Design as a Service vs In-House Designer: True Cost Breakdown

Design as a service vs an in-house designer has become a major consideration for businesses that want to stay competitive. In today’s market, creative design is no longer optional, as businesses need strong visuals to stand out, connect with their audience, and establish trust. Therefore, the question is not whether you need design support, but how best to secure it.

Some companies choose to hire full-time, in-house designers who live and breathe the brand every day. Others prefer design as a service, where they subscribe to a flexible, on-demand approach that delivers professional design work without the overhead of permanent staff. Both approaches have their benefits and challenges, and the costs - both visible and hidden - can vary widely.

You could also consider Freelancers or Agencies, but in this article, we break down the costs between in-house talent and designers so you can make an informed decision about which approach aligns best with your business goals.

Cost Breakdown at a Glance

In-House Designer: often above $36,000/employee per annum ($3000 per month)

Design as a Service: Often between $3000 - $20,000/month

Of course, the accurate cost depends on the role, skill and scope of the project. But here’s what you need to know from the get-go: the hiring cost of a full-time hire often goes beyond the salary.

Edie Goldberg, Chair of the Board for the SHRM Foundation and founder of E. L. Goldberg & Associates, estimates that the total cost to hire a new employee can be three to four times the position's salary.

Also, the Training Industry Reports put the US training expenditures at $98 billion in 2024.

So, we can infer that hiring one employee (with training and all overhead costs) is far more expensive than using Design as a Service.

Design as a Service vs In-House Designer: A Brief Comparison

As established above, businesses often weigh the choice between hiring an in-house designer and subscribing to design as a service for creative support. At their core, both provide design solutions, but the way they operate and the value they deliver are quite different.

Design as a Service (DaaS)

Design-as-a-Service or Creative-as-a-Service works like a typical SaaS subscription with monthly charges for a service.

Instead of hiring an employee, businesses pay a set monthly fee to access a team of professional designers. The service usually covers a wide range of creative needs, from social media graphics and branding to website design. The main advantage lies in flexibility; you can scale up or down depending on your workload without the long-term costs tied to full-time staff.

In-House Designer

An in-house designer is a permanent employee dedicated exclusively to your business. They become familiar with your brand voice and identity over time, which can lead to a consistent design style. However, hiring one often involves significant costs beyond salary, including benefits, training, and equipment. Their creative output is also limited to their personal expertise, unless you expand the team.

Key Differences at a Glance

Flexibility: DaaS offers on-demand scalability, while in-house designers are fixed resources.
Cost Structure: DaaS is subscription-based, while in-house hiring involves salaries, benefits, and overhead.
Skill Range: DaaS gives access to diverse specialists, while in-house depends on the skills of one or a few individuals.
Consistency: In-house designers provide brand familiarity, while DaaS requires clear onboarding for brand alignment.

Pros and Cons of Design as a Service vs In-House Designer

Both options come with unique advantages and drawbacks. Understanding these will help you see beyond cost and consider how each approach fits into your business structure and long-term goals.

Design as a Service (DaaS)

Pros:

Cost Predictability: Flat monthly fees with no hidden overhead.
Access to Diverse Skills: A pool of specialists across branding, web, print, and digital.
Scalability: Easy to increase or reduce design volume as business needs change.
No HR Burden: No recruitment, benefits, or employee management.
Up-to-Date Expertise: Teams stay current with design trends and tools.

Cons:

Less Embedded in the Brand: Designers are not part of your day-to-day team, so initial onboarding is crucial.
Subscription Dependency: Work ends if you cancel the service.
Turnaround Limits: Depending on the provider, complex requests may take longer.

In-House Designer

Pros:

Deep Brand Knowledge: Works closely with your team and builds a strong sense of brand identity.
Direct Communication: Immediate access for brainstorming and quick fixes.
Consistent Style: Long-term familiarity often leads to design consistency.
Dedicated Focus: The designer is fully invested in your company’s projects.

Cons:

High Costs: Salaries, benefits, and overhead add up quickly.
Limited Skill Set: One person may not cover all design needs (e.g., web, motion graphics, print).
Scaling Challenges: Growth requires additional hires, which is time-consuming and costly.
Management Needs: Requires supervision, training, and ongoing performance reviews.
Risk of Turnover: Losing a designer disrupts workflow and forces rehiring.

Cost Breakdown of Design as a Service vs In-House Designer

Design as a service vs In-house hires.png

When comparing design as a service (DaaS) with an in-house designer, the true cost extends beyond just monthly fees or salaries. Each option carries its own financial and operational implications. Below is a breakdown of the major cost factors.

1. Quality of Work

Design as a Service: You gain access to a team of vetted professionals with varied expertise. This ensures a wide range of design needs are covered with consistent quality.
In-House Designer: Quality depends on the individual’s skills and experience. A junior designer may deliver entry-level work, while a senior designer brings expertise but at a much higher cost.

