Agency vs. In-House Brand Work

We don’t call it client-side. Once you’re here, you’re in-house.

Happy American Thanksgiving week. 🦃 TIL that On Brand readers come from 82 different countries and 43 US states—which is so cool! Willkommen, bienvenidos, bienvenue, thanks for being the best. Hope everyone around the world gets a chance to spend some quality time with their couch and a slice of pie.

I’m thinking about brands × agencies a lot right now—got a few upcoming posts on this subject. Every scaled brand team has relied on agencies to help scale their strategic prowess or creative output, and if you’ve worked in any major agency, chances are you’ve already worked with some tech clients—maybe one you’d like to work for directly someday. If you’re exploring the switch, or even just a transition into brand marketing from any other field, this post is for you.

You’re here because you recently subscribed or signed up for one of my resources—my course waitlist on Maven, lightning lesson, or Notion templates.

If someone sent you this post and you’re not subscribed, join those people learning how to tactically advocate for brand at your company. 📬

---

The first thing I tell anyone considering the switch from agency to in-house brand work: Get ready to become fluent in a whole new language. And no, I’m not talking about the endless acronyms that tech companies love (though there are plenty of those too).

Recently, I hopped on the phone with a strategy director at a notable NY-based creative agency who’s spent the last 5 years working agency-side and wanted to learn about my experience working in-house. It’s a question I’ve heard a lot—when it comes to brand, what are the differences between working in an agency vs. being client-side? What do you need to know about making the transition? And more universally, what does it take to succeed when the success of an entire brand sits on your shoulders?

First of all, we don’t call it client-side. Once you’re here, you’re in-house!

I’ve spent my entire career working in-house at tech companies including Gusto, Redbubble, Kiva, Brex, Notion, and now Later. And at each company, I’ve managed external agency relationships—everything from niche, single-channel agencies to world-class ones spanning whole rebrands or campaigns, like COLLINS, Instrument, B-Reel, Gretel, Fuzzco, FNDR, and DEPT to name a few.

What "in-house" really thinks about agencies

Speaking on tech and B2B SaaS especially, there are a number of assumptions and misconceptions about agencies that can make it harder for brand operators to bring agencies on board:

• That agencies are always expensive

• That agencies are more geared to strategy (talking about the work) than execution (doing the work)

• That agencies can never know the brand or audience as well as the in-house team

• That agency output will take too long

These are all myths, to varying degrees, that I’m actively combatting—especially that “brand work” is always expensive. Yes, agencies often have minimums and they don’t always make sense for every type of project. But in my day-to-day, especially when quarterly and annual planning rolls around, I’m often advocating for agency support and explaining different ranges of what we can pay and what we can get.

Subscribe to get next week’s post on How to Work with Agencies (featuring Q&A with a few of my favorite agencies):

---

The real differences: Working in-house vs. agency

1. Alignment is now your #1 job

You’re not just managing projects anymore; you’re the internal brand ambassador. This shift is massive. While agency life involves presenting to clients periodically, in-house means you’re constantly championing brand strategy and selling its value to internal stakeholders.

You’ll need to persuade C-suite executives who might not fully grasp the importance of brand—and do it repeatedly. This means having frameworks and documentation ready to showcase how brand impacts business goals (I’m your new bestie xo). I always emphasize tangible tools that demonstrate how brand strategy ties to business outcomes and leads to measurable results. Building trust takes time, and mi$take$ can happen if you don’t have a strong foundation with your stakeholders.

📎 Why You Need a Corporate Strategy Summary (& Template)

2. You’re now the translator between “brand” and “business”

You’re not just a strategist; you’re a translator. The most successful in-house brand leaders I know can speak both languages—of business and marketing teams, and creative and design teams—fluently. You need to be versed in:

• Creative best practices like UX copywriting and design principles

• Technical jargon (on both sides) and how to translate it for different audiences

• Business metrics and how brand initiatives impact them

• Product roadmaps and how brand supports product strategy

Being this translator means you can contribute meaningfully to creative discussions while also talking ROI with your CFO. It’s a unique skill that takes time to develop but becomes invaluable when it comes to driving buy-in and getting work approved.

How to Get Brand Buy-In

3. Structure and team dynamics are different

In-house brand work faces more variables than agency life, and this can be one of the biggest adjustments for people making the switch. While agencies typically have standardized structures and clear reporting lines, in-house brand teams can look wildly different from company to company.

First, there’s the question of where brand actually lives in the org chart. I’ve seen brand teams report into Marketing (whose leaders come from all different specializations), Design, and even directly to founders or in a Product org. Each structure brings its own challenges and opportunities. Under Marketing, you might have more autonomy but need to work harder for design resources. Under Product, you’re closer to the roadmap but might struggle to maintain brand consistency across marketing channels. Under Design, you might have better access to creative resources but need to build stronger relationships with growth teams to connect brand work to campaigns.

