Why Outsourcing Media Execution Isn’t Enough Without Strategic Alignment
By Campfire
Outsourcing media execution has become commonplace. More than two‑thirds of U.S. businesses outsource at least one function, and marketing regularly ranks near the top . By 2025 global advertising will exceed $1 trillion, with digital channels capturing more than 75 % of total spend . Within video, digital formats are surging: a recent IAB study projects that digital video will account for 58 % of U.S. TV/video ad spend in 2025, up from 48 % in 2024, while linear television’s share slips to 42 % . Despite this digital dominance, linear channels—broadcast TV, radio, print and sponsorships—still command sizable budgets and reach.
Many brands outsource media buying to specialist partners. Yet too often those relationships stop at execution. Campaigns may hit cost‑per‑thousand (CPM) or click‑through goals, but they fail to advance the broader business outcomes that matter: revenue growth, customer lifetime value, brand equity and margin. The missing ingredient? A strategic layer and partner that aligns media across digital and linear channels with business and brand goals.
The Complexity of Modern Media
Media planning isn’t just about programmatic display or social targeting. Consider the breadth of today’s buying landscape:
Digital video and CTV are growing fast—digital video ad spend climbed 18 % in 2024 and is projected to grow 14 % in 2025 . But they also require deeper data integration and attribution models.
Linear platforms (broadcast and cable TV, radio) still deliver mass reach and credibility. In 2025 they will account for 42 % of U.S. video spend .
Print, out‑of‑home and sponsorships remain effective for local activation and brand equity, though they rely on specialist negotiation and measurement.
Fragmentation across these channels means execution alone isn’t enough. Without strategic oversight, budgets splinter into siloed buys managed by different vendors, each optimizing for channel‑level KPIs rather than business outcomes.
Where Execution‑Only Relationships Fall Short
Misaligned KPIs. Channel‑based metrics (CPM, CTR, cost per acquisition) don’t always correlate with brand or business outcomes. Optimizing for the cheapest impressions can cannibalize brand equity or long‑term growth.
Fragmentation without integration. Buying digital media requires one skillset; negotiating TV packages, print runs or sponsorship rights requires others. When these activities aren’t tied together by a strategic framework, budgets scatter and learnings aren’t shared.
Siloed reporting. Execution partners often provide platform‑specific dashboards. Without consolidated reporting that connects media activity across digital and linear channels back to revenue, margin or share, marketing executives can’t see whether spend is actually moving the business.
The Importance of Linear Platforms
As digital accelerates, it’s easy to dismiss legacy channels. Yet linear TV still holds 42 % of TV/video ad dollars in 2025 . Radio, print and sponsorships remain powerful for scale and trust. These channels provide unique advantages: broadcast TV can quickly build reach and credibility; radio is effective for frequency; print and sponsorships can reinforce brand associations and target niche audiences. An effective media partner should incorporate these platforms into the larger plan, balancing reach and precision across digital and linear.
Why Compensation Models Matter: Commission vs. Retainer
Traditional agency compensation often relied on commissions—agencies took a fixed margin percentage (often 10–20 %) of the media spend to cover staff, technology and overhead. This structure can create perverse incentives: agencies earn more by encouraging larger buys, regardless of efficiency. When those parameters were set decades ago when teams were buying three networks and a small handful of publications, it was in a time with much fewer channels to consider, and reporting… what reporting? A percentage model makes it difficult to account for time spent on strategy, multi‑platform coordination, or reporting.
Retainers are becoming more popular across the industry. In a recent benchmark survey, 43 % of agencies reported retainers as their most popular pricing model , giving clients predictable monthly expenses, transparency, and for agencies a stable revenue base. Retainer billing is becoming quite common: clients pay a monthly fee to cover management and are often charged a smaller percentage of media spend, allowing agencies to staff adequately and cover technology and reporting costs.
