WHICH IS BEST FOR MARKETING?

DIGITAL AGENCY OR INTERNAL MARKETING TEAM

Is it cheaper to go with an agency or hire an internal team? Is it more effective to run marketing in-house or through an external agency? These are questions that every business owner and/or manager needs to ask themselves. We’re here to help answer that question.

WHICH WILL COST LESS?

ADVANTAGE: AGENCY

At first, this seems counter-intuitive to many business owners. Shouldn’t it be cheaper to get someone in-house than it is to pay an outside vendor and cover all of their costs? Nope. We’ll break it down.

EXTERNAL AGENCY (LIKE PHRASING):

  • Social Media Retainer
  • Paid Social Media Management Retainer
  • Paid Search Management Retainer
  • CRM Management Retainer
  • Search Engine Optimization Retainer
  • Total Monthly Cost: $9,500

INTERNAL MARKETING TEAM:

  • Salary for 2 Employees: $8,500
  • Avg. Overhead for Employees: $2,000
  • Comparable Marketing Software: $1,000
  • Total Monthly Cost: $11,500

At just under 50% the cost of hiring 2 internal employees with minimal experience (less than 2 years each), you can have access to an entire team of SEO, social media, email, website development, paid search, and other digital marketing specialists.

*We chose some baseline costs and services to make this example workable. The truth is that the spread is often far larger than this in favor of agencies with a costing structure similar to Phrasing.*

WHICH WILL GIVE YOU BETTER EXPERTS?

ADVANTAGE: AGENCY

In contrast to cost, this one shouldn’t be a surprise. While agency employees are ALWAYS hired for their specialties, smaller internal marketing teams need employees with the ability to wear multiple hats. While this isn’t a bad thing, individuals can only be an expert at a few things.

When agency team members are specialists, they spend hours every week reading up on the newest updates and trends on a specific discipline. Clearly, it is not realistic for even the most capable of individuals to do this across all of the areas of digital marketing.

Even when hired with a diverse skill set, internal teams will rarely be able to match the diversity of expertise than an agency like Phrasing can provide your brand.

WHO WILL KNOW YOUR BRAND BETTER?

ADVANTAGE: INTERNAL TEAM

While a good agency team will immerse themselves into your brand and your industry, an employee that lives and breathes nothing but your brand will almost always have more knowledge about your brand.

All of the attention given and immersion time in the world will not replace the knowledge of an internal team member. This advantage will always rest with creating your own team.

WHICH PERFORMS BETTER?

ADVANTAGE: IT’S A TIE (DEPENDS)

This cannot be definitively decided here. Performance will vary greatly depending on the skills of each team and your brand’s specific set of needs. We’ve seen some internal teams kill it and taken over from some agencies who were absolutely tanking.

While we can’t definitely say which will perform better, the typical Return on Investment advantage will typically go to an agency. At a lower cost, assuming similar performance, an agency would still edge out the internal marketing team for a return on investment.

WHICH IS BEST FOR OVERALL?

ADVANTAGE: AGENCY

While this might seem like a very self-serving conclusion, it is also the truth. While internal teams are never a horrible idea, the cost of pulling one together that could rival a strong agency team is prohibitive and also fairly unlikely.

Agencies are forced into a constant state of competition with dozens of competitors. This constant struggle for a variety of clients pushes these teams to be more innovative. It also allows for far more testing and research.

More competition. Better researched tactics. Proven strategies. Lower overall cost. That seems like a winning combination to us.

In conclusion, if you’re curious about whether or not Phrasing is a good solution for you, contact us directly or answer 10 questions and we’ll let you know if we think we can beat your current marketing…possibly at a lower cost.