Time well spent? Two assumptions agencies might need to rethink

I’ve worked in agencies for most of my career. I’ve seen the best of what can happen when sharp minds come together in the same room. But I’ve also seen hours disappear without much to show for them – and learned the hard way that time spent doesn’t always equal value created.

Since launching my own consultancy, I’ve been reflecting on two things we often take for granted in agency life. Both are well-meaning. Both are rooted in tradition. And both are starting to show their limits.

They are:

• That people learn by osmosis

• And that the office is the default space for all work

Neither is wrong. But both deserve a closer look.

Learning by osmosis – are we expecting too much from proximity?

A few days ago, I ran a poll asking what people in PR and comms believe we actually learn by osmosis in agencies. The top answer was client management (with 55% of the vote) – not strategy (13%), not creative development (13%), not writing (6%).

That result stuck with me.

While the idea of learning through exposure and observation has its place, it’s not the same as having real guidance, structure or feedback. Osmosis might help you pick up surface-level behaviours. But when it comes to deeper skills like strategic thinking, writing craft or leading teams, relying on passive learning alone isn’t just unreliable – it’s a gamble.

And it assumes something else too: that the people around you were taught well enough to pass it on. That the culture is clear enough to absorb. That someone is modelling what good looks like.

That’s a lot to assume – especially when time is tight, roles are overloaded, and everyone’s just trying to get through the day.

None of this is an argument against learning from others. It’s a case for being more intentional about how people are supported, developed and shown what good actually looks like – beyond the hope that they’ll pick it up along the way.

The office isn’t broken – but it’s not the answer to everything

The second assumption is about where work gets done.

I’ve always loved the buzz of being in a good agency – the pace, the creativity, the shorthand you build with the people around you. But that doesn’t mean the office is the best place for all types of work. It isn’t.

Some roles thrive in it. Others don’t. Some tasks benefit from collaboration. Others need calm, focus and freedom from interruption.

Since going solo, the two things I’m asked to do most are develop strategies and write. Neither has ever required me to be in an office. In fact, when clients bring me in as an external consultant, they’re not paying for proximity – they’re paying for focus. And they know my time is better spent thinking than collaborating for the sake of it.

This isn’t a rejection of the office – it’s a call for more thoughtful use of time and space. Not just returning to old defaults, but designing better conditions for the kind of work we say we value.

The 5pm meeting that said it all

A few years ago, I was called into a 5pm meeting on a Friday with four other senior directors. We were there to discuss a film treatment for a client.

We talked for half an hour. Nothing was really happening. Eventually, I asked what the objective of the meeting actually was.

“We need someone to write the treatment,” came the answer.

In my head, I did the maths: five people, half an hour – two and a half hours of collective agency time to reach one simple sentence. Time I could have spent just getting the work done.

So I said I’d leave the room and write it. Which I did.

Later, someone described that response as “refreshing”.

That wasn’t the aim. And I didn’t agree. I just hate wasted time.

The real question – are we creating the right conditions for great work?

Agencies are full of smart people doing fast, demanding, often brilliant work. But the pressure to deliver can sometimes crowd out the space needed to think, reflect and develop.

If we want better strategy, better creative, better people – we have to think harder about how that actually happens.

• What’s absorbed and what’s ignored?

• What needs to be modelled, and what needs to be taught?

• What kind of work happens best in the room – and what kind happens best outside it?

These aren’t questions with one answer. But they’re worth asking.

Because time well spent doesn’t always look like time well filled.

It’s also the kind of thing I help with – from sharper brand strategy to clearer messaging and confidence-building in roles that need more than just being in the room. If that sounds useful, feel free to get in touch.