Should we build our MMM in-house or use third-party agencies?

We’ve seen many brands move in-house their media buying, but haven’t seen the same with MMM.

Why did many brands in-house their media buying?

✅ Direct access to platforms
✅ No cost penalties
✅ Tighter integration of buying + data

Given these broader trends, I would have expected measurement to follow the same path. For some teams, it has, yet typically it remains owned by third parties.

4 reasons why MMM has not been in-housed

1. Tools to drive growth
Third parties have scalable platforms, automation, and benchmarks to help you take value from measurement.
In-house means bespoke tools can be built, but it takes time, talent, and ongoing investment.

2. Avoiding politics
MMM touches marketing, finance, analytics and product.
Third parties act as neutral referees. In-house? The influence of politics can creep in.

3. Embedding incremental measurement
Running the analysis is only half the job. The bigger challenge? Getting the business to trust and act on the results.
Third parties often bring credibility and a proven framework for change. In-house teams can do this, but they need to combine technical expertise with strong internal influence, and that is often two different profiles.

4. Cost model
In-house isn’t always cheaper. You save fees but add salaries, tech, and turnover risk. Vendors spread costs across clients.

So, will the future of MMM be in-house or with Agencies?

Firstly, ignore my prediction. 5 years ago, I would have predicted much more in-house take-up. But that reality hasn’t taken hold, and many third-party providers have seen and continue to see significant growth. With a continued demand, I do expect third parties to still be the default.