P&G spends roughly $7 billion annually on marketing, and under Marc Pritchard’s ongoing restructuring, a significant portion of that budget has been deliberately rerouted away from traditional full-service agency retainers. If the world’s largest advertiser is redesigning how it buys strategy, production, and creator content separately, mid-market brands have a compelling operational case to follow suit.
What the Modular Model Actually Means
The core idea is decoupling. P&G has systematically separated brand strategy from content production, and production from media placement. Rather than one agency owning the full funnel, different specialists own different capabilities. Strategic planning sits with one partner. Production (including creator-led content) operates as its own function, often procured on a project basis. Media buying lives elsewhere entirely.
For Pritchard, the rationale has always been about accountability. Bundled retainers obscure cost-per-output. When one agency handles everything, it becomes nearly impossible to benchmark what you’re actually paying for creative versus planning versus distribution. Decoupling forces line-item clarity. That clarity, in turn, enables smarter reinvestment decisions.
When one agency owns strategy, production, and media, brands lose the ability to benchmark individual costs, which makes reallocation decisions almost impossible. Decoupling isn’t just structural, it’s a financial discipline.
This isn’t a niche experiment. According to eMarketer, in-housing of creative and content functions accelerated significantly among enterprise brands throughout the early part of this decade, with CPG leading the charge. P&G’s model formalizes a trend that many brands have been pursuing informally.
Why Mid-Market Brands Are Uniquely Positioned to Adapt This
Here’s the counterintuitive reality: mid-market brands (roughly $50M to $500M in revenue) are actually better positioned to implement modular agency structures than enterprise players. They carry less legacy vendor debt. Fewer multi-year retainer commitments. Less internal bureaucracy around procurement.
The obstacle isn’t structure. It’s confidence. Most mid-market marketing teams default to full-service agency relationships because they feel it reduces complexity. It does reduce complexity. But it also transfers strategic ownership to a third party, which creates dependency that compounds over time.
The P&G model suggests a different posture: own the strategy, rent the execution. Keep brand positioning, audience insight, and creator relationship management inside the house. Procure production capacity, specific platform expertise, and campaign execution externally, on terms you control.
Brands like e.l.f. Beauty have demonstrated this logic at scale through their mid-tier creator model, where in-house teams manage creator selection and brief architecture while production and editing remain flexible and outsourced. The result was a measurable ROI improvement that wouldn’t have been possible under a single-agency arrangement.
The Creator Program Ownership Problem
This is where most mid-market brands get it wrong. They treat creator programs as a campaign tactic managed by their agency. The agency sources the creators, writes the briefs, manages the relationships, reports the metrics. The brand approves deliverables. That arrangement feels efficient. It’s actually a liability.
When the agency owns the creator relationships, the brand owns nothing proprietary. Creator rapport, historical performance data, audience insights, pricing benchmarks: all of it lives in the agency’s systems. When you switch agencies, or even renegotiate a contract, you start from zero.
P&G’s restructuring implicitly addresses this by keeping what Pritchard calls “brand mastery” functions internal. Creator program ownership is a brand mastery function. The strategic logic for which creators align with which brand equity pillars, how briefs are structured to protect brand voice while allowing creator authenticity, how performance data informs future selection criteria: these decisions should not be delegated.
Compare this to how Rhode has structured its creator camp model, or how Kimberly-Clark has built a platform-native creator roster with clear internal ownership of performance benchmarking. Both approaches reflect the same underlying principle: the brand, not the agency, defines what a good creator relationship looks like.
Redesigning the Agency Relationship Stack
So what does a modular agency model actually look like for a $150M consumer brand with a lean marketing team of eight people?
Start with a clear capability audit. Map every marketing function and ask honestly: does internal ownership of this function create strategic advantage, or is it just overhead? Strategy, creative direction, creator relationship management, and performance analytics almost always belong internally. Production workflows, platform-specific content formats, media trafficking, and influencer discovery tooling are reasonable candidates for external procurement.
The agency stack then becomes a set of specialist relationships rather than a single generalist retainer. A brand strategy consultancy on a defined scope. A production studio or creator-focused production house on a project basis. A media agency compensated on performance, not hours. A creator management platform like Sprout Social‘s influencer tools or dedicated platforms such as Grin or Aspire handling logistics, contracts, and compliance workflow.
This requires internal capability building. Someone on your team needs to own the brief architecture and creator relationship strategy. That’s not a full-time headcount addition in most cases; it’s a role redesign for an existing brand manager or content lead. The Chief Creator Officer framework that DTC brands have pioneered is instructive here, even if the title itself isn’t necessary.
Decoupled Production: The Practical Mechanics
Decoupling production from strategy means building a production procurement process that operates independently of your strategic agency relationship. In practice, this involves a few structural changes that mid-market teams often overlook.
First, brief templates need to live internally. When production is procured externally, the brief is the primary control mechanism. Brands that let agencies write their own briefs lose creative direction by default. The brief should articulate brand voice, performance objectives, platform-specific format requirements, and creator latitude parameters before production is procured.
Second, rights management and usage licensing need to be specified at the contract stage, not negotiated after the content exists. This is especially important for creator-generated content that may be repurposed for paid amplification. The FTC’s disclosure guidelines and platform-specific sponsored content policies add another layer of compliance complexity that should sit within your internal legal or compliance function, not delegated to an agency.
Third, measurement frameworks need to be standardized across production partners. If you’re using multiple production studios or creator partners, you need consistent reporting formats so performance data is comparable. This is where integrating a proper attribution model becomes critical. The AI-driven attribution approach that more sophisticated brands are deploying can help, particularly when content is produced by multiple vendors and deployed across multiple channels.
