Who to hire for creative

Written by a studio, so read it with that in mind. We have tried to be fair: each option is the right answer for some brand at some stage.

Best when you need one skill, the brief is clear and you can direct the work yourself. Often the best value there is.

Risk: one person, one style, one calendar.

Best for a launch, a film or a website. You get direction and making in one place, for a fixed scope.

Risk: it ends when the project ends.

Best when you need steady content in one look, every month, without managing it.

Risk: you pay in quiet months too. Check what rolls over.

Best when you ship creative daily and product knowledge matters more than range.

Risk: one person cannot be great at film, web and design.

Best for campaigns across television, outdoor and media buying, with strategy attached.

Risk: minimum budgets and slower turnarounds.

Before launch: a project. Growing: a retainer, plus freelancers for spikes. At scale: in-house, plus specialists for films and launches.

Most brands need two of these, not one.

One owner on your side. One written brief. Revision rounds agreed before work starts. That decides the outcome more than who you hire.

Bad briefs sink good teams.

• Freelancer: one skill, clear brief, you can direct
• Project studio: a launch, a film, a website, fixed scope
• Monthly retainer: steady content in one visual system
• In-house: daily output, deep product knowledge
• Big agency: multi-channel campaigns and media buying

• Freelancer: availability, and a single style
• Project studio: momentum stops when the project does
• Retainer: paying through quiet months
• In-house: one person stretched across film, web and design
• Big agency: minimum budgets, slow turnarounds

• Who exactly does the work?
• What is included, and what is extra?
• How many revision rounds?
• Who owns the files at the end?
• What happens if we stop?

One owner on your side, one written brief, and rounds agreed up front. That decides the result more than who you hire.