From dominance of global empires to digital ecosystems, Sir Martin Sorrell, Founder & Executive Chairman, S4 Capital, has witnessed every reinvention of modern advertising. In 2026, he argues that technology will take over geography in driving power, structure and survival in marketing services.
Over five decades, Sir Martin Sorrell has watched the advertising industry reinvent itself again and again. His career spans every major phase of that evolution: from serving as CFO at Saatchi & Saatchi during the age of blockbuster global campaigns to building WPP into the world’s largest marketing services company and now leading S4 Capital as a digital-first, data-driven challenger. As Founder and Executive Chairman of S4 Capital PLC, Sorrell believes marketing services in 2026 are being shaped by two overriding forces: geography and technology, with technology now clearly in control.
He locates the industry’s first great shift in the Reagan–Thatcher era, when globalisation transformed both brands and agencies. Networks spread rapidly across borders, multinational clients expanded at scale, and holding companies prospered on the assumption that consumers everywhere would grow more alike. While that idea proved partly true, globalisation nonetheless fuelled decades of sustained growth.
According to Sorrell, that world however, is now breaking apart. Geopolitical strains, uneven economic growth, inflation and higher interest rates have made expansion harder and efficiency more important than ever. As a result, clients have become more cautious and more demanding: budgets are tighter, experimentation is limited, and every decision must justify its return.
Running alongside this geographic fragmentation is a profound technological shift. The rise of the internet, mobile and now artificial intelligence has reshaped the industry’s foundations. Power has moved decisively towards digital platforms, placing traditional advertising models under strain while digital ecosystems, dominated by a small group of major players, continue to expand. To survive, Sorrell argues, agencies must become quicker, more integrated and deeply rooted in technology.
Sorrell’s path from Saatchi to WPP to S4 mirrors this transformation from globalised, multi-brand structures to unified, technology-led organisations built for speed, data and efficiency. For Sorrell, the age of the ‘mad men’ has given way to a hybrid workforce of creative, media and technology specialists. Only those able to adapt both structurally and culturally, he says, will remain relevant in 2026 and beyond.
Sir Martin Sorrell, Founder & Executive Chairman, S4 Capital speaks to Dr. Annurag Batra, Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of BW Businessworld and exchange4media about the past, present and future of advertising
Q] What are the defining forces behind the marketing services era in 2026?
The marketing services era in 2026 is being shaped by two powerful forces: geography and technology.
In the 1970s and 1980s, when I was CFO of Saatchi & Saatchi before founding WPP, the defining shift was geographical. Reagan and Thatcher accelerated globalisation. Ted Levitt argued in 1983 that consumers would eventually behave the same everywhere. He later admitted he overstated the case, but globalisation still took hold.
Agencies like Saatchi grew in that environment. Campaigns such as British Airways’ ‘Manhattan Landing’ symbolised brands expanding across borders, and WPP followed that trajectory through the 1990s. By the early 2000s, the balance shifted. The internet, then mobile, and now AI began reshaping the industry. Geography still matters, but technology has become dominant.
At the same time, globalisation is fragmenting. Geopolitical tensions persist. Growth is harder to find. Inflation remains stubborn. Interest rates are higher. Europe is slower. Parts of Africa are volatile. In this climate, efficiency is critical. Clients are far more selective. They cannot afford to go everywhere and do everything. They need technology deployed quickly and at scale.
Agency models have adapted. Saatchi was a multi-branded holding company. WPP remained multi-branded but moved toward technology and data, including Kantar, which in hindsight should not have been sold. S4 is built on four principles: digital or predominantly digital, data-driven, faster and more efficient, and a single unified brand. All major holding companies are moving in that direction.
The industry has shifted from globalisation to technology, efficiency and fragmentation. That defines marketing services in 2026.
Q] Publicis is now performing exceptionally well. What do you have to say about that?
Maurice has a very good successor in Arthur Sadoun. So, they have a very strong leadership, strategy and structure.
Q] Did they make the right acquisitions and build the right narrative with clients?
