36 replies to this topic

[chriscbs]

I'm not sure if anyone caught this article by Gary Angel on E-Commerce News about Bringing Search Engine Marketing In-House.

I can appreciate both sides of the argument of agency vs. in-house, but I can't help but feel that this article is very one-sided.

I'm feeling the need to argue some of his points, and I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

- He starts by comparing the outsourcing of PPC to the outsourcing of Payroll. I can agree that payroll is not a differentiator and PPC is, but how about comparing PPC to marketing? Most companies employ some kind of marketing firm, even though it can be a core differentiator. Is that not a better comparison?

- Another fear that is brought to light is the idea that within an agency, the majority of the SEM knowledge falls on one or two people, and if someone leaves, the competitive advantage is gone as well. An equally compelling argument can be made about an in-house SEM person leaving (and worse, going to work for a competitor). I'd also argue that an agency SEO/SEM has the advantage of working on many accounts, and quickly accumulating knowledge from a number of perspectives. I also strongly believe that a lot of knowledge is passed around within an agency. If one of us learns something, everyone takes advantage of it.

- He also states that the only real differentiator in the PPC world is a PPC bid-management tool. What about landing page design, compelling ad text, and shopping cart conversion optimization?

He concludes by saying: Therefore, if you've been thinking about the possibility of bringing your SEM efforts in-house, there aren't necessarily any compelling reasons why you shouldn't.

Doesn't that statement oversimplify it just a little?

To replace an established SEM agency, you're probably looking at hiring an SEO, a person to manage PPC, a talented designer (if you don't already have one), and a web developer ... and then managing the process of getting them all to work as a cohesive unit (something that the agency has already accomplished).

I should also say that I met Gary at SES Chicago last December and we chatted briefly. He's definitely a good guy, and I think that he has a lot of industry related knowledge; I just can't help but disagree with him on this point!

[joedolson]

To replace an established SEM agency, you're probably looking at hiring an SEO, a person to manage PPC, a talented designer (if you don't already have one), and a web developer ... and then managing the process of getting them all to work as a cohesive unit (something that the agency has already accomplished).

True. On the other hand, this is also true of any other business unit you need to establish. Most businesses aren't going to also outsource R&D, Engineering, Technical Writing, Payroll, Marketing, and Accounts - every business unit needs some kind of specialized knowledge, new employees, and team work. If you're willing to invest in establishing that team for your SEM as well, you might as well.

You also then have the distinct advantage that your SEM team is 100% invested in your business, rather than dividing their attentions between dozens of different clients. You know for certain that your SEM team has your best interests in mind.

I'd argue, though, that there's a place for a qualifed outside search marketing consultant during the hiring and team development phase, however. If you want to make certain you're hiring the best possible people for your team, it's probably worth the price to hire somebody to help you with that.

(And to disclose, I haven't read the article you're referring to...)

[bwelford]

I believe that marketing should be a core activity of the company and you should build up the internal resources to do it well. However as Joe said, in getting to there, an outsider who can help you 'learn how to fish' rather than 'doing the fishing' for you may well be a very useful way to go

[A.N.Onym]

This is the same issue with outsourcing SEO. You only not have an inhouse SEO (or outsource SEO), if SEO isn't the core functionality of your company or you don't need significant traffic.

However, I'd agree with Barry that every company should have an inhouse SEO/SEM.

[iamlost]

In my experience with medium to very large companies there were two recurring reasons for outsourcing SEO/SEM:
1. cost:
* the actual cost of contracting out can be less than hiring/training/retaining similarly qualified staff.
* contracting out can have accounting advantages beyond actual cost.

2. structure:
* SEM cuts across traditional business structure: IT, Personel, Sales, Advertising, Marketing; even into Finance and Operations.

A consultant is an outsider whose interdepartmental wanderings are more easily accepted than some poor staff SEO whose memos go up, aside, and down upsetting everyone along the way before perhaps returning.

I tracked one memo (requesting a single header change) along a 23-step process over 4-days requiring 9-authorisation signatures. And the executive board had been wondering why they were being hammered in the SEs.

