Pros
Decent client list, although significant churn in the Senior Team churn increasingly makes client retention a challenge
Cons
It’s hard to envisage many organisations where dissatisfaction is similarly widespread across each level of staff. Junior members are utilised to the extent that weekly in-house psychologist sessions are offered. Directors are frustrated by the non-collaborative culture (new business economics are structured this way) and the subjective path to partnership. Partners bemoan the significant multiple of the Senior Partner’s salary to the remainder of the partnership – although this is a Partnership in name only with the Senior Partner having majority share. That aside there are numerous red flags in this business: 1) Reputation and visibility of the business remains with the Founder and there is no clear succession plan – a new Managing Partner has recently been brought in but there is a poor track record of success here; 2) The offering is not integrated (at a time when clients want end-to-end advice from fewer providers) – it is Financial PR, compared to most peers who offer this + Corporate + Consumer + Digital. Frequent mention is made internally of grey hairs at the Board table and “Top Right” advice, although genuinely skilled PR advisors are limited internally in number and time-served, with many Partners being promoted early in their careers to raise working capital for the business; 3) The business is not structurally profitable (ex-project income) and, while not uncommon for PR agencies, the correlation between retained income and overheads is heading the wrong way; 4) The business is not scalable and lacks the international presence of most of its peers. Solving this is difficult as there is no balance sheet or parent to tap for growth capital and the company is privately held. Being acquired by a larger group is an obvious way out of the hole, but the founder’s fantastical valuation aspirations and buying an unenviable culture remain insurmountable issues.