A short walk from Soho to Southwark

In our work we have the privilege of speaking to the owners of marketing agencies all over the world every day. Those conversations offer a rare vantage point from which to sense the true pulse of the industry: how people are responding to the challenges we all face, what clients are asking for, how teams are coping, and what agency leaders really think about the future that lies ahead.

At the moment, that pulse feels uneasy.

Many owners quietly admit that they would like to step away from the business altogether. They survived COVID and the extraordinary disruption that followed, endured the relentless pressure of procurement, adapted to waves of new technology, and watched margins tighten year after year. For many of them, work that once felt exhilarating now feels draining, and a profession that once promised excitement and creative adventure has begun to feel more like a long, grinding obligation.

Perhaps the most telling observation of all is a simple one: it no longer feels like fun.

That thought was on my mind the other day as I walked past the WPP Campus—the sleek grey monoliths of One Southwark Bridge Road and Rose Court in London, where thousands of advertising professionals now spend their days inside immaculate glass buildings filled with identical chairs, identical meeting rooms and, inevitably, identical PowerPoint decks.

One cannot help but wonder whether identical thinking sometimes follows.

These buildings are more than just real estate; they are architectural symbols of an entire era in our industry. They reflect the age of the holding company and the industrialisation of creativity – a business model that elevated scale, automation and operational efficiency above the more intangible qualities of texture, personality and inspiration that once defined the craft.

It was striking to hear the new CEO of WPP, Cindy Rose, recently suggest that the organisation no longer sees itself as a holding company. Perhaps that shift in language reflects a deeper realisation shared quietly across the industry: that the model itself may have reached the end of its useful life, not only as a business structure but also as a cultural framework. It has struggled to serve clients as well as it once promised, and it has often served the people working inside it even less.

The world those buildings represent feels very far removed from the Soho where many of us first learned the business.

In those days advertising felt less like an industry and more like a slightly disreputable travelling circus that had somehow taken up permanent residence in a single, energetic square mile of central London.

When Soho was a village

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, Soho was not merely a district of London; it was the creative village of the global agency world, and quite possibly the most exciting place on earth to work in an agency.

Agencies occupied crooked Georgian townhouses whose staircases creaked with the footsteps of young creatives rushing between floors. Around them clustered production companies, edit suites, photographers, illustrators and publishers, all scattered through narrow streets that seemed permanently scented with espresso, cigarette smoke and the faint but unmistakable smell of possibility.

The geography of the place made creativity wonderfully accidental. You might leave the office with the beginnings of an idea and, within the space of an hour, find yourself returning with a director, a photographer and a much better version of the thought you had started with.

Lunch might unfold at Il Siciliano, with Aldo holding court at the centre of the room, while the evening would almost inevitably drift toward the Groucho Club, where the industry gathered to exchange stories, gossip and occasionally even ideas.

Between those moments you would inevitably encounter a planner, a copywriter, a film director and—quite possibly—a jazz musician, because Soho at that time existed at the intersection of advertising, film, music, publishing and art. The entire neighbourhood seemed to run on a combustible mixture of talent, mischief and mild chaos, and it was precisely that chaos that made it so fertile.

Creativity, after all, is rarely tidy. It thrives on collisions between personalities, arguments about ideas, bursts of laughter, flashes of ego and the occasional moment of glorious irrationality.

The industry was full of characters. Copywriters often resembled slightly dishevelled poets who had accidentally wandered into commerce, while art directors dressed like rock stars and producers possessed the miraculous ability to solve impossible problems in the time it took to order another round at the bar.

Today an HR department might describe many of those individuals as “challenging”, but at the time they were simply the people who made the work extraordinary.

On evenings like those you might hear the melancholy warmth of A Rainy Night in Soho drifting from a nearby bar, sung by The Pogues. The song somehow captured the spirit of the place: boisterous and imperfect, full of life in the moment yet already carrying the faintest hint of nostalgia.

We did not realise it then, of course, but we were living through what would later be remembered as a golden era.

The age of big risks

Part of what made that era so exhilarating was the way the business itself operated. Decisions were often made in rooms filled with strong opinions and stronger personalities, and ideas were approved not because they had passed through endless layers of procurement or been validated by predictive analytics, but because someone in the room believed in them deeply enough to fight for them.

An idea that made people laugh, or surprised them, or simply felt brave in a way that others had not yet attempted could quickly gather momentum. Agencies took risks—sometimes enormous ones—and when those risks succeeded they did so spectacularly.

Campaigns entered popular culture, agencies became famous almost overnight, and careers were launched on the strength of a single piece of work that captured the imagination of the public.

It was not always sensible, but it was undeniably exhilarating, and above all it was joyful.

The age of optimisation

Over time, however, the centre of gravity within the industry began to shift. Technology transformed the way agencies operated, data became an essential currency, procurement departments gained influence and efficiency gradually became the dominant language of the business.

In many respects these changes were inevitable and even necessary. The industry professionalised itself, then systemised its processes, and eventually began to optimise them with increasing sophistication.

Yet somewhere along that journey something subtle changed.

