Recently, I was asked by a European ad agency how to break into the U.S. market, what tools were available to research U.S. companies, and where they could learn about accounts in review. Rather than dash off an email I caught myself in mid peck. It was clear from their questions that although they prided themselves on being strategic, this agency was not thinking strategically at all. Getting U.S clients was not the real issue.
They needed a gut check. I suggested they start by asking themseves:
- Why they wanted U.S. clients?
- Had they fully explored all the opportunities in their country’s market?
- Was there a real basis for a relationship? For example, tactically speaking, could they demonstrate cultural differences that would be a stumbling block if their prospect simply translated their existing English advertising? Can you say Chevy Nova? How about Clairol or Starbucks’ stumbles in Germany?
- With clients forced to do more with less, could they overcome the objection of the added cost to work at a distance?
- Had they identified specific companies they could help, had contacts in, or at least an affinity for?
It was clear that they hadn’t considered these issues (or many others). My Euro friends seemed intent on a shotgun approach. They would have been happy to dance with whomever said yes–not the basis for a good relationship, plus the “yeses” would have been few and far between. Their strategy would have been frustrating, expensive, and demotivating for the entire team and would have impressed few, if any, prospective clients.
In addition to being strategic about new business, this agency also needed to be selective. This can be counter intuitive, considering that sales is partly a numbers game. But knowing who they were as an agency, understanding their real value to a client, and then acting in accordance with these values would increase their ratio of wins far more than a vague tactical move to expand into the U.S. When marketing problems more closely match the agency’s strengths, wins increase.
Following established, logical and simple business practices seems like a no brainer; so why not do that instead of making things more complicated than they need to be? Instead, we approach business development like a peacock: all flash and dazzle, squaking loudly to attract whomever will listen, as if brilliant creative will open doors otherwise closed. It’s style without substance; and with so many smart marketers out there now, and no shortage of good ideas, business is not won by simply presenting great creative.
I suggested to my Euro friends that they do some real soul searching, and then if it still made sound business sense to target U.S clients, start by researching U.S companies with existing offices or with plans to expand in their country. Or let another firm do the heavy lifting by developing partnerships with larger U.S agencies already working for international companies in their country.
New business has no magic bullets; it’s combination of diverse skills that include business acumen, instinct, strategy, psychology and more. Missteps happen because we fail to engage all of these senses. I think much of what I told this agency they already knew; theirs was not a gap in knowledge but a failure to be self-critical. Marketing likes to quantify and qualify everything; it’s built into our DNA. And even through they knew better, this agency ignored their gut. As a stubborn person once told me, “don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s made up.”
View David Wiggs's profile
