I am getting really sick of reading articles about how social media should never be outsourced and that no one can truly understand the brand, but the brand itself. Really? In that case, the website should be built in house, call centers should never be outsourced, events should be planned by the company, speech writers dare not be hired and etc etc. Quick check- do you see that happening? Good, neither did I.
I appreciate the outlook that social media should be run in house. I think in a perfect world, with unlimited resources and headcount, no internal politics and lots of tech savvy staff- maybe it is the ultimate answer. However, I personally have never come across any company living in this scenario. It seems there is a lot of chatter about what works in Utopia and not about what really works in the real world. I want to like this article by Econsultancy because I think they got it mostly right, but I have to slight them for the controversial title. It’s too absolute.
I have spent time in both roles ( agency and brand) and I can tell you there isn’t one perfect mix of agency and brand. You’ll notice that recently many former leaders of social media at brands have recently moved onto agencies. There’s a reason. While, dialogue and customer engagement should live within the brand, that activity makes up a very small portion of building a social media program. You have to build the strategy. Resources must be organized and allocated to maximize results. Consumers have to be heard and their thoughts synthesized into actionable and tactical nuggets. Pages need to be built. Systems need to be acquired. And on and on… It’s a lot of ongoing work and much of it get shifted to an agency. Here are the reasons why:
Slow Production:
Social media is a fast moving channel; we’ve all had that beat into our brain at every and any social media conference we’ve attended. Brands move slow. With small teams, there is no way a internal social media group could produce the work an agency of 45 could in the same amount of time. If a brand wants a quick turn around, they’re going to hire an agency.
Lack of Resources:
Engaging an agency works best with how large companies are structured. Many companies are limited in their head count, but have a sizable budget for agency spend- something you often overlooked in this argument. Only in social media utopia can a brand retain the type of headcount it would take to run a proper internal social media group. This is not a definite rule, but more often than not the case.
Lack of In-house Skills:
Most internal social media teams are small with limited skills. Even if a team member has significant social media experience, they still are one person. Additionally, outsourcing allows a brand’s employees to work where they thrive. Many social media team leaders are excellent project managers- with significant experience working through red tape and directing agency partners to get desired results.
Creatures of habit:
Brands are use to outsourcing work. It’s how the company is organized. So naturally, it’s easier to outsource that to hire. Often companies outsource work and the agency hire sits on site. It’s almost a hybrid between company and agency. That employee gets to soak up the brand;s culture, but is in many ways protected from some of the internal drama. There’s another reason this works out in the teams favor- it allows for acquisition of more internal budget. If you’ve worked in a brand you know that often budget= power.
Agencies are going to remain a lasting part of the brand social media puzzle; they are in many ways faster, less biased by internal politics, and better equipped to deliver quick any high quality results. There’s less red tape, more focus on collaboration, and generally more comfort with the subject matter at a macro level. That said, an agency should be a partner to social success, not a social media overlord. That means empowering the brand to make decisions and drive the road map. This, unfortunately, is not easy for most agencies to do.
