The LinkedIn pitch frenzy: Meritocracy or marketing stunt?

When Atlys’ marketing head, Santosh Hegde posted on LinkedIn a call for a "young, hot creative partner" five months ago, he received 153 responses within 24 hours. He is not the only marketer to have taken to LinkedIn to solicit agency interest. Around the same time, Acko’s senior director for brand marketing Prateek Malpani also posted about his search for a creative partner, receiving close to 200 responses. In 2023, Uniqlo’s Nidhi Rastogi, marketing director, had a similar experience.

Over the past 8-12 months, brands like Paytm, Honasa, Uniqlo, Acko, and Atlys have been receiving an avalanche of responses within hours of posting open calls for agency partnerships. This raises an important question: Does this approach genuinely foster meritocracy, or does it reduce agency selection to a high-stakes popularity contest?

On paper, LinkedIn-led pitches seem like a great equaliser, offering smaller agencies access to major brands without needing deep networks or costly pitch processes. However, Mithila Saraf, CEO of Famous Innovations, cautions that the sheer volume of responses can create a system where visibility trumps true strategic alignment.

“It often becomes more about who gets noticed first rather than who’s the best fit,” she says. “The sheer volume can lead to rushed decisions, where visibility and quick thinking win over deep strategic alignment. So, while it opens doors, it also risks turning agency selection into a game of who shouts the loudest.”

Mithila Saraf, CEO of Famous Innovations.

Pallavi Chakravarti, founder of Fundamental, is more direct. “How can asking agencies to work for free on the basis of a 100-word post be a process that fosters meritocracy? If brands genuinely want to reach agencies they wouldn’t have otherwise considered, inviting them to submit credentials should be enough,” she fumes. Instead, agencies end up pouring time and resources into a speculative ask that is often not thought through, with no clarity on competition, budget, or expectations.

Sayantan Choudhury, senior partner at Animal, likens the trend to advertising’s own fear-of-missing-out (FOMO) strategy being used against agencies. Brands now doing this are not just smaller startups but well-established players. He says, “But for those who believe advertising requires thought, discernment, and craft, this approach feels reductive.”

Abrar Nakhuda, head of digital at Infectious Advertising, suggests that this democratizes access for smaller or emerging agencies that might lack the networking advantage. After all, a well-thought-out pitch, regardless of an agency’s size, can stand out purely on merit if given an equal opportunity.

But he wonders whether brand teams that receive large amounts of entries evaluate every submission deeply. They might resort to quick filters rather than diving into strategic depth.

Abrar Nakhuda, head of digital at Infectious Advertising.

“The approach could work well for disruptive ideas but might compromise due diligence, especially for long-term agency partnerships. Ultimately, it accelerates the pitch process but doesn’t always guarantee the best fit—meritocracy exists, but within the framework of attention economics. It also risks brands resorting to quick filters rather than conducting deep evaluations,” he notes.

The commoditisation of creativity

One of the biggest pitfalls of LinkedIn pitches is the race to the bottom on pricing. Agencies, eager to win business, often undercut each other to unsustainable levels. But is this devaluing creativity itself?

LinkedIn pitches are not the sole culprits behind the commoditisation of creative services—they are a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. Chakravarti believes that commoditisation is a larger industry issue, not just a result of LinkedIn pitches.

“Agencies undercutting each other has been happening for a while. The more recent development is how unsustainable it has become. But strategy and long-term brand-building are still commanding a premium they deserve,” she says, adding that brands are being offered by fewer agencies, with most opting for the volume-over-value game.

Pallavi Chakravarti, founder of Fundamental.

Himanshu Singh Gurjar, founder of Purpose Studios, shares an anecdote. A client once chose the cheaper option and later regretted it, eventually hiring an agency that charged significantly more. This proves that undercutting might win short-term business but rarely delivers long-term value.

Saraf concurs, “When brands post open calls, agencies—especially newer or smaller ones—often feel pressured to lowball just to stay in the race. The problem? It sets a dangerous precedent where creativity and strategy take a backseat to pricing.”

Agencies end up treating projects as quick wins rather than long-term partnerships, and brands risk getting work that’s efficient but not necessarily effective. If this trend continues, the creative industry might reach a point where price, not quality, dictates success—something that is detrimental to both sides in the long run.

Desai puts it bluntly: “When you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. The issue is that creative services have already been subsidized over the years. Agencies take up low-paying projects in hopes of making money later on media or production. Brand-building is not the priority anymore—survival is.”

