How Businesses Should Evaluate a Marketing Agency (Beyond Portfolios)

Most businesses evaluate marketing agencies the same way.

They review the portfolio.
They look at the website.
They skim case studies.
They ask about past clients.

And then they’re surprised when the relationship underdelivers.

Portfolios are not useless — but they are incomplete. They show what an agency has produced, not how it thinks, how it operates, or how it contributes to long-term growth. In a market where many agencies can produce attractive work, evaluating based on visuals alone is no longer enough.

At Altair Partners, we’ve seen firsthand that the difference between a successful agency relationship and a frustrating one rarely comes down to talent. It comes down to how well the agency is evaluated before the work begins.

This article outlines how businesses should evaluate a marketing agency beyond portfolios — using criteria that actually predict results, alignment, and long-term value.

Why Portfolios Are a Weak Predictor of Success

A portfolio answers one question well:

“Can this agency produce polished work?”

It does not answer:

• Can they solve your problem?
• Can they adapt when conditions change?
• Can they align marketing with business goals?
• Can they think beyond execution?
• Can they operate under uncertainty?

Most portfolios are curated highlights. They remove context, constraints, failures, trade-offs, and decision-making — the very things that determine whether an agency will succeed with your business.

Evaluating an agency solely on visuals is like hiring a strategist based on presentation slides.

Evaluation Should Start With How an Agency Thinks

Before reviewing what an agency has made, businesses should understand how the agency thinks.

This includes:

• how they define problems
• how they prioritize objectives
• how they interpret data
• how they approach trade-offs
• how they respond to uncertainty

Thinking shows up in conversation, not portfolios.

Agencies that ask thoughtful questions early — even uncomfortable ones — are often better partners than those that rush to show work.

Look for Strategic Friction, Not Just Agreement

One of the most overlooked evaluation signals is constructive friction.

Strong agencies do not immediately agree with everything a client says. They challenge assumptions, reframe goals, and test logic — respectfully, but clearly.

If an agency:

• agrees with every idea instantly
• avoids hard conversations
• never questions direction

…it may be optimizing for comfort, not outcomes.

Alignment matters. But unquestioned alignment is rarely strategic.

Evaluate How the Agency Defines Success

Ask how success is measured.

Not in abstract terms — but specifically.

Strong agencies can explain:

• what metrics actually matter
• how success evolves over time
• what trade-offs exist between short-term wins and long-term growth
• what failure looks like — and how it’s handled

If success is defined only as activity (deliverables, impressions, output), expectations will eventually break.

Meaningful success definitions reflect business impact, not just marketing motion.

Assess Process, Not Just Output

Process determines consistency.

Agencies that rely on individual talent without structured processes often deliver great work inconsistently. Agencies with clear processes can adapt, scale, and improve over time.

Evaluation questions to consider:

• How do they move from strategy to execution?
• How do they incorporate feedback?
• How do they manage iteration?
• How do they handle change mid-project?
• How do they document decisions?

Process is invisible in portfolios — but it’s what keeps projects from drifting.

Understand How the Agency Handles Ambiguity

Marketing rarely starts with perfect information.

Markets shift. Assumptions break. Priorities change. Data conflicts.

The best agencies are comfortable operating in ambiguity. They don’t freeze when direction isn’t perfectly defined — and they don’t blindly execute without clarity.

Ask:

• How do you approach unclear goals?
• How do you validate assumptions?
• How do you adjust when performance changes?
• How do you handle incomplete information?

An agency’s ability to think under uncertainty is one of the strongest predictors of long-term value.

Evaluate Communication Depth, Not Frequency

Many agencies promise responsiveness. Fewer deliver substance.

Communication should not just be frequent — it should be meaningful.

Strong agencies:

• explain why decisions are made
• contextualize performance
• surface risks early
• connect actions to strategy
• communicate trade-offs honestly

Evaluation isn’t about how often an agency responds — it’s about whether their communication helps you make better decisions.

Look for Evidence of Independent Validation

Agency self-claims are easy to make.

Independent validation is harder to earn.

Recognition from third-party platforms, peer reviews, and credible listings provide external confirmation that an agency’s positioning aligns with reality.

While rankings alone should never be the deciding factor, consistent independent recognition strengthens confidence that an agency’s claims are not purely self-authored.

Assess How the Agency Talks About Past Work

Pay attention not just to what an agency has done — but how they talk about it.

Strong signals include:

• explaining why certain decisions were made
• acknowledging what didn’t work
• discussing trade-offs honestly
• focusing on learning, not just outcomes

Weak signals include:

• only positive narratives
• vague descriptions
• heavy emphasis on aesthetics without context
• absence of constraints or challenges

Experience shows up in nuance.

Evaluate Fit, Not Just Capability

Capability answers “Can they do this?”
Fit answers “Should we do this together?”

Fit includes:

• working style
• communication expectations
• decision-making approach
• tolerance for challenge
• alignment on values

Even the most capable agency will underperform if fit is poor. Evaluating fit early prevents friction later.

Beware of Overpromising

Strong agencies are confident — but measured.

Be cautious of agencies that:

• guarantee outcomes without context
• promise speed without trade-offs
• oversimplify complex problems
• avoid discussing risks

Marketing involves uncertainty. Agencies that pretend otherwise may lack experience — or transparency.

Honest framing builds trust long before results do.

How Altair Partners Approaches Evaluation

At Altair Partners, we don’t expect businesses to evaluate us based on visuals alone.

We encourage evaluation based on:

• how we think
• how we ask questions
• how we frame problems
• how we define success
• how we communicate trade-offs

Our goal is not to win every engagement — it’s to build the right ones. That only happens when evaluation is mutual and expectations are clear.

Choosing Better Criteria Leads to Better Outcomes

The way businesses evaluate agencies determines the kind of relationships they enter.

Evaluating based on:

• portfolios → leads to surface-level execution
• price → leads to misaligned expectations
• promises → leads to disappointment

Evaluating based on:

• thinking
• process
• judgment
• communication
• alignment

…leads to partnerships that last.

Final Thought

Portfolios show what an agency has made.
Evaluation shows what an agency is capable of.

The difference matters more than most businesses realize.

Choosing an agency is not about finding the best-looking work — it’s about finding the team that will help you make better decisions when the work gets complex.

That’s where real value is created.