Creativity, which had once been the beating heart of the industry, increasingly began to feel like a department within it rather than the force that animated the whole enterprise. Even the architecture of the business seemed to reflect the shift, as the crooked townhouses of Soho gave way to vast corporate campuses that were functional, efficient and impressive, yet curiously devoid of the quirks and irregularities that once made the industry feel human.

In the process something of advertising’s personality—and perhaps even its soul—was quietly diminished.

The change calls to mind the eerily ordered vision of industrial progress imagined by Thomas Hardy, in which every aspect of life becomes rationalised and optimised until something essential to human vitality slowly disappears.

Finding our way back

And yet there are reasons to feel optimistic.

Creativity has never truly depended on buildings, holding companies or organisational charts. At its core it has always been about people—curious people, brave people, slightly eccentric people who take pleasure in surprising and delighting others through the ideas they bring into the world.

Those instincts have not disappeared. They have simply been buried beneath an accumulation of dashboards, processes and quarterly forecasts that have gradually obscured the simple pleasures that once drew so many talented individuals into the profession.

Which suggests that finding our way back to joy may not require a revolution at all, but rather a thoughtful rebalancing of priorities.

For those of us who own or owned agencies, that rebalancing might begin with a few simple commitments.

Five ways agency owners can find their way back to joy

1. Put ideas back at the centre of the business.
   Technology, data and process should support creativity rather than replace it. The agencies that thrive over the long term are rarely the most efficient; they are the ones whose ideas capture the imagination of clients and audiences alike.
2. Focus on agency culture and create space for characters.
   Agencies have always been built by brilliant misfits—people whose curiosity, eccentricity and stubbornness often made them difficult to manage but indispensable to the work. If we try to sand away every rough edge, we inevitably sand away the originality as well.
3. Encourage thoughtful risk again.
   The most memorable campaigns have rarely emerged from cautious thinking. They have come from moments when agencies and clients were willing to be brave together and trust an idea that felt slightly uncomfortable but undeniably exciting.
4. Rebuild real creative communities.
   Great ideas flourish when people collide in the real world—in conversations over lunch, in late-night debates, in the spontaneous encounters that once defined Soho. Creativity is still, at heart, a social activity.
5. Make the business fun again.
   Joy is not a frivolous luxury in a creative industry; it is one of its most powerful fuels. The best work in advertising has almost always been created by teams who were enjoying themselves and who believed, even briefly, that what they were doing mattered.

The Soho of the 1990s may never return in quite the same form.

But the spirit that made it special—the sense that creativity could appear anywhere when curious people collided—remains available to us.

And if we can rediscover even a small measure of that spirit, the next great era of agencies may not lie behind us at all.

It may simply be waiting for us to remember how to enjoy the work again.

*Written by Doug Baxter, Managing Partner · Agency Futures

La entrada Finding Our Way Back to Joy se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

I confess: I am 22 years old, I am an intern, and I still stumble over the word ‘communication’ like someone who walks into a huge house and cannot find the bathroom. That is why this text does not aim to teach anything; it only aims to voice the uncomfortable questions that arose in my mind.

One of the ideas that came up repeatedly in the conversation was this: from 2000 to 2025, infant mortality was cut in half. Not slightly. Not ‘a little’. In half. We could be witnessing the greatest decline in human history. Vaccines that cost $1.50. Injections that cost $2 and prevent women from bleeding to death during childbirth. Mosquito nets that prevent malaria from continuing to be a game of Russian roulette for millions of children.

And, even so, very few people talk about this.

This is where, as someone who is beginning to look at communication from the inside, something grates on me. Because if saving millions of lives isn’t a ‘sexy’ headline, what is? At what point did we decide that data only matters if it’s wrapped up in drama, conspiracy or apocalypse?

Lack of continuity

Gates mentioned something that struck me as rather shocking: last year, more children died than the year before. Not because a new disease had been discovered, but because international aid had been cut abruptly and haphazardly. Mosquito nets did not arrive. Nutritional supplements remained in warehouses. HIV drugs were wasted. People died. Not because of a lack of solutions, but because of a lack of continuity in the projects.

From the perspective of someone starting out in communications, this is almost surprising and ironic. The story is simple and brutal: give a little money, save millions; cut it, people die. Period. And yet, no one talks about this. It doesn’t make headlines, no posts go viral, it doesn’t provoke mass outrage.

Perhaps it is because it is too rational. Perhaps because there are no obvious villains nor plot twists that surprise us. Perhaps because accepting that the world improves with actions that are small, silent and constant is not very glamorous, nor exciting, nor worthy of a meme.

One of the most absurd moments of the talk was when Gates recounted how healthcare aid in Mozambique was cancelled because one province is called Gaza and someone, doing text searches, decided that this meant funding condoms for Hamas. The result: babies born with HIV because medication for pregnant mothers was cut off. If this were a television series, we would say that the script was implausible. But it was real. And it happened almost without anyone noticing.

Tell what does work well

Here appears the real elephant in the room of communication: we don’t know how to tell properly what does actually work. We know how to amplify mistakes, scandals and catastrophes, but we get bored by the long processes, the cumulative results, the slow improvements. We prefer collapse to progress because collapse has a narrative.

