Omnicom’s recent acquisition of Interpublic Group (IPG) has created the world’s largest marketing services group, but the deal’s importance goes beyond just scale. It’s the latest signal that agency holding companies are racing to reinvent themselves—not just as a collective of specialized agencies, but as fully integrated marketing platforms.

Agency consolidation redefines how marketing gets done, who owns the systems, and where value is created. It also forces CMOs of agency client companies to rethink what to consolidate, what to own, and how to stay in control.

Why agencies are becoming platforms

Traditional agency models have come under pressure. Time-and-materials-based services are being squeezed by automation. Media platforms now hold rich data and optimization tools. Clients expect more transparency, measurable ROI, and tighter cost control. And as execution becomes commoditized, agencies’ pricing power has eroded. No surprise, then, that most holding companies have seen share prices fall since their 2021–2022 peaks (see Figure 1).

Figure 1

In response, agencies are getting bigger and deeper. Publicis has doubled down on its “Power of One” model; WPP has focused on offering more integrated capabilities; and other holding companies are consolidating brands, slashing costs, and integrating data and technology into their core offerings.

There’s a deeper shift underway as well. Agencies no longer only sell advertising services. They compete to provide the infrastructure behind modern marketing—systems, data, and workflow tools. Holding companies have been moving away from the old billing models of hourly rates and media commissions toward value-based pricing and proprietary products. They are building offerings across five key dimensions:

• fixed pricing tied to defined outcomes, using AI and automation to boost margins while offering predictable cost structures for clients;
• data and technology monetization, achieved through proprietary targeting solutions, workflow platforms, and ROI analytics;
• bundled media products, combining media, data, and technology (such as WPP’s Xaxis and Finecast, now integrated into GroupM Nexus);
• audience data solutions, selling impression-based access to owned data assets, bypassing third-party brokers; and
• proprietary media inventory, where agencies act as wholesalers of media with undisclosed margins rather than buying on behalf of the client.

Together, these moves add up to a new strategic logic: Future profit pools will come from controlling the marketing operating system, not just executing campaigns.

The illusion and reality of integration

Agency consolidation may appear to promise simplicity, with one partner, one integrated team, one invoice. But the reality is more complex.

Even as agencies consolidate, marketers often still navigate fragmented tools, competing incentives, and legacy agency brands under one roof. Without a clear strategy, the CMO ends up coordinating across silos, losing time, control, and performance. This isn’t a knock on agency partners, just a recognition of the structural challenge of large-scale service integration.

Just as important, consolidation raises the underappreciated risks of lock-in. Historically, switching agencies came with friction in contracts, continuity, or team dynamics. Today, lock-in is more architectural:

• Workflow lock-in. When agencies own the end-to-end workflow—from briefs to approvals to reporting—they effectively become the client’s marketing operations engine. Switching them out feels more like an enterprise technology migration.
• Data and identity lock-in. Agencies are investing in consumer identity graphs and proprietary audience data. As that infrastructure deepens, brand teams risk losing their strategic seat at the table.
• Technology lock-in. Agencies increasingly offer integrated stacks such as measurement tools, AI engines, and campaign platforms. These offer speed and efficiency but make it harder to pivot or build in-house capabilities.
• Marketing strategy and brand stewardship lock-in. Lean marketing teams often rely on agencies for their breadth of expertise as brand guardians and strategic advisers. But that proximity can erode ownership of strategy and in-house expertise, limiting the role of the marketing team to briefing and project management.

To counter lock-in risks and stay resilient, it’s useful to consider which activities should be controlled in-house and which can be delivered by external partners. The internal team retains control while giving agency partners room to differentiate where it counts. That approach paves the way to thriving in the new world of super-sized agency platforms.

The right model depends on the company’s marketing ambition. If the goal consists mainly of efficient, effective advertising at the lowest cost, then the integrated solutions of holding companies may be beneficial. If the ambition is broader, then keeping control and selecting best in class for each job to be done may be more valuable.