A company that brings SEM inhouse must fully understand, accept, and entitle the process or it will die screaming in smothered frustration.

[projectphp]

I think, despite being an outsourced SEM, that inhouse can make a lot of sense.

However, the solutuion would need to be pretty specific. I don't get why inhouse ppl don't multiskill. I doubt many businesses could justify as fulltime web developer, but a web dev/SEO/SEM/Online Marketer/Online Evangelist (read: blogger/blog commenter/forum participant) might make a whole lot of sense.

Such a person has the benefit of being "in teh loop" about teh business, able to doa ranhge of tasks at rather short notice, and keep the agenda of Search in everyone's face, as we all know the issues caused when search is an after thought.

However, several of the poitns on both sides worry me.

I also strongly believe that a lot of knowledge is passed around within an agency. If one of us learns something, everyone takes advantage of it.

That only matters if you are allowed to. An inhouse Web Dev will have far greater control than an agency, especially for large businesses in whihc politics is such an overiding factor.

Knoweledge that can't/isn;t allowed to be used is really rather useless knowledge.

Therefore, if you've been thinking about the possibility of bringing your SEM efforts in-house, there aren't necessarily any compelling reasons why you shouldn't.

Hmm. See, all his points, to me, don't really add up to much of anything solution wise. Sure, there are no reason s not to, but neither are there reasons to.

A marketing team that added the web guru I mentioned above would benefit hugely. An inhouse PPC put in the hands of someone incredibly uninterested (a marketing person say) would be a disaster (I have seen this happen repeatedly).

To take SM inhouse requires a solid, quality solution, and one that is significantly better than outsourcing. Find that, and you have an argument worth hearing.

[A.N.Onym]

I don't get why inhouse ppl don't multiskill. I doubt many businesses could justify as fulltime web developer, but a web dev/SEO/SEM/Online Marketer/Online Evangelist (read: blogger/blog commenter/forum participant) might make a whole lot of sense.

You see, to multiskill, one needs to be really interested in his job and in learning. Some people just sit and do the tasks, given to them from the bosses, while others learn something new to become better. That's how I got to this forum: I was trying to learn something new on my own.

As for internal communication, this may not happen. In one of the companies I have been working in, there were 3-5 people becide me, busy with different tasks. We didn't talk or cooperate much, because the tasks and their difficulty were different.

I suspect, as Michael said, it takes a special approach both to fostering your inhouse SEO and internal communication, if you really want to reach the sky with an inhouse SEO.

[projectphp]

I think that is probably why so many don't do it. Rather than take the huge risk, and fall short, hiring an external agency provides the "middle of the bell curve" approach that won't get you fired, and also blamability.

I am not sure how hard it is to find a person like I mentioned. Web dev, especailly inhouse, can get pretty dull. Throwing on top a few other tasks seems like a great way to fill out a job. For sure, it takes the right person, but with teh right person, it would fly.

[iamlost]

but a web dev/SEO/SEM/Online Marketer/Online Evangelist (read: blogger/blog commenter/forum participant) might make a whole lot of sense.

but most companies pay didley squat for labour.

Read some SEO/SEM employment ads - they want the farm and the kitchen sink and many years experience for entry level wages. Often the qualifications list exposes total ignorance of real designer/SEM requirements.

A person that is interested and experienced enough to be so cross trained can contract out at a multiple the employed wage and benefits rate for exactly the same work while being appreciated rather than taken for granted. Or build and run their own web ad/affiliate/ecommerce network.

The greater the web presence the more sensible inhouse SEM. But what does sense have to do with it? The turf wars and restrictions and pitance wages that I have seen (been out of contracting for almost a year) and still hear about have little to do with sense and much more to do with bureaucracy, routine, and privelege.

[projectphp]

Not everyone wants to work for or by themselves.

And everyone needs to start somewhere. If you an code a bit and do a bit of basic web work, you can grow into an accomplished SEO, so teh experience part, I agree, isa bit silly.

have little to do with sense and much more to do with bureaucracy, routine, and privelege

Agreed. But then, markets pay what they deem teh work to be worth. Give it a few years, and see what these skills, as standard, are worth.