Gates repeatedly emphasised that the problem is not a lack of money, but perception. Many people believe that rich countries devote 10% of their budget to international aid. In reality, it is less than 1%. When this is explained to them, they readily agree to increase it to 2%. The problem is that no one explains it properly. Or no one tries hard enough.

As an intern, I find this particularly disturbing because it confronts me with a responsibility I didn’t know existed. Communicating is not just about making something understood, but deciding what deserves to be understood. And that’s where we fail miserably.

At the conference, he also spoke about things that sounded like science fiction: virtual doctors; tutors who know exactly where you are going wrong; African farmers receiving better advice than even the wealthiest farmer in Europe would have… All said with exasperating calm. Without expectation. Without epic background music. As if the future were boring paperwork.

And there lies the problem: what truly changes the world rarely seems spectacular at the time. It is quiet, slow, unphotogenic.

What really matters

Communication cannot just be about repeating facts. It has to provoke a little, make someone wonder why they didn’t know this before. Show the difference between what makes headlines and what really matters.

It is not about embellishing figures or selling cheap optimism. Gates made it clear that a pandemic worse than COVID is possible. But he also said that we have better tools than ever to deal with it. The two things coexist, and perhaps communicating well means not choosing just one.

I don’t intend to close any debate, nor am I in a position to do so. But one thing became clear to me: communication fails more because of how we tell things than because of what we know. And for someone just starting out, that’s a little scary… but also exciting.

If communication serves any purpose, it should make visible the everyday miracles that occur, even if they don’t get likes, even if they don’t go viral, even if they make people uncomfortable a little while someone smiles and thinks: “this should matter to me more than it does.”.

And perhaps, just perhaps, that is where the real work begins.

La entrada The value of communication beyond data se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

In recent years, and particularly intensely in 2025, we have talked a great deal about what communication brings to organisations. We have generated rivers of specialised content, we have asserted our role in forums, conferences and networks, and we have broadened the narrative about our strategic relevance. At the same time, the nomenclature has changed: we are no longer just communication directors; we are now responsible for corporate affairs.

The problem is not the change of name. The problem arises when it is not accompanied by a real change in the way of intervening in decisions. “How many words, how many nomenclatures for one same confusion”, as Cortázar said.

Trends, yes, but with demands

When discussing trends for 2026, the diagnosis is widely shared: greater fragmentation of audiences, conversational environments that are increasingly more scattered every day, increasing pressure on reputation, private spaces that are gaining ground to public spaces and an artificial intelligence that accelerates processes, lowers the cost of producing content and I am not very confident that it raises the bar for what is considered a differentiator.

All of this forms part of the context that communication professionals will be dealing with this year. But the real challenge is not so much identifying trends – we have been doing that for many years – as ensuring that they do not remain a rhetorical exercise, something we also know a lot about. Because the risk is clear: talking about change without changing anything.

I don’t know if we’re going round in circles a bit, but we keep repeating the idea (which is now so obvious) that communication cannot continue to be a reactive function. It cannot be limited to explaining decisions made in other areas or strategically glossing over what has already been decided. If we truly aspire to be a structural area, communication must be part of the core where priorities are defined, risks are assessed, and decisions that affect the business and its reputation are made.

Less noise, more meaning

Paradoxically, while we demand greater strategic relevance, the sector contributes to saturating the ecosystem. New blogs, podcasts, newsletters and opinion formats emerge almost daily. In part, this is logical: if no one is talking about you—or your brand—it seems as if you don’t exist, especially in an algorithm-mediated environment, now more than ever as AI tracks your GEO like a bloodhound.

But: are we providing clarity or simply more noise?

An abundance of content does not always translate into greater influence. Often, the opposite is true. In an oversaturated context, value lies not in saying more, but in saying what matters, when it matters, and from a position of judgement. This requires giving up certain comfortable platitudes in favour of more thoughtful positions that are more connected to the reality of organisations and less dependent on passing fads.

AI as a mirror, not as an excuse

The emergence (now normalised) of artificial intelligence is perhaps the most obvious challenge of 2026. Not so much because of what it automates – a lot, as we know – but because of what it reveals. AI writes, summarises, translates, proposes and multiplies production. What it does not do is answer the question for us: what is important?

Here, it is worth turning the usual discourse on its head. AI has not come to make us think less; it has come to make us think much more. This is according to Xavier Marcet, and it is worth remembering. We cannot lose the value of thinking. He adds another recommendation that is worth bearing in mind: “thinking is done alone; reasoning is done as a team“.

In communication, AI can accelerate the “what”; but the value will continue to lie in the “why” and the “what for”. And that requires thought.

Thinking is not a luxury nor an intellectual gesture. It is a professional responsibility. Especially in a context where technology is accelerating, the noise multiplies and the temptation to express an opinion without criterion is always a click away from.

If communication wants to occupy the place it claims to want to occupy, in 2026 it will have to demonstrate this less in storytelling and more in decision-making. Less in overexposure and more in influence. Less in fashion and more in craftsmanship. In short: take action.

It means thinking before speaking. And acting accordingly. Or, in other words: from saying to doing.

Happy 2026, the year of action.

