It's not a question of which model is always the best, but which one can deliver what your company needs now — without unnecessary expense and false expectations.
A good choice when you need a single skill, a small project or occasional help.
A good choice when you need more disciplines and a larger volume of content or campaigns.
For businesses that want strategy, execution, tracking and approvals to work as one stream.
It makes the most sense when the company has enough work every day for several permanent roles.
Ratings are indicative — specific performance always depends on the person, the team and the contracted scope.
| What do you need? | Freelancer | Agency | Simbia system | Internal team |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| One time specialist task | Excellent | Good | Good | Often too expensive |
| Regular content and campaigns | Limited scope | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent |
| Automation and consolidated reports | Depends on the person | Depends on the system | Embedded in process | Requires internal tools |
| Fast everyday internal reaction | Upon availability | By agreement | By package and priority | The best |
| Fixed employment cost | None | None | None | Highest |
| Continuity if one person is absent | Risk | The team takes over | Team and system take over | Depends on team size |
Freelancer or a clearly defined project may be the most rational choice.
When ads, content, web and reports must work together, an owner of the whole process is needed.
For constant production and numerous internal requirements, it can be the fastest choice in the long run.
During a short introductory conversation, we determine the scope, goal and data, and only then do we propose a model that makes sense.
