A question every direct marketing enterprise faces is whether to use in-house or outsourced creative. There’s little doubt the desire to reduce costs continues to fuel the issue, especially with technology expenses going through the roof.
Some companies I’ve worked with, such as PaperDirect and Day-Timers, invested heavily in technology and in large, highly talented creative teams. These investments paid off handsomely because the creatives worked on the copy and design of new and existing products and packaging as well as promotions.
The same individuals may not have designed both products and promotions, but much of the hardware, software and support they used were shared throughout the creative group. So one initial and obvious aspect of the in-house/outsource issue is the type and volume of the work you have now or anticipate.
Direct marketers selling non-proprietary technical products often can use art and copy supplied by their vendor manufacturers, along with the vendor co-op funds to help offset advertising costs. In this example, the marketer may have a lower volume of work. While it is unquestionably time-consuming to standardize the various styles and formats supplied by multiple vendors, there often is no product or packaging to design and fewer promotional pieces and pages to create and update.
Similarly, a DMer with fewer overall promotions and fewer new products to launch may find the investment required to assemble a highly trained staff and buy the necessary technology will take too long to pay back. Moreover, because technology changes rapidly, the hardware or software can become obsolete before the payback occurs.