La entrada From saying to doing: communication 2026, less speech and more impact se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

AI is hot on our heels, and although this has been a year of twinning, we will see if we have lost our bearings a little and allowed ourselves to be swallowed up. Here, too, we can set ourselves apart.

And the role seems to be starting to wake up. From Dircom to Corporate Affairs Management, because communication is in everything, because everything communicates.

This year has been a year of preparing for take-off. We have made progress, and in fact there has been a notable increase in reports, analyses and opinions on what is happening in our sector, well above other years. There are some reports that are worth rereading and that encourage us to continue rethinking. But the most important thing is to focus on the year that is about to begin.

We will discuss this when we return from our holidays, but we can give you some key points in advance.

3 keys to communication in 2026

It is clear that communication has taken a significant step forward this year by opening up a clear debate on the need to move from being merely a support function to becoming a fully-fledged participant in the business. Here it is summarised accurately by Joaquín Mouriz in this article in Ejecutivos magazine.

For comma, these will be some of the coordinates:

1. Less, but better.
   The saturation of messages and channels forces brands to fine-tune. Relevance will be more powerful than frequency. Prioritising is not giving up but rather choosing well.
2. Consistency as an asset.
   It may seem old-fashioned, but it is not. Reputation is no longer built solely on visibility. What you say, do and are must be consistent. It is worth emphasising this point; it is not new, but it is fundamental. Brands that fail to achieve this consistency will lose what little trust they have left.
3. Leadership editorial.
   Brands with ambition must behave like media outlets: they must have their own agenda, solid points of view and a distinctive approach. There are many opinions out there, but not so many criteria. Own media must defend their territory.

At comma, we believe that communication is not a final layer. It is structure. And that is why, in 2026, we will continue to work as we always have: with strategy, attention to detail and the ambition to make every message count.

We took advantage of the season and asked AI to sing us a song. Here is what it came up with. It’s just a little nod, a different way of wishing you happy holidays this year and hoping that 2026 will connect us more and better with who we really are.

Merry Christmas and here’s to another year full of good communication!

La entrada Close 2025. Open 2026. Communication matters. se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

This is not a logbook of stock market investments. For that, there are increasingly well-paid financial advisors. Nor is it a market oracle, God save Warren Buffett! La Vuelta al Mundo merely aims to provide a snapshot of the diplomatic, economic, commercial, stock market and, of course, geostrategic issues that dominate the global scene. At a crucial moment, when the multilateral order that has governed us since the end of the Cold War—the era carved out by the hammer blows between the US and the former USSR, which created a fragile but resistant armour that balanced the telluric forces of a planet under nuclear threat and the clash between two economic concepts: the free market and state interventionism—is under threat.

Many unknowns have accumulated in the complex equation that should lead to a harmonious world, with open trade relations and free capital flows. Most of these questions arose in the first quarter of this millennium, just after the end of a period of tense calm, with arms reduction, nuclear non-proliferation treaties and a boom in investment and trade globalisation that many analysts called The Great Geostrategic Siesta. This term was coined from an ingenious numerical game: from 9/11 (1989), the date on which the Berlin Wall and the bloc of planned economies fell, and 11/0 (2001), when the Twin Towers in New York collapsed, elevating the fight against international terrorism to the top of geopolitical agendas around the world.

The only combined foreign attack on American soil came close to bringing about the Clash of Civilisations predicted by Samuel P. Huntington, a political scientist and professor of political science at Eaton College with a British passport, who saw a confrontation between Western Catholics and Eastern Muslims as inevitable. Similarly, during those years, Francis Fukuyama’s theory in his famous essay The End of History and the Last Man, that liberal democracy would proclaim victory over authoritarian regimes at the end of the Cold War, had moments when it seemed that the battle between the heavyweights of world ideology was going to tip in favour of Washington’s allies.

Pulse to the markets in a world in turmoil

Twenty-five years into the 21st century and three major crises later—the dot-com crash of 2000, the credit crunch of 2008 and the Great Pandemic of 2020—and no shortage of industrial restructuring and productive dynamics put in place to mitigate collateral damage and usher in more sustained and prosperous economic cycles, geostrategic swords remain raised. Now the standoff is between the US and China, with Russia waiting in the wings as a leading nuclear power, and a cohort of emerging markets gaining international muscle. At almost the same pace, other key players of the past, such as the European partners in the EU, Japan and the United Kingdom, have lost their influence abroad.

This geopolitical framework has not prevented old conflicts, such as that in the Middle East, from continuing to be a particularly volatile hornet’s nest, or others from emerging, such as the war in Ukraine on the very borders of the EU. Nor has it prevented investors in the stock market from being carried away by impulses more or less surrounded by realpolitik. Gone is the New Economy that, at the beginning of the century, incorporated technologies into the production patterns of companies and countries. It was the era of the Internet, and the private tech sector was emerging without rules or internal structures capable of assimilating such a huge commitment to the future. All this created a stormy climate from a credit perspective. Personal loans (mortgages) and corporate guarantees led to (…) the nationalisation by the US Treasury of one of its flagship investment banks, Lehman Brothers, and the suspension of the Moscow Stock Exchange in the face of the free fall of its securities!!!

