Brandbusters
PLEN

Agencies · Media · MarTech · Technology · AI

I don't ask whether a partner is good. I check whether the relationship delivers for your business.

I independently assess agencies, technology providers and other partners: results, capabilities, costs, the contract, ways of working, data, risks and readiness for the next stage.

The aim of the audit is not an automatic change of partner. The aim is a sound decision: keep the relationship, fix it, renegotiate, consolidate the scope, run a pitch or choose someone else.

Let's talk about an auditSee the scope of the audit

Possible decisions

  1. KeepThe partner delivers, and the model fits current needs.
  2. FixThe capabilities are right, but the way of working isn't.
  3. RenegotiateThe scope, fees or accountability are no longer adequate.
  4. ConsolidateToo many suppliers are doing overlapping work.
  5. Run a pitchThe company needs to compare the market and new options.
  6. ChangeThe capability gap or conflict of interest is too large.

01 / Signals

A relationship can look fine and still not create enough value.

The partner sends reports. Meetings happen regularly. Projects get delivered. Invoices stay within budget.

And yet the board still doesn't know:

  • which business outcomes the relationship has produced
  • whether the scope of services matches the current strategy
  • whether the company is receiving the capabilities it is paying for
  • who is accountable for decisions and mistakes
  • whether the data and accounts really belong to the company
  • whether the technology is being used as promised
  • whether a similar result could be achieved more simply
  • whether the current partner is ready for the next stage of growth

The most common reasons for starting an audit

  • 01costs are rising, but results aren't improving proportionally
  • 02reports show activity rather than business impact
  • 03after the pitch was won, the people who presented disappeared
  • 04the company bought technology its team barely uses
  • 05several partners are doing similar work
  • 06the split of responsibility between the company and the supplier is unclear
  • 07the contract hasn't kept pace with changes in channels, data and technology
  • 08the partner recommends solutions it earns money from
  • 09decisions are made on data controlled by the supplier
  • 10an AI provider impresses with a demo but can't explain the cost, the risk or how it works at scale
  • 11the relationship has lasted for years and nobody has checked whether it's still the best option

02 / I'm not looking for someone to blame

I audit the partner and the model the company has built with them.

I don't assess an agency or supplier in isolation from the company. Weak results do not always mean a weak partner. I examine the complete operating relationship: the strategy, brief, responsibilities, capabilities, data, governance, commercial model and decisions on both sides.

Weak results don't always mean a weak agency or supplier.

That's why I don't run an audit “against” the partner.

A good recommendation might be: change the agency. It might equally be: keep the agency, but improve the brief, the KPIs, governance and how decisions are made on your side.

The problem may be:

  • an unclear strategy on the client side
  • a poorly defined brief
  • conflicting expectations from different people
  • the wrong KPIs
  • a budget that is too small or unrealistically allocated
  • no access to data
  • delayed decisions
  • too many levels of approval
  • an unclear division of responsibilities
  • a contract that rewards activity rather than results

03 / Who I can assess

One partner or the whole supplier landscape

01

Media and performance agencies

Channel strategy, planning, media buying, optimisation, attribution, cost transparency, data quality and impact on results.

02

Creative, branding and content agencies

Strategic and creative quality, brand consistency, process efficiency, use of content, production organisation and the ability to work across many channels.

03

CRM, loyalty and marketing automation

Communication architecture, use of data, segmentation, automation, scenario quality, impact measurement and platform costs.

04

E-commerce and software houses

Product quality, the roadmap, how estimates are made, delivery pace, technical debt, accountability for conversion and readiness to scale.

05

MarTech, AdTech, data and analytics

Actual licence usage, integrations, data ownership, reporting quality, overlapping functionality and total cost of ownership.

06

AI and automation providers

The value of the use case, solution quality, data sources, access control, dependence on external models, security, auditability and cost at greater scale.

07

PR, social media, influencers and research

Fit with goals, quality of recommendations, how impact is measured, cost transparency and how the organisation uses the materials delivered.

An audit can cover one partner, a selected area or the entire supplier landscape.

