When clients become bad for business

There has been significant noise around Ogilvy’s decision to work with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on a recruitment advertising campaign, considering the southern border immigration situation and documented conditions. A transcript from an internal meeting between Ogilvy CEO John Seifert and senior leaders was leaked, and it is a fantastic insight into the ethical quagmire of working with clients with less than rosy reputations. A few thoughts from my side:

1. An issue can arise when there is a gap in perception caused by differences in stakeholder expectations and organizational realities. Bearing in mind the polarizing nature of the U.S. CBP situation, it should have been clear that working with this organization had the potential for Ogilvy to become embroiled by the negative halo.

2. Given the above and if deciding to move forward with the said client, it would have been essential to prepare for a negative response externally and internally. From an internal perspective, it seems employees became aware of the client relationship through the media, which gives the impression of limited transparency and secrecy. If you can’t face the red face test of being open with your employees, you shouldn’t take on the client.

3. A key argument by John Seifert appears to be that every client has baggage and history. That is true, but every company has a different value system, and choosing to work with them means you are associated with that value system.

4. One employee raises the point that working with the U.S. CBP through this project may provide the opportunity for the better good – i.e., to help hire the best people for an essential role. I believe this is a valid argument, and positioning around this topic would have been a lot better with this sentiment at its core.