Then there’s the constant need for alignment. Along with org charts, decision-making processes tend to be less standardized too. In an agency, you generally know who needs to approve what and when, with clear workflows and approval chains. It’s obvious who the client is. In-house, you’re navigating a complex set of stakeholders, each with their own priorities and perspectives (and it’s not always clear who the final “client” for the work actually is). In-house processes can vary widely based on the project, stakeholders involved, and company stage. Sometimes decisions happen quickly with little documentation; other times you’re stuck in endless review cycles.

You need constant alignment with executives who might have strong opinions about brand (especially founders), product teams who are shipping features on their own timeline, and various department heads who all want their initiatives prioritized.

Learning to navigate this ambiguity—and knowing when to push for more structure—becomes a crucial skill.

The third piece is that resources and budgets tend to be more fluid in-house. Unlike agencies where projects typically come with pre-defined scopes and budgets (and scope creep conversations and norms are fully baked into the processes), in-house teams usually need to be more flexible. You might start the quarter with one budget and end up with something completely different based on company performance or changing priorities. This means you need to be adaptable and creative in how you use your resources, whether that’s internal talent or external partners.

The key here isn’t fighting against these variables, but learning to work with them. Build relationships across departments, document your processes where you can, and stay flexible where you need to. I wouldn’t still have my sanity if I hadn’t learned to see these structural challenges as opportunities to shape how brand operates within your organization.

4. The financial reality is different

Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: compensation. The financial structure of working in-house at tech companies is fundamentally different from agency compensation, and it’s not as straightforward as “tech pays more.”

Other people smarter than me have written more about marketing salaries in tech, so I’ll keep my thoughts high-level: Working in-house at tech companies typically means a good chunk of your compensation comes in the form of equity. Unlike agency bonuses that are tied to company or personal performance over a year, equity is a longer-term bet on the company’s success. At early-stage startups, you might be offered a lower base salary but more equity upside. At scale-ups, you’ll likely see a more balanced mix of cash and equity, often with higher base pay but potentially less explosive equity growth potential.

The stage of the company matters enormously. Early-stage startups might offer equity that could be worth a lot... or nothing. Scale-ups tend to offer more predictable compensation packages, often with both higher base salaries and equity that’s easier to value (though still not guaranteed). The goal is to understand not just the current value of your offer, but also the potential trajectories—both up and down. Either way, you need to be comfortable with that uncertainty and know your risk tolerance.

It’s also likely you’ll see different comp structures in tech than what you’re used to. While established agencies often have clear salary bands and promotion paths, tech compensation can really vary wildly between companies and roles. I’ve (often, unfortunately) seen marketing designers making less than their product design counterparts, but I’ve also seen brand strategists commanding higher salaries than traditional marketing roles because of how the company values brand work. The good news is that total compensation in tech often outpaces agency salaries, especially at senior levels.

Then there are benefits and perks, and obviously this varies widely. In my outsider experience, agencies are famous for their client-facing perks (hello, Soho House memberships)—but scale-up+ tech companies might be more likely to offer better healthcare, more flexible work arrangements, and generous L&D budgets. It’s not necessarily better or worse, just different.

Making the transition

So if you’re considering making the switch, these are my best tips to keep in mind:

1. Translate your stakeholder management skills to your new audience

   1. Audit your new stakeholders (and hold a brand listening tour) to understand their motivations

   2. Learn to speak their language (and learn both the tech jargon and when to hold on the agency jargon)

2. Get up to speed on the brand vs. growth dialogue myth:
   

   The Brand vs. Growth Myth

3. Keep your external perspective (it’s one of your best weapons!) and don’t fall into the echo chamber of B2B tech marketing:
   

   We Need to Kill "All-in-One"

It also helps to be sure you understand the company stage. Quick summary: early-stage startups offer more ownership but less resources; scale-ups provide more stability but potentially less influence. Choose based on your risk tolerance—and career goals!

The line between agency and in-house work continues to blur. More companies are building robust internal creative teams, while agencies (especially at the enterprise level) are embedding themselves deeper in client organizations. If you can navigate both worlds effectively, then good job, you are smart.

Success in-house comes down to three things: your ability to build trust, translate brand value into business impact, and maintain high creative standards 🤌🏼 while juggling multiple stakeholders. It’s challenging, but for the right person, it’s incredibly rewarding.

I’ve heard the biggest surprise for most agency folks making the switch is how much they enjoy being able to see their work through from strategy to execution, and actually living with the results. There’s something special about building a brand from the inside out—even if it means trading your agency’s fika breaks for your tech company’s kombucha. 🍺

---

Have you made the switch (or in the other direction)? I want to hear how it went!

---

If you liked what you read, consider:

• saying hi or dropping a question in the comments!

• connecting with me on LinkedIn: 👩🏼‍💻 Kira Klaas

• sending to a friend 💌 or coworker 💬