ASOPROFESSIONALLET’S TALK ↗

THE ASO PROFESSIONAL FIELD GUIDE / In-house vs outsourced ASO

WHO OWNS THE WORK?
WHO HAS THE TIME?

Compare in-house and outsourced ASO using workload, product knowledge, implementation capacity and accountability across the whole release process.

GET INTO THE DETAIL ↓
Gabriel Machuret reviewing an ASO consulting brief and app strategy
GABRIEL MACHURET / ASO IN PRACTICE

MAKE THE THINKING VISIBLE

Every task still needs an owner.

Swipe horizontally to compare all columns →

Illustrative editorial review
WorkstreamInternal ownerExternal contribution if agreed
Product factsConfirms capabilitiesAsks questions and records assumptions
ResearchSupplies contextInvestigates and recommends
CreativeApproves claimsBriefs or produces scoped assets
PublishingAuthorises releaseProvides agreed implementation support

Editorial evaluation framework, not a provider ranking, fee quote or guarantee of results. Illustrative responsibility map; assign the actual roles for your engagement.

01

Map the recurring workload.

List research, metadata, creative, coordination and reporting tasks over a realistic release cycle. Identify what is continuous and what is occasional. A short project and a sustained operating function need different staffing decisions.

The visual separates responsibility from where a person works. An outsourced specialist still needs internal context, while an internal team may need external expertise for a particular decision.

02

Check internal capacity honestly.

Name the person who can brief the work, review recommendations and coordinate implementation. If nobody has time to approve changes, buying more external output may simply create a larger backlog.

Use the briefing guide to expose dependencies. Available hours, decision authority and access to product facts matter as much as enthusiasm for growth.

03

Evaluate capability gaps.

An internal team may have product context but need research or experimentation support. An external provider may bring relevant experience but need time to understand the app. Record the actual gap rather than treating one model as inherently more knowledgeable.

Compare proposed deliverables with the team’s current capability. Provider comparisons can help when the external part of the work is still undefined.

04

Plan knowledge transfer and continuity.

Keep research rationale, approved versions and decisions accessible to the team. Agree who maintains the record after a project ends or a person changes roles. A dependency on undocumented knowledge makes either model fragile.

Use a change log and shared review standards. The output should help the next owner understand why decisions were made, not merely identify the latest file.

05

Choose a workable combination.

A hybrid arrangement can assign internal ownership with external diagnosis, review or training. Define boundaries and a review point to assess whether the arrangement is meeting the need.

Compare project versus ongoing work separately from employment location. The decision is about capability and workload, not a permanent ideological choice.

CLEAR UP THE DETAILS

Common questions.

Does outsourcing remove internal work?

No. Product context, approvals and implementation ownership still need accountable people.

Can an internal team use a consultant?

Yes. A focused review or specialist project can complement internal capability.

What should stay documented?

Research reasoning, approved assets, release changes, responsibilities and evaluation decisions.

FOLLOW THE NEXT QUESTION

Keep learning.

PUT IT TO WORK ON YOUR APP

Want a second pair
of experienced eyes?

Explore the scope, deliverables and process before starting a conversation.

WORK DIRECTLY WITH GABRIEL ↗