Why in-housing digital marketing often fails

There is a discussion in the marketing world around companies ‘in-housing’ digital activities. This means setting up teams (or even an internal agency) for tasks that would normally be outsourced to a digital agency.

Most of the arguments for in-housing revolve around control of data, a dream of cost saving, and the thought that a dedicated team in your own office will be more focused on success rather than usual agency stuff (like billing).

The control of data is a reasonable argument, as long as you know what to do with it (I see many organisations who zealously protect data but don’t use it at all). There is almost certainly no cost saving after paying for the software and hardware that an agency can spread over multiple clients).

The biggest difficulty is attracting and retaining talent. In-house teams cannot offer career paths to most digital specialists. An adwords manager in an agency can rise up to team leader, head of media etc at progressively larger agencies, and then to regional or global roles. But in most companies with an in-house team, the same adwords manager is highly unlikely to transition to senior marketing roles, let alone a CMO or CEO path. This leaves many in-house teams with junior staff who leave once they outgrow their role.

If you want employees to be committed to the company, they need to see a clear path for career growth. If you can’t provide this, it is best to outsource.