In-House, Agency, or Platform for Video

If you own the video budget, the question is rarely whether video is worth it. It is how to produce enough of it, on brand and on time, without the cost curve running away from you. Three models compete for that budget: an in-house team, a creative agency, or a platform that supplies production capacity on a subscription. Each is good at something, and the trick is matching the model to the shape of your demand.

This post walks the three-way choice the way a CMO actually weighs it: cost, speed, the ability to flex with volume, and brand control. No option wins every category. What matters is which one fits the program you are running now.

What are the real trade-offs between in-house, agency, and platform video?

Each model is built around a different assumption about how much video you need and how steadily you need it. In-house is built for control. Agencies are built for standout single pieces. A platform is built for repeatable volume. When you pick one, you inherit its strengths and its limits together.

In-house: control and culture, at a fixed cost

An in-house team is the best option for brand control and speed on small, familiar asks. The people making your video sit inside the business, know the brand cold, and can turn a quick request around in a morning. That closeness is real value, and no external partner fully replaces it.

The limit is capacity and cost. Headcount is fixed, so an in-house team is expensive to keep idle between spikes and hard to flex when a launch week lands several campaigns at once. Hire for the peak and you carry cost you rarely use. Hire for the average and you miss the peaks, which is when the work matters most. We break the numbers down in the cost of in-house versus outsourced video production.

Agency: high craft, priced per project

An agency is the best option for a flagship piece where craft is the whole point: a brand film, a launch hero, a set-piece that has to be perfect. Agencies bring senior creative direction, specialist crews, and a polish that is hard to match internally. For a handful of standout pieces a year, that is money well spent.

The limit shows up with volume and speed. Agencies price per project, so cost scales directly with output and there is no volume relief as your program grows. Timelines built for a big set-piece rarely fit a program shipping every week. The model is excellent for hero work and a poor fit for always-on demand. We compared it directly in video agency versus video subscription.

Freelancers: flexible, but hard to hold together

Freelancers are the pressure valve teams reach for when in-house is full and the agency is too slow or too expensive. They add capacity fast and cost only when used. For a one-off gap, they work well.

The trouble is consistency. Every freelancer interprets the brand differently, availability is never guaranteed, and the coordination load falls back on your team. Run a program on a rotating freelance pool and brand drift and reliability become your problem to manage. Flexibility comes at the cost of a single, dependable standard.

Where does a platform or subscription model fit?

A platform sits where in-house and agency both struggle: steady, high-volume, on-brand production at a cost you can plan. It supplies production capacity on a subscription, so you get on-demand output without hiring for the peak or paying per project. Think of it as the model that carries the always-on volume while your in-house team and your agency do what each does best.

The four things a CMO asks about line up well here. Cost is a predictable subscription rather than a variable invoice. Speed is fast, with a first cut in about 48 hours. Volume flexes with demand instead of being capped by headcount. And brand is built into the workflow through templates, brand kits, and a review step, so consistency is the default rather than a policing job. A platform does not replace craft on your hero films; it removes the volume problem so your best people are free for the work only they can do.

This is the operating-model shift the wider series is about. For how the pieces fit together across intake, production, and governance, read the enterprise video operating model. For the full picture of what enterprise video costs across each model, read the real cost of enterprise video production.

Get a Free Consultation →

How should a CMO actually choose?

Start with the shape of your demand, not the model. Map how much video you need, how steady that demand is, and how much of it must be perfect versus simply good and on brand. Most of what a large business needs is the second kind: social cutdowns, product explainers, training, executive updates, event recaps, all on brand and on time.

From there the choice gets simpler. Keep an in-house team for the quick, close-to-the-business work and brand ownership. Bring an agency in for the few hero pieces where craft is the whole story. Put the platform underneath to carry the always-on volume at a predictable cost. The question is not which single model wins. It is what share of your volume each one should carry. We walk through when to bring production in-house at all in whether you should bring video in-house.

What does the platform model look like in practice?

DUAL, a specialty insurer, is a clear example of choosing the platform route for volume. Rather than build a full production team or brief an agency for every piece, they used a subscription model to ship on-brand video at scale without adding headcount. The result was more output, faster turnaround, and one consistent brand across all of it, with in-house effort reserved for the work that needed it most.

That is the pattern for most enterprises that get this right. It is rarely a single model, but a mix, with a platform carrying the volume so the fixed cost of an in-house team and the per-project cost of an agency both get spent where they earn their keep.

Frequently asked questions

Is in-house or agency better for enterprise video?

Neither is better in every case; they solve different problems. In-house wins on brand control and speed for small, familiar work, but carries fixed cost and cannot flex to spikes. An agency wins on craft for a few hero pieces, but prices per project and moves slowly for always-on volume. For a large program, most CMOs use both plus a platform to carry the steady volume at a predictable cost.

What is a video platform or subscription model?

It is a service that supplies production capacity on a recurring subscription rather than per project or per hire. You send briefs and footage, and the platform edits and delivers on-brand video, typically with a first cut in about 48 hours. Because cost is flat and capacity flexes with demand, it fits always-on volume better than fixed headcount or per-project pricing.

Does a platform replace an in-house team or an agency?

Usually not. It carries the high-volume, always-on production so an in-house team can focus on close-to-the-business work and brand ownership, and an agency can focus on the hero pieces where craft is the point. Most enterprises run a mix, with the platform absorbing the volume that neither of the other models handles cost-effectively.

How do the costs compare as volume grows?

Agency cost rises with every project, so it climbs steadily as you make more video. In-house cost is fixed, which is efficient at high steady volume but wasteful when demand dips. A subscription platform holds a flat, known cost and flexes capacity with demand, which makes the per-video cost fall as volume rises. Research on video budgets shows production volume climbing year over year, which is why predictable cost matters more than it used to.

Sources and further reading

The trade-offs above line up with how industry researchers describe rising video demand and the in-house versus outsourced debate. For wider context:

• Wistia State of Video report on rising production volume and how businesses resource video.
• HubSpot research on video marketing on where teams invest and the pressure to produce more.
• Content Marketing Institute research on in-house versus outsourced content models in enterprise teams.

Where to go next

This post is part of a series for marketing leaders weighing how to run video at scale. For a like-for-like comparison of the two outsourced routes, read video agency versus video subscription. For the framework that ties the models together, read the enterprise video operating model. For the full cost picture, read the real cost of enterprise video production.

To work out which mix fits your volume and budget, book a free consultation.