How do you select and manage a media agency in Oceania?

Selecting a media agency in Oceania almost always means selecting one agency for both Australia and New Zealand under a single ANZ mandate. That is efficient. And it is precisely where regional contracts tend to go wrong. The two markets run on different measurement systems, different ownership maps, and regulatory regimes that point in opposite directions on several categories. The selection discipline is standard; the regional question is whether the agency, and the contract, treat two markets as two markets.

This article addresses that question directly. For a broader view of the regional media environment, see the guide to Advertising in Oceania: the media landscape, which covers channels, audiences, and spending patterns across the region.

The central decision: one agency for both markets, or separate appointments?

A single ANZ appointment offers coordination and consolidated commercial terms. It concentrates leverage in one relationship and removes the overhead of managing two separate mandates. Those are real advantages.

But the risk is equally real. A single appointment concentrates all leverage in one counterparty, and it creates structural pressure for the smaller market to be planned from the larger one. When that happens, New Zealand receives a scaled-down version of an Australian plan rather than a plan built from New Zealand’s own media landscape.

Separate appointments cost coordination but buy local depth in each market. Neither structure is universally correct. What is wrong is making the choice implicitly, by defaulting to the regional mandate without testing whether the shortlisted agencies can genuinely service the smaller market on its own terms.

What to test agency candidates on for a regional mandate

The media agency selection process, step by step sets out the generic framework for running a structured review. For an ANZ mandate, that framework needs four additional lines of interrogation built into the brief and the evaluation scorecard.

1. Commercial transparency across the group

Principal trading became a live trade debate in Australia in 2024 and 2025, and ANZ mandates sit with the same agency groups. Ask every candidate, in writing: where it or its group trades as principal in either market; how agent-versus-principal status will be declared per transaction in each market; how rebates, value banks, and media-owner incentives are treated in each; and whether audit rights reach group level and cover both markets. In this region, that answer is the pitch.

2. Dual measurement fluency

Australia and New Zealand do not share a measurement infrastructure. Australia now operates on new common currencies, including VOZ for total television since the end of December 2024 and the new MOVE for out-of-home since March 2026, both introducing trend breaks that require careful restating of year-on-year comparisons. New Zealand has no integrated total-television currency and relies on Nielsen broadcast ratings alongside broadcasters’ own streaming data, with operator-owned out-of-home measurement.

Ask candidates how they evidence delivery per market on each market’s own basis, how they handle the Australian trend breaks, and how they label digital figures as platform-reported, third-party-measured, or modelled in both markets. A single blended ANZ dashboard is a warning sign, not a convenience.

3. Counterparty currency

Ownership moved in both markets between 2025 and 2026. In Australia, Southern Cross Austereo completed its acquisition of Seven West Media in January 2026, and Network 10 has been owned by Paramount Skydance since August 2025. In New Zealand, Sky completed its purchase of Discovery NZ in August 2025, and a further radio transaction was agreed in August 2026, though it had not completed at the time of writing.

Ask candidates whether their rate benchmarks and group deals reflect the current ownership map in each market, and how cross-market out-of-home operators, including oOh!media, JCDecaux, and QMS, are negotiated regionally versus locally. Benchmarks built on the previous ownership structure are not reliable.

4. Per-market compliance

The two regulatory regimes diverge in ways that matter for campaign execution. Australia’s gambling-advertising reform commences 1 January 2027, while New Zealand prohibits online casino advertising under its 2026 Act, pending a licensing regime. Australia’s ban on social media use for those under 16 has been in force since 10 December 2025, while New Zealand has no equivalent measure. New Zealand broadly permits direct-to-consumer prescription medicine advertising; Australia does not. The two privacy regimes also differ.

Ask candidates who owns compliance in each market. Reject any answer that treats the region as a single regulatory environment.

What the regional contract must pin down

A well-negotiated appointment is the foundation of a manageable relationship.

For an ANZ mandate, selecting a media agency in Oceania requires four things to be settled in writing before the contract is signed.

First, market separation. Delivery must be evidenced and reported per market on that market’s own measurement basis. Blending results into a single ANZ line makes it impossible to assess performance in either market accurately.

Second, commercial terms per market. The contract must specify agent-versus-principal status per transaction in each market, disclose rebates and value banks in each, and extend audit rights to group level across both markets.

Third, compliance allocation per market. Named responsibility for gambling, medicines, youth-platform, and privacy rules must be assigned in each market and cleared against each market’s own regulatory calendar, not a consolidated regional one.

Fourth, governance of the mandate. The contract should specify where planning authority sits for each market, how the smaller market’s service levels are protected, and how the agreement adapts as regulation and ownership evolve in either market. This last point matters because both markets have been moving quickly. Building an adaptation mechanism into the contract avoids relitigating the deal mid-term.

The market-level dynamics behind this regional picture, advertising in Australia and advertising in New Zealand, are each covered in depth in this series.

Managing the agency relationship after appointment

Signing the contract is not the end of the selection process. It is the beginning of the management relationship. Three practices support a productive ongoing structure across two markets.

Agree performance yardsticks per market before the contract is signed, with each market’s measurement bases written into the agreement. Yardsticks agreed after appointment are harder to enforce and easier to dispute.

Review commercial disclosures, including principal positions, at each major buying cycle in both markets. The ownership and principal-trading environment in this region has been changing. What was declared at appointment may not reflect the current position a year into the mandate.

Structure ongoing reviews to recognise outperformance as readily as they identify shortfalls. An agency that receives only corrective feedback has less commercial incentive to bring you its best thinking. The relationship works best when it runs in both directions.

Running a regional pitch with independent support

For advertisers planning an agency review across Oceania, Vendor-MGT runs agency selections and pitches independently, working exclusively on the advertiser’s side. A well-structured process in this market typically runs ten to sixteen weeks from the decision to review to contract signature, with the agency transition adding a further four to eight weeks. If you are considering a review, The Pitch sets out how that process works and what it covers.

Frequently asked questions

Should I appoint one media agency for Australia and New Zealand, or two? There is no universally correct answer. A single ANZ appointment offers coordination and consolidated commercial terms, but concentrates leverage and risks the smaller market being planned from the larger one. Separate appointments buy local depth in each market at the cost of coordination overhead. The decision should be made explicitly, by testing whether shortlisted agencies can genuinely service each market on its own terms, not by defaulting to a regional mandate.

What should an ANZ media agency contract cover? The contract should specify delivery evidenced per market on each market’s own measurement basis, agent-versus-principal declarations per transaction in each market, disclosure of rebates and value banks in each market, audit rights reaching group level across both markets, named compliance responsibility per market against each market’s regulatory calendar, and governance provisions that protect the smaller market’s service levels and allow the agreement to adapt as ownership and regulation change.

What should I test agency candidates on for a regional Oceania mandate? Four areas: commercial transparency, including where the agency or its group trades as principal in either market; dual measurement fluency, including how they handle Australia’s VOZ and MOVE trend breaks and New Zealand’s separate measurement bases; counterparty currency, meaning whether their benchmarks and group deals reflect the current ownership map after the 2025 and 2026 transactions; and per-market compliance, with named responsibility for gambling, medicines, youth-platform, and privacy rules in each market separately.