Retainers benefit both sides:
Transparency. Retainers clarify what clients pay for: hours spent on strategy, planning, channel negotiations and reporting. Commission structures hide these labour costs in the margin.
Cross‑platform labour. Navigating digital platforms, linear networks and sponsorships requires specialized practitioners and continuous optimization. Retainers reflect this ongoing work rather than tying compensation to spend volume.
Predictability and alignment. Long‑term retainers allow agencies to plan staffing and invest in data and analytics, while giving clients stable costs and more strategic focus .
For Campfire and similar practitioners, moving away from commissions toward retainer or hybrid models ensures we are paid for the strategic value we provide and not just the amount of media we buy. It also supports greater transparency: clients can see exactly where time and resources are allocated, and we can work agnostically across platforms without being biased toward channels with higher commissions.
The Rise of Specialized Rosters and Agency Partnerships
As marketing becomes more complex, brands are changing how they work with agencies. In a World Federation of Advertisers survey, 75 % of multinational advertisers were only somewhat satisfied or less with their existing agency roster structure, and 69 % had recently made or planned changes . The dominant model “multiple agencies managed individually by marketing” was used by 90 % of respondents . Another study from the 4A’s notes that while 47 % of brands still favour a single holding‑company model, there is a growing trend toward working with multiple smaller agencies or specialist networks .
Why the shift? Brands are recognising that no single partner can excel at every discipline. Independent media agencies offer flexibility and specialist expertise, while creative agencies and PR firms excel at storytelling, production and earned media. When these partners collaborate early—during strategy and planning—brands benefit from deeper insights and integrated execution. Research shows brands are seeking centralisation, flexibility and simplified services , but they also value specialist expertise.
The WFA report highlights that 67 % of companies work with 1–25 agencies globally and that 80 % now have some functions from an in‑house agency set‑up . This indicates a hybrid model: brands build internal capabilities but also maintain rosters of external partners for specialist tasks like cross-channel media strategy and implementation. Effective roster management requires clear roles, performance evaluation and integrated processes .
Why Partnerships Matter for Strategic Media
At Campfire, we don’t just buy media we orchestrate it. We partner with brands directly along with creative, brand and PR agencies because creative messaging, earned media and paid placements must work together. When we’re involved early in strategy, we can:
Translate business goals into media priorities. Understanding product margins, competitive threats and brand positioning allows us to recommend the right mix of linear, digital and sponsorship channels.
Ensure cohesive storytelling. By aligning with creative and PR partners, we make sure that messaging resonates across formats and that paid placements amplify earned moments while setting the right KPIs to the campaign goal per medium we invest in.
Integrate reporting. We build dashboards that connect cross‑channel media activity—digital, linear, print, sponsorships—to business outcomes, so all partners see the same data and can adapt in real time.
Drive efficiencies. By coordinating buys across platforms and partners, we negotiate better rates, avoid too much audience duplication and re‑invest savings into higher‑impact opportunities.
From Execution to Strategic Orchestration
The media landscape’s fragmentation demands more than execution. Digital may be surging but linear channels still matter as every network and publisher is a digital and social company. Commissions are giving way to retainers as agencies and brands seek transparency and alignment. Brands are rethinking their rosters, working with multiple specialist agencies while building in‑house capabilities .
To navigate this complexity, brands and agencies need partners who are strategists first and buyers second - practitioners who align media investments with business and brand objectives across every channel. At Campfire, we believe that outsourcing is only valuable when it comes with strategic orchestration. By embracing transparent compensation models, partnering with specialist agencies, and integrating digital and linear platforms, marketers can turn fragmented media environments into powerful engines for growth, not just savings.
And importantly, we don’t stop at strategy. We have the in‑house buying expertise to execute across digital, linear and sponsorship channels, ensuring the plan comes to life exactly as designed. That combination of strategic orchestration and specialized buying sets Campfire apart and is how we deliver results for the agencies and brands we partner with. Sound Interesting?
