#and unfortunately. i have a larger workload right now. -> six hours of in person class a week of which i attend 3. which. feels bad ngl.

[camellia-thea]

.

[outspokeco-blog]

How To Choose A Marketing Agency

This post was originally published on the Outspoke’n Blog

How do you choose a marketing agency? This specific question has probably kept many business owners up late at night. As a business owner, usually, a time comes when you realize you need help marketing in order to grow your business. Unless you have a background in marketing, your expertise probably lies elsewhere. This a where a marketing agency comes in. Finding the right marketing agency will allow you to focus on what you do best. Unfortunately, finding the right marketing agency can seem downright impossible at times.

At Outspoke, we have spoken to dozens of business owners that have struck out when trying to find the right agency. It’s unfortunate and there really isn’t a manual on how to find, vet, and hire the right marketing agency. Until now. Armed with years of experience, we put together a guide to help you find and hire the right marketing agency.

12 Things To Consider When Hiring A Marketing Agency

1. Industry Experience Matters

Arguably the hardest part about finding the right marketing agency is the number of agencies to choose from. Did you know there are currently 100,000+ marketing agencies in the United States alone? That is a tough place to start.

So, what do we recommend? Start by looking for agencies with experience in your industry. To achieve real results, your marketing plan will have to be tailored to your specific industry and buyer personas. Each industry is unique and learning the nuances can take quite a while. While marketing agencies may serve clients in many different industries, industry experience matters. So does experience working with companies of a similar size as yours. Marketing multi-billion dollar companies are much different than marketing businesses with a smaller budget. Even if both of those companies operate within the same industry. Starting here will help to quickly narrow down your list of potential agencies.

2. Understand Your Needs

Clearly defining your needs is a key component when choosing a marketing agency. It is all too common however for businesses to schedule meetings with prospective agencies before clearly documenting their needs. Consider the following:

What goals do you hope to achieve in the next six months?

What is your budget?

How will you measure success?

Reputable agencies will ask you all of these questions in your initial discovery call, but it is important to keep these in mind when selecting potential agencies in the first place.

P.S. If an agency doesn’t ask about your specific goals and needs, that is a major red flag.

3. Set Expectations

Once you have defined and documented your needs, you need to set expectations with potential agencies. Make it very clear what results you expect, how communication will be handled, who will manage projects, deadlines, etc.

In our experience, most failed agency relationships are a result of skipping this step. When both sides don’t have clearly defined expectations and processes in place, it is nearly impossible to succeed. Be clear about what you expect.

4. Look for Partners

At Outspoke we have a partnership mindset, meaning we operate as if we are part of the businesses we work with. This means we are focused on real results, not vanity metrics or non-sustainable strategies. As a HubSpot Agency Partner, we have many clients that work with us for years at a time. These relationships are only able to last the test of time because of this partnership mindset

Pay close attention to the way agencies sell themselves and the relationships that come with it. If an agency seems too focused on closing the deal as quickly as possible, this is usually a bad sign. If an agency is willing to take time to get to really know you, your business and your goals, both short-term and long-term, they probably have a partnership mindset. The chances of someone caring about your business as much as you do are low. However, the right marketing agency will feel like this is exactly the case. Partners don’t sacrifice long-term success for short-term results. The wrong agency will.

5. The Beer Test

I once had a boss tell me, “I look for people with the technical capabilities and that pass the beer test.” Put simply, the beer test requires you to answer a simple question: would you want to grab a beer with the person after a long day work?

While we aren’t saying drinking beer with the agency you hire is required (it doesn’t hurt from time to time though!), this simple test generally helps weed out people that aren’t a good personality fit. The human element matters. We have several clients committed to 80+ hour per month retainers. This results in a lot of back and forth and time together. You don’t have to be best friends with the people at the agency you decide to work with, but a good personality match can make the relationship much more enjoyable.

6. Ask for References

Reputable agencies will have plenty of past clients and should be happy to share their contact information so you can ask about their experience. Imagine being able to talk to a person who is in the same industry as you and had an amazing experience with an agency you are considering. This would give you a lot more confidence than any flashy website or sales presentation.

If an agency refuses to let you talk to its past clients, run. At Outspoke we enjoy having our happy clients help us close the deal. Often times their confidence in us is all it takes!

7. Bigger Isn’t Always Better

Marketing agencies come in all sizes. Some “agencies” are actually just a one-person show. Other agencies have hundreds of employees and locations all over the country or world. Size alone shouldn’t be a determining factor, but you should consider it when hiring a marketing agency. Generally, smaller agencies are more efficient. It is much easier to manage a team of 5 as opposed to a team of 500. However, larger agencies often have more diverse skillsets in-house.