On 15 September 2008, the world seemed to be turned upside down. The country that championed the free market, which Fukuyama had elevated to the pinnacle of capitalism, was intervening in its banking system, while the nation that had pioneered economic planning – Russia, heir to the Soviet model – was defending its stock market tooth and nail.

This geostrategic game is what Around the world seeks to explain in each weekly meeting with its followers. To explain these seismic aftershocks on a planet in constant flux, with trends and phenomena that are more or less paranormal. To try to propose a regular game for those interested in following the trail of geopolitical, economic, investment and business shifts that are shaping a new system of international relations that will surely replace a process of globalisation that has driven the flow of goods, services and capital with virtually no borders.

A geostrategic race for global hegemony

This is a crucial moment in history. Trump 2.0 aims to bury multilateralism, undermine and even fragment globalisation, promoting, if necessary, the creation of two trading blocs, two spheres of power dominated by the US and China that will reconfigure value and supply chains, economic and trade diplomacy, and private business. All this is taking place amid a geostrategic race for global hegemony unparalleled since the Second World War. Beijing is challenging the supremacy of the dollar and its technological leadership, with AI as proof of origin of this innovative El Dorado.

For all these reasons, at Agencia comma we believe that Around the world, its review of Risk, which each week proposes a move that may differ substantially from that of the previous seven days, can serve as a road map in this famous game of geostrategy for taking investment positions in the global casino in which we live. Although this road map would also fulfil its purpose if it served, at least, to shape ideas and modulate consciences at a time when an ever-dangerous economic and ideological nationalism has emerged which, contrary to the collective subconscious that has prevailed in this first quarter of a century, leaves little trace of the triumph of liberal democracy that has ruled in the so-called Western bloc.

The return to protectionism, to the customs duties re-established in the interwar period almost a century ago, with the revival of reciprocal tariffs and a series of export bans and controls between the two superpowers of the moment, calls for a periodic review of events and rigorous analysis. This is especially true if, in the meantime, we have witnessed a stock market boom that has weathered geopolitical conflicts, with rampant global economic anaemia and corporate uncertainties about business AI projects and the dawn of an era of oil overproduction, but with emerging electricity demand to supply massive data centre facilities, the engine room of the intelligent algorithm that awaits us.

These are turbulent times. In the markets, where volatility has taken hold; in geopolitics, with intense tensions and rivalries; and in the economy, where business cycles have become endless, with no glimpse of their hidden dangers. In the case of high-income countries, excessive and risky indebtedness and runaway fiscal deficits.

Rocky roads towards technological leadership

But these are also complex times. Environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) criteria have transformed their acronyms. Now, the talk is of Energy, Security and Geopolitics, company boards are beginning to demand directors and executives with experience in these areas, and doubts have been raised as to whether the two acronyms can coexist peacefully. Energy neutrality and climate change are facing rocky roads. And values are adapting to multiple transitions: logistical, commercial and, above all, competitive. Without a precise compass, but with high doses of active resilience. Similarly, AI leaves unresolved dilemmas. Will nuclear energy return to solve the energy demand deficits of its data centres? Will its assets enjoy an eternal era of splendour? Will its robotic algorithms replace more or less skilled workers?

In all these areas, Around the world will seek to find analyses and points of view that clarify this combination of factors that will determine whether the future of humanity is written in terms of progress or destruction. Each week, it will report on geopolitical, economic and investment perspectives. Of course, it will keep an eye on the European roadmap, which must emerge from its ostracism if it wants to compete on equal terms with the US and China on a planet that is spinning too fast. That’s the thing about translational motion.

La entrada Around the world, a weekly game of ‘Risk’ at the capital’s Gran Casino se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

La realidad es que, de forma casi imperceptible, pero a una velocidad increíble, hemos ido dejando atrás el mundo analógico. Y quienes más rápido lo han hecho, hemos sido los de mi generación: la generación Z.

The hybrid generation: between two worlds

Those of us born between the late 1990s and early 2000s experienced a transition from analogue to digital. In a way, we are the first generation of digital natives (or at least their immediate predecessors), because we grew up alongside the development of today’s technology. Our childhood was marked by pencils, notebooks and filing cabinets, but our adolescence and adult life unfolded in a completely digital environment.

We learned to write with pencil and paper, to use school diaries, notebooks for each subject, filing cabinets full of folders… However, we soon discovered that these tools were only temporary. What seemed to be the norm was replaced by reminder apps. Google Drive became the new universal filing cabinet, and collaborative documents have gradually replaced the physical exchange of notes or writings.

Generation Z lives in a hybrid world, with one foot in each. We know what it was like to look up information in encyclopaedias or libraries, but we also know how to use ChatGPT to get any answer in seconds. We experience the excitement of developing photos from film rolls and at the same time manage our galleries on our mobile phones, including editing. These references not only marked our adolescence, they also map out the transition between one world and another. Each of them reflects how our routines, our consumption habits and, ultimately, our way of communicating have changed.

