Shortly after Omnicom and IPG announced their merger last year, I wrote a piece on the value of independence. Independent agencies getting gobbled up by giant holding companies is not a new phenomenon, but the then-pending merger of two of the largest such companies felt like a philosophical line in the sand. Now that the merger is complete, it’s a good time to take another look at the landscape.
The cost of scale—in real numbers
Of course, numbers never tell the whole story, but they do give context that can help frame the picture that is starting to emerge. Since the deal closed in November here’s where things stand:
This isn’t a criticism; it’s the math of consolidation. In fact, they’re right in line with what most industry experts predicted. Scale demands efficiency, and efficiency demands reduction. From this perspective, I imagine there are a lot of Omnicom executives who are thrilled with these results to date.
What it makes clear, however, is the widening chasm between what these behemoth agencies now offer and what smaller, independent agencies are able to deliver.
The move from agencies to systems
The most profound change isn’t the job losses; it’s the entirely new model. The merged company is no longer a collection of individual agencies that may occasionally compete with one another. It’s a systematized platform—fewer brands, centralized data and media, and standardized, integrated ways of operating and delivering services.
Legacy agencies like FCB and MullenLowe are being folded into larger structures. PR firms like Ketchum and Golin are being combined into fewer, bigger entities.
This kind of compression is undoubtably creating efficiency which has its value. But it often ends up eliminating the very thing clients value most in their agency partners: a unique point of view.
How clients are responding
I am not predicting the demise of mega agencies. These standardized systems and scale will no doubt help them continue to win and retain massive global clients like American Express, Mercedes-Benz, and Bayer. But a new trend is emerging alongside it, with some clients beginning to split their agency rosters. They need the scale, media clout, and global operations of the big holding companies, but they’re increasingly turning to smaller, independent agencies like ours when they need innovation, creativity and true strategic thinking. Clients are beginning to see that the efficiency they’re getting from consolidation and standardization is coming at the expense of objectivity and differentiation.
The talent exodus
With any merger or consolidation, it’s easy to get lost in the spreadsheets and lose sight of the human costs. Thousands of talented creatives, strategists, and leaders have recently found themselves outside the system. Not because they failed, but because the system changed.
These people aren’t just disappearing. They’re joining independent agencies (including ours) or starting their own businesses. Top talent isn’t automatically gravitating to the biggest agencies anymore. Instead, people are looking to join agencies with more focused and agile business models that more closely align with their specific skillsets. The result has been a quiet but powerful redistribution of talent across the industry—further bolstering creativity and innovation within independent agencies.
The value of independence is changing
Independence has long been framed as a cultural benefit. It’s more personal, collaborative, and human. For employees, that means you’re not just a faceless cog in a wheel—easily lost or discarded. For clients, it’s the focus on ideas over structure and the ability to have open and collaborative relationships while maintaining direct access to senior leadership—without worrying about client conflicts.
All of this remains true. But today, independence is also a strategic choice.
In a marketplace where sameness is the byproduct of consolidation, differentiation becomes the most value currency of all.
The return of choice
The industry is not moving in one direction and leaving everyone else behind. It’s splitting in two:
As these models continue to move apart, the value of each approach becomes easier to see. Both have a role, and I believe that ultimately, they will both succeed. That’s because today, independence is no longer just an alternative. It’s a necessary counterbalance.