By now you have clearly defined and documented your needs and expectations. Does size matter? We can’t answer this question for you, but keep in mind the pros and cons of larger and smaller agencies. It’s not uncommon that we are contacted by larger agencies that need help with their workload. Struggling with efficiency, they often have more luck allowing smaller, more efficient agencies handle part of their workload. Speaking of outsourcing work, don’t forget to ask potential agencies what work they handle in-house vs outsourcing.

8. Outsourcing vs In-House

This may come as a surprise to you. A lot of marketing agencies sell work that they don’t actually complete. In fact, there are very few agencies that exist that complete 100% of work in-house. Make sure you discuss this with potential agencies. However, it’s important to remember that outsourcing work isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Hiring a marketing agency is outsourcing. Understanding what is being outsourced and why is critical.

At Outspoke we have several partners that we outsource work to and vice-versa. We have vetted these partners and trust their expertise. They fill in the gaps in our technical skillsets and allow us to offer additional services that our clients need. An important distinction to note — we have established partners that have been vetted and we are fully transparent up-front with potential clients about these partners.

9. Transparency Matters

Speaking of transparency, it really matters. One of the hardest aspects of outsourcing work is a lack of visibility into what is done on a daily basis. When you have a team in-house, checking on progress is as simple as walking down the hall. When you hire a marketing agency, you will have to let go of some control.

At Outspoke we try to reduce this feeling as much as possible. Our project management tool, Monday.com, allows us to invite a guest to their project board(s). This allows them to track in real-time exactly what we are working on, how many hours we estimate it will take, how many hours it actually takes and any roadblocks we may experience. It is important to discuss transparency with prospective agencies to ensure you will be provided enough visibility into the process to feel comfortable. What is required to feel comfortable will vary for every business owner, so be honest with both yourself and the prospective agency about your needs in regards to transparency. Feeling like you’re in the dark isn’t fun for anybody.

10. Balance Quality with Quantity

Depending on your budget, you probably can’t afford the most expensive agency. You may even be actively looking for inexpensive options. Finding a balance between quality and quantity is imperative. You are often better off spending a little bit more for a higher quality service. Many times the cheaper option ends up becoming more expensive. This happens for several reasons such as:

You have to hire another agency to fix bad work

The lower quality work reduces your growth rate

The turn around time is so long you miss an important deadline

It is a balancing act and one that is hard to master. More expensive isn’t always better, but neither is the lowest bidder.

11. Location, Location, Location

In the modern world, location is becoming less important with each passing year. Companies are now hiring globally as much as locally. As you begin your search for potential agencies, consider location. There are some services that require on-site work, such as a video shoot. Hiring a local agency for services like these is often much more affordable. You will not have to cover traveling expenses, hotels, or any other associated costs.

The majority of digital marketing services offered, however, can be completed from anywhere in the world. This provides a huge opportunity for businesses like yours. Imagine living in New York City where the cost of living is very high. Marketing agencies regularly charge $300/hour in these markets. If you only focus your search within New York City you will probably have a hard time finding affordable prices. By opening your search to emerging markets, like Denver for example, you can get the best of both worlds. A location with plenty of local talent and hourly rates that are much more affordable. Take advantage of the global economy that we all currently work in. There are so many opportunities if you open your search up geographically.

12. No Agency Can Do Everything

We saved the best for last. The number one red flag that we look for when considering partners is a company that says they can do everything. Look for agencies that have focus. Consequently, don’t be discouraged if you hear “no” from time to time. When agencies turn down particular work due to lack of expertise this can be a great sign. It means they aren’t focused solely on revenue. No agency has expertise in everything. What you need to do is find an agency whose expertise aligns with your needs. That is the holy grail and we hope this guide helps you find just that.

Did you find this post helpful? Head over to our blog to read some more. You can also drop us a line if you’d like to chat! If you’re into moving fast, hire us.

[deltreey]

I've been a software dev for a long time.  I've also been running my own software company for a few years now.  This is important information because of why I do these things.  I am a sofware developer because I love learning.  I slack off when doing a job that bores me, and software development always has something new to experience which keeps me excited and interested.  Why start a software company then?  That puts me in the role of manager rather than developer.  The truth is simple.  I've worked for a lot of companies, and I don't see any of them doing a great job of managing their software development.  That's not to say none of them have done a good job, but no one out there seems to be doing a great job.

How are they different?