2. Scalability

Design as a Service: Easy to scale. You can increase your design requests or add more services without recruitment delays.
In-House Designer: Scaling means hiring more staff. And adding multiple designers significantly raises payroll and benefits costs.

3. Management

Design as a Service: Project management is usually built into the subscription, saving you time. You submit requests, and the team handles execution.
In-House Designer: Requires supervision, performance management, and workload planning. This responsibility often falls on marketing managers or business owners, which adds indirect costs.

4. Employee Benefits

Design as a Service: No benefits, pensions, or health insurance costs since the designers are not your employees.
In-House Designer: Beyond salary, you must budget for benefits packages. Depending on location, this is usually 20–30% of the base salary.

5. Equipment and Software

Design as a Service: Providers supply their own tools and licenses (Adobe Creative Suite, Figma, etc.), saving you thousands annually.
In-House Designer: You must purchase equipment and design software. Costs may range from $2,000–$5,000 upfront for hardware and $600–$1,200 per year for software subscriptions.

6. Training and Onboarding

Design as a Service: Minimal training required. The team is already skilled, with only brand onboarding needed.
In-House Designer: Training, onboarding, and development are ongoing costs. Expect additional expenses for workshops, courses, and time lost during the learning curve.

Estimated Annual Cost Comparison

Design as a Service (DaaS): ~$18k–$36k/year (most providers run $1.5k–$3k/month).
In-House Designer (mid-level): ~$70k–$95k base + $15k–$25k benefits/overhead + $3k–$6k tools/training = ~$90k–$125k/year.
In-House Designer (senior-level): $110k–$150k+/year all-in.

👉 On average, Design-as-a-Service costs about 3–4x less than a full-time hire, while offering broader expertise and scalability.

How to Choose the Best Option for You

The decision between design as a service and hiring an in-house designer depends on your business size, goals, and creative demands. There’s no one-size-fits-all answer, but you can weigh the following factors to guide your choice.

Budget: If you need predictable costs without the burden of salaries and benefits, design as a service offers better value. Conversely, if you have the budget to sustain long-term overhead, an in-house designer may fit better.
Design Volume: Businesses with fluctuating design needs benefit from the scalability of DaaS. For steady, ongoing projects, though, an in-house designer can be more practical.
Skill Requirements: If your projects span multiple areas (branding, UI/UX, print, motion graphics), DaaS provides access to diverse specialists. However, if your needs are consistent and focused, one skilled in-house designer may suffice.
Team Integration: If deep brand immersion and constant collaboration are priorities, an in-house designer is more suitable. But if you prefer streamlined, request-based workflows, DaaS is the simpler route.
Growth Plans: Companies in growth mode often lean on DaaS to scale quickly. On the other hand, established businesses with structured creative departments may prefer to expand in-house.

AMAKA Studio: Beyond Design-as-a-Service

The rise of design-as-a-service proves one thing: businesses are demanding faster, more scalable, and more cost-effective ways to deliver creative. But while traditional DaaS platforms offer speed and variety, they often lack the strategic partnership and brand depth needed to truly move the needle.

That’s where AMAKA Studio comes in. We combine the flexibility and cost efficiency of a DaaS model with the strategic insight and creative partnership of an embedded team. Our clients don’t just submit requests and wait for deliverables — they gain a creative partner that understands their brand DNA, anticipates needs, and scales output without sacrificing quality or cohesion.

In other words, AMAKA Studio is not just another subscription service. We’re the next evolution of creative-as-a-service:

Strategic Partnership: Creative aligned with your marketing and growth goals.
Scalable Output: Expand or contract design support seamlessly.
Brand Consistency: Dedicated creative direction that protects your identity across every channel.

So when you’re weighing the costs of in-house versus DaaS, consider a third path: AMAKA Studio — your creative engine for scalable, brand-driven growth.

Cost Breakdown at a Glance

In-House Designer: often above $36,000/employee per annum ($3000 per month)

Design as a Service: Often between $3000 - $20,000/month

Of course, the accurate cost depends on the role, skill and scope of the project. But here’s what you need to know from the get-go: the hiring cost of a full-time hire often goes beyond the salary.

Also, the Training Industry Reports put the US training expenditures at $98 billion in 2024.

So, we can infer that hiring one employee (with training and all overhead costs) is far more expensive than using Design as a Service.

Design as a Service vs In-House Designer: A Brief Comparison

Design as a Service (DaaS)

Design-as-a-Service or Creative-as-a-Service works like a typical SaaS subscription with monthly charges for a service.

In-House Designer

Key Differences at a Glance

Flexibility: DaaS offers on-demand scalability, while in-house designers are fixed resources.
Cost Structure: DaaS is subscription-based, while in-house hiring involves salaries, benefits, and overhead.
Skill Range: DaaS gives access to diverse specialists, while in-house depends on the skills of one or a few individuals.
Consistency: In-house designers provide brand familiarity, while DaaS requires clear onboarding for brand alignment.

