I hear you but I still haven't made up my mind

"There will be no interactive agencies or traditional agencies in a few years - there will just be advertising agencies and each will do it all under their one roof."

Recently, I've spoken to a few recognized thought leaders and also a few regular media Jacks and Jills and it seems that a lot of us are talking about the sustainability of specialization in this field. The reason this is a buzz-worthy topic within my network today is because interactive shops are now taking on traditional services. Traditional shops have been bringing on interactive arms and touting full service for years now; there are plenty of full service agencies who were once TV, Radio and Print powerhouses which now "do interactive".

Some of us think that the move towards Full Service - where ad agencies will direct the entire media mix and the sum will be in theory, greater than all the parts - is happening now for digital shops and it's a good thing. And it could be - digital should drive the marketing mix (for all the reasons frequently stated on this blog). However, traditional shops have done a pretty lousy job of integrating interactive into their core competencies at the level that delivers real value to the client. The two fields move at dramatically different paces and are held to very different expectations. Undeniably though, each needs the other to reach optimal results and it makes a great deal of sense to have one firm directing the mix and capitalizing on all that data, negotiating cross-channel pricing and effectively communicating intelligence under a sole set of objectives. Others say "specialization breeds excellence" and there are too many parts for one company to do well.


I'm on the fence but I'm leaning... How do you feel?