The rise of Generative Engine Optimisation (GEO) has forced UK businesses to make a critical decision – should they outsource this new discipline to a specialist agency or build an in-house team capable of managing AI-powered search strategies? This question sits at the heart of how many organisations are restructuring their digital marketing departments as search engines continue to evolve beyond traditional link-based ranking factors. The answer is not straightforward, and it depends on your business size, budget, existing expertise, and growth trajectory.
In 2026, as Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, and Perplexity AI continue to shape how people find information online, the skills required to succeed in GEO are fundamentally different from traditional Search Engine Optimisation (SEO). This shift means that the typical in-house team structure that worked for SEO may no longer be optimal, and the agency landscape itself is rapidly evolving to meet new demands. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of each approach – agency versus in-house – will help you make an informed decision about where your marketing budget should go.
The Current State of GEO Skills and Talent in the UK Job Market
Finding people with genuine Generative Engine Optimisation expertise remains one of the biggest challenges facing UK businesses considering an in-house approach. The discipline is so new that there are relatively few professionals who have spent multiple years mastering it. Most SEO professionals are still in the early stages of understanding how AI Overviews, Large Language Model (LLM) optimisation, and generative search impact their strategies. This talent gap creates an immediate problem for businesses trying to hire.
When you search for GEO specialists on traditional recruitment platforms, you find very few candidates with proven track records. Most people claiming GEO expertise have backgrounds in SEO, digital marketing, or content creation, with only recent training in generative search principles. This means that unlike hiring an experienced SEO manager with a ten-year track record, hiring a GEO specialist means taking a calculated risk on someone still relatively early in their career specialisation. The salary expectations for these roles are also rising quickly, with UK agencies actively competing for the same small pool of genuinely skilled professionals.
Specialist GEO agencies, by contrast, have already invested in building teams of people who work exclusively on generative search strategies. They’ve developed proprietary processes, testing frameworks, and content optimisation systems specifically designed for AI Overviews and other generative search interfaces. This head start in team development and process refinement gives agencies a significant advantage over businesses trying to build internal capabilities from scratch. However, the quality of agencies varies significantly, and not every GEO agency is equally qualified to deliver results.
According to a 2024 survey by the Content Marketing Institute, 67% of UK marketing teams reported having limited or no expertise in AI-powered search optimisation, compared to only 28% lacking confidence in traditional SEO
The recruitment challenge extends beyond just finding one specialist. Building an effective in-house GEO team typically requires multiple roles – a GEO strategist, content optimisation specialists, technical implementers, and potentially an AI training specialist to help understand how different LLMs interpret your content. Each of these roles needs to be filled by someone with growing expertise in a field that’s still defining itself. This multiplies the hiring risk and the overall cost of building internal capability.
Cost Comparison: Agency Fees Versus In-House Salaries and Overheads
When you break down the financial case for each approach, the numbers tell an interesting story that varies significantly depending on your business size and commitment level. Let’s start with the in-house route. Hiring a senior GEO specialist in the UK typically costs between £45,000 and £65,000 annually, plus employer’s National Insurance contributions (adding roughly 15% to your base salary), pension contributions, and any benefits package you offer. This means your actual cost for one person is closer to £55,000 to £80,000 per year before they’ve made a single strategic decision.
If you want to build a proper team rather than a single person managing everything, you’re looking at multiple hires. A realistic small team might consist of a GEO strategist (£55,000–£75,000), a content optimisation specialist (£35,000–£50,000), and a technical implementer (£40,000–£55,000). That’s a total investment of £130,000 to £180,000 per year in salaries alone, before overheads. You’ll also need to account for training budgets, GEO software subscriptions, AI tools, and the time it takes for these people to become truly effective. Most organisations find that a newly hired internal team needs 3–6 months before they’re operating at full effectiveness.