04 / Audit scope

Eight dimensions that give the full picture of a partnership

Possible finding status:ConfirmedLikelyUnverifiedRisk
01

Strategic fit

  • Does the partner understand the company's business model and priorities?
  • Does the scope reflect the current strategy, or the situation of several years ago?
  • Do the recommendations support revenue, margin, the customer or efficiency?
02

Results and measurement

  • Do the KPIs measure real impact?
  • Is there a baseline and an expected result?
  • Do the reports lead to decisions?
  • Can the partner's impact be separated from other factors?
03

Scope and economics

  • What exactly is the company paying for?
  • What is the fee model?
  • Are there additional mark-ups, commissions, rebates or technology costs?
  • Do the scopes of different partners overlap?
04

Capabilities and team

  • Who actually works on the account?
  • How much time do senior people give it?
  • Does the partner have the capabilities it promised?
  • Is the team stable and able to lead the next stage?
05

Quality of delivery

  • Is the work on time and to the expected standard?
  • How does the partner handle mistakes and changes?
  • Can it move from recommendation to execution?
  • How much work does the client's internal team have to correct?
06

Cooperation and governance

  • Are roles and responsibilities clear?
  • Who makes decisions?
  • How are problems escalated?
  • Does the meeting rhythm lead to action, or only to status updates?
07

Data, technology and ownership

  • Who owns the accounts, data, configurations, documentation and materials produced?
  • Can the company change supplier without losing continuity?
  • Are the solutions integrated?
  • Is there unjustified vendor lock-in?
08

Risk and future readiness

  • Does the contract cover current ways of working and the use of AI?
  • How does the partner protect data?
  • Can the solution's behaviour be traced?
  • What happens in the event of a failure, a change of supplier or a sudden increase in scale?
  • Will the model still work in a year or two?

AI / Technology providers

An impressive demo is not due diligence.

When assessing an AI-based solution, I look beyond the features shown during the sales process.

The assessment does not replace a legal opinion, a formal security audit or penetration testing.

I also ask:

  1. 01what business problem the solution is meant to remove
  2. 02how its value will be measured
  3. 03which models and subcontractors the provider uses
  4. 04where data is processed and stored
  5. 05whether client data is used for further training
  6. 06what permissions the system will receive
  7. 07whether actions and responses are logged
  8. 08how quality and resilience to errors are tested
  9. 09when human approval is required
  10. 10who is accountable for a wrong decision or an action taken
  11. 11whether the solution can be moved to another provider
  12. 12what the total cost will be at ten times the usage
  13. 13what the plan is in the event of a failure or incident

This is a business and operational assessment of the provider. If a legal opinion, a formal security audit or penetration testing is needed, we bring in the appropriate specialists.

05 / How I run the audit

Facts before opinions

  1. 01 · Goal

    Goal and scope

    We agree what decision the audit should enable, which partners it covers and which areas matter most.

  2. 02 · Data

    Documents and data

    I analyse, among other things:

    • — the contract and scope of work
    • — budgets, invoices and the fee model
    • — reports, KPIs and dashboards
    • — briefs, plans and recommendations
    • — campaign and project results
    • — SLAs, backlogs and roadmaps
    • — access to data, accounts and documentation
    • — information about tools and subcontractors
  3. 03 · Interviews

    Conversations with both sides

    I talk with the board, the internal team and the partner. I look not only at differences of opinion, but also at differences in how the goal, scope and accountability are understood.

  4. 04 · Verification

    Assessment and verification

    Every finding is based on evidence. I separate facts, interpretations, assumptions and areas that can't be confirmed with the data available.

  5. 05 · Recommendation

    Recommendation

    I present the assessment, the key risks and the recommended option: keep, fix, renegotiate, consolidate, run a pitch or change partner.

  6. 06 · 90-day plan

    Action plan

    A plan for the first 90 days: decisions, owners, deadlines, metrics and how improvement will be monitored.

06 / What you receive

Not a supplier ranking. Decision-ready evidence.

Depending on the scope of the audit, you receive:

  • a short executive summary for the board
  • an independent assessment of the partner or the whole portfolio
  • a scorecard covering eight dimensions of the partnership
  • an analysis of results and how they are measured
  • a map of scopes, costs and responsibilities
  • an assessment of the team and capabilities
  • a list of gaps in the contract and governance
  • an assessment of ownership of data, accounts and documentation
  • a register of the key risks
  • a recommendation on the future of the relationship
  • an improvement plan for the first 90 days
  • the outline of a new scope of work
  • a brief or pitch criteria, if a change of partner is justified

Every significant finding receives one of these labels:

Confirmed
— there is sufficient data.
Likely
— the evidence is partial.
Unverified
— more information is needed.
Risk
— requires a decision or safeguard.

