In March 2020, I started my career as a one-person marketing team in higher education at the beginning of a global pandemic. It wasn’t exactly what I pictured for my first job after graduation. I had my hands full, wearing many hats: creative, crisis communications, digital, media, social, PR, print, and more. As with many organizations, our money, time, and resources were limited, so I partnered with agencies to streamline and optimize different workflows and projects.
Now, as I start my second year at Ologie, after spending five years working with different agencies from the client side, I have a better understanding of what an agency needs from its client partner. You may not know what the final answer and deliverable should be yet, but you should be ready to explain the problem, share the context behind it, and know who will make decisions along the way.
Be clear about expectations, but not set on the answer.
You should have a clear understanding of what you want a project to accomplish, but that doesn’t always mean knowing exactly what the final result should be.
If you’re bringing in an agency because your internal team needs extra help getting something made, you may already have a fairly defined assignment. If you’re also looking for research, strategy, or creative thinking, there needs to be room for the agency to question whether the requested deliverable will solve the actual problem.
Budgets, timelines, internal expectations, and limitations should still come up early. There’s a difference between giving an agency direction and giving it the answer.
Decide who gets a voice and who gets a vote.
Everyone seems to have an opinion on marketing efforts, especially in higher education. There are usually plenty of people who should be heard because they know the institution, audience, or subject better than anyone else. That doesn’t mean every person needs the same role.
Some people may be there to provide background, while others need to review the work for accuracy or make sure it can realistically be implemented. A much smaller group should be responsible for choosing a direction, with a clearly identified person or group giving final approval.
When those roles are unclear, feedback starts coming from every direction, and the agency is left trying to resolve disagreements that need to be worked through internally. Fewer is usually better when it comes to decision-makers, but more can be helpful almost everywhere else: more context, more perspectives, and more access to the people who know the institution best. Determining the appropriate time for feedback and decision-making is critical for success.
Share the things your agency cannot see.
Agency partners can research your institution, learn your language, and talk to your audiences, but they still won’t know everything happening behind the scenes unless you tell them.
A similar approach may have already been tried. Leadership may be divided, or another priority may be competing for the same time and attention. It can be tempting to leave out the messy parts, but that information helps the agency understand the actual project, instead of the cleaner version that exists in the brief.
The same is true when priorities change. What feels obvious on the client side may only appear to the agency as feedback that no longer matches what was originally discussed. If the goal, timeline, or priority changes, be up front about it and talk through what that might mean for the budget, scope, or rest of the timeline.
Use your agency for more than an extra set of hands.
Capacity was one of the biggest reasons I worked with agencies on the client side, but each client may have a different reason for deciding to work with an agency. While it’s easy to want to default to execution mode, agencies can also recognize when a request is being driven by unclear messaging, limited audience insight, or internal disagreement that another deliverable (or original request) may not fix.
You don’t have to accept every recommendation. Your institution is still responsible for sharing the context, making the decisions, and making sure the work is right for the people it needs to serve. But if you want outside thinking and new ideas, the agency needs enough room to provide it. Finding that balance can lead to a better working relationship, but it can also lead to better work. Both teams have a better chance of creating something that reflects the reality of the institution, holds together through review, and actually accomplishes the goal that everyone set out to solve.