Agency retainers for GEO services typically range from £2,500 to £10,000 per month, depending on the scope of work and the agency’s positioning. A mid-tier agency providing comprehensive GEO strategy, content optimisation, and technical implementation might charge around £5,000–£7,500 monthly. This is roughly £60,000–£90,000 per year, which sits in a comparable range to a single senior in-house hire. However, agencies bring several cost advantages that often get overlooked. You don’t pay employer’s National Insurance, you don’t provide pension contributions, you don’t fund training budgets, and you aren’t paying for unused capacity when work is slow.
Another financial consideration is the software and tools required to execute GEO effectively. Tools for content analysis, AI search monitoring, LLM testing, and performance tracking can cost £300–£2,000 per month depending on which platforms you use. An in-house team typically requires access to multiple tools simultaneously, as different team members need different capabilities. An agency has already invested in these tools and amortises the cost across multiple clients, meaning you benefit from their infrastructure without the individual investment.
| Approach | Annual Cost (Base) | Additional Overheads | Total First Year Cost | Break-Even Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single In-House Specialist | £55,000–£80,000 | £10,000–£15,000 (training, tools, recruitment) | £65,000–£95,000 | Ongoing |
| Small In-House Team (3 people) | £130,000–£180,000 | £20,000–£30,000 (tools, training, infrastructure) | £150,000–£210,000 | 12–18 months |
| Mid-Tier Agency Retainer | £60,000–£90,000 | Included in retainer | £60,000–£90,000 | Immediate |
| Premium Agency Retainer | £90,000–£150,000 | Included in retainer | £90,000–£150,000 | Immediate |
The hidden cost in the in-house approach is opportunity cost. If your new hires are still learning GEO principles and developing strategies for your business, they’re not generating results yet. An agency comes in with existing playbooks, battle-tested strategies, and the ability to deliver results more quickly. For businesses that need results within 3–6 months, this speed advantage can be worth significantly more than the upfront salary savings of hiring in-house.
Speed to Market: Getting Your GEO Strategy Live Faster
One of the most underestimated factors in the agency versus in-house decision is how quickly each approach can deliver meaningful results. This matters particularly in GEO, where the landscape is still shifting and early movers are capturing significant visibility advantages. If you hire an in-house team, you’re facing a substantial ramp-up period. Your new hires need to understand your business, your content ecosystem, your technical infrastructure, your competitors, and your target audience. They need to develop a strategy, socialise it with stakeholders, and secure budget and resources before they’ve even started optimising.
A typical timeline for an in-house team might look like this: weeks 1–2 (onboarding and understanding the business), weeks 3–4 (competitive analysis and GEO opportunity research), weeks 5–8 (strategy development and approval), weeks 9–12 (first optimisations and implementation), and weeks 13+ (performance monitoring and scaling). You’re realistically looking at 4–5 months before meaningful results start appearing. For some businesses, this timeline is perfectly acceptable. For others competing in fast-moving sectors, it’s a significant disadvantage.
An external GEO agency begins work immediately with existing knowledge of how generative search operates, common optimisation patterns, and which content types perform best in different scenarios. They’ve already developed repeatable processes because they work with multiple clients across different industries. Your kick-off meeting might be week 1, but your first content optimisations and technical recommendations are likely appearing in week 2 or 3. By month 2, most agencies have delivered their initial strategic recommendations and begun implementation. By month 3, you should see the first measurable improvements in visibility and traffic from generative search sources.
This speed advantage is compounded when you consider that GEO is an evolving discipline. Google AI Overviews changes, ChatGPT’s training improves, and Perplexity AI releases new features. An in-house team needs time to understand each of these shifts and adjust their approach. An agency is monitoring these changes across multiple clients in real-time, meaning they identify patterns, test new optimisation techniques, and develop updated strategies far more quickly. You benefit from their cross-client learning immediately, rather than your team having to learn these lessons the hard way on your own properties.
HubSpot research found that companies working with external agencies saw measurable improvements in their AI search visibility within 45 days on average, compared to 120 days for teams building internal capability from scratch
The speed advantage becomes even more pronounced if your current marketing team lacks any technical SEO background. If your in-house hire is coming from pure content marketing or traditional marketing roles, they need additional time to understand technical optimisation, site structure, schema implementation, and how these factors influence AI Overviews. An agency team member brings this technical knowledge immediately.
