CCI crackdown on major media agencies may spur advertisers’ shift to ‘hybrid in-housing’

The Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) ongoing investigation into some of the country’s largest advertising firms — including GroupM, Publicis, Madison, Dentsu, and IPG — has reignited concerns over transparency and prompted advertisers to reevaluate their media buying strategies. While some foresee a decisive shift toward in-house operations, others argue that agencies will remain indispensable, albeit with a more refined and accountable approach.

A growing number of companies are considering in-house media operations, driven by a mix of factors: speed, control, data ownership, and cost efficiency. Procter & Gamble, one of the world’s largest advertisers, has already moved a substantial portion of its media planning and buying in-house, citing improved efficiency, greater cost control, and stronger data oversight. The company reportedly saved $65 million in a single year, with nearly 30 percent of its $7 billion global media spend now managed internally.

But the push for in-house media management is not solely about cost savings. The recent regulatory scrutiny has amplified long-standing trust issues between brands and agencies, reinforcing the desire for more transparency.

“The shift toward in-housing has been visible for some time, but now it is accelerating,” said Syed Amjad Ali, group marketing head at Homefoil and former president at Mullen Lintas. “We have built an entire digital setup in-house, which has led to greater control and transparency.”

Meenakshi Menon, founder of GenSxty Tribe and Spatial Access, believes that large advertisers will increasingly adopt in-house models over the next decade, driven by a desire for greater transparency.

Krishnarao Buddha, former marketing executive at Parle Products, agrees that advertisers are becoming more vigilant. “There is a growing awareness of trust issues with agencies, and brands want to be more involved in negotiations,” he said. “That doesn’t mean agencies will disappear, but their role is evolving.”

Trust deficit and cautious approach

Despite the appeal of in-house operations, industry veterans caution that the transition is not without its challenges. Rahul Vengalil, chief executive and co-founder of tgthr, points out that in-housing becomes significantly more complex when it extends beyond digital and performance-based campaigns.

“It is an uphill task to internalize all media duties for a company,” he said. “Talent acquisition and innovation are major hurdles. Agencies bring intangible value – expertise, scale, and negotiation power – that brands often struggle to replicate in-house.”

History suggests that in-house media teams do not always succeed. Companies such as CavinKare experimented with in-house teams between 2016 and 2017 but ultimately shut them down. Similarly, Dabur’s in-house agency, Adbur, once handled direct negotiations with major broadcasters but has since ceased operations.

Sandeep Goyal, managing director, Rediffusion pointed out that no in-house agency has ever succeeded beyond a few years. Mudra was set up by Reliance for Vimal, and Seasons was almost in-house for Bombay Dyeing but failed for multiple reasons.

“Now most e-comm companies have in-house digital outfits. But they are not mainline brand agencies. Godrej, I believe, has set up something recently but let’s see if that succeeds,” he added.

Strategy and scrutiny

For many advertisers, agencies remain essential, particularly when it comes to large-scale media buys. Nisha Singhania, CEO and managing partner at Infectious Advertising, believes that while regulatory scrutiny may prompt brands to seek more oversight, the shift to in-house operations will likely be incremental rather than revolutionary.

“Media buying is a complex function where agencies still offer tremendous value,” Singhania said. “Their ability to negotiate bulk deals and provide industry-wide insights is difficult to replicate internally.”

Unlike in Western markets, where standardized rate cards and transparent pricing are the norm, India’s advertising landscape remains opaque, relying heavily on human negotiation. For many brands, moving media operations in-house would require hiring seasoned professionals capable of navigating these complexities – a challenge that could offset potential cost savings.

Experts predict the rise of hybrid models rather than a wholesale departure from agencies, . Andy Gilroy, Vice President for Asia-Pacific at Peach, sees a growing trend where brands demand greater transparency and accountability from agencies. He envisions two dominant models emerging: full in-housing, where companies absorb staffing and technology costs, and a hybrid approach, in which a dedicated agency team operates on-site, with costs structured through an agency model.

Technology is also playing a crucial role in enabling brands to take greater control over their media operations.

Rather than signaling an exodus from agencies, industry observers see a transformation in how brands and agencies collaborate. Companies such as P&G are not severing ties with agencies but are instead keeping critical decisions in-house while still relying on external partners for execution, innovation, and scale.

“Agencies, once seen as the sole gatekeepers of media buying, are now shifting into more of an advisory and performance-driven role,” said Sushant Sadamate, COO and co-founder of Buzzlab. “They are no longer just executing media plans; they are helping brands refine in-house capabilities, integrate technology, and navigate an increasingly complex digital landscape.” Brands will not necessarily abandon agencies. Instead they are working with them in smarter, more strategic ways.

Leave a comment Cancel reply