At RAUS Global, we spend much of our time identifying structural shifts in the marketing economy so that our clients can be at the forefront of industry trends. Our work spans the full gamut of marketing procurement; from agency eco-system optimization and pitch management to compensation frameworks and governance architecture. That vantage point makes one thing increasingly clear: AI is no longer a creative experiment. It is an operational variable.
In February this year, we attended Agency Hackers’ conference (in New York City) under the deliberately unsettling theme, “The Robots Are Coming.” The room was filled with agency founders debating what AI means for creativity, staffing, and growth. Yet from a brand-side marketing procurement perspective, the more consequential question is not whether the robots are coming. It is whether commercial models are evolving as quickly as workflows.
One of the clearest voices in the room was Chris Murphy, Managing Director and Founder of Tuncarp. Murphy is not a futurist speculating from the sidelines. With more than fifteen years across APAC and EMEA at Ogilvy and Publicis Sapient, he moved from delivery into strategy before building and scaling his own studio from seven to fifty specialists in under three years. When he hired his first prompt engineer in May 2023, it was not a publicity move. Within eight months, AI-led work represented 38% of agency revenue.
“I’m not here to talk about AI tools,” Murphy told the audience. “I’m here to talk about people.”
For marketing procurement leaders, that statement is more commercial than philosophical.
If agencies are reorganizing labor around AI-native roles, are brands still buying yesterday’s staffing logic?
The Structural Tension Beneath the Surface
Before AI accelerated production, the agency workforce had already tilted senior. In 2019, approximately 11% of creative agency employees were between 20 and 24 years old. Today, that figure sits closer to 6%. The pandemic rewarded experience and predictability. and apprenticeship layers thinned and as a result, teams became more senior-heavy.
Then AI entered the workflow and altered the execution layer almost overnight.
Chris described producing a three-minute AI-driven film that required roughly 8,000 images and 1,500 video outputs before reaching a final cut . The technology did not eliminate creativity. It accelerated iteration and expanded variation at a scale previously impractical.
“AI can generate infinite output,” Chris observed. “But it doesn’t know what matters.”
When iteration accelerates and parts of execution become machine-assisted, the labor profile changes. If workflows evolve but rate cards remain static, a gap emerges between operational reality and commercial structure.
As one global procurement director remarked, “AI isn’t the threat. Paying yesterday’s prices for today’s workflow is.”
This is not a critique of agency intent. It is a question of alignment.
Where Value Now Resides
Chris’ agency, Tuncarp, operates at roughly four prompt engineers for every senior creative. Juniors expand the possibility space through rapid experimentation across multiple models. Seniors shape narrative, refine tone, and determine what ultimately represents the brand.
“If you have too many seniors, they become very expensive executors,” Chris noted.
The implication for procurement is straightforward. If automation compresses production, then value shifts toward narrative authorship and strategic judgment. Storytelling becomes the premium capability. It is the discipline of selecting from abundance and shaping meaning, not merely generating assets.
A European CPG procurement lead expressed the distinction clearly:
“As a Brand, we are happy to pay for excellent storytelling. We are not happy to pay senior rates for automated iteration.”
Procurement does not need to dissect prompt logs. It does, however, need transparency around workflow architecture. What portion of output is machine-assisted? How has AI altered time allocation? Where does human judgment begin and where does it meaningfully add value?
Without visibility, efficiency gains risk being absorbed invisibly into margin rather than reinvested into stronger outcomes.
The Transparency Moment
AI has created what can only be described as a “transparency moment” for agencies and brands alike. Production is faster and variation is broader. Agencies are investing in tools, AI-native talent, and new operating rhythms. Those investments are legitimate.
But commercial frameworks must evolve alongside operational ones.
If production compresses and experimentation expands, brands and agencies should openly discuss how efficiencies are shared. Are savings being redirected into strategic depth and creative leadership? Are scopes of work (SOWs) structured to reflect exploration layers explicitly? Are compensation models tied to value creation rather than simply to hours logged?
Procurement’s role is not to resist innovation. It is to ensure that innovation and economics move in tandem.
A senior marketing procurement executive shared: “Our responsibility isn’t to squeeze agencies every time technology changes. It’s to make sure the economics reflect reality.”
That is the balance the industry must now strike.
Looking Beyond the Quarter
Chris’ concern extends beyond immediate margin conversations. “I’m not worried about the next 12 months,” he said. “I’m worried about three or four years down the line if we don’t hire the right juniors now.”
That horizon should resonate on the brand side as well.
The industry cannot afford to eliminate the junior bench in the name of short-term efficiency. AI may compress certain execution layers, but it simultaneously expands the need for exploration, experimentation, and tool fluency. The roles and responsibilities of juniors are changing. They are no longer purely production support. They are increasingly AI-native operators who test, iterate, and expand creative possibility. The solution is not removal. It is evolution.
Procurement has a key role in supporting that evolution. If compensation models and scopes do not recognize experimentation layers as legitimate value drivers, agencies will struggle to justify investing in them. If brands insist on purely output-based economics without understanding workflow shifts, they risk hollowing out the very capability they will need three years from now.
There is another reality worth acknowledging. Even in some of the larger agency pitches we have observed recently, some from innovative and forward-thinking networks, the articulation of how AI reshapes the agency labor box is often vague. Slides reference AI acceleration and agency case studies showcase a high level of both value and efficiencies generated from AI. Yet when it comes to explaining how staffing models, cost structures, and value creation have fundamentally changed, the narrative frequently lacks clarity and even direction.
That gap is risky.
We are all operating in a new environment. Agencies are recalibrating talent models. Brands are recalibrating governance. If we are not collaborating to identify where AI creates genuine efficiency, where it increases creative quality, and where it requires new forms of investment, we risk undermining the entire value proposition on both sides.
An agency founder in the audience said, “this is the first time in years that both agencies and brands are learning at the same speed. If we treat that as a zero-sum negotiation, we all lose.”
The opportunity lies in shared transparency. Protect the junior bench, redefine the role, articulate the labor shift clearly, and align compensation with where value truly sits. If we fail to do that, the debate will devolve into cost arguments rather than capability conversations.
Redesigning the Value Equation
The solution is not confrontation. Nor is it passive acceptance. It is joint redesign grounded in transparency and commercial maturity.
If AI accelerates production, agencies should demonstrate how workflows have evolved and where human expertise remains indispensable. Procurement, in turn, should move beyond hourly arithmetic and engage in discussions centered on narrative quality, strategic depth, and business impact.
The objective is alignment, not reduction.
AI can generate 8,000 images. It can compress timelines that once justified entire teams. But Brands are not buying volume. They are buying clarity, coherence, and commercial return.
Procurement’s responsibility is to ensure that when the robots accelerate the work, the value equation accelerates with them.
That conversation is no longer optional.