I’m sitting across a young actress who recently packed up her Volkswagen Jetta, along with the rest of her life, and moved across the country to Los Angeles. Her younger sister knew my older brother and my mom ran into her dad at Costco and now we’re here, sitting in a Starbucks in Beverly Hills. So you’re an agent? She asks a little hesitently. Not exactly, I’m a manager. I tell her. She nods and smiles and then asks, what’s the difference? It’s a good question and one I’ve had to answer many times. Not only to young aspiring artists but friends, family, Uber drivers and even clients. Although there are a number of similarities between agents and managers in the entertainment business this article we’ll discuss the fundamental differences that set the two representatives apart.
There are three distinct differences between a talent agent and a manager. 1: Agents operate on a deal to deal basis while managers take on a day to day approach. 2: Agents specialize in a very specific area of the business and managers generalize fulfilling a broader role. 3: Agents represent a larger number of clients in comparison to managers who tend to represent fewer clients.
Deal to Deal vs. Day to Day
Understanding the differences between agents and managers begins with understanding what each of them do on a daily basis. Agents are responsible for finding their clients work. They are transactional. No different than anyone who works in sales, the salesman is responsible for selling the product. In the case of agents, the client and their services, be that acting, writing, directing, etc. are the product. On a daily basis, an agent will go through the list of clients they represent and look at which of those clients currently has a job and which clients need a job. For those clients who need a job, this then becomes the primary objective for the agent. Converting the “need a job” clients into “has a job” clients. In order to do so, the agent will begin sourcing as many opportunities as possible in the hopes of exchanging the client and their work for a financial fee (in addition to other contractual terms: exclusivity, credit, travel, etc.). Should the agent be successful and both parties come to an agreement, a deal is made contractually solidifying the job. Once the deal is done, the client is now working which means the agent can move on to the next client and more importantly, the next deal. It’s important to understand that given the primary objective, agents will often spend more time communicating with producers, casting directors and studio executives finding those opportunities than they will their own clients. I want to highlight the significance of this because it is a common misconception that agents spend the majority of their time communicating and engaging with their clients. Quite the opposite in fact, an agents communication and engagement is directly correlated to the number of opportunities. Keep in mind the opportunity could simply be an audition, a general meeting or pitch but the important thing to understand is that time is the greatest commodity and an agents time is most effectively spent finding work for their clients.
Conversely, on the management side of the entertainment business it is the manager who is in constant communication with their client regardless of any one opportunity. It is the managers daily responsibility to ensure that what the agent is selling (the client and their work) are at the highest value and able to perform at the highest level. Just as an agent sells, finding the opportunity for the client, the manager prepares, ensuring the client is able to make the most out of that opportunity. So what exactly does that look like? On any given day, a manager will help an actor prepare for an audition, rehearse lines, give notes on a script helping to improve and develop the story, meet with a client and talk through an opportunity, weighing the pros and cons, booking travel and housing ensuring the client is comfortable, or simply getting a client in the right mindset and mentally prepared. I like to think the role of the manager is very similar to that of a sports coach. In order to get the best out of their players week in, week out, it requires a meticulous nature and level of focus. Think about all the preparation that goes into your favorite teams weekly game. There is the tactical element of watching film, analyzing the opponent, memorizing plays. There is the physical element of eating and training preparing your mind and body and last but certainly not least, the logistical element. Getting on a flight, staying at a hotel, coordinating and arranging transportation. It would be ridiculous to expect the players to be responsible for all this, they have the game to worry about. Hollywood is no different. It’s the clients responsibility to focus on the opportunity (the game) and it is the manager (the coach) who is responsible for every other element. Putting the player in the best position to win the game. This is a critical distinction between agent and manager because just as the agents duty is often done once a deal has been made, the managers job is just beginning.
Specialize vs. Generalize
The second key difference between agents and managers is that agents specialize in a specific area of the entertainment business. Agents have a narrow focus in comparison to managers. Within the largest talent agencies, agents are broken up by department or more rather, what type of artists those agents represent. For instance, there are Feature Talent Agents and these are the agents who specifically represent actors and actresses within feature films. It is their job to communicate with casting directors, producers and studio executives and get their clients cast in the film. Then there are TV Talent Agents and these agents represent actors and actresses in television. Similar to their feature counterparts, the tv talent agent is responsible for getting their clients cast in television shows. Then there are Feature Literary Agents, these agents represent writers and directors within feature films. It is their job to sell a writers script or get a director hired to direct a film. Similar to talent agents, literary agents are also broken up by film and television. A TV Literary Agents represent writers and directors within television. Then there are branding and endorsement agents, unscripted agents, digital agents and many more. This is important to understand because often times artists believe they simply need an “agent” to find work but are not specific in what type of agent they need. It would do no good for an aspiring actress who does not write to have a feature literary agent. That specific type of agent would get the artists no closer in getting cast. They would need a tv or feature talent agent who works specifically with actors and actresses.
