The Exit Interview: Shashi Sinha gets candid on Omnicom, IPG and what comes next

Few advertising leaders have influenced as many parts of India’s media and marketing ecosystem as Shashi Sinha. Across a career spanning more than four decades, he has built agency businesses, nurtured generations of leaders and helped strengthen the country’s audience-measurement architecture across print and television through his work with MRUC and BARC. His contribution has extended to the institutions that represent advertising agencies and the platforms that recognise and celebrate the industry and its work.

Equally significant is the breadth of relationships Sinha has built across the ecosystem. His circle spans marketers, broadcasters, publishers and other media owners, technology partners, agency leaders and competitors, many of whom are also long-standing friends. That ability to bring different parts of the industry together has made him more than an agency veteran, it has made him one of Indian advertising’s most trusted bridge-builders.

It is this cross-industry standing that makes Sinha’s departure from Omnicom, and the direction he takes next, particularly important to watch. In this exit interview with BW Marketing World, he speaks candidly about why he chose to leave before the end of his contract, how he views the Omnicom-IPG integration, why former IPG leaders must fully embrace the new organisation and where the advertising business must find its next sources of value. He also discusses the very different ideas now occupying his attention, from nutrition and oncology to data, content and women’s entrepreneurship, all connected by one central ambition - the potential to create impact at scale.

Excerpts: 

Your departure came earlier than expected. Why did you choose to leave Omnicom now when your contract ran until March 2027?

The decision was not sudden for me. When I became an adviser at the time of the merger, I made it clear to the global and regional leadership that this would not be a long-term arrangement. My contract was due to run until March 2027, but I chose to bring that forward because I was getting a little bored and wanted to do more for myself, not only for financial reasons, but also to remain intellectually stimulated.

Once I felt that the merger had progressed reasonably well, with no significant attrition among either people or clients, barring one major client being affected, I initiated the conversation. That happened in April, following which I served my three-month notice period.

I did not speak about it publicly because the process was complex. I have spent more than 40 years with IPG across its different businesses. I cannot speak for what IPG may have meant elsewhere, but IPG in India was deeply personal to me. It feels as though a significant era is ending, but maturity lies in looking towards the future rather than only reminiscing.

Becoming an adviser also worked well as a transition. It sent a signal to the market, and several people reached out to me with different ideas. I did not finalise anything while I was still with the company because that would not have been fair, but it certainly got my mind working. Some of the opportunities that came to me were not even in the industry in which I have spent my career.

When I became an adviser at the time of the merger, I made it clear to the global and regional leadership that this would not be a long-term arrangement”.

What is your advice to former IPG leaders and teams who are now part of Omnicom?

I have been very candid with my former IPG colleagues that this is it. This is a new company, and they must get used to its style and embrace it completely. If you are half-hearted about it, that will show. It will affect you, your relationships and eventually your clients. Some of the important IPG businesses in India are built on very old, locally developed relationships, whether it is Amul, ITC, Mahindra or several others. Psychology has a way of revealing itself. If you do not accept the new reality, it will show in those relationships and could affect them.

I have said this to the key leaders: either embrace it and go with it, or, if you cannot embrace it, find another path. People will compare organisational styles and say that things were done differently earlier. But if you are part of the new company, you must fully accept that this is the future.

This is a new company, and they must get used to its style and embrace it completely. If you are half-hearted about it, that will show. It will affect you, your relationships and eventually your clients”

Omnicom global leadership described the transaction as a merger rather than an acquisition and said roles should not automatically have gone to Omnicom executives. How do you see this?

Broadly speaking, most of the leadership positions have gone to Omnicom executives. That is not limited to India - if you look across markets globally, you will see Omnicom leaders occupying many of the important roles.

Human nature will shape how this is perceived. If you are on the IPG side, you may feel that you have been done in. Those who made the decisions, however, would presumably say that they made the best appointments possible. I was not part of that decision-making process, so I cannot judge whether individual decisions were right or wrong.

India and parts of APAC are slightly different because IPG was considerably stronger here. That can make the perception more pronounced. These are difficult questions, but the leadership structure is what it is. People now have to decide how they respond to that reality.

There is a growing perception that advertising, media and marketing are no longer high-growth or particularly attractive businesses. Do you still see a future for this industry?

Absolutely. The future is there, although the industry may not continue in the form in which we know it today. There is power in areas such as influencers and commerce. Ultimately, communication requires expertise, and not everyone can do what a communication specialist does. Media agencies bring aggregation, scale, data and technology to the table, and they do so at a relatively lower cost than consulting companies.

The economy may be going through a difficult period because of external factors, and that creates concern. But the need for communication will remain, and the business will continue to grow. Its shape will change, and the sources of value will change with it.

And then there is the AI impact…

What AI has done, and I am sorry to say this, is expose the fact that many people were doing grunt work and passing it off as skill. If someone is doing routine work without applying any distinctive expertise, technology will inevitably take over a large part of it. Talented people will always have value. There are professionals who understand strategy, data and technology together and bring something that is extremely difficult to replicate. Karan Anand is one such example. He may formally lead strategy, but he understands data, technology and strategy in combination, and that creates genuine value.

The business will not disappear, but much of the routine work from which agencies previously made money will go away, whether because of AI or other technologies. Clients will increasingly ask why they should pay agencies for work that technology can perform.