[Sush]

An outsider is always an outsider though we do outsourcing when it is reallly helpful for the business.

However I always prefer to have my own resources to get the best results.

From SEO to designing I always like to maintain a continous flow between all the tasks. So that involved person can realize how their contribution is related with the total project. SEO is not enough without a good design and clean coding for a site as well as SEM can not run alone without satisfying your visitors. Therefore you need to be well informed and provide relevant information to your visitors. So at the end of the process you can not deny the importance of content writer or a creative communicator.

[kestrel]

To replace an established SEM agency, you're probably looking at hiring an SEO, a person to manage PPC, a talented designer (if you don't already have one), and a web developer ... and then managing the process of getting them all to work as a cohesive unit (something that the agency has already accomplished).

I've found a lot of smaller design agencies already have the design and development skills, but don't have specialist SEO skills. In these cases they seek a contractor to assist them in the long term hope that they will either develop the skills in-house or learn how to fish for a skilled SEO.

Then there are those that have already realised the importance of SEO i.e. the larger agencies, super affiliates, businesses who depend on SEO, and neither would dream of not having a full-time, in-house SEO.

they want the farm and the kitchen sink and many years experience for entry level wages. Often the qualifications list exposes total ignorance of real designer/SEM requirements.

Then there are the inbetweens who fall into this category...

They know they need SEO/M but they either, don't realise that it's a bit more than keyword research and header tags, or they don't realise the potential ROI, or they are speculating in a new area of business for the company, and thus are only willing to pay a pitance.

Agreed you can hire an SEO for a lower hourly rate than a private hire domestic cleaner gets, but will they give you all that a truly skilled SEO can?

*edit*

Actually yes they probably will. Because some skilled SEO's are having to except these wages...

Edited by kestrel, 07 February 2007 - 05:19 AM.

[A.N.Onym]

Yes, janitor wages for expert skills (as good expert as they don't have or know anyone, who could objectively evaluate the knowledge level) is common. The only time I have seen a good salary offered is when they already had a SEM directory and they needed an assistant (or when the company has already worked with a good SEM).

[egain]

There is possibly one other thing not been mentioned (which applies to the UK market at least) and that is the lack of skilled resource. Something like traditional marketing/web design is quite well resourced in terms of human resource. However I know from having my own company, and previous experience in a large North West based agency that getting that skilled resource is very very difficult in the current market.

That tied in with the cost of hiring someone to do such a job, does put a lot of people off. Why pay someone 20+ per annum when you can pay an agency circa 5K+ for the same service (figures ropey i know) when both probably will deliver similar ROI's

Edited by egain, 07 February 2007 - 05:25 AM.

[kestrel]

There is possibly one other thing not been mentioned (which applies to the UK market at least) and that is the lack of skilled resource.

I have seen the same. So if SEO's are in demand then why the poor wages?

From my experience many still don't understand the benefits of SEO or what the organic results are. Here in the East of England many are still hooked on PPC and SEO is a new concept (some not all).

For that reason, as a freelancer, I try to target those that already know what SEO is, and what it can do for their business, rather than try and ask someone to part with, what can after all, be a significant sum of money.

Those that understand, realise it's a small amount compared to the ROI.

[egain]

Completely agree Kestrel, and thats part of the problem (the wages), and the lack of "understanding" of SEO in particular.

I think many of the FTSE companies get SEO, however there is still a large scale misunderstanding of SEO, caused either by lack of education of previous bad experiences.

[chriscbs]

Wow, great discussion.

Multiskilled People
I'm not sure how good you can get at one thing if you're pushed to be multi-skilled. I'll take development as an example. The dev world moves so fast when it comes to web technology. Every project that we do has the latest and greatest .NET component, more AJAX integration, fewer steps to checkout in the shopping carts, etc. If I were to grab one of our software engineers and say, "start reading up on SEO, because you're going to be optimizing some of these sites, too," their first reaction would be, "in addition to keeping up with all the new dev tricks and best-practices????"

