The ethical dilemma of pitching: should agencies charge for their pitches?

Agencies invest substantial resources when pitching to win new business. It’s part and parcel of how agency-client relationships are forged, but the process can easily be exploited by brands fishing for free ideas under the guise of a request for proposal. 

Others are more brazen, offering a pitch fee in return for intellectual property rights. This sounds like a win-win; brands get the ideas, agencies get some “easy” cash. This practice is harmful to the brand’s long-term goals and devalues agency expertise.

But it isn’t just about money: it’s about respect, value and the integrity of the creative process.  

The onus to uphold ethical pitching practices doesn’t fall squarely on the shoulders of brands, it requires action from agencies and prospects. The Pitch Positive Pledge (that Brave Bison supports) has been pivotal in addressing the issues. 

More needs to be done.

Pitching costs more than just money

Pitches are a significant resource drain, especially when there’s no guarantee of a win.

On average, an agency spends 175 hours on each pitch. That’s the same as one full working month, and the effort can cost a staggering £39,604 of non-billed hours.

MediaSense's Pitch Smart study reveals that it’s not just the agency’s time and money that gets sacrificed in the pitching process – it’s team morale. Sixty-four per cent of respondents find pitching damaging to their culture, while 54% say it’s increasingly affecting staff mental health.

The hours teams dedicate to meeting the ever-escalating standards of pitching also diverts their attention away from existing clients, risking the agency’s reputation and potentially costing them even more in lost profits.

Fishing for free ideas also damages brands’ reputation

Brands using the pitching process to accumulate free ideas severely damage their reputation. Agencies talk. Stories of insincere clients circulate quickly.

This perception impacts the brand’s ability to build genuine partnerships, preventing them from addressing their real challenges effectively. 

Most agencies can tell if an RFP is disingenuous. Red flags include a lack of information, no mention of a budget and if it isn’t procurement-led. All of this indicates a lack of seriousness from the brand, resulting in their RFP being rejected.

However, if a brand is willing to pay agencies for their pitch, it demonstrates that they’re in it for the long-haul. It presents them as a high-value client to agencies. 

Agencies deserve to know who they're competing with 

Agencies have no idea how many others they’re competing with in over 80% of pitches. 

When agencies invest significant time and money without knowing the competitive landscape, the process becomes riskier and potentially less rewarding. Agencies deserve transparency, a fair competitive environment, where agencies can tailor their pitches effectively without overextending their resources.

A balance needs be struck between transparency, IP rights and competitiveness

Agencies shouldn’t give away all their ideas for free – a serious client won’t expect them to. 

Charging for pitches is more than a way to offset costs; it’s a path to connecting with quality brands who respect the work and want a partnership. But it can create a scenario where agencies lose the business because another is willing to give the information for free. This highlights agencies’ dual challenge of asking for transparency and protecting their IP while maintaining a competitive edge.

Instead of fully fleshed-out ideas, agencies should present high-level strategies and conceptual frameworks, demonstrating competitive expertise without giving away IP prematurely – with non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and pitch protection schemes put in place to protect the agency’s work and safeguard IP.

Brands need to change the way they view agencies 

Brands play a crucial role in supporting agencies to find this balance. For some, this requires a mindset shift. 

Agencies aren’t a one-stop shop for free ideas. Those that treat them as such limit their potential for genuine growth. Fragmented ideas lack the strategic depth necessary to address complex challenges. 

The best results come from strategic partnerships built on mutual respect, even if it means paying an agency’s pitch fee. This approach leads to innovative solutions that align precisely with the brand's needs and drive sustainable success.

Investing in a genuine partnership means agreeing to fair compensation for the agency's effort. This ensures the relationship is built on trust and long-term vision rather than short-term gain.

Answering the call for ethical pitching

When it comes to agency-client relationships, the most successful ones are where the value exchange is fair. 

Whether an agency decides to charge for their pitch is ultimately up to them. But it’s imperative that in all cases, pitches are transparent from both sides and the ideas presented during them are protected and respected. 

When brands and agencies are equal partners, they unlock the potential for innovative strategies that deliver far better results than a transactional approach ever could. This shift not only benefits agencies but also ensures that the brand receives high-quality, well-considered proposals that can truly enhance their market position.

---