Flexibility, Scalability, and Changing Your Mind
The flexibility question is genuinely important, particularly given how uncertain the GEO landscape remains. If you hire an in-house team and discover that your GEO strategy isn’t yielding results, you’re stuck with employees for several months’ notice period and potentially redundancy costs. If you contract with an agency and the partnership isn’t working, you can exit with reasonable notice and try a different agency with fewer complications. This flexibility matters when you’re investing in a strategy that’s still proving its long-term value.
Scalability works differently depending on your approach. An in-house team can be scaled, but slowly. If you hire one person and then need to double your GEO efforts, you hire a second person, which takes 2–3 months of recruitment and onboarding. If you’re with an agency, you typically increase your retainer, and the agency adds resources to your account within days. This matters enormously during high-opportunity periods. If you discover that a particular product category or service area is getting significant visibility in generative search results, you want to capitalise on that opportunity immediately – not wait for an internal hiring process.
The scaling also goes the other way. If your business goes through a period where you need to reduce marketing spend, cutting an agency retainer is straightforward – you reduce the scope or pause the engagement. Reducing in-house headcount involves conversations that most leaders find uncomfortable, plus severance considerations and the loss of accumulated knowledge about your business. For businesses with variable revenue or seasonal patterns, this flexibility is valuable.
Skill diversity is another scalability advantage of agencies. If you need expertise in technical GEO one month and then content strategy the next, an in-house team might only have one person trained in each area. An agency has multiple team members specialising in different aspects of GEO. If your primary contact is unavailable, there’s a backup. If you need advice on AI Overviews optimisation and your team member is focused on Perplexity AI, someone else in the agency can step in. With a three-person in-house team, this redundancy is harder to build.
Quality Control and Accountability in GEO Work
Quality and accountability operate differently depending on whether you’re managing an internal team or an external agency. With an in-house team, accountability is clearer in some ways – they work exclusively for you, and you have direct authority over their decisions. You can oversee their work daily, influence their strategic thinking in real-time, and make adjustments quickly. This direct control appeals to many organisations and can lead to faster decision-making if your in-house manager has strong GEO knowledge.
However, quality control in an in-house setting depends entirely on your own knowledge level. If you don’t understand GEO deeply, you might struggle to evaluate whether your team is making sound decisions or just staying busy. You might not know if they’re applying best practices that have been tested across dozens of client accounts or if they’re operating in isolation based on limited data. This is where many in-house teams struggle – without external benchmarking, it’s hard to know if you’re doing well relative to the market.
An external agency brings quality control through multiple mechanisms. They’re comparing your results to dozens of other client accounts, which means they immediately recognise if your approach is underperforming against industry baselines. They’re bound by their reputation – poor results for you affect their ability to win new business and retain existing clients. Most agencies also operate with multiple team members reviewing each other’s work, meaning mistakes are caught before implementation. Your account manager is usually reviewing the technical team’s work, and there are often internal quality assurance processes before recommendations reach you.
Accountability is also clearer with agencies because the commercial relationship is explicit. If you pay for GEO services and don’t see results, you have clear grounds for conversation and potentially terminating the relationship. With an in-house team, poor results are more ambiguous – is it the team’s fault, leadership’s fault, or because GEO simply isn’t working for your particular business model? This ambiguity makes it harder to course-correct when results aren’t meeting expectations.
Another accountability advantage of agencies is that they’re tracking your progress against agreed metrics from the beginning. Most agencies establish baseline visibility metrics, agree on success measures, and report on those metrics monthly. An in-house team might not have the same rigorous measurement discipline if there’s no external pressure to prove their value. This doesn’t mean in-house teams can’t be effective – it means that agencies have built-in accountability mechanisms that require extra effort to replicate in-house.
