-
> But the board basically said percentage-of-spend is no longer an option. Full stop.
If they’re doing good, can you just not re-negotiate with them? If % of spend is an issue, can you not get a flat rate from them instead? After a certain level of spend, there’s no reason to have a %age of spend imho.
> So now I’m trying to think through whether I need…
I’ve been in every position, including yours, so I’ll answer from my perspective – assuming the size of the company you work for is closer to medium/large than small:
* Contractor: your team will have to support that person because they won’t be able to do everything, or you have more than one contractor.
* Consultant: your team will have to do most things, because the consultant isn’t going to do much except… consulting, I guess, so you’ll have some skill gaps to fill (unless it’s a “”consultant”” like me who sometimes does the actual job, but in these cases with smaller companies, I only use the word “consultant” because it’s easier to explain, I’m mostly a contractor…)
* Full-time paid media / SEO person: I’ve been there too – unless you have two separate people on the job, it’s not going to be very productive.
* Hybrid approach: This is probably what worked best when I was the full-time paid media / SEO person in-house. I got to hire some contractors who’d help me with the vision I wanted to deliver, and honestly, that was really chill and I got to work on some more interesting stuff within the company instead of doing the grunt work, but that comes at a cost (that the company was happy to pay so it’s fine). It’s efficient but it’s someone on the payroll + contractors, so that costs a lot of money.> And if I’m honest, outside of initial setup and strategy, I haven’t seen a TON of ingenuity over the last year+. Which maybe is normal? I realize good campaigns can become optimization and maintenance. Maybe that’s all I actually need?
Yeah, and I think it gives you good ground for negotiation. Something along the lines: “The account is mature, I accept that you do less, but I still want you onboard in case things go ape.”
Challenge them occasionally, but there’s only that much that can be done, especially if they don’t have power over messaging/content/business in general.
In any case, the lack of “ingenuity” is definitely not something unusual, but imho it’s grounds for negotiation, especially if you feel you’re not getting value from that.
> What I do know is I need somebody that digs in and actually thinks. Somebody that identifies opportunities, challenges assumptions, tests things, and owns outcomes.
The agency can do that and should do that if the budget allows.
> For those of you that have made this jump, would you hire in-house? Start with a contractor? Keep strategy outside and execution inside?
> And honestly… where are you finding these people?
Plenty of them in the sea that can do it.
Hires and agencies carry the same kind of risks: there are good ones, but there’s also no guarantee that they’ll do good either, so if you have something that works now… don’t fix what’s not broken is what I want to tell your bosses.
I honestly don’t understand leadership. It’s great to hire in-house, but if it’s a hire “for the sake of saving money”, it’s not going to happen.
It’s such a short-sighted mindset, imho, but better keep it quiet because the boss knows it all.
Good luck with that though, I hated to be in your position lol.
