Skip to main content

In-house marketing vs agency

Comparison

In-house suits continuous work needing institutional context and enough volume to fill a role. Agencies suit work needing several disciplines at partial capacity. The comparison is only fair when salary is loaded with payroll costs, tooling, recruitment, and management time.

When the first option wins

In-house wins when the work genuinely fills a role, institutional context is decisive, and the person stays. Knowledge compounds and stays with the business.

When the second option wins

An agency wins when you need five specialists at a half-day a week each — a shape you cannot hire — or when the cost of a wrong full-time hire is unacceptable.

Verdict

For most companies between ten and two hundred people, the answer is neither: one internal owner holding the standard, plus external capacity for depth.

Not sure which applies to you? Describe the situation.

Start the conversation

See where you currently appear in AI answers.

Start the conversation