This duality makes us aware of what has been lost, but also of what we have gained. Perhaps that is why many young people are experiencing a partial return to analogue: they are going back to Kodak cameras, paper diaries and vinyl records. In my opinion, I don’t think this is empty nostalgia or a passing fad, but rather a search for balance between the digital and the ‘traditional’.

Communication in the age of immediacy

In this context, journalism and communication have also changed completely. Today, digital technology gives us immediate access to thousands of platforms, content and ways to connect with other people. All information is literally just a click away.

The problem is that this immediacy has become a constant bombardment that overwhelms us every day, especially on social media. Virality and the speed with which we consume content have left behind the printed newspaper and any tool that requires more than thirty seconds of our attention. They call it efficiency.

But that same speed brings with it risks: superficiality, misinformation, and the loss of messages in an endless ocean of stimuli. And we know it. My generation knows that it is very easy to be deceived, that social media is fertile ground for lies. At the same time, we also know that today people consume information in fifteen-second reels . That is why many creators have had to adapt to the consumption style of Gen Z and Alpha.

Paper, on the other hand, had something that digital still lacks: permanence and credibility. By leaving paper behind, we gained speed, but we sacrificed the pause for reflection that communication also needs.

Education in the age of AI

We must be aware that technological advances and the possible definitive replacement of paper are inevitable. That does not mean it is a negative thing, but it does mean accepting that we are most likely heading towards a 100% digital future.

In this scenario, the key is to adapt. As a society, we cannot allow part of the population to be left behind in this process. The digital divide is a real obstacle and poses a risk of exclusion for those who do not have sufficient access or training to function in the digital environment.

At the same time, we must not forget that new generations need to learn how to use technology responsibly. Artificial intelligence, for example, opens up a world of possibilities: it can help us to be more creative, more efficient and solve problems in unprecedented ways, but it can also pose risks if not used wisely. That is why it is essential to teach and educate in technology, encouraging critical thinking that allows us to take advantage of all the positive aspects without falling into the harmful ones.

Balance is difficult, but possible.

From my point of view, living with both analogue and digital technology has made my generation the best prepared to navigate any environment and adapt to any work situation.

In the end, growing up between analogue and digital has not been a disadvantage, but a gift. It gave us the opportunity to experience the best of both worlds: the calm of writing by hand and the adrenaline rush of endless scrolling scroll ; the wait for a developed film roll and the immediacy of an Instagram story. Perhaps that is why we value nuances so much, because we know what it means to lose them.

It’s not about choosing one or the other, but about finding the right balance. Knowing when speed is needed and when it’s worth taking a break. And, above all, remembering that behind all the screens, diaries and notebooks, there are always people, with our desire to communicate, to understand each other and to leave our mark.

La entrada Losing paper, embracing pixels. se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

What is it like to work in a communications agency as part of Generation Z? There is no single answer. Sometimes it is motivating, sometimes demanding. It combines enthusiasm, responsibility, constant learning and a great desire to do things well.

Those of us in this generation bring a different perspective: we grew up in a digital environment, we value purpose and we care about the values we work with.

We are looking for coherence, environments where you can contribute from the start and a professional culture that also takes people into account.

This article is a personal look at how we experience agency work, what drives us and why, despite the challenges, we remain committed to this profession.

Gen Z at work: what we look for, what we value

We have never completely separated the personal from the professional, because life has taught us that everything is mixed. We want to work in a meaningful way, with responsibility, but also with freedom. Teams where we can propose without fear, learn without having to prove it all the time and make mistakes without drama.

We are motivated by projects that add up, that bring more than notoriety. We care about how things are said, but also from where and for what purpose. We are not satisfied with “it has always been done this way”; we look for criteria, intention and impact.

In the communications sector, this translates into a more agile, more collaborative and more critical approach to ideas. If a campaign has no soul, it shows. And we notice it faster than anyone else.

Teleworking, flexibility and trust: that’s how we work best

We have normalised working from home, from a café or from another city. Not because we don’t want to see the team, but because we understand work as something that is organised, not watched over. The important thing is that it is done well, not from where it is done.

One of the keys to our work experience as a generation is flexibility. Being able to work from home or in a hybrid model helps us to concentrate, to organise ourselves better and to give our best. But it’s not just about convenience: it’s also about mutual trust and a more contemporary way of understanding teams.

Teleworking in communication works well when there is structure, effective digital tools and a collaborative culture. At comma, hybrid is not an exception, it is part of the DNA.

Although connecting in person multiplies

Not everything happens through a screen. Going back to the office when it’s time or meeting in a coworking space can unlock an idea that didn’t come up, spark a valuable conversation or simply remind you that there are people behind the email.

Shared spaces remain key to creating team culture, strengthening relationships and activating creativity. Sometimes, the most improvised is the most brilliant. And in an agency, that goes double.

What does Generation Z bring to corporate communication?

Generation Z brings a vision that is more connected to social, digital and new languages. We understand platforms well, we handle different formats and we know how to communicate with younger audiences, without the need to impost.

But we also value consistency: messages with substance, brands with purpose, communication that is built on honesty. What drives us is not just doing it right, but doing it with meaning.

A new way of communicating: more authentic, more connected.

We are not here to change everything, but to add a different way of looking. Closer, more critical, more aware of how brands relate to people.