- Agencies compare your results against 20+ benchmark accounts, identifying performance gaps quickly
- In-house teams need to build their own benchmarking mechanisms, which takes time and effort
- Agencies have standard quality assurance processes to catch errors before implementation
- In-house teams depend on internal review processes that vary by organisation
- Agencies report monthly to stakeholders on agreed metrics, creating automatic accountability
- In-house teams need to establish their own reporting discipline to maintain visibility
- Agencies’ reputation depends on your success, creating economic incentive to deliver results
- In-house teams’ job security is less directly tied to measurable GEO success
Building Hybrid Models: The Reality of Most Successful UK Organisations
In practice, the cleanest agency-versus-in-house comparison is somewhat theoretical. Most UK organisations that are genuinely committed to GEO are building hybrid models that combine elements of both approaches. This hybrid strategy often provides the best of both worlds – the speed and expertise of an agency combined with the control and business understanding of an in-house team.
A common hybrid model involves hiring a single in-house GEO strategist or manager (rather than a full team) alongside an external agency or freelancer handling execution. The in-house person focuses on strategy, understanding your business deeply, overseeing the agency’s work, and integrating GEO into your broader marketing function. The agency handles the actual technical implementation, content optimisation, and ongoing monitoring. This approach costs roughly £65,000–£85,000 for the in-house role plus £3,000–£5,000 monthly for the agency, totalling around £100,000–£140,000 annually – less than a full in-house team but more than pure agency fees.
The advantages of this model are significant. You have someone internal who understands your business, your customers, your content ecosystem, and your strategic priorities. That person can make better decisions about which GEO opportunities matter most for your business. They can also hold the agency accountable because they have the knowledge to evaluate the agency’s recommendations. The agency, meanwhile, benefits from having a clear internal point of contact who understands GEO and can give feedback quickly, which improves the quality of their work.
Another hybrid variation is hiring a GEO specialist in-house but contracting with an agency for specific high-value projects. For example, your in-house person handles ongoing GEO maintenance and monitoring, but when you need to optimise a major product category for Google AI Overviews or develop a complex content strategy for Perplexity AI, you bring in an agency with deep expertise in that specific area. This lets you retain internal capability while accessing specialist expertise when you need it most.
A third variation involves hiring multiple freelancers specialising in different GEO functions rather than either a full in-house team or a single agency. One freelancer might focus on technical GEO, another on content optimisation, and a third on LLM training and testing. You coordinate them internally or through a loose project manager. This approach appeals to businesses that want flexibility and access to specialists but prefer to avoid long-term agency retainers. However, it requires more internal management bandwidth than a single agency relationship.
| Model | Internal Resource | External Resource | Total Cost | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pure In-House | 3–5 people (full team) | None (or minimal tools) | £150,000–£210,000/year | Large organisations, very technical focus, full control priority |
| Pure Agency | None | Full-service agency retainer | £60,000–£150,000/year | Speed, expertise, flexibility, resource constraints |
| Hybrid: Manager + Agency | 1 GEO manager (£65,000–£85,000) | Agency (£3,000–£5,000/month) | £100,000–£140,000/year | Medium businesses, need both strategy oversight and execution capability |
| Hybrid: Specialist + Freelancers | 1 specialist (£50,000–£70,000) | Multiple freelancers as needed | £70,000–£120,000/year | Businesses wanting flexibility and specialist expertise without full team |
| Project-Based | Minimal (oversight only) | Agency for specific initiatives | £15,000–£40,000 per project | Budget-conscious, smaller scope, testing GEO approach |
The hybrid models work particularly well because they acknowledge that GEO success requires both specialist expertise and deep business understanding. Your in-house person brings the business knowledge and strategic oversight. Your external partners bring the specialist expertise and fresh perspective. Together, they typically deliver better results than either approach alone.