Pros and Cons of Design as a Service vs In-House Designer

Both options come with unique advantages and drawbacks. Understanding these will help you see beyond cost and consider how each approach fits into your business structure and long-term goals.

Design as a Service (DaaS)

Pros:

Cost Predictability: Flat monthly fees with no hidden overhead.
Access to Diverse Skills: A pool of specialists across branding, web, print, and digital.
Scalability: Easy to increase or reduce design volume as business needs change.
No HR Burden: No recruitment, benefits, or employee management.
Up-to-Date Expertise: Teams stay current with design trends and tools.

Cons:

Less Embedded in the Brand: Designers are not part of your day-to-day team, so initial onboarding is crucial.
Subscription Dependency: Work ends if you cancel the service.
Turnaround Limits: Depending on the provider, complex requests may take longer.

In-House Designer

Pros:

Deep Brand Knowledge: Works closely with your team and builds a strong sense of brand identity.
Direct Communication: Immediate access for brainstorming and quick fixes.
Consistent Style: Long-term familiarity often leads to design consistency.
Dedicated Focus: The designer is fully invested in your company’s projects.

Cons:

High Costs: Salaries, benefits, and overhead add up quickly.
Limited Skill Set: One person may not cover all design needs (e.g., web, motion graphics, print).
Scaling Challenges: Growth requires additional hires, which is time-consuming and costly.
Management Needs: Requires supervision, training, and ongoing performance reviews.
Risk of Turnover: Losing a designer disrupts workflow and forces rehiring.

Cost Breakdown of Design as a Service vs In-House Designer

1. Quality of Work

Design as a Service: You gain access to a team of vetted professionals with varied expertise. This ensures a wide range of design needs are covered with consistent quality.
In-House Designer: Quality depends on the individual’s skills and experience. A junior designer may deliver entry-level work, while a senior designer brings expertise but at a much higher cost.

2. Scalability

Design as a Service: Easy to scale. You can increase your design requests or add more services without recruitment delays.
In-House Designer: Scaling means hiring more staff. And adding multiple designers significantly raises payroll and benefits costs.

3. Management

Design as a Service: Project management is usually built into the subscription, saving you time. You submit requests, and the team handles execution.
In-House Designer: Requires supervision, performance management, and workload planning. This responsibility often falls on marketing managers or business owners, which adds indirect costs.

4. Employee Benefits

Design as a Service: No benefits, pensions, or health insurance costs since the designers are not your employees.
In-House Designer: Beyond salary, you must budget for benefits packages. Depending on location, this is usually 20–30% of the base salary.

5. Equipment and Software

Design as a Service: Providers supply their own tools and licenses (Adobe Creative Suite, Figma, etc.), saving you thousands annually.
In-House Designer: You must purchase equipment and design software. Costs may range from $2,000–$5,000 upfront for hardware and $600–$1,200 per year for software subscriptions.

6. Training and Onboarding

Design as a Service: Minimal training required. The team is already skilled, with only brand onboarding needed.
In-House Designer: Training, onboarding, and development are ongoing costs. Expect additional expenses for workshops, courses, and time lost during the learning curve.

Estimated Annual Cost Comparison

Design as a Service (DaaS): ~$18k–$36k/year (most providers run $1.5k–$3k/month).
In-House Designer (mid-level): ~$70k–$95k base + $15k–$25k benefits/overhead + $3k–$6k tools/training = ~$90k–$125k/year.
In-House Designer (senior-level): $110k–$150k+/year all-in.

👉 On average, Design-as-a-Service costs about 3–4x less than a full-time hire, while offering broader expertise and scalability.

How to Choose the Best Option for You

Budget: If you need predictable costs without the burden of salaries and benefits, design as a service offers better value. Conversely, if you have the budget to sustain long-term overhead, an in-house designer may fit better.
Design Volume: Businesses with fluctuating design needs benefit from the scalability of DaaS. For steady, ongoing projects, though, an in-house designer can be more practical.
Skill Requirements: If your projects span multiple areas (branding, UI/UX, print, motion graphics), DaaS provides access to diverse specialists. However, if your needs are consistent and focused, one skilled in-house designer may suffice.
Team Integration: If deep brand immersion and constant collaboration are priorities, an in-house designer is more suitable. But if you prefer streamlined, request-based workflows, DaaS is the simpler route.
Growth Plans: Companies in growth mode often lean on DaaS to scale quickly. On the other hand, established businesses with structured creative departments may prefer to expand in-house.

AMAKA Studio: Beyond Design-as-a-Service

In other words, AMAKA Studio is not just another subscription service. We’re the next evolution of creative-as-a-service:

Strategic Partnership: Creative aligned with your marketing and growth goals.
Scalable Output: Expand or contract design support seamlessly.
Brand Consistency: Dedicated creative direction that protects your identity across every channel.

So when you’re weighing the costs of in-house versus DaaS, consider a third path: AMAKA Studio — your creative engine for scalable, brand-driven growth.