Based on the chosen role, marketers should define what the company wants to own and control vs. what it should outsource or automate via AI. Many brands see the shift from broadcast mass marketing to more targeted engagement across numerous channels as an opportunity to get closer to the consumer. They are weighing the right balance of in-house ownership vs. outsourcing in the following areas:

• Data. Owning consumer and marketing performance data not only saves money; it offers a route to deeper consumer insights. Agencies could support or oppose that aim.
• Technology. Taking marketing and e-commerce platforms and media buying tools in-house can increase cost transparency and keep data close. Some technology should be in-house (though potentially operated by an agency), while other technology could be outsourced.
• AI and automation. AI-driven automation is reshaping consumer experience as well as changing cost models. Marketers must decide how much they want to control AI tools and where they want to benefit from the expertise and investments an agency brings.
• Process. The new holding company stacks provide an end-to-end workflow. Here, marketers must decide which activities belong in-house and which are better outsourced.
• ROI measurement and marketing analytics. Holding company stacks often also offer integrated reporting. The question is how much to rely on the holding company to measure and analyze performance and what to take in-house or outsource.

Six moves for the consolidation era

Beyond making a list of which marketing assets and processes to own, and which to outsource, it’s critical to determine how these pieces will be orchestrated. In addition, companies should be realistic about which capabilities or technologies would be too costly to develop in-house. To that end, six moves can help structure an arrangement that works for each company’s particular situation.

1. Start with defining your internal operating model. We have seen global agency consolidation pitches recently where the client’s internal operating model was still evolving, making it hard for either side to establish an effective and seamless agency setup. A clearly defined strategy and operating model allows the agency to align with both and serve as a complement.
   
   The relevant considerations here include: Should paid, owned, shared, and earned touchpoints be integrated or kept in specialist teams? Should marketing and sales be integrated? How should creative messaging and touchpoint execution connect? Which activities should occur at a global level, and which at a regional or local level?

2. Decide what to integrate and what to keep modular. Not everything needs to be centralized. Tight integration is critical for measurement, data, and workflow. But creative excellence and brand voice should remain distinct. Use standardization only where it drives true efficiency.

3. Treat agency technology like enterprise software. When agencies pitch proprietary tools, don’t treat them as freebies. Assess them like any enterprise platform—against your IT standards, data strategy, and cost structure. Clarify ownership, portability, and integration up front.

4. Codify ownership and portability in writing. Don’t leave this to interpretation. Document who owns what data and tools. Define export formats, documentation standards, and transition support.

5. Build an internal marketing operations engine. If you want a lead integrator agency, you need an internal integrator too. Build the operational and architectural capabilities to govern workflow, data, identity, and performance. Establish an operating rhythm to stay aligned and nimble.

6. Shift to outcome-based pricing. Results-based models sound great, but they need balance. Use a scorecard that includes business outcomes, operational metrics, and brand-building indicators. This rewards performance without inviting short-term behavior.

The future remains in play

Agencies still have a valuable role to play. AI and automation won’t replace agencies overnight or remove the value that external resources and expertise can bring, but they are changing the game. Some marketers are already insourcing what was once unthinkable, from campaign optimization to creative production. Cost informs these moves, to be sure, but marketers also want to regain control over pace, quality, and data ownership. Consolidation brings opportunity if CMOs ask the right questions:

• Integration. Can one agency partner deliver creative origination, production, and execution across all channels? If so, will that bring cost transparency and operational simplicity, or just shift complexity into a black box?
• Data. Will the agency’s audience data and technology stack improve targeting, insights, and ROI? How does that align with the internal ambition to own customer data and protect signal integrity?
• AI. Are AI-driven insights, planning, and optimization tools creating more empowerment or more dependency?
• Process. Will moving to an agency-owned workflow streamline operations or give up too much control over marketing governance?

The Omnicom–IPG deal marks a turning point in holding company evolution, following similar moves by WPP and Publicis. But agency consolidation won’t make things simpler for CMOs. Instead, it highlights the trade-offs involved in both in-house and outsource decisions. Ultimately, allying with an agency partner should empower the marketing team to get closer to consumers, have better insights, and still control key marketing decisions with a full understanding of the short-term ROI and long-term brand impact.