Beyond technology, has the agency industry also weakened itself by continually reducing its own fees?

Yes, we have undercut ourselves. In the spirit of free competition, agencies have steadily reduced the value at which they are prepared to offer their services. Earlier, there were certain established guidelines and commercial disciplines. Much of that has now gone for a toss.

The unfortunate consequence is that the large companies will become even larger because they have the scale to withstand this pressure. At the same time, I believe there will be considerable opportunity for niche players doing highly specialised work. The industry will become more difficult to operate in, but I remain optimistic. There is still a great deal of opportunity in the business for those who can demonstrate differentiated value.

You have spent years helping to build the industry’s measurement systems. What has gone wrong with measurement today?

The problem with measurement is not a lack of skill or technical capability. It is a stakeholder problem. The stakeholders involved are all intelligent people and understand the long-term implications of their decisions. But they are also dealing with immediate commercial pressures. If you are running a broadcasting company, for instance, you have the next quarter to think about. When someone asks you to invest for a longer-term measurement solution, your response may be -- what do I do about my ratings today?

We have also become accustomed to viewing India as one homogeneous market. It is not. There are many different consumer segments operating simultaneously. Linear television is not necessarily competing with connected television, and connected television is not necessarily competing with every other form of digital media. These are different segments with different audience profiles.

If we begin measuring these segments properly, there is enough opportunity for everyone. In fact, if measurement is sorted out, the industry will win. Today, many marketers do not have confidence in what their communication investments are delivering. That is one reason so much money is moving towards ecommerce. Even there, marketers may not always know the complete outcome, but they can at least see some apparent connection with results. Until the industry can demonstrate, directly or indirectly, what returns communication is generating, this problem will continue.

I am encouraged by indications that advertisers may become more actively involved in measurement. They must be at the table because, ultimately, it is their money.

Does leaving Omnicom also mean stepping away from your positions in industry bodies?

I occupied those positions as a nominee of the company. Once I resigned from the company, I resigned from the boards of BARC, MRUC and AAAI as well.

There may be a slightly different arrangement with MRUC. Its technical committee work has been pending for some time, and some members felt that I could help navigate it because of my understanding of research. The chair of the technical committee does not necessarily have to be a board member. I may, therefore, become an associate member of MRUC in my personal capacity and continue helping the technical committee, while remaining off the board.

I was associated with BARC from the time it began and spent around 15 years with it. I genuinely believe BARC has considerable potential. Cross-media measurement is technically possible; we had advanced conversations with companies such as Nielsen and Kantar in the past. The challenge is stakeholder management, along with empowerment and funding.

In India, the government is also a key stakeholder in measurement, which is not necessarily the case in other markets. That adds another layer of complexity.

And it keeps the challenges growing. What are we likely to see you do next?

I will certainly do something, but I do not want to pick up too many things. I also do not want to enter into direct conflict with what I have just spent years building. Otherwise, why would I leave?

Some of what I do will be outside the advertising industry because working in a different field can offer a new perspective and open up the mind. I am looking at possibilities in nutrition and nutraceuticals, as well as oncology. We have already done a fair amount of work in some of these areas, although nothing may be launched for another six months.

I also see a significant opportunity in data in India, so I may explore something in the data science or data-technology space. Content is another possibility, although it would be a small, specialised segment rather than a mainstream content business.

Influencers and their connection with commerce also interest me. The question is not simply whether influencer marketing will grow, but how influence can be connected meaningfully with commercial outcomes.

What will determine which of these ideas you finally pursue?

The first question I ask anyone who approaches me is - what is your vision? What interests me is the potential to create impact at scale. One nutrition company, for example, spoke about helping one million women overcome anaemia. In oncology, the larger question is how earlier testing and detection can improve outcomes. Another idea being discussed is how women across the country can be enabled to become entrepreneurs at scale. Shark Tank does what it does for a relatively small number of people, but can something be built at a much larger level?

The biggest lessons from some of the work I have been associated with—including the scale of Amul and “The Taste of India”—were about the power of scale. That is what I would like to replicate in some form.

I may take up smaller assignments to help friends, but the two or three substantial things I finally choose must have the potential to scale. They may make money or they may not; that is a separate consideration. The potential for scale and impact has to be there.

After more than four decades in the business, what will you miss most?

I will miss the people and the friendships. We were competitors, but many of us across the industry were also very good friends. I believe many of those relationships will continue, even if I am no longer attending every industry gathering. What I will especially miss is the everyday camaraderie of being part of a team. I used to joke that, in our leadership meetings, something that could technically be completed in 10 minutes would take two or three hours because 10 or 12 of us would sit together, talk and catch up on what was happening in everyone’s lives. That will change because I will no longer be part of the team and everyone will be busy with their own responsibilities. I will not miss the intellectual or content side because I believe I will find enough opportunities to keep myself engaged. It is the people and the shared moments that I will miss.

What is your advice to young professionals entering advertising today?

This remains a very good industry. Communication will always be valuable, and we continue to see how effectively it can build brands, influence behaviour and even create movements.

The industry is not disappearing - it is changing shape. Anyone entering it must keep pace with that change. They must understand data, technology, measurement, influencers, commerce and how these different elements connect. There is still tremendous potential in this business. But people must be able to measure, qualify and demonstrate the value they create. The opportunities will belong to those who understand what the industry is becoming, rather than holding on to what it used to be.