Industry-Specific Considerations for Different UK Business Types
The right choice between agency and in-house varies significantly depending on what industry you’re in and how search visibility directly impacts your revenue. For eCommerce businesses, where Google AI Overviews and generative search directly influence product discovery and sales, the case for getting specialist GEO help quickly (via agency) is strong. Your product visibility window is immediate and continuous – you can’t afford months of ramp-up time while an in-house team learns the business. Most successful UK eCommerce businesses are either using agencies exclusively or using the hybrid manager-plus-agency model to ensure both speed and accountability.
For B2B SaaS and software companies, the timeline is less urgent but the stakes are still high. A prospect discovering your solution through Google AI Overviews rather than traditional search could be a meaningful competitive advantage. However, B2B sales cycles are longer, so the urgency is lower than eCommerce. Many B2B companies are taking a more measured approach, hiring an in-house strategist to understand how generative search fits into their competitive landscape and then working with agencies on specific initiatives. This makes sense because B2B decision-making is complex and benefits from someone internal who understands the sales process intimately.
For local services – plumbers, electricians, accountants, law firms, and similar businesses – the consideration changes again. Local search visibility matters enormously, but your competitive set is smaller and more geographically defined. You might not need a full in-house team, but you benefit significantly from having someone internally who understands your service offerings, your local market, and how you differ from competitors. An agency works well, but a hybrid model with one in-house person plus agency support is often optimal. If you’re looking for GEO services in San Antonio or another city with a competitive local services market, you’ll find many agencies equipped to serve this sector effectively.
For media and content publishers, GEO strategy is different because you’re optimising for visibility in generative search feeds and AI Overviews that cite your content. These businesses benefit from having in-house GEO expertise because the strategy is so intertwined with editorial decisions and content strategy. Your editorial team needs to understand GEO principles to be effective. However, publishers often also work with agencies on specific initiatives, particularly around technical implementation and new tool evaluation. A hybrid approach is very common in this sector.
For nonprofits and charities, budget constraints often make the pure in-house approach impractical. Most nonprofits benefit from working with agencies on a limited scope – perhaps focused on the specific services or campaigns that drive the most impact. Some nonprofits are also finding success working with specialists who offer pro bono or discounted services, recognising that GEO helps nonprofits reach people who need their services.
Making Your Decision: A Framework for UK Businesses
To make the right decision between agency, in-house, or hybrid, work through these key questions honestly. Start by assessing your urgency: do you need meaningful GEO results within 3–6 months, or is a 6–12 month timeline acceptable? If you need fast results, an agency or hybrid model wins. If you can invest time in building internal capability, in-house becomes more viable.
Next, evaluate your budget flexibility. Can you commit to a 3-year in-house team investment, or would you prefer the flexibility to adjust spending annually? Can you afford to have one person unavailable through illness or leave without your entire GEO programme pausing? If flexibility matters, an agency is stronger. If you have stable, predictable budget and don’t need flexibility, in-house is more cost-effective long-term.
Assess your internal expertise. Do you have anyone on your existing marketing team with strong SEO or technical marketing knowledge who could learn GEO? That person could become your internal GEO lead or manager, making the hybrid model effective. If everyone on your team is generalist marketers without deep technical experience, getting a specialist from an agency or freelancer is probably smarter than hiring in-house.
Consider your competitive landscape. How many of your significant competitors are already investing in GEO? How visible are they in AI Overviews and generative search? If you’re playing catch-up, the speed of an agency is valuable. If you’re early to GEO in your market, you have more time to build internal capability. Consider whether GEO is actually real or just SEO rebranding – understanding the genuine value of GEO helps you justify whatever investment you make.
Think about knowledge retention. If you hire someone in-house and they leave in two years, what knowledge walks out the door? Is GEO so central to your strategy that losing that person would be catastrophic? If yes, either hire two people (full team) or use an agency so your knowledge isn’t solely dependent on one person. If GEO is important but not existential, a single in-house person or hybrid model is fine.