The point I'm trying to make is that it's possible to be multi-skilled, but at the end of the day, what is the quality of the output? You've got someone who excels in one area, and is at best decent at SEO, decent at design, decent at dev, for example.

To me that seems like much more of a way to cut cost then it does a way to create differentiation among your competitors. If you want to be the leader, I still think you need a group of people that are all highly-skilled in their area of expertise, that know how to work together to deliver SEM results. Whether you hire them all in-house, or hire an existing group (agency).

True. On the other hand, this is also true of any other business unit you need to establish. Most businesses aren't going to also outsource R&D, Engineering, Technical Writing, Payroll, Marketing, and Accounts - every business unit needs some kind of specialized knowledge, new employees, and team work. If you're willing to invest in establishing that team for your SEM as well, you might as well.

I think that brings up two interconnected points. First, the decision has to be partially governed by the size of the organization. Second, what does it take to provide SEM results that meet the standards of the particular organization?

For the majority of our customers, SEM means PPC management, natural optimization, and everything that happens after the visitor gets to the site -- shopping cart optimization, call-to-action design, web statistics analysis, ongoing testing, etc. Which means, IMHO, at the absolute least three or four talented people.

For other organizations, it may be possible to get away with one multi-skilled person, and a PPC bid-management tool.

[A.N.Onym]

Frankly speaking, there isn't that much new going on. Sure, new languages appear, new tricks come along, but if a person is professional enough (writing readable and secure code from the start), then there aren't many problems with following another industry.

When it comes to SEO, it all evolves around the people, not the search engines. So, this means you don't need to track the SEs and only need to find more ways to deliver quality to your customers. And there's a limited amount ways to do that.

It is clear that one person can't be expected to do everything at once. However, it should be reasonable for a SEO to be able to create a well researched article, code some HTML/CSS/PHP and also know about social (word of mouth) marketing.

You are correct in a way that one person can't be a developer and a SEO at a time. His/her preference will pick one, anyway. That's why partnering with someone, who can barter a service should be helpful for any parties involved.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 07 February 2007 - 08:35 AM.

[fctoma]

Bringing SEM/SEO in house is exactly what we did back in 1999. I believe it was a good move for me and the company. I started here as a sales guy, we develop software at the company I work for and when I started in 97, they had a two page, pretty much text site.

We went to one of the first SES conferences hosted by Danny; I think there were under 200 attendees, in San Fran. It was an eye-opener and I instantly got interested. We had maybe 200 visitors a month, really slow back then. Now, we average 700 visitors a day. 90% of these visitors are from SEs.

I credit our in-house SEM, plus the in-house knowledge of our software work flow, and all the pieces that fall behind within the company. I have an internal knowledge and passion for our software, thus making it much easier for ME to do our SEO, rather than an outside company. I still do sales, but most of my time is focused on SEO/SEM.

Over the past few years, we've received tons of offers from SEO companies wanting to "SEO" our site. Once I get them on the phone, it always is the same story. Most of them haven't even taken the chance to look through our site before they call. Most of them have no clue what we're about. Most of them cost twice as much as my monthly salary.

Anyways, I'm a big fan of SEO in house. If you have the will to learn, its a great job! Constantly moving, constantly learning.

Have a great weekend from Idaho!

<edit>Signature, Frank. Signature</edit>

[cline]

One key issue the article missed was how many FTEs you need in SEM. If you don't have enough SEM work for a full FTE, preferably two, you don't have enough work to allow an inhouse person to specialize in SEM. SEM is sufficiently complex and rapidly changing that if you don't specialize in it, you cannot do it well.

This trumps whether SEM is a core function of the business. I've got lots of clients who are 100% dependent on SEM for customer acquisition. But they need only a small amount of SEM work. They're far better off getting that from a specialist than trying to do it inhouse.

There's also an efficiency issue. Several years ago a headhunter tried to lure me to take an inhouse position. Great sounding position, excellent compensation. But when I found out how big the program to be managed was, I asked the headhunter, "this is only a 5/hr per week job. What am I going to do with the other 35 hours per week?"