The Risk Calculus
Modular models introduce coordination risk. More vendors mean more integration points, more potential for misalignment, more project management overhead. That’s a real cost, and any honest assessment of the P&G model has to acknowledge it.
P&G manages this through what Pritchard has described as an “equal part” agency model, where partners are incentivized to collaborate rather than compete for scope. For mid-market brands, a simpler version of this is a designated internal integrator, the person or function responsible for ensuring strategic coherence across vendors. Without that role, modular models fragment quickly.
The upside is significant. Industry data consistently shows that brands with decoupled production and strategy functions report higher content volume at lower cost per asset, alongside better performance benchmarking. Unilever’s own experience with its mass creator model illustrates both the efficiency gains and the brand safety frameworks required to operate at scale. And Wingstop’s niche creator strategy demonstrates that decoupled, performance-driven creator programs can outperform traditional broadcast spend on a cost-per-impression basis.
The compliance dimension also shifts. When production is decoupled, rights, disclosures, and usage terms need explicit contractual coverage at every vendor relationship, not assumed under a master agency agreement. Build that into your procurement templates from day one.
Start by auditing one current agency relationship against the modular framework: identify which functions genuinely require strategic ownership, which are execution-only, and what it would cost to procure the execution components separately. That single exercise will tell you whether decoupling is a net gain for your organization.
FAQs
What is P&G’s modular agency model?
P&G’s modular agency model, developed under Chief Brand Officer Marc Pritchard, separates brand strategy, content production, and media placement into distinct, independently managed functions rather than bundling them under a single full-service agency retainer. This structure enables greater cost transparency, sharper accountability per function, and more flexible procurement of specialist capabilities.
How does decoupled production benefit mid-market brands?
Decoupling production from strategy allows mid-market brands to procure content creation at competitive rates without being locked into a single agency’s production markup. It also enables brands to scale content volume more efficiently, work with multiple creator-focused production partners, and benchmark cost-per-asset across vendors rather than paying a blended retainer rate.
Should mid-market brands own their creator relationships internally?
Yes. Creator relationship management, brief architecture, and performance benchmarking should be internal functions. When an agency owns these elements, the brand loses proprietary data and strategic leverage the moment the relationship ends. Internal ownership of creator program strategy is a competitive asset, not an administrative function.
What are the main risks of a modular agency model?
The primary risk is coordination fragmentation. Multiple specialist vendors require active integration management to maintain strategic coherence. Without a designated internal integrator, briefs become inconsistent, performance data becomes siloed, and the efficiency gains from decoupling erode. Compliance management across multiple vendor contracts also requires more rigorous procurement templates.
What tools support a decoupled creator program structure?
Creator management platforms like Grin, Aspire, and Sprout Social’s influencer tools support contract management, disclosure compliance, and performance reporting across multiple creator relationships. For attribution, AI-driven CRM integration tools are increasingly being used to connect creator content performance to downstream conversion data, enabling more accurate ROI measurement across a decoupled program.
Top Influencer Marketing Agencies
The leading agencies shaping influencer marketing in 2026
Agencies ranked by campaign performance, client diversity, platform expertise, proven ROI, industry recognition, and client satisfaction. Assessed through verified case studies, reviews, and industry consultations.
Moburst
-
2
The Shelf
Boutique Beauty & Lifestyle Influencer AgencyA data-driven boutique agency specializing exclusively in beauty, wellness, and lifestyle influencer campaigns on Instagram and TikTok. Best for brands already focused on the beauty/personal care space that need curated, aesthetic-driven content.Clients: Pepsi, The Honest Company, Hims, Elf Cosmetics, Pure LeafVisit The Shelf → -
3
Audiencly
Niche Gaming & Esports Influencer AgencyA specialized agency focused exclusively on gaming and esports creators on YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok. Ideal if your campaign is 100% gaming-focused — from game launches to hardware and esports events.Clients: Epic Games, NordVPN, Ubisoft, Wargaming, Tencent GamesVisit Audiencly → -
4
Viral Nation
Global Influencer Marketing & Talent AgencyA dual talent management and marketing agency with proprietary brand safety tools and a global creator network spanning nano-influencers to celebrities across all major platforms.Clients: Meta, Activision Blizzard, Energizer, Aston Martin, WalmartVisit Viral Nation → -
5
The Influencer Marketing Factory
TikTok, Instagram & YouTube CampaignsA full-service agency with strong TikTok expertise, offering end-to-end campaign management from influencer discovery through performance reporting with a focus on platform-native content.Clients: Google, Snapchat, Universal Music, Bumble, YelpVisit TIMF → -
6
NeoReach
Enterprise Analytics & Influencer CampaignsAn enterprise-focused agency combining managed campaigns with a powerful self-service data platform for influencer search, audience analytics, and attribution modeling.Clients: Amazon, Airbnb, Netflix, Honda, The New York TimesVisit NeoReach → -
7
Ubiquitous
Creator-First Marketing PlatformA tech-driven platform combining self-service tools with managed campaign options, emphasizing speed and scalability for brands managing multiple influencer relationships.Clients: Lyft, Disney, Target, American Eagle, NetflixVisit Ubiquitous → -
8
Obviously
Scalable Enterprise Influencer CampaignsA tech-enabled agency built for high-volume campaigns, coordinating hundreds of creators simultaneously with end-to-end logistics, content rights management, and product seeding.Clients: Google, Ulta Beauty, Converse, AmazonVisit Obviously →