Agency or In-House? Sociallyin’s Keith on the Social Media Decision Brands Get Wrong
When brands struggle to turn social media into meaningful results, the default advice is often to post more, chase trends, or boost engagement. But according to Keith at Sociallyin, that advice can miss the real problem entirely. In this interview, Keith shares what he’s seen when clients come to the agency after trying to run social in-house, and why the agency-versus-in-house debate is more nuanced than the usual cost comparison.
When the usual advice doesn’t fit
Keith describes a common scenario: a brand has been managing social internally but can’t convert consistent posting into meaningful outcomes. The standard prescriptions—more content, trend-jacking, engagement tactics—don’t help when the underlying issue is a stretched team or a missing strategy.
“Sometimes the brand doesn’t need more content. It needs a better understanding of its audience and a clearer reason for being on each platform,” he says. That distinction matters because it shifts the focus from output to intent. Without a clear reason for each platform, even a high-volume posting schedule can fail to move the needle.
The skills gap that cost comparisons miss
When brands weigh hiring an agency against keeping social in-house, Keith says the conversation usually centers on cost. What gets overlooked is the range of skills involved. Social media isn’t just content creation—it includes strategy, creative production, paid advertising, community management, and performance analysis.
“One internal hire rarely covers all those areas equally well,” Keith notes. At the same time, he points out that an agency still needs someone inside the company who understands the business and can make decisions. “It’s not always about choosing one or the other. It’s about knowing where the gaps are.”
That framing avoids the binary trap that many online guides fall into. Instead of asking “agency or in-house?” the better question may be “which capabilities are missing, and where can we fill them?” For more on this hybrid approach, see this guide to building a social media team.
The hidden costs of deciding too quickly
Keith also warns that brands often make the decision based on the monthly price tag without considering what they’re actually getting. A smaller in-house team might look cheaper until you factor in production tools, training, and the time spent managing campaigns. An agency can also become an expensive mistake if the company isn’t ready to collaborate or doesn’t have clear goals.
“The highest cost is usually the time lost trying to make the wrong setup work, especially when competitors are already learning what connects with the same audience,” he says. That time cost is easy to overlook because it doesn’t appear on an invoice, but it can compound quickly in a fast-moving landscape.
Practical takeaways for brands
Keith’s answers suggest a few practical steps for brands facing this decision:
- Diagnose before you prescribe. If posting consistently isn’t working, the problem may be strategy or audience understanding, not content volume.
- Map the skills you need. List the core functions—strategy, creative, paid, community, analytics—and identify which ones your team can cover well.
- Plan for internal ownership. Even with an agency, someone inside the company needs to understand the business and make decisions.
- Look beyond the monthly fee. Factor in tools, training, and management time when comparing options.
- Avoid rushing the decision. The cost of a wrong setup often shows up as lost time and missed learning, not just money.
For brands weighing the agency route, resources like the American Marketing Association’s guide to selecting an agency can help structure the evaluation. But as Keith’s comments suggest, the most important step may be an honest assessment of internal gaps and goals before any contract is signed.
Ultimately, the agency-versus-in-house question may be less about picking a side and more about building a setup that matches the brand’s actual needs. As Keith puts it, “It’s about knowing where the gaps are.”