At comma, that perspective is complemented by the experience of the senior team, and the result is work that is more current, more relevant and more aligned with the times we live in. And that is, in the end, what we strive for: that our work connects, inspires and adds value.

La entrada What it ‘s like to work in a communications agency as Gen Z se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

Reading helps to avoid spelling mistakes. Because those who read are less likely to mess up in the noble art of putting each letter where it belongs. Besides, there is no greater mark of ignorance than the obscene and obsessive insistence on not writing well and not wanting to do so. But good spelling also helps to express oneself better and to express oneself more, because those who consciously make spelling mistakes find puns that those who do not read are unaware of. A spelling mistake is not the same as a spelling error. Besides, the one who deliberately misspells is also the master of irony because he can write paragraphs like this one criticizing what he himself is guilty of. That hyphen is without tilde.

Reading helps to make life not so boring. It is what rosemary and thyme are to chicken and rice. Those who read are able to express themselves with greater opulence. Because it is not the same to say that you have a headache (as any mortal would say) as that “on my forehead, the drums of a formless torment thunder, and every thought is an arrow that vibrates between temple and temple”. Because the one who says the former passes through life without pain or glory and the latter will do so with pain and glory. And neither is it the same to say that something does not matter to you as “you make a lot of noise to me, my friend, but your business gives me less care than the shadow that chases the wind”. The first is vulgar and vulnerable to the passage of time, the second assures you a place, at least, in the Olympus of peculiarity.

Reading is useful to travel around, to Gulliver’s worlds, to Macondo or to Jandula without having to take a cheap plane at 6 a.m. on a Friday and stay in a speculative apartment where you wait for the time of the free tour to get to know the most hidden corners only known by the millions of tourists who visit every European capital. Books take us to other worlds, to other places where we can reflect on our own lives and learn other points of view that we can then apply to our real experiences when we close the book. I once met a psychiatrist who reminded me of the gypsy Melquíades from One Hundred Years of Solitude. He drew a parallel between the brain and a mansion and said that for every book we read, a new room opens up for us. But of course, even if it’s great to have a very big house with many rooms, the more rooms, the more places to maintain and the more chances you have of being robbed. So maybe it wouldn’t hurt to put an advertisement on the covers of the books, like the one for tobacco. Something that says “Reading seriously harms your health and that of those around you”, but it would be something very intense, it would do a disservice to reading and would perpetuate the stereotype that readers are a nuisance. I insist: stereotype, lest any of you think that I really mean it when I say that we are all a bunch of nincompoops.

So reading is like Swiss Army knives with knife, spoon and screwdriver that neither cuts, nor serves to eat nor unscrews, or like the Adidas 3-in-1 shower gels that we men buy that are gel, shampoo and toothpaste and do not clean the hair, nor the body, nor the mouth. They do everything, but they are useless. That’s right, reading is useless.

La entrada What is reading for? se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

Professional success is not just about technical knowledge or industry expertise. There is an essential part of performance that has to do with how we structure our days, what we decide to do first and how we anticipate the unexpected. How we manage our tasks says a lot about our ability to achieve results. In short, good planning is a strategic tool that boosts productivity and paves the way to success.

What is planning?

Planning is not simply making a to-do list. Planning is setting priorities, charting a clear path and making conscious decisions about how to spend our time. This practice allows us to focus our efforts on what really matters and reduce the feeling of constantly putting out fires.

Having a concrete and well-structured plan also helps to anticipate potential obstacles. It gives us room to react quickly, make more informed decisions and resolve situations strategically. More importantly, it allows us to stay focused, avoid unnecessary distractions and not fall into the trap of indefinitely postponing what we know we need to do. Solid planning is often the best antidote to procrastination.

Structure and clarity: keys to good planning

Structure is the foundation of all good planning. Having the workspace in order, both physically and digitally, speeds up access to information and avoids wasted time that, added together, can add up to hours over the course of the week. This basic organization is the starting point for working smoothly and without friction.

In addition, having the right tools to facilitate task management, assignment of responsibilities and project tracking contributes to more effective team coordination. But beyond the tools, what is really decisive is knowing how to prioritize. Identifying what is a priority, what can wait and how time should be distributed allows you to work with a clear perspective. In a communications agency, for example, having client materials well organized and accessible is not a minor detail: it is a question of operational efficiency and quality of delivery.

How good planning optimizes your work

When planning is done with a clear head, the work is aligned with the objectives and the teams are organized in a meaningful way. Duplications are avoided, errors are minimized and each professional knows what to do and when to do it. This order allows a better distribution of the workload, avoiding unnecessary saturation and ensuring that the most critical tasks receive the attention and time they require.

In addition, planning ahead allows us to identify the times of the day when we are most productive and make the most of them. It is not a matter of filling agendas, but of designing days that allow us to move forward efficiently. Reserving time in the day for highly concentrated tasks, alternating them with spaces for meetings or reviews, and leaving room for unforeseen events is a smart way to balance intensity and sustainability. A well-thought-out schedule not only improves results, it also improves the work experience.

