Head to Head: Agency versus in-house – which is better?
In this series, Mumbrella invites the industry’s senior PR professionals to share their opposing views on the industry’s biggest issues. This week, Elly Hewitt, managing director at Alt/Shift goes head to head with PayPal’s Tom Hunter on whether working in an agency is better than in-house.
It has been a long fought debate in the PR industry: which is the best place to be? In an agency? Or working client side?
For Alt/Shift’s managing director Elly Hewitt, who worked client side for a short stint, working in agency allows for more of a diverse range of work, clients and ideas. Hewitt argues that agencies have a strong culture and braver approach to work.
In contrast, Tom Hunter, says working in-house is better because you are able to dedicate yourself to one brand and one company’s goals.
Yes, argues Elly Hewitt, managing director, Alt/Shift:
Tom, it was our pleasure to have you as part of the Verve Communications team. We always knew you were destined for big things and we are glad we have played a role in your career trajectory.
It was amazing to work with you, Prue! Thank you.
Totally agree with Tom. Currently have much more responsibility in-house and the role is more broad compared to agencies, but I learnt so many valuable PR tricks during agency life!
Agencies are forever chasing revenue and pushing their staff to work crazy hours, chase new business, and the whole time pretend to their clients that they’re “the only one”. It’s a meat grinder of a model. Churns people up. They don’t deliver their best work across all clients. Many suffer, especially if they’re smaller clients of an agency that’s servicing a big fish. Working in-house is “the dream” for agency people who aren’t sitting at the top of the tree and not having to do the grunt work.