Agency or in-house? An honest calculation
The comparison is almost always set up wrongly: agency fee against zero, because your own time costs nothing. Count honestly and the result shifts — though not always in the direction you expect.
In short
- An honest comparison counts your own time — otherwise "in-house" always wins, regardless of reality.
- Managing an agency costs time itself: two to six hours a month for briefing, approvals and questions.
- The sensible dividing line does not run between topics but between frequencies: outsource the one-off, keep the recurring.
- Strategy and audience definition cannot be outsourced — without them even a good agency works in the dark.
Both routes work. What does not work is deciding on the basis of a comparison in which only one side has costs.
The full calculation
| Item | In-house | Agency |
|---|---|---|
| Fee | – | 1,500–8,000 per month |
| Your own working time | 20–60 h/month | 2–6 h/month |
| Onboarding, one-off | 40–100 h | 10–20 h (briefing, access) |
| Tools and licences | 50–300 per month | usually included |
| Knowledge stays in-house | fully | partly to not at all |
| Cost of switching | – | 1–3 months of handover |
The row that tips it is the second. At an internal hourly rate of 80, thirty hours a month is 2,400 — and therefore the fee of a small agency.
Worth knowing
The "your own working time" row on the agency side is nearly always set to zero and actually runs to two to six hours a month: writing briefs, reviewing drafts, answering questions, approving.
That time is also not freely delegable — it falls on the person who makes the decisions. Which is exactly why agency relationships fail disproportionately often not on the work delivered but because nobody in-house had the time to manage it.
The right dividing line
The usual split goes by topic: SEO external, content internal. More useful is a split by frequency.
Outsource: one-off and specialised
Website rebuild, technical setup, design foundations, a video shoot, the initial configuration of ad accounts.
Why: tasks you need once do not repay the learning — and quality here depends heavily on experience.
Keep in-house: recurring and close to the customer
Written pieces, answers to customer questions, following up, ongoing upkeep.
Why: this work needs substance from the business. Outsourcing it produces interchangeable content — not through lack of skill, but because the knowledge is not there.
Never outsource: strategy and audience
Who your customers are, what you do not offer, which position you hold.
Why: an agency can facilitate these questions but not answer them. Without an answer it works in the dark — and you notice only after six months.
Mixed: craft on your substance
You supply figures, cases and position; text, design and implementation happen outside.
Why: the most workable form for small companies — provided you actually supply the substance.
When an agency gets expensive without anyone noticing
No decision-maker in-house. If every approval takes three weeks, the agency works on things that are long outdated — and invoices the time regardless.
No access to the substance. An agency that never speaks to your customers and never sees a project report can only stay general.
No agreed target. "More visibility" is not a target. Without a number both sides look at, you will be discussing feelings after twelve months.
The most reliable early mistake works in both directions: deciding too soon. Commission an agency before the audience is clear and you are paying for someone else to guess. Start yourself without having the time and you produce nothing finished for three months.
The better order is nearly always: do the four weeks of listening and deciding yourself first — nobody can take that off you — and only then decide who handles the execution. That order costs one month and prevents the most expensive version of either route.
How to recognise a suitable agency
Four characteristics, checkable in the first conversation:
- They ask more than they answer. Anyone proposing measures in the first conversation has not understood the situation — or is selling something off the shelf.
- They say what they do not do. An agency that can do everything does nothing particularly well.
- They cite results with figures and context. Not "we tripled the traffic", but from what to what, over what period, in which industry.
- They explain what you have to supply. Anyone saying "we handle everything" has either not understood where your substance sits, or is planning to work without it.
Work out honestly whether we should do marketing in-house or outsource it. Our situation: - What we offer: [offering] - People who could contribute time: [number and role] - Realistically available hours per month: [number] - Internal hourly rate: [amount] - Budget for external work: [amount per month] - What is already running: [bullet points] - Is our audience defined in writing? [yes / no] Tasks: 1. Set both routes side by side with all items – including your own working time on both sides, onboarding, tools and switching costs. 2. Tell me which tasks from our situation belong in-house (recurring, close to the customer) and which should be outsourced (one-off, specialised). 3. If our audience is not defined in writing: say clearly that this question has to be settled before the decision, and why. 4. Name the three conditions under which an agency arrangement would fail for us. 5. Phrase five questions I should ask in the first conversation. Do not recommend specific agencies.
In closing
The calculation rarely comes out the way it is set up — because your own time is missing on one side and the management time on the other. Enter both and you have a sound basis.
The most workable form for small companies is usually the mixed one: substance and strategy in-house, craft and one-off work outside. And in every case the four weeks of listening and deciding first — nobody can take those on for you.
Common questions
Is a marketing agency worth it for a small company?
For one-off, specialised tasks nearly always — website rebuild, technical setup, design foundations. For recurring, customer-facing work such as written pieces, rarely, because that needs substance from your own business. For strategy and audience definition, never: an agency can facilitate those questions but not answer them.
What does a marketing agency cost?
For ongoing support of small companies, fees typically run between 1,500 and 8,000 a month. On top come two to six hours of your own time monthly for briefings, review and approvals, plus ten to twenty hours one-off for onboarding.
Why do agency relationships fail?
Usually on three things, and rarely on the professional work: there is no decision-maker in-house with time, the agency gets no access to the substantive material, or no number was ever agreed that both sides look at.
What should never be outsourced?
Defining the audience, deciding what you do not offer, and the position you hold professionally. Without those answers even a good agency works in the dark — and that only becomes apparent after around six months.
How do you recognise a suitable agency?
By four things in the first conversation: they ask more than they answer; they say what they do not do; they cite results with a baseline, period and industry rather than multipliers; and they explain what you have to supply. "We handle everything" is a warning sign.
Marketing that sets itself up
The Studio Engine beta is live. Claim your spot and help shape it from the start.
Join the beta →