (1/28):
Having recently worked for a WPP firm listed above, it was
apparent to me that the middle levels were the day to day
account leads doing all the heavy lifting including managing
and mentoring the juniors.
The top dogs were significantly less billable and swooped
in to impart knowledge and make the client think they did
what the mids were doing. That strategic counsel and senior
influence is critical, but not by any means the worker class.
The middle group, who has the skills to manage accounts,
bring in new biz (write ALL the proposals), and mentor the
juniors are the next SVPs. They also come at a bargain price
compared to the rain-makers who don't grind it out near as
well as a strong AS or SAS.
I have heard that firms are top heavy. I have heard firms
were over staffed, but this is the first I have ever heard
someone say that the mids were the problem.
Seriously, the gulf between the SVPS and AEs was so huge,
I have little doubt the joint would fall apart quick without
the mids.
Any of you in the biz, unless your culture is vastly different
than my WPP haunt, would you be comfortable with only the
old balls and the newbies interfacing with the client? The
only accounts lost in my years in the firm world were lost
due to either odd idiosyncrasies of the seniors or unfortunate
mistakes by the newbies.
Sorrell is a good and smart man. Having known him only a
bit, I am happy to go out on a limb and presume his comments
were taken out of context. Otherwise, trimming the mids will
be suicide.
This also sounds like code for paying lower salaries and
hiring current talent at lower levels in the future (the well
known title inflation in recent years). Best of luck with
that.
Sorrell Said What
We All Are Thinking... (1/27):
...that public relations is top-heavy, that there are a lot
of middle management that does nothing, and that the junior
staff is great worker bees.
Of course, large companies dont want their budgets to be
used to TRAIN people.
Question (1/27):
Does Mr. Sorrell expect his clients to finance his junior
staff's training? Firing the top is a very poor trend that
PR and its holding companies are embracing. Where are the
mentors? PR's associations and groups are trying to recruit
while WPP thinks there's too many people in PR? Come on.
No name middle staff
executive (1/27):
The middle people do the work. Is that not clear to a gigantic
holding company that gobbles up firms in the name of creative
synergy?
Bill Huey, Strategic
Comms. (1/27):
On a related note, there is a piece in Advertising Age
this week claiming that advertising is a hard as rocket science,
or at least that ad guys should say that it is to get more
respect.
Well, advertising ain't rocket science, and PR isn't investment
banking. Neither will command the budgets and fees that rocket
science and investment banking do, for obvious reasons.
Martin can run his holding company any way he wants, with
thousands of juniors who "learn the business over time"
(at client expense of course), but his comments reveal how
little he knows about the business himself.
Chicago PR Guy (1/27):
Hmmm...a very interesting theory/idea. Sadly, though, it reflects
a fundamental lack of understanding by Martin.
Unlike consulting firms, investment banks and other entitites
where all you need is "big ideas" and "folks
to implement," (translation: off-the-shelf playbook solutions)
high-value PR requires thoughtful analysis, thinking on one's
feet, and the ability to manage client peculiarities, politics,
etc.
The problem isn't too many folks in the middle. It's too
many senior people who forgot how to counsel clients, build
business and implement; mid-level folks who are worked too
long and too hard and leave agency business to recapture work-life
balance and junior people who aren't trained, but thrown into
the breach, and jettisoned at the first sign of a downturn.
It's going to take a lot more than "getting rid of the
middle," Sir Martin. You should know that....
|