Once again, it is nearly quite the opposite for managers. Managers generalize in that they have a broad focus. Managers often times represent multiple types of artists and individual artists who are multifaceted. It is not uncommon for a manager to work with an actor who also writes and directs. This is another reason why managers take on a day to day approach with their clients. If a client is an actor, a writer and a director, it’s the managers job to help their client prioritize what to focus on at any one point in their career. To better understand this, let’s use Bradley Cooper as an example. Beginning his career Bradley Cooper was an established actor. Bradley acted in multiple successful films such as the THE HANGOVER, LIMITLESS, SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN SNIPER before he ever directed his first film, A STAR IS BORN. In order to make the transition from actor to director Bradley was forced to pass on future acting opportunities and focus on his directing career. This transition may sound simple but it is an art within itself. Very simply, great managers have perfected this art. Establishing Bradley first as an actor was a conscious effort to solidify Bradleys credibility and visibility within the business. Once established, it then gave Bradley the professional and financial opportunity to shift his focus from acting to directing. Again, this may sound easy but when stretched over the course of a career it is anything but. Having the guidance of a manager can be critical in determining ones success in making such a transition and finding success in multiple arena’s of the business. To summarize, while agents tend to be very narrowly focused on one facet of an artists career, managers take on a broader, wide-ranging role.
More Clients vs. Less Clients
Lastly, one of the fundamental differences between agents and managers in the entertainment business is the number of clients they represent. Generally speaking, agents have larger client rosters while managers have smaller rosters representing fewer clients. So why is this? A main reason for this is because of the difference in how agents and managers are financially compensated. Both agents and managers take 10% of their clients work. That means if you were an actor and you booked a role in a film and were paid $100,000 both your agent and manager would receive $10,000. However, reflecting back to section 2 (specializing vs. generalizing) because agents are primarily representing one type of artists they are limited to commissioning that client within that specific area. Continuing with our Bradley Copper example, if Bradley’s TV Talent Agent booked Bradley a role in a television show as an actor it would be Bradley’s tv talent agent who was compensated NOT their Feature Literary Agent. Why would they? The feature literary agent did not get Bradley the tv acting job, the tv talent agent did. Conversely, Bradley’s manager would be compensated regardless if Bradley booked an acting job, writing job, directing job or anytime of job. Because managers take on an all-encompassing role in the artists career, they are able to be compensated for each and every job the artists gets regardless of what part of the business it’s in. NOTE: while individual agents may be compensated accordingly to the job and their role, the agency at which the client is represented (and where each of the individual agents are employed) would be compensated no differently than the manager. Put another way, the agency is always compensated but the individual agent may not be. So how does this effect the number of clients an agent and manager represents? If an agent is only being compensated for when their client works in one area of the business, they need to represent a larger number of clients in order to make up for the areas of the business they aren’t compensated for. When Bradley Cooper directs a movie, his manager and feature literary agent will be compensated but that means Bradley’s tv talent agent cannot rely on Bradley being available for a tv acting opportunity in which that agent would benefit from. Thus forcing that tv talent agent to represent another artists who is available.
In addition to financial compensation, another reason why managers represent fewer clients than agents is time. Because managers wear multiple hats and represent their clients in multiple areas of the business, they are only able to allocate so much time to each client. This forces managers to represent fewer clients because they are spending a greater amount of time on each individual client in comparison to an agent. While an agent may get a client a job and not speak to them for 6 months until the client needs the next job, it is the manager who is speaking with that client every day over the course of those 6 months. So while managers are able to commission clients on all areas of their career, they are in turn responsible to attend to all areas of their career. It is not possible for a manager to attentively represent a large roster of clients. The intimate and meticulous role of the manager requires focus and attention. The more clients the manager has, the less focus and attention each individual client is able to receive. While on the agent side, agents are able to represent a much larger number of clients because the role of the agent does not require them to be nearly as hands on with their clients. Given the agents primary objective (get the client work) they are able to achieve that objective and move onto the next client.