- If you need results in 3–6 months, choose agency or hybrid
- If you need cost certainty and can accept some risk, choose in-house team
- If you need both speed and control, choose hybrid model
- If you have someone in-house with SEO or technical background, hybrid model is strongest
- If you’re in eCommerce or urgent search visibility is critical to revenue, lean towards agency
- If you’re in B2B with longer sales cycles, in-house or hybrid model works well
- If you’re competitive in GEO already, you can afford longer in-house ramp-up
- If you’re behind competitors in GEO, agency speed is valuable
Finally, consider running a test before committing fully. Many businesses work with an agency for 3–6 months to understand what good GEO looks like and what results are realistic, then decide whether to build in-house capability or continue with the agency. This test approach costs money but provides valuable data for your decision.
Frequently Asked Questions About GEO Agencies Versus In-House Teams
How long does it typically take for an in-house GEO team to become fully effective?
The timeline varies depending on the team’s background and your business complexity. If you hire someone with strong SEO experience transitioning to GEO, they can often start delivering results within 6–8 weeks of starting, with full effectiveness around 4–5 months. If you’re hiring someone new to both SEO and GEO, you’re looking at 3–6 months before meaningful results, with full effectiveness potentially taking 6–9 months. During this period, they’re learning your business, your customers, your competitive landscape, and your technical infrastructure simultaneously – all while developing GEO strategy. An agency, by contrast, can typically deliver initial recommendations within 2–3 weeks and measurable results by month 2–3, because they’re bringing existing playbooks and frameworks rather than learning everything from scratch. The in-house ramp-up timeline also depends on your onboarding process – if you have clear business documentation, accessible stakeholders, and a streamlined approval process, ramp-up happens faster. If these things are unclear or fragmented, it takes longer.
Can a single in-house person manage GEO effectively, or do you need a team?
A single person can manage GEO effectively for small to mid-sized businesses, particularly if they’re experienced in SEO or digital marketing. They’ll handle strategy, priority-setting, some implementation, and oversight of any freelancers or agency partners you work with. However, they’ll struggle with the breadth of work if you’re a large organisation with multiple product categories or service areas requiring different strategies. For enterprises, a team of 3–5 people (strategist, content optimiser, technical implementer, and potentially specialists in specific areas like eCommerce or B2B) is more realistic. The key variable is how much execution work they need to do versus how much they can outsource. A person who’s 80% strategy and 20% execution can manage well alone. A person trying to be 50% strategy and 50% execution across multiple initiatives will be stretched. Most successful in-house setups involve one in-house strategist who oversees external partners doing execution – this gives you the best of both approaches.
What happens if your agency isn’t delivering GEO results – how do you switch agencies?
Agency switching is relatively straightforward if you have a clear exit process in your contract. Most agency agreements specify notice periods (typically 30–60 days) and termination terms. You should document the baseline metrics when you start with your first agency – this creates a clear record of what you’re measuring and where you started. If your second agency performs better against those metrics, you have evidence of the improvement. The main cost of switching agencies is the transition period (usually 2–4 weeks where the new agency is learning your business and the old agency is handing over knowledge) and potentially some duplication of early-stage work. To minimise disruption, make sure your first agency documents their process, their findings, and the optimisations they’ve implemented so the next agency doesn’t start from zero. Ask for a transition period where both agencies work together briefly if possible. It’s also worth noting that not every agency is right for every business – poor initial results might be because the agency wasn’t the right fit, not because GEO isn’t working. If results are poor, it’s often worth trying a different agency or approach (like a hybrid model) before giving up on GEO entirely.
How do you measure whether in-house GEO work is actually valuable?
Measuring in-house GEO effectiveness requires establishing clear baseline metrics before work begins. Track your visibility in Google AI Overviews for your target keywords – note how often your content appears and in what position. Track traffic from AI Overview clicks if your analytics platform captures this. Monitor your visibility in other generative search interfaces like ChatGPT and Perplexity AI if relevant to your business. Set realistic success metrics – you’re unlikely to achieve 100% AI Overview coverage for every keyword, but you should see meaningful improvement in coverage and positioning over 3–6 months. Compare your metrics month over month and quarter over quarter. If an in-house person has been optimising for GEO for 6 months and your AI Overview coverage hasn’t improved, or your traffic from generative search is declining while competitors are gaining visibility, that’s a signal that the approach isn’t working. However, also consider external factors – Google AI Overviews availability varies by query type and geography, so some stagnation is normal. Talk to other businesses in your industry about their GEO results and benchmarks – if they’re seeing significant improvements and you’re not, that’s actionable feedback. The clearest measure is revenue impact – if your GEO work is leading to more qualified traffic and conversions, it’s working. If you’re seeing traffic increase but no conversion improvement, your GEO strategist might need to refocus on intent-driven optimization.
