What type of leadership and attitude do we need to innovate in digital advertising and ad tech?
We work in a highly polarized industry where our methods of tackling fraud and providing transparency are shaped by conflicting and self-interested business models. And the industry leaders who loudly and publicly advocate for their interests seem to be winning the day.
When The Trade Desk CEO Jeff Green labeled all SSPs as “resellers” in October, outrage ensued, and the industry response was telling. But not in the way one would hope.
Of multiple executives asked to comment on this seismic shift, most hid behind anonymity, signaling a troubling lack of boldness.
It’s a pattern we’ve seen play out countless times. Senior executives who position themselves as industry leaders on stage, in podcasts and on social media consistently retreat to anonymity when their views might challenge powerful platforms. This timidity only serves the big platforms.
Favoring the bold
Index Exchange’s Andrew Casale demonstrated what actual industry leadership looks like by publicly calling The Trade Desk’s characterization of SSPs “ignorant.” His willingness to attach his name to a controversial position proves that executives can speak openly without inviting commercial catastrophe.
Meanwhile, lower-level ad tech execs and even rank-and-file employees should also be willing to speak up on behalf of their interests. If I were a CEO and my employees were scared to defend our business model publicly, even if only due to fear of jeopardizing their future employability by The Trade Desk and other buy-side companies, I would seriously question their ability to do their job.
But leaders need to set the example. This is an industry where supposed leaders consistently choose self-preservation over transparency. Every anonymous quote about The Trade Desk’s market power is an admission that we’ve created a system where many assume that speaking the truth requires invisibility.
The productive power of conflict
For proof of the power of standing up for your own interests, consider the healthy shake to the industry that came from The Trade Desk labeling SSPs as resellers.
The Trade Desk deserves credit for forcing this conversation. To be clear, TTD’s broad-brush approach of labeling all SSPs as intermediaries that don’t add much value to the supply chain is only partially accurate in substance. But it has created exactly the kind of productive industry introspection we need. By taking such a strong stance, TTD made neutrality uncomfortable and forced legitimate players to step forward with evidence of their value.
This is creative destruction in action: Old structures must be dismantled for more efficient ones to emerge. The Trade Desk’s extremism on the topic of reselling created pressure; public responses from cleaned-up SSPs provided a necessary correction.
You don’t have to fully agree with TTD’s stance to see its impact. But, while we can all agree that not all DSPs and SSPs are the same, TTD forced us to confront what separates the good actors from the bad.
Index Exchange banned resellers and MFAs from its platform, proving that not all SSPs are equal. Without executives like Casale willing to make this distinction publicly, TTD’s overreach on its SSP criticisms would go unchallenged, and the industry would lose important nuance.
Why disruption drives innovation
Disruption always looks threatening to incumbents, but it compels adaptation and new business models.
By undermining the role of SSPs as interchangeable programmatic pipes, The Trade Desk forced them to own the unique value they can bring. But TTD’s public stance also forced the company to be ready to reply to the same question about what value it brings as a DSP.
Wrapped up in the back-and-forth prompted by TTD is the overall market pressure toward efficiency and innovation—the SSPs that lose access to easy margin will need to look for new competitive edges in data, measurement or curation. Innovation emerges from conflict, not consensus. If everyone in ad tech were comfortable, the market would stagnate.
Reputable ad tech companies, on both the buy and sell side, as well as industry thought leaders, must be bold and flush out the garbage generated by middlemen that add no value. But that cannot happen anonymously. Staying anonymous today is too often a convenient way to avoid making the right choice tomorrow.
Remember: Real innovation requires real accountability.
“Data-Driven Thinking” is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.
Follow Alessandro De Zanche and AdExchanger on LinkedIn.
For more articles featuring Alessandro De Zanche, click here.