They made two acquisitions, Epsilon and Sapient, which were criticised at the time. I thought the prices were too high. I was wrong. They have worked out well. The leadership is strong and the strategy is built around digital and data, which is critical. The challenge is integration. They have swallowed the whale and taken on a lot of business. That is not easy to sort out. There are murmurs about difficulties, but that is natural. Their structure is geography first, then client, then capability. That is what we have done at Monks.
Omnicom has gone discipline first, client next and country third. That is wrong. The disciplines will compete. Media will try to build creative capability. Creative will try to expand into other areas. Vertical heads will protect territory. You have to organise by country first, then client, then capability. WPP is following the same route as Omnicom. That is a big mistake. If they have taken McKinsey’s advice, we will know by February 26. Perhaps they will recommend a country-first model. It is not perfect, but it suits a fragmented world with uneven growth and a need for efficiency.
Historically, the Americans dominated. Then the British with Saatchi and WPP. Today the leaders are French and American, with Publicis and Omnicom, both at $20 billion. WPP’s market cap is three billion sterling, just under $4 billion. At one stage it was $24 billion. In size WPP is not very different from Publicis and Omnicom, yet their market cap is $20 billion while WPP is at four billion dollars.
Q] Dentsu last year said they want to sell their international business.
They have tried. So far, they have been unsuccessful.
Q] Why do you think they have been unsuccessful? Is it the price or is nobody interested in the asset?
It is an interesting question. Are the Japanese good at running multinational businesses? There are successful examples like Toyota and Sony. They have had ups and downs, but they are fundamentally strong companies. So, why is it different here? When you have such a dominant position in your domestic market, like Dentsu and Hakuhodo, it becomes almost fortress-like. Dentsu would probably be better off focusing on Fortress Japan, divesting its international business and moving forward. The same applies to Korean agencies. Cheil and LG Ad have not expanded much beyond South Korea. You could make a similar argument about France, but Publicis and Havas have succeeded.
In the past I have seen networks like Dai-Ichi Kikaku from Japan which always had a Japanese executive, always male, running markets like Thailand, Singapore or Malaysia. Although they would never admit it, they preferred having Japanese country heads. That reflects issues of trust, faith and agility. Coming back to Dentsu, their current CEO does not speak English. He is perfectly capable and successful, but meetings require a translator, which makes things difficult. They would be better off focusing on their home market. Japan is tough to operate in, but with the new prime minister holding a strong electoral position, a significant change is underway. The Japanese stock market is at an all-time high and the yen is weakening, suggesting structural shifts.
As for whether an Indian business could scale globally, anything is possible, but it is extremely difficult to do organically, even in an AI-driven world. It requires acquisitions and aggressive capital deployment.
The M&A environment is currently very active. But building a global agency network from scratch remains extremely difficult. Some Indian investors explored raising capital to acquire Dentsu International, but that was unrealistic. Over time, with significant capital and aggressive investment, it is possible but unlikely. What we are likely to see is an industry dominated by Publicis and Omnicom. We will also see whether Cindy Rose can resuscitate WPP.
Q] Last year advertising crossed a trillion dollars. In India it stands at `1,25,000 crores. Advertising is growing but agencies are not. Why is that happening and what is the challenge for S4 in this environment?
It is not growing as well as we would like it to. The challenge for us is what I call the wow, how and now. We have to get clients to transform at scale and at speed. Instead, many tinker with AI through audits, tests and reviews. Few move decisively unless there is external pressure.
The ad market crossed $1 trillion in the year before last, reached about $1.1 trillion last year and is around $1.2 trillion this year. Over 50 years, there was almost a one-to-one correlation between corporate profitability and ad spend, a little under eight percent. Today the market is growing at five percent or six percent, and all the growth is in Digital.
The traditional business, about $300 billion, is declining and without live sports like the IPL or T20 it falls faster. The $900 billion digital market is growing at 15% to 20%. Google is $300 billion, Meta $200 billion and Amazon $70 billion. TikTok outside China, including Larry Ellison’s and Silver Lake’s stakes, is valued at about $50 or $60 billion. That is almost $600 billion of the $900 billion digital market. Two-thirds of digital sits with four platforms, and roughly half of the $1.2 trillion total market sits there. It is effectively two industries. It is K-shaped.