07 / Independence

I look at it from the perspective of the person accountable for the budget and the result.

For more than 20 years I managed marketing, digital, e-commerce, CRM, technology and transformations across many markets.

I have worked with creative, media and performance agencies, software houses, technology platforms, research firms and global and local suppliers.

I know both sides of the relationship: the board's expectations and the realities of the teams expected to deliver results.

As part of the audit:

  1. §1I don't sell media or licences
  2. §2I don't take commission for recommending a supplier
  3. §3I disclose potential conflicts of interest
  4. §4my fee doesn't depend on the current partner being dismissed
  5. §5I don't assume in advance that the company needs a pitch

My client is the company commissioning the audit. My responsibility is to support a sound decision, not justifying a thesis adopted in advance.

08 / Engagement models

From a quick check to a full restructuring of the supplier landscape

The simplest entry point

Partner Health Check

About 2 weeks

For a company that has doubts about one partner and needs a quick, independent assessment.

The scope covers the key documents, results, a few interviews and a recommendation for the board.

02

Full partner or portfolio audit

Usually 4–6 weeks

For a company that needs an in-depth assessment of results, costs, capabilities, the contract, data, governance and risk.

It can cover one key supplier or the whole landscape of agencies and technology.

03

Partnership reset, pitch or partner selection

For a company that wants to implement the recommendation after the audit.

I can help:

  • redesign the model of cooperation
  • prepare a new scope of work
  • agree KPIs and governance
  • hold a remedial conversation
  • support renegotiation
  • prepare and run a pitch
  • assess proposals and teams
  • plan a safe change of supplier

The final decision is always the client's.

09 / Who it's for

An audit makes sense if:

  • the board isn't getting a clear answer on the value of the relationship
  • the budget is significant, but how it is used remains opaque
  • the relationship has lasted several years without a formal evaluation
  • the company is considering a pitch or a contract renewal
  • partners have overlapping scopes
  • the technology hasn't delivered the expected adoption or impact
  • after an acquisition, the existing supplier landscape needs assessing
  • you need an independent view between the business, procurement and a specialist team
  • you want to improve the relationship before deciding to end it

An audit makes no sense if:

  • the decision to dismiss the partner has already been made and the report is only meant to justify it
  • the company won't share contracts, results or key people
  • the aim is to find the cheapest supplier without assessing value
  • there is nobody able to implement the recommendations once the audit ends

Frequently asked questions

Does the agency or supplier know about the audit?

That depends on the agreed model. A transparent audit, in which the partner can present data, context and its own view of the relationship, usually gives the most value. An earlier, confidential analysis on the client side is also possible.

Do you always recommend changing partner?

No. Changing supplier is costly and risky. Often the better solution is to improve the brief, KPIs, scope, team or governance.

Do you also assess the client organisation?

Yes. I assess the whole model of cooperation. A partner can't achieve good results with conflicting expectations, delayed decisions and the wrong KPIs on the client side.

Do you check the agency's prices and fees?

Yes, but I don't judge value by the rate alone. I analyse the fee structure, scope, team involvement, additional costs, commissions and the relationship between cost and result.

Is this a formal media or financial audit?

It may include an analysis of the media model, costs and transparency, but it doesn't replace a specialist financial or legal audit or a forensic media audit. If that scope is needed, an appropriate partner can be brought in.

Can you assess an AI provider?

Yes — in terms of business value, operating model, data, permissions, cost, scalability, auditability and governance. A formal legal assessment and technical security testing should be carried out by specialist firms.

Can you run the pitch afterwards?

Yes. But the audit and the pitch are kept separate. First we establish whether a change of partner is really needed. Only then do we design the selection process.

How do you protect confidential information?

The scope of access, how data is stored and who is entitled to see the results are agreed before the audit starts. Information about partners is not used outside the project.

Let's not assume the partner has to change.

Let's check what really needs to change: the partner, the scope, the contract, the way it's managed — or perhaps the expectations and decisions on the company's side.

Let's talk about an auditSee other ways of working together