Since leaving the field of full-time journalism many years ago, I’ve worked at a couple agencies, have applied for jobs it many others and have talked with folks at, again many others. So, I’ve gained some knowledge about how agencies can organize their client teams. I’m no expert, but know what I like and what seems to work.
At one agency I worked at, the client team was structured pretty much like a circle: The client was in the middle and the entire account team around the client with each person having first-hand 
knowledge of client needs and access to the main client contact.
At another agency, there definitely was a hierarchy — kind of like a stick in the mud: Most of the information came flowing down from the top level account person to the rest of the team. Sure, there was some client contact via meetings, but not much — unless you were in account management. Any questions I had, had to go up the line.
One time, I emailed the client contact — who I had actually met once — about some 
information I found that I thought would be of interest. I immediately received a call from from a higher up in my department telling me that was not allowed; and later was called in talk with the person who headed up client services. (it was kind of like being called into the principal’s office for speaking out of turn in class).
Now, I’m not naming names of the agencies because the names don’t matter. I’m looking at the client structure and how effective each is.
In recent job interviews I’ve had and in talking with those involved in other agencies, it seems that the circle structure (you also could call it a horizontal structure whereas the stick is vertical) is predominant. And, I am soooo glad for it.
Here’s why I believe a circular client structure is more effective:
- You simply learn better when receiving input first hand — not second or third hand. A client is more optimally served by the agency when all team members really know what’s going on — not just learning client needs second hand.
- What if you have questions? It is more time- and money-efficient to be able to ask the client directly, right then and there than to ask someone who then has to ask someone who might have to ask someone else. And, then relay the answer back down the line. If you have more questions? Repeat the process or give up and do your best guessing.
- Direct access to clients, being involved in client meetings, etc., allows everyone on the team to have a full understanding of client branding / positioning and what it wants to achieve. Then, client team members can take that first-hand knowledge and contribute their respective skills to the team to try to achieve the best results. It’s so much easier to do so with a full understanding, than only having sketchy information.
- Everyone feels like a true part of the team. Okay, this is subjective and more morale-type stuff, but can’t be discounted.
With all that said, I realize that it is not cost-effective to always have all client team members at all meetings and such. However, there is a happy medium so that client team members have enough direct client access to be sure they are following the needs of the client, then to be working in uncertainty.
I definitely welcome your thoughts on agencies’ client team structures, types, what works, what doesn’t, etc.
-Mike
