Disgusted (7/15):
It's fine to say better for an unhappy manager to leave --
but the broader issue is why WPP insulted everyone who has
ever worked for an agency by assuming that someone with ZERO
agency experience could come in at the CEO level.
What PR agency exec in his or her right mind would want to
take the job now, when WPP has made it clear they don't put
much value on agency experience?
Former Burson Person
(7/15):
So Nides barked at B-M for 8 months until Mack figured out
what he was going to do. Nice job of recruiting, Mr. Paster,
and here's hoping you can recover some of the headhunter's
fee.
Meantime, what a great message this sends to B-M troops about
WPP's ability to find committed leadership for its units.
And what must B-M clients think?
Another example of what happens when the beancounters call
the shots in a business built by Harold Burson on outstanding
client service. Sad.
Chicago
PR Guy responds to Former Burson Person (7/15):
Perfectly said. The illusion that any of these guys in senior
management care about anything other than the bottom line
is completely fallacious.
Ron Levy (7/15):
Burson-Marsteller and its clients are better off. When a manager
wants to leave -- perhaps because the work proves more demanding
than supposed or requires a differenmt skill set -- the employer
is almost always better off bringing in someone who'll love
the job and do it more successfully.
Burson-Marsteller is one of the firms at the very top of
the mountain --and may need a leader who knows as much about
PR as the led.
|