How a global FMCG client redesigned its agency roster and remuneration model to release value — and reinvested it in growth rather than surrendering it to a cut.
Context
A global FMCG advertiser with a roster that had grown by accretion over years: many partners, overlapping remits, and fee structures built almost entirely on inputs — headcount and hours.
The problem
Scopes overlapped and competed. Fees rewarded effort rather than outcome, so productivity gains accrued to no one the client could identify. There was no clear line of sight from what was paid to the value received.
The approach
We segmented the roster by role and value, removed genuine duplication, and redesigned remuneration around value and transparency rather than volume. A light governance layer kept the new model honest, with performance and value tracked over time.
Outcome
[VA to insert verified figures — e.g. value released through cost saving and cost avoidance, roster reduced from X to Y partners, share of fees moved to value-based terms.] The released value was deliberately reinvested in growth priorities rather than banked as a cut.
What made it work
Roster and remuneration were treated as one design problem inside the operating model — so the saving was a by-product of a better ecosystem, not the objective that hollowed it out.
Common questions
How do you redesign an agency roster to fund growth?
Segment by role and value, remove duplication and shift fees from inputs to value, then reinvest the released value rather than banking a cut.
What is value-based agency remuneration?
A model that prices outcomes and transparency rather than hours and headcount, aligning incentives across the ecosystem.