Thanks for the thought provoking post. It sounds like you are implying both orthodox agencies and digital agencies will both move closer to the center? Perhaps as "digital" is taken more seriously by Marketing Directors, the agencies that server them will more accurately reflect the client priorities. Also, hopefully, Marketing Directors will see "digital" for what it is at it's very core – another channel to interact with potential customers on behalf of their clients – each digital channel with it's own nuances, but still a channel.

Good short succinct post.

I disagree that traditional agencies have all of a sudden got the digital chops to compete. You're implying that in a span of 2 years traditional agencies have acquired the sum knowledge of people that have been in the digital industry for over 10. It's not possible, and its not reality. Simply hiring a few programmers into a traditional agency will not win the race. You have to come up in digital, you have to live and breathe it. You'd be trying to retrofit a few digital folks into an old school broken model.

Take the reverse scenario and see if it works in your theory: A digital agency hires a brand manager and a print designer, and all of a sudden is a competitive branding/identity shop? I'm sure when seen in the opposite light you see its lunacy.

Not to be petulant, but seeing as digital has been around in some form for two or three decades isn't it just as orthodox as anything else? Hasn't digital quickly formed its own set of rather traditional rules around it's existence? Some stand-alone shops are exceptional standouts, but most aren't.

In an era of infinite channel opportunities but finite budgets isn't the greatest need for clients how to determine how all their media works together and where to best invest for a given brand/product/promotion? Guidance from people who can do it honestly, agnostically and effectively?

I think that a wider variety of people are being hired, as those 'traditional' shops still tend to have larger budgets for hiring and training.

Because of this, the model where the source of competitive advantage of a 'neutral'( or channel agnostic, or whatever you want to call it) shop is being eroded. Hopefully, the days of ad agencies only being interested in TV/the greatest margin they can squeeze is also dying off.

All being well, this bollocks about 'digital natives' will go with it. As Brett says, digital has been around for a fair old time. To suggest ad agencies have just had their heads in the sand for these many years is a bit of a nonsense.

The digital vs traditional distinction is meaningless. The ability to integrate is everything.

Yes i agree with it.

I think traditional agencies will be in for a very big and unpleasant surprise if they choose to "roll the digital scope into their responsibilities for a modest increase in revenues"! As everybody who's running a digital agency knows, creating outstanding digital work usually entails much more time and many more specialized functions than creating advertising campaigns.

In an ad agency you can basically do great ads by putting together a good account director or planner with a couple of skilled creatives. The finalization of ideas can always be outsourced. Not so in the digital space where creation of truly great work requires the insights of many more specialized people: information architects, front- and backend developers, system architects, motion graphic artists, visual designers, technical project managers, digital media planners, test, tracking and optimization experts...just to name some of the people who you would be well advised to seek out if you wish to achieve and extend your digital presence beyond the occastional viral film, facebook app, banner ad or campaign site.

To run a profitable and smooth business when you have so many cross-functional teams and specialists working together either in-house or via partnerships, requires years and years of practice and experience as well as processes that don't even exist in the traditional agencies today. Ask any managing director of a digital agency that delivers digital work across the board and from ideation to completion, and he will tell you of scoping issues and write-offs in a magnitude that is not even known to ad agencies. When you marry an ad agency with a tech company, you get a whole new breed of business model that only very few has learned to command - and even they are still on the first part of the learning curve.

I think it's incredibly arrogant to suggest that just because you're a smart ad agency that has pulled off some very clever media stunts or happenings like T-Mobile, that you then all of a sudden can master and merge a new business model into a very old one.

Hope you don't mind me saying Richard, but it has been a while since you wrote such shortsighted old tosh. You petty digs at 'digital' make it sound like you see it all like a pre-school playground where the big boys rule. Nonsense. I take the Darwinian view on this, it will the most adaptable to change that survive. You'd better hope that your 'confident prediction' about ad agencies getting with the programme heads true, from my experience I deeply suspect this will not be the case!