What’s the difference between hiring a freelance GEO specialist versus an agency?
Freelance GEO specialists typically charge hourly rates (£50–£150 per hour depending on experience) or project-based fees. An agency has employees, infrastructure, and processes built into their retainer pricing. With a freelancer, you have more flexibility – you can hire them for specific projects and pause engagement easily. However, you need to manage more directly (freelancers don’t have a project manager or account manager handling coordination), and if your freelancer leaves or becomes unavailable, your work stops. With an agency, you have continuity – if your primary contact leaves, another team member steps in. Freelancers are often stronger than agencies in specific technical skills (like schema implementation or technical GEO), but agencies are often better at strategy and integrated campaign planning. Many organisations use both – working with an agency for strategy and oversight while hiring freelancers for specific technical implementations. This hybrid approach to external partners often works well. The other consideration is that freelancers often take on multiple clients, so they might not dedicate as much thinking power to your business as an agency team member who’s focused on fewer accounts.
Building Your GEO Capability: An Action Plan for This Year
If you’ve decided to pursue GEO – whether through agency, in-house, or hybrid approach – here’s a practical action plan to execute your decision. Start by documenting your current state. Measure your existing visibility in Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, and Perplexity AI for your most important keywords and topics. Note which competitors appear in these interfaces and how frequently. This baseline is essential regardless of which approach you choose. It gives you measurable starting point and makes it much easier to evaluate whether your chosen approach is working after 3, 6, and 12 months.
Next, involve your executive team in choosing the approach. Share the cost analysis and timeline projections we’ve discussed. Get agreement on what success looks like and how long you’ll give the approach before evaluating whether it’s working. This prevents politics and second-guessing later when results are slower than hoped. If you’re going in-house, get buy-in on the hiring budget and timeline. If you’re going with an agency, get approval for the retainer amount and commitment period. If you’re building a hybrid model, get clarity on how the in-house and external resources will coordinate.
Set up the relationship correctly from the start. Whether you’re onboarding an in-house hire or starting with an agency, provide comprehensive documentation about your business, your customers, your competitive landscape, your technical infrastructure, and your goals. The better your new partner understands these things, the faster they can deliver results. Schedule regular check-ins – weekly for the first month, then bi-weekly, then monthly. This keeps work on track and prevents misalignment.
Establish measurement discipline immediately. Decide which metrics matter most to your business – is it traffic from AI Overviews, ranking visibility, conversion rate, revenue impact? Set targets for each metric. Review these metrics monthly with your agency or in-house team. This ongoing measurement is what separates effective GEO programmes from those that drift without direction.
Plan for learning and skill development. GEO is evolving rapidly, so whoever is managing it – in-house or external – needs to stay current. Budget for training, conference attendance, or research time. Allocate time for testing and experimentation. The most effective GEO programmes involve regular testing of new approaches, measurement of results, and iteration based on what works. This can’t happen if everyone is too busy with execution to think strategically.
Finally, give your chosen approach time to work. GEO results often take 3–6 months to become clearly measurable because generative search interfaces update slowly and it takes time for content optimisations to appear in AI Overviews. If you switch approaches, agencies, or strategies every month, you’ll never know if your approach was sound or just underfunded. Commit to at least 6 months before evaluating whether to make changes, with the exception of clear signs that something is fundamentally broken (like an agency delivering recommendations that contradict their own previous advice or an in-house person missing all agreed deadlines).
