Originally posted here (Spanish) in 2019

In November of 2019, I was celebrating my first 10 years in the digital world. Although I’ve been in advertising since 2004, it wasn’t until November 1st, 2009, that I fully delved into this world alongside my last creative director. I still believe it was the right moment for the change.

A decade has passed since the digital revolution exploded in our region, and while we were given numerous opportunities to catch up, we can now see that we faltered in several aspects, leading to independent agencies, small digital shops, and consultancies entering the universe that was once primarily controlled by the big traditional networks. I’ll touch on one specific point.

The recent acquisition of Droga 5 by Accenture shouldn’t surprise us.

What Accenture has done may surprise us because they’re a consultancy, but years ago, digital agencies were paving the way into creativity by acquiring independent agencies. A good example is when Publicis Sapient (then Sapient Nitro) acquired The Community.

We’re living through an evolution where the smartest players are surviving, not necessarily the strongest. This is an environment where the value of human capital far outweighs the commissions from traditional mass media (because these are smaller, and talent can yield greater returns), where strategy can no longer be overlooked or forgotten, where creativity is data-driven, and interpreting that data is a collective effort, not just an analyst’s role.

How could we not invest in creativity in digital environments, especially when it’s projected that this year, digital advertising spending will account for 50% of the total global advertising market? Now more than ever, ideas need to take center stage.

The mistake we made was not understanding “digitalization”

In 2010, we formed a good digital team; by 2011, it was even better – with clearly defined roles, technology intertwined with social conversation, and digital advertising no longer being an afterthought but rather a sector that, while not critical, was starting to draw more attention due to results.

I know the scenario I’m about to describe happened in many traditional agencies:

Once a digital department was established, discussions often revolved around “we need to digitize the agency” or “we all need to be digital.” This was a valid proposition, but the formula allocated for it was flawed and, in my opinion, is responsible for traditional agencies not seizing the opportunity ahead of the small digital boutiques that were sprouting up.

“Let’s take the digital department,” they said, “and disperse it.” “If we want everyone to be digital, we need to integrate digital individuals into the existing working groups.”

The formula seems right, but it wasn’t – or at least, it only led to slow transition or no transition at all.

Why wasn’t it the right approach? Because it fragmented. We divided and weakened a department that should have led the change. Instead of strengthening it, we diminished its influence, all while sending young individuals to try and integrate into a “status quo” already established, while the digital world was advancing rapidly, making more precise decisions. In my personal view, it’s the model that breaks from comfort and brings a shift to our profession.

What should we have done? In 2019, here’s what I proposed.

The digital department should never have been dismantled. It should have grown as demand grew, not just from clients, but also from the evolving talent pool. Instead of dispersing it throughout the agency, it should have (or should still) be the nucleus from which a new agency model emerges. This would involve assessing brands and determining, based on business projections, which ones would start investing more in this field. Better yet, we could have taken brands into this field, generating desired profitability.

Certainly, as Gastón Bigio pointed out in a self-interview, one of the factors that held us back was change – change involves people, and changing people costs money. But if we look beyond that and at other factors, fear becomes the most significant obstacle.

Fear of believing that it’s a risky world, fear of not seeing it as the future, or simply the fear of making a mistake, the fear of starting over. Because if I can be sure of one thing, it’s that the medium has changed, the times have changed, the terminology has changed, and the budgets have changed, but advertising, strategy, and ideas remain constant.

How do we understand these fears?

1. The medium has become more effective and efficient. Real-time results are daunting. This isn’t only intimidating for us as advertisers, but also for clients who expose their brand and decisions. We need to stand by their side, offering support and guidance.
2. Response times are fast, very fast. Speed always instills fear, especially when one lacks experience on the fast lanes. Therefore, talent must be appropriately suited for the task. Talent that grasps this pace already and is eager to learn the business.
3. Terms have shifted within the media department, but their fundamentals remain. Translating these terms is a valuable exercise, both for newcomers and for those experienced in handling client funds.
4. Believing that we can continue to live off media commissions is delusional. The value of strategy and ideas outweighs any commission. Budgets have decreased in traditional media and increased in digital, but the latter will never grow to be as large as the former. This reality can be painful.

And now? What can we do?

The battle is not lost. It’s a war of strategy and ideas, not budgets or team size. It’s a war where we need to acknowledge that we must unlearn every day. It’s not a war of “traditional vs. digital,” but a war of brands – making them reach the consumer at the right time, with the right message, and the right impact is the ultimate objective.