Maintaining planning for unforeseen events

Planning well does not mean doing everything to the millimeter, but leaving room for the unexpected. Because if there is one thing that is certain in any professional environment, it is that unforeseen events will arise that will force us to implement certain changes. That is why good planning must include room for maneuver. That flexibility is what allows us to adapt when plans deviate, without the team losing pace or motivation.

In our industry, for example, it is not uncommon for a client to request a last-minute modification to a campaign or launch. If you have planned well from the beginning, reorganizing tasks, reallocating resources or changing deadlines can be done nimbly, without creating tensions or jeopardizing the backlog. The key is to build a system that is solid, but not rigid.

Great benefits for mental health and well-being

Beyond productivity, good planning has a direct impact on well-being. When tasks are clear and orderly, the stress level decreases and the mental load is lightened. Knowing what you have to do, when and how, allows you to work with greater serenity and focus. This feeling of control has a positive influence on motivation and the confidence with which you face each day.

In addition, being well organized allows you to preserve personal time, which is essential to maintain a healthy work-life balance. It’s not just about performing better, it’s about living better. And in an environment like communication, where rhythms are demanding and deadlines are tight, this balance becomes a strategic asset.

Good planning, the key to efficient and satisfactory work

Planning and organizing is not an operational issue, it is a philosophy. It is a way of understanding work from the respect for one’s own time and that of others, from the commitment to results and from the awareness that the urgent should not overshadow the important.

Investing time in planning well not only improves processes and raises the quality of work, but also strengthens the team, reduces daily pressure and allows us to enjoy what we do more. It is an investment with a guaranteed return: in efficiency, well-being and satisfaction.

La entrada The importance of good planning se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

We did it in 2016, in 2024, in…, but, whatever, nothing has changed. Time passes, but our stubbornness persists.

Between the content we write in this blog, the chats we have with industry professionals in our podcast, the interactions in our social networks… we roll over and over again in a circle, in no case virtuous, of constant complaining, of starting over and of serious concern on the part of professionals who advise companies strategically.

But, in order to be more specific if possible, today I only want to focus on two aspects of this choking issue that I consider fundamental and for which I raise, once again, my voice in favor of achieving, hopefully, an institutional agreement, although I would be satisfied with a serious, professional and resounding debate in the sector to put an end, once and for all, to both absurd practices.

Budgets and competition

These two aspects are very simple: available budget and convened agencies.

We are not moving forward.

The manual of good practices between companies and agencies was presented years ago by DIRCOM and ADC (so much time has passed that even the name of the Association of Communication Agencies has changed), a manual that was ratified years later. Curiously, in most cases, the ‘recommendations’ of this manual are ignored by the convening companies that turn a deaf ear despite being part of the association of signatories, and by agencies that, despite playing with disadvantage, we are not able to refuse to play the game with the rigged rules.

Let’s be serious and stop cheating ourselves. There is an urgent need for a real, resounding and unbreakable agreement between the organizations that represent communication directors, communication agencies, non-associated communication departments and consulting firms that are not members of the Association to put an end to the senselessness of these blind competitions.

When someone is going to purchase a product or service, he knows what resources he has and, therefore, what he can aspire to. Each one of us knows what needs we need to cover and how much we can ask for it. It occurs to me that if you want to go on a cruise you know how much budget you have to do it and we never expect the cruise companies to be satisfied by paying them the price of a large cruise for an exclusive one. Nor do we go to a Michelin restaurant expecting them to charge us for a weekly menu, so why do we expect that, knowing the budget we have and the needs we have, an auction market is created for the highest bidder?

Communication is not about offers or flea markets. It is a serious matter. You are playing with your credibility, your reputation, your brand perception and your personal brand. Not everything counts and everything communicates.

Simple task

This repetitive proposal is really simple to apply. All communications departments know what budgets they have, and everyone knows who they have called for the competition. Sensible transparency is an essential part of our work, so why not apply it ourselves?

When we go to tenders, we always ask for budget and competence. Barely 1% usually give us a positive answer and, although we appeal to the aforementioned Manual of Good Practices, it is useless. Ninety percent do not know it, and although we send it to them, they do not take it into consideration. “We can’t give you that information” is the general response. Even when we encourage them to give our name to the other participants… No way.

The daily modus operandi is quite absurd because, 99% of the time, agencies are asked to adjust the budget. Wouldn’t it be easier, faster and more realistic to do it the other way around?

Personally I think it is much more creative to propose what to do with what you have, than to propose to do great things without knowing if such things are feasible or not. Paper holds everything.

Dircom-ADC Agreement

Comrades. The Manual of Good Practices has become too small or too big for us if we ignore it so much.

A serious, deep, professional and definitive debate is urgently needed among us to improve the state of communication consultancy in Spain. We must move forward, progress, improve and become much more united than we are now.

But there is more. There is professionalism, which we sometimes forget. This is about fellow professionals, colleagues, about the fact that today you are here, but tomorrow, for sure, the wheel will turn and, who knows… That we have to form a profession of height, respect, shared knowledge and good practices. Let’s think about whether we are not partly responsible for not advancing as other specializations that are gaining ground are doing.

La entrada Urgent need for a sector agreement between companies and agencies se publicó primero en Agencia comma.