Chris Pearce, Managing Director, Greenpark contends that too much brilliant work is still being measured after the fact instead of built to win from the start.
If the recent awards season has showed us anything, it’s that in-housing isn’t slowing down anytime soon.
The work being produced by internal teams today isn’t sneered at as “that’s pretty good for in-house” as it may have been a decade ago. It’s good, full stop. Packed with high craft, big ideas that hold their own against the best agency output.
Creative leaders from brands like PepsiCo, Sainsbury’s and several broadcasters showed what’s possible when the right talent sits closer to the business.
But in all the celebration, I felt something was missing. While creativity is strong, performance is lagging behind the creative.
Closing the gap between ideas and impact
The industry often likes to dress the reasons behind in-housing up in lofty strategic language, but the truth is far simpler.
Cost savings remain the number one driver. For CEOs and CFOs, a well-structured in-house team presents an irresistible business case.
That’s not to overlook the additional benefit of added control and speed. When you remove layers or account management, ideas can move faster. When the creative team sits close enough to overhear conversations about product launches or brand tensions, they’re more connected to what matters.
And perhaps most importantly: proximity breeds alignment. When everyone is measured against the same business outcomes, the relationship becomes more collaborative and less transactional.
These are real advantages, but they don’t automatically lead to better results. They simply create the conditions for better work.
Dig a little deeper and similar issues emerge across multiple in-house teams when it comes to the performance of the work.
Continue reading at Performance Marketing World.
