Evaluating an agency on "are we happy" produces a number nobody can use. Split it into three axes that move independently, and the conversation becomes usable.
The three axes
Expertise. Do they know their craft, your market, your audience? Do they use data? Do you learn anything from them?
Process. Do they meet deadlines, correct course, keep you informed, stay reachable, and are the estimates accurate?
Attitude. Do they think along, do they push back when needed, and do you trust their judgement?
Those three correlate less than you would expect. In IKAg's COLLAB measurements (321 measurements since December 2019, together more than 1,700 completed surveys), attitude consistently scores highest and expertise lowest: across the 137 measurements where the brand rated its agency the median is 7.33, with attitude at 7.68, process at 7.47 and expertise at 7.30.
An agency you like but learn nothing from is therefore not an exception but the average. Which is exactly why one overall number says too little.
Have both sides answer the same questions
This is the most important step. The agency fills in how it thinks the relationship is going, you fill in how it is going, and the gap between those two is what the conversation should be about.
That gap is also predictably large: in nine measurements where an agency rated both itself and its client, the agency scored itself higher nine times out of nine, by 1.4 points out of ten on average. See does my agency think things are going better than I do.
How to do it in practice
- The same questions, every year, so you get a series rather than a snapshot.
- Several people per side, answered anonymously. One voice is an opinion.
- A score plus a comment. The score allows comparison, the comment allows action.
- Discuss the differences, not the average. The gain sits where your answers diverge most.
IKAg runs this kind of evaluation with COLLAB, on both sides of the table. See www.ikag.be.
See also: what a normal satisfaction score is and how often to evaluate.