Guide
Strategy
Brands
You can run influencer marketing three ways: a full-service agency that runs it for a fee, a self-serve platform that gives your team the structure while you keep the strategy, or in-house/manual with no specialised tooling. The right choice depends on how many collaborations you run at once, how much internal time you have, and whether you want to own the strategy or hand it off. Most brands start manual, move to a platform once volume grows, and only bring in an agency for specific, time-boxed activations.
There are three basic ways to run influencer marketing: a full-service agency that does the work for a fee, a self-serve platform that gives you the tooling while you keep the strategy, or in-house/manual, where your own team handles it without specialised software. None of the three is universally "best" — each fits a different combination of budget, internal capacity, and how many collaborations you're running at once.
| Model | Who does the work | Cost structure | Control over strategy | Typically fits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agency | The agency's team | Monthly retainer, project fee, or a share of spend | Low-medium — you delegate strategy | Brands with no internal capacity, or a large, time-boxed campaign |
| Platform | Your own team, with software doing the heavy lifting | A fixed platform fee + internal time | High — you own the strategy | Brands that want to scale without handing over ownership |
| In-house / manual | Your own team, no specialised tooling | No software cost, but a high time cost | Highest | Brands still validating the channel, with few concurrent collaborations |
An agency takes on most of the work: sourcing and vetting influencers, negotiating terms, briefing, following up, and reporting. You keep overall ownership of objectives and budget, but day-to-day execution sits with the agency. It's the most expensive per collaboration, but requires the least internal time — valuable when you're short on either capacity or experience to run it yourselves.
A platform gives you the structure — per-creator tracking links, briefs, a status overview, payment — without taking the strategy off your hands. You still find and choose the influencers yourselves (see how many influencers you need for a campaign), but you skip building tracking and follow-up in a spreadsheet. It's typically the model that gives the most control per krone, if you have someone who can spend a few hours a week on it.
Pure manual operation — DMs, spreadsheets, email — works fine for the first handful of collaborations. The problem isn't that starting this way is wrong; the problem is that it breaks down quietly as the number of creators grows. See why manual influencer marketing becomes messy for the specific symptoms and where the threshold usually sits.
Agencies typically use one of three fee models, or a combination:
The exact numbers vary widely by agency, market, and scope. Treat them as something to negotiate and pin down in a contract for the specific engagement, not as an industry standard. See what to put in an influencer contract for the terms that should be written down regardless of which model you choose.
See also influencer marketing on a small budget if budget, rather than capacity, is the deciding factor.
The figures below are illustrative, built to show how the cost splits between the fee and internal time — they are not actual agency or platform prices. The example assumes a brand running 15 concurrent creator collaborations a month, and an internal hourly cost of DKK 400.
| Model | Fee per month | Internal time per month | Time cost (DKK 400/hour) | Total illustrative monthly cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agency | DKK 35,000 | 8 hours (follow-up and approvals) | DKK 3,200 | DKK 38,200 |
| Platform | DKK 3,000 | 40 hours (sourcing, briefing, follow-up) | DKK 16,000 | DKK 19,000 |
| In-house / manual | DKK 0 | 80 hours (everything, including tracking in a spreadsheet) | DKK 32,000 | DKK 32,000 |
At this illustrative volume, the platform is cheapest, because the software removes a large share of the time-consuming tracking and follow-up without costing a full agency retainer. The agency is the most expensive in kroner, but demands the least of your own time. The manual track looks cheap until you count the internal time — exactly the trap manual influencer marketing describes. At lower volume (say, 3-4 collaborations), the picture flips: the internal time manual work takes is low enough that neither an agency nor a platform is justified yet.
In practice, many brands change models over time, or combine them. A common path: start manual to validate the channel, move to a platform once volume outgrows what a spreadsheet can carry (see how to build an always-on influencer and UGC system), and bring in an agency for specific, time-boxed activations — a product launch, a major seasonal push — without giving up the platform as the day-to-day foundation.
It's our experience — not an objective truth — that most brands underestimate how much control they give up by going straight to a full-service agency, and how much structure they can get without it by using a platform instead. We built Make Influence because we saw the gap between "hand it all to an agency" and "run it in a spreadsheet until it breaks" as a false choice. A platform can give you most of the structure — per-creator tracking, briefs, a status overview — without handing over the strategy.
Not necessarily — it depends on what your internal time is worth and how many collaborations you're running. At low volume, an agency's fixed fee can cost more than a platform fee plus internal time; at very high volume or complex execution, an agency's scale can make it relatively cheaper per collaboration.
Yes, and most brands do. The most common path is manual → platform → occasionally an agency for specific activations, as volume and complexity grow.
No. In-house means your own team runs it — that can happen on a platform just as easily. "Manual" specifically means without specialised tooling, typically in spreadsheets and DMs.
Rarely at first — hybrid setups require someone to coordinate across vendors, which is itself an administrative cost. They make the most sense once volume and complexity are high enough to justify it.
No. Plenty of large brands run their entire influencer programme on a platform with an internal team, precisely because they want to own the relationships and the data. An agency matters when capacity or specialised expertise is the limiting factor — not automatically past a certain size.
Make Influence
Find creators with real audience data, run collaborations in one place, and see clicks and sales per creator while the campaign is live.
Book a demoCreate accountMake Influence
Apply to campaigns from brands that are actively looking, follow your own clicks and sales, and get paid without chasing invoices.
Create creator profileMore creator guidesMake Influence
Briefs, agreed terms, tracking links and results sit together — so brands and creators see the same numbers.
See how it worksBrowse the Academy