Credit: Chauncey Sims via Unsplash
The federal government’s new advertising procurement process, a shift to a centralised and integrated village model, could effectively favour multinational networks, according to independent media agencies.
The Department of Finance’s overhauled model, first flagged by AdNews in July, will see government communications contracts grouped under thematic “villages”, with agencies restricted to one appointment per village and service category.
The move aims to streamline procurement, but independent agencies say it’s anti-competitive and structurally biased against smaller, multi-skilled shops.
Rebecca Den Braber, GM of performance agency Impressive, said the model strongly favours large holding companies that can deploy multiple agency brands across different categories.
“Most independents only have one trading entity, so they can’t insulate themselves from the one-appointment rule,” she said.
“It’s impossible to compete on a level playing field.”
Braber also flagged concerns about the fixed four-year pricing arrangement amid ongoing cost-of-living pressures.
“Fixed pricing over that timeframe can easily erode margins, turning a profitable contract into a loss-making one. Larger agencies may absorb it. Independents can’t,” she said.
Sam Buchanan, CEO of the Independent Media Agencies of Australia (IMAA), described the proposal as “anti-competitive” and accused the government of ignoring the strength and value of the independent sector.
“This model effectively locks out independent media agencies in favour of multinationals,” Buchanan said.
“It’s a terrible message to send to Australian-owned businesses that play a critical role in the economy.”
Buchanan also criticised the lack of geographic weighting in the evaluation criteria, saying it sidelines high-performing agencies outside of NSW and Victoria.
“Procurement should reflect the whole country. Right now, it doesn’t,” he said.
He added that the system's rigidity, including a ban on cross-category service delivery and complex submission requirements, ignores how most indies operate.
“Indies are agile and cross-functional. The system doesn't reward that. It favours siloed specialisation, typical of holding groups,” Buchanan said.
The new requirement for agencies to demonstrate both independent and collaborative delivery capacity is another sticking point.
Buchanan said it's unrealistic for smaller multicultural or regional outfits.
“These agencies bring critical insights to the table, but they’re being held to the same benchmarks as full-service agencies. It’s an unfair bar,” he said.
Thinkerbell CEO Margie Reid took a more diplomatic tone but echoed the need for more flexibility in the model.
“We absolutely support the government’s emphasis on fairness and good governance,” she said.
“But it would be wonderful to see more flexibility to allow independent agencies to compete with holdcos on a project-by-project basis.”
The IMAA is calling for immediate consultation with the finance department to revise the model and develop a more inclusive approach, one that allows indies to compete on capability, not corporate structure.
As it stands, the integrated village model may simplify procurement, but industry insiders warn it risks complicating the future of Australia’s independent media sector.
Have something to say on this? Share your views in the comments section below. Or if you have a news story or tip-off, drop us a line at adnews@yaffa.com.au
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.