The founder was torn. He'd gotten two pieces of advice:
"Build an in-house team. You need people who care about your company."
"Hire a consultancy. You'll move faster and avoid costly mistakes."
Both advisors were confident. Both seemed right. And neither one was wrong.
The problem was that they were solving different problems. And the founder didn't know which problem he had.
The Comparison Framework
Let's stop pretending there's a simple answer. The right choice depends on your situation.
| Factor | In-House Team | Tech Consultancy |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Ongoing product development | Specific problems, decisions, audits |
| Cost model | Fixed overhead | Variable, as-needed |
| Speed | Slower to start, faster long-term | Faster to start, limited engagement |
| Context | Deep company knowledge | Broad industry patterns |
| Commitment | Long-term relationship | Project-based, can end |
When In-House Makes Sense
An in-house team is right when:
You have ongoing work that needs continuous attention. You need someone to maintain and improve the product indefinitely. The work never really "finishes."
You can afford the overhead. Hiring people means salary, benefits, management, office space (or remote infrastructure). It's expensive and ongoing.
You want deep context. An in-house team learns your business, your users, your domain. They accumulate knowledge that outsiders never can.
You're playing the long game. Building a team is an investment. It takes time to hire the right people, onboard them, and build the culture you want.
When a Consultancy Makes Sense
A consultancy is right when:
You have a specific problem to solve. A decision to make. An audit to conduct. A migration to plan. Something with a beginning and an end.
You need outside perspective. Someone who hasn't been in the trenches with you. Someone who can see patterns you can't because you're too close.
You're at an inflection point. You need guidance for a transition—scaling, pivoting, raising funding—and want expert help for that moment.
You can't afford an in-house team yet. But you need technical guidance that you can't get from reading blog posts.
The Hybrid Approach
Here's what most founders eventually discover: you need both.
You need an in-house team to build and maintain your product. You need a consultancy to help with decisions you can't get wrong.
The trick is knowing when to use which.
Use a consultancy when you're making a decision that will constrain your options for years. When you're not sure if you're on the right track. When you need someone to tell you the hard truth.
Use your in-house team when you're executing on a clear plan. When you know what needs to be built. When you need continuous improvement over time.
The Mistake Most Founders Make
The most common mistake is treating a consultancy like an in-house team. Or treating an in-house team like a consultancy.
Hiring a consultancy for ongoing development is expensive and frustrating. They don't have the context, and you're paying for their learning curve.
Hiring an in-house team for a one-time decision is wasteful. You're paying for overhead you don't need.
Match the resource to the problem.
The Bottom Line
There's no universal answer. The right choice depends on what problem you're solving.
If you're building a product that will evolve over years, you probably need an in-house team.
If you're making a decision that will shape your company's future, you probably need a consultancy.
And if you're not sure which problem you have, that's exactly when a consultancy can help.
Need Help Figuring Out What You Need?
At Startupbricks, we help founders understand what resources match their challenges. Sometimes that means recommending a consultancy engagement. Sometimes it means helping you build your team. Let's talk about what you're actually trying to solve.