Procter and Gamble has taken their Secret brand in-house, replacing their agency Wieden and Kennedy.
“P&G Vice Chairman-Chief Financial Officer Jon Moeller said Secret “no longer has an agency of record. The brand team has become its own agency, bringing in nearly all advertising creation and media planning.New ads are “being created in as little as a tenth of the cost of traditional executions,” Moeller said. “The time from idea to execution has significantly reduced, producing content in under a month,” compared to an average production time of three to five months when using an agency. Taking over media planning also gives Secret “complete control and flexibility to react in real time to current events,” or consumer feedback, he said.”
Worrying? Alarming? Downright terrifying? Well, only time will tell.
My take on it:
Cost-saving, time-saving and creativity can (and will) happen in the short term by bringing all creative in-house. But in the long term? Building a full in-house agency has significant implications.
Good ideas might come at first - but they may soon get stale, and it becomes expensive to hire new creative talent. Teams may not be able to keep up the creative output, seeking outside assistance in the form of freelancers anyway.
The beauty of an agency is its size, capability, network, opportunities and varied creative thinking from so many different people. But maybe they can pull it off. They certainly have the money.