A big merger brought with it bigger challenges, talent retention, avoiding efficiency overlap, keeping leaders that came together from both sides—IPG and Omnicom—happy and most importantly making sure that the clients who have for years worked with the individual entities support them equally through the transition into Omnicom. For a holding company which retained all of their six media agency networks, the writing on the wall is clear- there can’t be any compromise with client confidentiality and competitive protocols were top priority. Tony Harradine, CEO, APAC, Omnicom Media in conversation with Neeta Nair, Editor of IMPACT talks about navigating through the merger and the way forward in this rather complex advertising industry.
Q] I remember, Tony, you were here a few months ago. Back then you were finalising the details of the merger. Now that some of those decisions have come to light, tell us how has it been received by the people within the company and also the industry at large?
It was probably the most significant event we’ve seen in our organisation. Inevitably the question on everybody’s mind was: how does this affect me, my future and the team around me? Our number one priority— beyond communicating the benefits of this change to our clients— has been to ensure clarity around everybody’s future role within the organisation. There were initial announcements around the brand architecture, and we remain strong believers in the agency brands. The agency brands stand; the client teams stand within those brands. That also gave confidence to clients that there would be minimal disruption. Overall, the reaction has been positive. Naturally, in a business going through a change like this, there will be some anxiety, but we’ve ensured frequent communication internally to provide clarity as the transition unfolds.
Q] Some IPG leaders I spoke to believe that the global rules shouldn’t apply here as IPG is bigger than Omnicom in India. How are you overcoming that sentiment of ‘IPG versus Omnicom’ within the setup that you have created now?
I hear you, and every market is going to say it’s nuanced in its own way. IPG and Omnicom both have been very good at recognizing that localization matters. But there does need to be some degree of global consistency. From day one we made it clear that while Omnicom was acquiring IPG, the goal was to create a new organisation that brings together the best from both sides. Even leadership roles have been decided to identify the strongest leaders.
IPG has a very strong heritage in India. The same management team for many years under Shashi Sinha is testament to the deep local client relationships that they have built over time and a reputation for strategic and creative excellence. Omnicom in India is a younger, less than two-decades-old organisation but one that has been anchored strongly in global relationships and global infrastructure. Bringing these organisations together creates something powerful for the Indian market — combining strong local relationships, global scale, talented teams and complementary technologies.
Q] Are you seeing some discontent at the surface level at this point? It has been three months now since some key leadership decisions were announced.
Nothing disruptive at all. Naturally there are questions about what the future holds, but that’s expected in any transition. It takes time to build a common culture and will definitely take longer. But we are off to a great start.
Q] There was so much buzz on the creative side, with mergers and agencies being retired. On the media side it seemed quieter with just the ‘IPG Mediabrands’ name being dissolved.
Omnicom Media and IPG Media Brands had already been on a journey of transformation. There has always been distinctiveness of media agency brands, but the decision was taken years ago to have a consistent operating unit. That became Omnicom Media Group for us and Mediabrands for IPG. We’ve probably completed about 50% of the transformation already. Now, we’re going through another phase as we come together.
Whereas on the advertising side, there were very distinct brands without an operating overlay. It was only up until recently that there was an Omnicom Advertising, now run by Sean Donovan, my counterpart, So, there has to be acknowledgement that it’s a bigger undertaking for them. They’re essentially doing two transformations within the same timeframe. What it’s doing is creating a mirror image of both divisions so they can collaborate more effectively. Operationally it’s going to create better efficiencies for us to connect media and creative work.
Q] Omnicom has managed to consolidate networks into three distinct ones on the creative side, but all six media brands have been retained. Was there a specific reason for that?
I can’t speak on behalf of my advertising counterpart. For us, the decision was largely client-driven. Many clients have strong relationships with specific agency teams and cultures, and they didn’t want disruption. Another factor is scale, the number of brands handled between Omnicom and IPG is immense. In India alone, we handle multiple brands within the same sectors. Automotive is a good example where we have a dozen or so. Maintaining distinct teams and brands helps ensure confidentiality and proper competitive protocols.
Q] On one hand there is the question of scale, which you obviously have, and on the other side there is redundancy, as you try to remove duplicates. What does the new Omnicom structure really offer to the clients today?
Certainly, a deeper talent pool. We are a business built on both technology and people, and while a lot of the conversation in the market today focuses on technology, both are equally important for delivering success for our clients. One of the biggest advantages of this merger is a much deeper bench of talent. It also allows us to connect capabilities more intentionally across areas like buying, e-commerce, data and analytics, and marketing consultancy. These capabilities existed earlier as well, but sometimes within separate ecosystems. Now we can bring them together in a more integrated way. At the same time, we continue to believe strongly in the value of agency brands, because clients ultimately buy into teams and culture as much as they buy into technology and capabilities. The vision is to combine strong client-facing teams and cultures with a broader ecosystem of specialised capabilities.
