Every thought:
"I don't want to have all my eggs in basket" while picking an agency?

Our team took a balanced approach to the pros and cons of each https://www.seerinteractive.com/blog/multiple-vendors-vs-single-aor/

I have always described this decision as
"Ease vs Excellence" - It's more work for you as a manager to pick a company that only does part of the total solution, in doing so you get a partner focused on winning in 1 area.

The issue is if you have 5 different partners and you ask them what to do with 100k in budget every one will find 100k to spend with them, with no regard for the other channels, meaning you have to do that work.

There are times when its better to choose a company who might not be top of the industry but isn't going to put that work back on you. I find a lot of specialist agencies don't have empathy for how much work we put back on our clients sometimes w/ our top notch recommendations.

For some clients "good enough" results and having someone to manage the whole things for them to work on other areas is a net positive to the business, but specialist agencies (like us) sometimes struggle to be like "why are you OK being ranked #5 when we could get you #1"

Its b/c our world view is so narrow we might not realize that focus has value...if OK results gives you as an exec back 5 hours a week to go build a new thing that could break new ground and revolutionize your industry, that trade off might be worth it.

I had to learn this myself early on - being the "highest performer" of the clients options - doesn't mean you are always the easiest to work with and there's value in being easy to work with, and that is up to your client to decide the value of that tradeoff.