The part that is growing is investing $600 billion this year in AI capacity. Google is spending $135 billion. Amazon is spending $135 billion. Meta, previously at $85 billion, is also investing heavily. The hyperscalers are building data farms and energy infrastructure around AI and that strengthens those platforms. Alphabet is valued at over $4 trillion. NVIDIA reached $5 trillion. Alphabet could surpass NVIDIA. The US stands at about $28 trillion, China at $18 trillion and India at roughly $5.5 trillion. By that comparison, Alphabet and NVIDIA are already almost as large as India in terms of GDP.
Q] Is there any hope for advertising agencies?
Yes, there is, but they have to be much more technologically focused. Thinking back to the difference between today and 1985; back then the skills were centered around strategy and creative. Then the skills became strategy, creative and media. Then they became strategy, creative, media and tech. Today, most holding companies are organised around three core capabilities: creative, media and production - content creation, media planning and buying, and production. The emphasis has shifted over time.
The balance of skills has shifted dramatically over time. It is a different model. The CEO of an agency today is very different from Don Draper. Don Draper represented the ‘mad men’. Today it is mad men and tech men, or mad men, media men and tech men — and increasingly, mad women, media women and tech women.
Q] Any acquisitions that you’re planning globally or in India?
No. We have to get our house in order first. We need to improve top line growth and strengthen margins. Liquidity is strong and we have reduced net debt, we guided the market to 100-140 million pounds last year and came in significantly below that, which we have already flagged. That gives us more flexibility.
The real issue is how we get companies to shift quickly and transform at scale. It is in their interest, yet many remain cautious. We see AI having impact in five areas: visualisation and collaboration, compressing the cost and time of producing ads, personalisation at scale using first party data and platform signals, algorithmic media planning and buying, and overall efficiency, including democratising knowledge. That is where the focus has to be. We have to implement it. No client should spend more than 10 percent of media cost on creative, and that is not about devaluing creativity.
I was speaking to a strong creative leader and asked what he thought about AI. He said there is a great deal of mediocre work and AI as a tool can raise the general standard. Exceptional work however, will remain exceptional. But then I watched 54 Super Bowl ads. Much of it did not resonate. I liked the Lays ad where the father hands over the potato farm to his daughter. I also liked the Meta and Google ads. For the amount of money spent, in some cases the impact was limited.
Q] Fees have been declining and clients are bringing more work in-house. What are clients doing wrong? What can they do better? What is your commentary?
It comes down to three things: agility, taking back control and first-party data. Those are the areas clients need to focus on.
In India, and I see some of this in China as well, I am not sure all companies fully appreciate the value of marketing and brand building. We can debate upper funnel versus mid and lower funnel, but there is clearly a shift towards short-term thinking. Private equity works on five-year hold periods. Venture capital often looks for the exit before the investment. Listed companies report quarterly. Fragmentation and volatility add to that pressure.
The advice we provide is highly valuable and needs to be valued accordingly. Some Indian companies understand this very well. Others do not. Indian entrepreneurs are among the best in the world. The country’s large business leaders are exceptional and are expanding beyond India. Sunil Mittal’s investment in BT is a good example.
Q] What is your advice to entrepreneurs building companies today, especially in advertising, marketing and media services? And how do you see the opportunity for India in this shifting global environment?
People talk a lot about resilience. Agility is critical because of the volatility we have discussed. But above all, never give up. Maurice Saatchi used to say nothing is impossible. When you are knighted, you need a crest and a motto. Mine is persistence and speed. If you have a vision or passion, pursue it.
India is in a strong position. It sits in one of the most dynamic regions of the world, alongside Latin America and the Middle East. North America will always matter, but concerns around China and Taiwan are pushing companies to diversify risk. India will be among the top three economies by 2050, possibly earlier. On a purchasing power basis, it may already be there. It is not just India, but also Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore and Malaysia. Modi’s leadership and the technological push have created significant opportunity. The downside is that Trump may succeed in relocating manufacturing, but not necessarily jobs. Work outsourced to India, because it was cheaper, is beginning to move back to the United States.