Q] When you talk about consolidation of this scale, the elephant in the room is usually client conflict. You have Samsung and Apple, Tata Motors and Volkswagen and so on. You have managed to save some and sacrifice some. Were the casualties in India higher than those in other markets in APAC?
Tony: Not really. There weren’t many instances where it became a major issue. Clients may sometimes use moments like these to reassess their partnerships, but overall it wasn’t a major problem. Look at our competitors like GroupM in India. They’re awash with conflicting brands and have managed it for years. We’ve managed it as well within our separate businesses of OMG and IPG. Coming together hasn’t created a major issue. Our obligation is always around client confidentiality and sensitivity to conflicts. We wouldn’t be as big as we are today if we hadn’t lived up to that.
Even if you take a client like Apple which is extremely sensitive to their IP and their ways of working, as long as they have the reassurance that their team will remain their team, they don’t care who else is in the bigger fold. They just don’t want us to touch OMD and their team and we are fully abiding by that.
Q] Globally, you’re number one. In India, you’re number two even after consolidation. Do you have a strategy and a time frame for toppling WPP in India as well?
It depends on how you define number one. I know that WPP’s narrative on the media side is always defined by billings and scale. Yes, that could be a by-product of success to some degree. For me the real measure is the strength of our talent and the capabilities we build. If we continue attracting strong talent and delivering great work for clients, scale will follow naturally. But scale can work differently in different markets, some places see it as a halo and in others, clients feel like they are going to be lost in a sea of other businesses. Our ambition is simply to be the best at what we do in every market we operate in.
Q] Given the geopolitical realities and the war right now, have your plans for the first year of transition been impacted already?
So far, we haven’t seen any material impact in Asia-Pacific. In most years there are geopolitical tensions somewhere in the world, and large organisations are generally equipped to navigate that. At this stage we haven’t seen any significant change in ambition or investment from our major clients.
Q] Can you tell me where does India really rank amongst your other markets in APAC and the growth figure you are aiming for, in this year here?
Tony: India is among our top three markets in APAC. Australia is very strong for us and China is naturally significant because of its market size. India has historically been more of a challenger market for Omnicom, but it has also been one of our fastest-growing under Kartik’s leadership. With the addition of IPG Media Brands, the scale and growth opportunity in India have increased significantly. We have massive ambitions for India and the expectation is a double-digit growth figure.
Q] They say advertising is growing in India, but agencies are not. According to you, where is growth really going to come from? Which sectors?
There are several opportunities. Banking and financial services continue to present strong growth potential. Historically we’ve had less exposure to FMCG compared with some competitors, so that remains another opportunity. There is also growth coming from small to medium enterprises, emerging and disruptive businesses that are evolving from performance-led marketing toward long-term brand building. Additionally, existing businesses that want to move to more of an enterprise-level partnership with us, for them we have a plethora of services that we haven’t cross-sold or cross-pollinated to the degree which I know we can. So organic growth will be a huge priority as well. Commerce is another important area for us. We acquired Flywheel a few years ago, and combining the commerce capabilities across the merged organisation will create significant opportunities. Influencer marketing is another fast-growing space in India.
Q] Talking about remuneration models, do you think there will be a new model for how agencies are compensated?
Yes, that conversation is already happening. Many clients now ask about new ways of working and how agency compensation should evolve. With the onset of agentic capability, traditional models based on commissions or FTE (full time equivalents) based retainers may not fully reflect the value agencies create today. Over time we’re likely to see a greater shift toward compensation tied to business outcomes and measurable impact. It’s still early days, but the direction of travel for the industry is quite clear.
Q] What should the media agency of tomorrow look like if it wants to compete with consultancies and technology companies?
The key is bringing together consultant-level strategic thinking with technology and operational excellence, everything that the platforms get. Hopefully, we can free-up our agency teams to be orchestrators focusing on strategy, as opposed to having them roll up their sleeves doing repetitive tasks.
Q] Publicis CEO Arthur Sadoun recently said he isn’t trying to compete on scale with either Omnicom, or other tech companies which can always do better by pumping in more money. In that context, what does scale really bring?
Scale can mean different things. Gone are the days when it would be about chest beating to proclaim you are the biggest buyer. The real value comes from how intelligently you apply scale to create better outcomes for clients. If scale refers to the depth of talent you can bring to clients, then it’s incredibly important. There’s a real competition for talent across the industry. Scale also allows you to invest in technology, data infrastructure and innovation. It gives you the ability to experiment, learn quickly and work closely with major technology partners.
