Does your agency need to specialize? That’s a question I’ve been revisiting lately. A surprising 60 percent of AdWeek’s 100 Fastest-Growing Agencies are classified as “full service.” If so many of the most successful agencies can out-pace others while positioned as full service, how important can it be to go niche? Have I encouraged agencies to step back from the “be everything to everyone” position, when it doesn’t make that much difference in the end?
As it turns out, things aren’t always as they appear. There seem to be some inconsistencies in Adweek’s categorization of the fastest-growing agencies. Dark Horses, for example, is second on the list for “full-service agencies,” but it is positioned as “a creatively-led sports marketing agency” (and “entertainment and/or sports agency” is among Adweek’s fifteen other agency categories). Viral Nation, another fastest-growing agency, is classified as a “full-service agency” while positioned as “the premier Influencer Marketing Agency connecting brands to influencers…” (when “influencer marketing agency” is another category option).
When all is said and done, 60% of the fastest-growing agencies may not actually be full service. I’ve reached out to Doug Zanger, senior editor at Adweek, for clarification, and I will update this post with his response if I hear back.
Among Adweek’s Fastest-Growing Agencies, the fifteen agency categories are primarily based on the type of marketing (e.g., direct marketing, branding, experiential, and strategy). It’s possible for a full-service-categorized agency to also be specialized based on the target industry, geographic area, target consumers, or even a particular service. Additionally, an agency may be correctly categorized but not technically positioned as “full service.”
While doing some second-guessing over the importance of niche positioning, I happened to read a valuable article about the pros and cons of specializing from my colleague, Jody Sutter. Here are some key takeaways:
Specialization sounds like a no-brainer. And yet...it can be easier said than done. If you are considering a specialty for your agency, read this post from Databox, and this one from Jody Sutter for tips on easing into it.
PROs of agency specialization
CONs of agency specialization
PROs of being a generalist (full service) agency
CONs of being a generalist (full service) agency
I’d argue it’s as important as ever. I still believe (as do most of the agency consultants and industry insiders I know) that specialization gives agencies a valuable edge when done correctly.
After reviewing agency website after agency website, I can say with certainty that failure to put a stake in the ground makes an agency forgettable. I don’t recommend it. But does that mean you will fail if you don’t specialize? No, plenty of agencies take the “be everything to everyone” approach — too many agencies. It may make it more challenging to win new business, but that alone (probably) won’t be the demise of your agency.
In the article I referenced earlier, Jody Sutter pointed out that nobody ever asks what happens to the cobbler’s children when they grow up. So maybe your agency doesn’t have the best positioning because you are too busy working for your clients. It doesn’t necessarily mean your children die from a lack of shoes. They may end up happy and healthy, with calloused feet. In other words, your agency may succeed in spite of interchangeable positioning.
I suspect I may even find some examples of that among Adweek’s 100 Fastest-Growing Agencies. Part of me wonders, if an agency can succeed with bland positioning, what could they do with a compelling position? And the other part of me is just curious to explore what they’ve been doing that’s allowed them to succeed despite a positioning handicap. Stay tuned to explore that with me next week.
Image credits: specialized niche agency © Adobe Stock / iushakovsky; specialize for success © Adobe Stock / Daguimagery; cobbler's children © Adobe Stock / agcreativelab;