A lot of companies get this part right.  Software developers are different from other employees.  The distinction is important in the same way it's important to acknowledge that an insurance agent is different from a construction worker.  But they are employees, which means they must be managed too.  Software development is brain work.  Everyone says this, but no one acknowledges what it means.  Maybe I can get the point across with and example. I was working my first .NET job years ago, and I was still learning how to code .NET.  I was capable of coding other things, but I was still getting a grasp on the complexities of the Visual Studio IDE, something that takes months to years depending on the developer.  A random manager (not the development manager) came up to me and asked me to create a bunch of folders on a shared drive.  He sent me an excel spreadsheet with over 1k folder names.  I pondered how to do it and gave him an estimate of 5 hours as I tried to figure out how to write a program to manage file systems in .NET.  I started creating a complex application and learning about how the code could be used to manipulate the folders and how to import the list of folder-names from excel.  After an hour, the development manager called me over and showed me how dumb I was being.  He showed me a quick Excel trick (that I knew) to add extra columns with other content, (specifically the mkdir command from the windows command line) then copy pasted it into a command prompt and pressed enter.  I immediately used his idea for the larger list and had the project completed in 5 minutes. Developers are tasked with jobs that other people don't know how to do.  There are usually 100 ways to do the task.  It's not just the developer's job to do the task, but to find the most efficient way to do it.  But if you think about what that means, something else may occur to you, something that every developer knows, even if they don't admit it to themselves.  If you don't know how someone does something, how can you know where the limits of their capabilities end?  Developers are often given tasks that have nothing to do with software development.  In the example above, I could have simply spent 5 hours creating the folders by hand.  It's not really software development, but the manager didn't know what is and what isn't included in that list.  A knowledge worker's job is to get it done.  Programming is a side-note to developers today.  Our job is just "whatever it takes".

How do you keep them working?

I talked about this at length in my previous post on Managing Developers.  The truth is that your programmers took the job because they love it.  But motivation is a genuine problem with all employees.  The answer to this is (surprisingly) found in the daily scrum.  I don't advise that all of Agile is needed for every org.  But the morning meeting where developers talk to other developers about what they're doing is really everything you need to provide them with motivation.  They will see when they're slow, and have help from others in moving quicker. But as managers know, every person is unique.  Many blogs suggest varying degrees of balance between pay and making the work interesting.  But the truth is, your best developers will be working on code, even if they're not working on your code.  Getting them to work on your code is matter of making your code something interesting to do, which a lot of companies get.  But there's a second factor there that a lot of people forget as well.  We'll get to that in a bit.

How they screw themselves

Developers make crappy managers.  This isn't new information.  In fact, in software development, to tell another developer "you would make a good manager" is an insult.  It means "get out of my code, you're breaking it".  Because developers make crappy managers, they don't often take on the role.  More importantly, when they do, they do a bad job of that.  Managing people is a complete 180 turn on how they did their job as a knowledge worker.  As a knowledge worker, they had to "get it done" regardless.  As a manager, their role becomes "what is reasonable to get done" and "what can I be certain of"? What's worse is that estimating is hard.  As I said above, software development is about getting any task done, even if you're not sure how to do it.  How do you estimate how long it will take to do a task that you've never done before?  You don't--not well at least.  At the good software companies, at least they let the developers do the estimating (at the bad ones, their managers try to estimate for them), but that's not really a solution to every task being unique and new. Unfortunately, while it's hard for developers to estimate, it's even harder for them to estimate their own skill level.  I couldn't count the number of developers whose response to every task is "sure, I can do that".  Maybe some of you can, but a minor argument could mean the difference between six years and six weeks.  This would be a manager's job normally, but those managers were often developers before.  So their default response is also "sure, we can do that". And the hardest part to understand here is that the "sure, I can do that mentality" isn't wrong.  As I said above, that's what a knowledge worker's job is.  But when you transition into the role of managing people, your job is to make decisions, not to simply follow instructions.  What tends to happen is the opposite.  Developers either managing themselves or managing other developers just keep saying "yes I can" instead of "do you think that's a good idea?".  They are perpetually, and consistently overworked.  Actually, that's not true.  Some of them are perpetually and consistently overworked.  These guys burn out and quit.  The others are perpetually and consistently under-performing, often intentionally to avoid ending up like the other group.  There is very little middle ground. That dichotomy has created an interesting stereotype.  Developers are considered lazy.  Their estimates are considered over-generous.  And they're usually given even more work and complained to about how long it's taken.  I like to refer to Software Development as magic (which I take directly from SCIP @ MIT).  The problem with magic is that it is simultaneously impossible and instantaneous.  So developers often see their co-workers simultaneously mesmerized by their work and complaining that it took too long.  That's not a reasonable situation in any other profession.

So how do you manage that?

