Key takeaways
• There is no universally correct commercial model for agency support.
• Projects provide clarity around scope, budget, and delivery, but not every communications objective has a clear start and finish.
• Retainers work best when they provide continuity, flexibility, and responsiveness – not simply guaranteed agency time.
• Many organisations benefit from a hybrid approach, using a retainer for ongoing communications and projects for major campaigns or initiatives.
• The right commercial model should support the communications strategy, not dictate it.
One of the most common discussions in agency procurement processes is whether support should be delivered on a project basis or through a retainer. It’s usually framed as a commercial decision.
How much flexibility do we need? Which option gives us greater control? How do we manage budgets and demonstrate value?
These are all sensible, practical questions but they can distract from an equally important one.
What does this communications challenge actually require for success?
Too often, organisations feel they have to choose one model or the other. In reality, different communications activities often benefit from different commercial approaches because effective agency relationships are built around the work that needs to be done – not around a preference for one pricing model.
Projects provide clarity – but not always continuity
Project-based support has obvious advantages. The scope is clearly defined, budgets are agreed upfront, and deliverables, timescales, and responsibilities are all relatively straightforward. For a product launch, exhibition campaign, annual report, video, or strategic messaging project, that clarity is invaluable. Projects give everyone confidence about what will be delivered, when, and how much it will cost.
However, not every communications objective fits neatly into a beginning, middle, and end. For example, media relationships develop over time, thought leadership grows through consistency, and reputation is built through repeated, credible communication rather than occasional bursts of activity. Even major announcements often perform better when they are supported by months of quieter communication that has already established credibility with journalists and audiences.
A good retainer buys responsiveness – not activity
Retainers are sometimes viewed with understandable caution.
Are we paying for capacity we don’t need? Will the agency invent tasks to fill the time? How do we demonstrate ongoing value?
Those questions are entirely reasonable, and a retainer should never become an excuse to generate activity for the sake of filling hours. Its benefit lies in giving both client and agency the flexibility to respond when opportunities emerge, such as a journalist calling looking for expert comment, a market development creating an opportunity for thought leadership, or an internal innovation suddenly becoming newsworthy.
Communications rarely happen according to a perfectly planned timetable. Sometimes the greatest value comes from already having people who understand your business and can respond quickly, without every conversation becoming a new scoping exercise.
The commercial model should follow the communications strategy
Perhaps the debate has become back to front. Instead of asking whether projects or retainers are better, organisations should first consider what they are trying to achieve.
Are they delivering a clearly defined campaign with a fixed scope? Or are they building visibility, reputation, and market understanding over time?
Those are fundamentally different communications challenges. One may suit a project and the other may benefit from ongoing support. Many organisations need both and the commercial model should reflect the work, not force the work to fit the commercial model.
Adopting a hybrid approach
This is why we often recommend a hybrid approach. Managing an ongoing press office, maintaining a regular programme of social media content, providing day-to-day advice, and creating a steady flow of stories typically requires a consistent level of support each month. Trying to scope, quote, and secure budget approval for each individual activity would often create more administration than value, slowing down work that should be responsive.
For that reason, we often recommend a modest retainer for this core activity. It provides continuity, gives clients access to ongoing strategic support, and allows both teams to focus on communications rather than repeatedly negotiating fees for routine work.
Alongside that, many clients also have larger initiatives that are naturally project-based: a product launch, exhibition campaign, employer branding programme, annual report, or strategic messaging project. These have a clearly defined scope, timeline, and deliverables, making them well suited to project pricing.
In practice, many of our clients don’t choose between projects and retainers at all. They use both. A retainer provides the continuity and flexibility needed for day-to-day communications, while projects allow investment to flex as priorities evolve throughout the year. The result is a commercial model that reflects the reality of how communications works: predictable where it can be, flexible where it needs to be.
Hannah Kitchener
Associate Director
About the author
Hannah is an associate director in the UK, leading strategic campaigns for industrial clients across the EMEA region. A professionally qualified journalist (NCTJ), she combines specialist sectoral knowledge in construction, energy, and materials handling with a strong network of trade media contacts to secure valuable coverage. Her expertise in inter-cultural communication, honed by degrees in modern languages and translation, is key to executing campaigns that succeed across diverse European markets.