The effort-to-reward ratio: Is it worth it?

Most LinkedIn-sourced briefs are project-based rather than retainers. This means agencies are often spending more time pitching than executing.

Saraf calls this the real struggle, likening it to speed dating. Agencies spend hours, sometimes days, crafting responses and pitch decks, only to realise they’re one of hundreds fighting for a one-off project. When there’s no retainer or long-term commitment, it becomes an exhausting cycle of chasing work rather than actually doing it.

“Some agencies have figured out how to be more selective, but for many, the fear of missing out on potential business keeps them stuck in this loop. It’s like speed dating—exciting at first, but exhausting when nothing serious comes out of it,” she notes.

Sayantan Choudhury, senior partner at Animal.

According to Choudhury, the fundamental issue is pricing. “If people don’t see the value in what agencies bring to the table, they will always look for the cheapest option. The industry is in a race to the bottom.”

In the LinkedIn era, posting agency requirements feels less about finding the right partner and more about farming likes. If you’ve been in the game long enough, you should already know who’s best for what. Meanwhile, the pitch frenzy is out of hand. Agencies must choose wisely—every pitch borrows time from paying clients. Long-term retainers may be harder to land, but they bring real creative impact, deeper strategy, and far less exhausting hamster-wheel pitching.

For agencies, the only way forward is to be selective. “Every pitch you do borrows time from paying clients,” says Chakravarti. “Agencies should not forget that and should only pitch for opportunities that genuinely add value.”

Red flags in open calls

So how can agencies avoid being burned by LinkedIn pitches?

Mithila Saraf warns against vague briefs: “If a brand can’t articulate what they need beyond ‘Looking for a great agency! Drop your creds,’ it’s a sign they haven’t thought through the project.”

Unrealistic demands—like a full campaign upfront or “great exposure” in lieu of payment—are red flags. Worse, some brands treat pitches as free idea farms. The fix? Ask sharp questions early—budget, decision-makers, scope—so you don’t chase a brief that’s DOA.

The bedrock of a successful pitch is conversation. Chakravarti also highlights the lack of discussion—work created in a silo is a red flag. “I’m sure that’s what happens consistently in these online, come-one-come-all type pitches issued on social,” she adds.

Hence, agencies need to get the full picture and understand what’s worked (or flopped) before. They should have a POV, challenge assumptions, and actually discuss it with the client. If not, they could end up shooting in the dark—wasting hours on work that’s unlikely to see the light of day.

Desai also advises watching out for an overwhelming number of competing agencies: “If more than five agencies are pitching, it’s a red flag. Also, if the budget is undefined or if the brief demands virality without a strategy, walk away.”

How can brands ensure due diligence?

Gurjar believes the solution is simple—brands need to be clear on what they are looking to achieve through the project. If it’s an award-winning campaign, look at past award-winning work. If it’s business impact, look at case studies that prove effectiveness.

“We're in awards season and a lot of the work being created right now is for that. So, if that's what a client is looking for, then just look at past work and whether it's converted to awards! The other parameter is always about making sure that the key top talent works on the account even after the business is bagged,” he notes.

Chakravarti adds that due diligence should be a two-way street. If an agency tends to overpromise and underdeliver, clients tend to sack them. Ergo, agencies should also vet clients—whether they pay on time or do they pay at all?

Nakhuda offers a structured approach for brands: “Ask for real-world case studies, not just pretty decks. Meet the execution team before signing. If an agency has drastically undercut competitors, it may cut corners in execution or introduce hidden costs later.”

Bringing transparency and accountability to LinkedIn pitches

The informal nature of LinkedIn pitches often leads to undefined budgets and unrealistic timelines. So how can brands and agencies improve the process?

Choudhury suggests that brands should be more transparent. “If you’re going public with a pitch, be clear about your timelines, budgets, and deliverables. Let agencies not be the only ones prancing around in the proverbial emperor’s clothes,” he says.

Saraf believes clarity is key. While a lot of LinkedIn pitches start with excitement but hit roadblocks when budgets, timelines, and expectations aren’t defined. Hence, she recommends that brands should share ballpark figures upfront, and agencies should ask direct questions.

At its best, LinkedIn can democratise access to opportunities. However, unless brands and agencies bring greater structure, transparency, and respect to the process, the platform risks becoming a battleground where popularity outweighs true merit, and creativity is traded for the lowest bid.