The good managers have learned that managing up is often more important in software development than managing down.  As I said, the good developers want to be there.  But note that I'm also only talking about the good ones.  Because many developers have worked other places and seen other developers burn out, they may already have bad habits and find ways to reduce their workload.

attribution: Dilbert

The reality is more akin to the Scotty Principle than you might think, and there's a reason for that.  It's not about you.  It's not about reducing the work-load.  It's not even about keeping your boss in line.  It's about your company!  The cost of software is astronomical.  It's goal is to make your company money (or save your company money, but the result is the same from an accounting perspective).  And as we have seen, software estimates are basically bullshit, so if you trust them, you're going to have delays with releasing the software. And that's the core of it.  Unexpected delays cost money--a lot of money.  If you release software early, no one gets hurt.  If you release it late, often millions of dollars are lost.  It is vital that software estimates be inflated, not for the overworked team members, not for the slackers, not even because it makes you look good to release early.  It matters because the estimates will be wrong and that costs your company money. Here's an example: You tell your company (or customer) that it will take you 6 months to implement something.  You deliver it in 3 months.  The staff has been retrained in another month, and you have a better company for it.  Imagine if you had said 2 months?  Staff training taking a month, the company would have started retraining 1 month into the project.  Retraining would be complete a full month before the project was finished.  The staff training might stick, or it might not.  The new machines they brought in to run the project would be sitting gathering dust, and the contract they had cancelled had to be unexpectedly renewed for astronomical costs--and that's just for starters. Because the project is behind, you're pushed to release it in an incomplete state.  Your developers are overworked and the end result is not as good as it would have been.  To clean up the code and get it working right with all the original intended functionality is likely to actually end up taking the full 6 months in that situation.  It's incredible.

Why would you do that?

This all sounds like you're going to end up being the manager who gets fired for stuff taking too long.  And there will be people who claim they can do it faster, but that's corporate politics and is well outside the scope of this blog post.  Here's the reality.  Trust is everything in management.  You're in charge of people because the company trusts you to have their best interests at heart.  If you betray that trust by failing to deliver on time, then you are not strengthening your position. Trust is even more of a big deal in software development.  I often get jokes from charities I help out with IT services about how "I don't mess with you because I like my money in my bank account".  And that's a real thing in enterprise development.  Not just from the perspective of trusting programmers to correctly handle tons of PII data about you and your employees and customers, but also because the programmers don't have to be malicious to cost you money. Since the role of managing software development is more trust-inflated than even that of other managers, you need to be that much more reliable.  If you make a mistake, the costs can literally be every dollar in the bank.  Do not take that responsibility lightly.  More importantly, don't shrug it off to get a slightly better estimate.  Take your time.  Get it right.  This is a scientific game, not a productivity one.

But nothing will get done!

This is where things get interesting.  We have seen companies (like Valve) where their programmers never complete a project.  This is a very real possibility if you only manage up.  If you only ever inflate estimates and keep telling the upper management "no".  But that's only half of managing programmers.  What I've described so far is all about managing their estimates.  The second part of this discussion is about managing the work. Everything I have to say about this can be summarized in one sentence.  Don't lose focus.  Software Developers (especially the good ones) love to explore every new technology, try every new thing, and learn every new language.  At every meeting with them, you can expect them to suggest using this technology or that to make the project better.  New things excite them. Other managers, similarly, love exploring new ideas.  New sales ideas, new software to increase productivity.  New technology that will automate more of the business.  These ideas align perfectly.  The result is that the managers and programmers feed off of each other talking about how they can leverage this new technology to provide this new software.  It is a wonderful experience being in a meeting of dreamers like that.  The problem, of course, is that dreamers aren't always doers. Dream big.  Let your developers dream big.  But you set the timeline.  You set the agenda.  And you make sure they finish a project before moving onto the next.  Managers will often want to pull people off of your current project to start on another.  Push back!  If your company is worth the money they pay you, then it's important work!  A manager pulling a programmer off of one project--even one the developer is excited about--is just as dangerous as changing your technology stack halfway through a project.  And it happens ALL THE TIME. Work will progress just fine, as long as you don't let your programmers lose focus, either from their own hubris (I can implement this new thing in no time) or from the company's eagerness to try new things.

And...Magic!

Something magical happens when these things align.  Your developers find they don't have to pretend not to work hard.  Your managers don't have unrealistic expectations.  Your company makes money, and progress moves forward--at a reasonable, but not breakneck pace. Something even more terrifyingly magical happens when they don't.  I've seen this, so this is actually happening.  There are companies that no longer hire their internal software developers to do things.  They hire outside contractors because their internal developers give them timelines that can literally be 10 years for a single page website with no major functionality. That is not how a manager conflates timelines.  That is how a developer does.  This is a place where the developers have learned that no amount of time is enough.  So they come up with arbitrarily high numbers because they don't want to be wrong anymore. So understand how important it is for you to get it right.  Because if you don't they'll find another way to survive, and it will look like that, or worse...and yes, I've seen worse too.