Cannes Lions 2026 - Inside Out: In-House or Agency?

25 June 2026

Tensions have been rising, and in recent years an increasing number of brands have chosen to bring their creativity partially or fully in-house. But is this shift away from agency partnerships a step forward or a step back?

Billed as a debate, anyone attending purely for that reason would have left disappointed. What unfolded instead was a civilised, thoughtful conversation, punctuated by the occasional playful dig, between creative professionals who clearly share a deep mutual respect. The result was a thought-provoking and worthwhile way to end an afternoon at Cannes Lions.

Rei Inamoto (founding partner of I&CO), Judy John (Global CCO of Edelman), and David Lee (Chief Brand and Creative Officer at Squarespace) all brought their A-game to the Rotonde stage. In terms of balance and quality of contribution, this was an evenly matched and consistently engaging panel from start to finish.

Audience engagement was another standout success. From the outset, attendees were invited to participate via QR code-sharing opinions and submitting questions. The first prompt asked: “What is the single greatest competitive advantage an external agency has over an in-house team?” The majority answered: objectivity. A second question revealed an almost even split in the room - 44% in-house versus 56% agency. By the end, the live Q&A delivered some of the most entertaining moments of the session.

Inamoto starts by mentioning that only 5-10% of Cannes Lions-winning work is created brand-side. A figure mirrored in Super Bowl advertising. Award-winning work overwhelmingly comes from agencies. But awards are only one measure of success. For brands, the ultimate metric is impact: how the work shapes public perception and contributes to the bottom line.

It's also worth noting that overall, only around 5-10% of work is created by in-house agencies so, taking that into account, things are pretty even.

The first provocation posed to the panel: “In-housing everything is a bad move for most brands and a career risk for CMOs.”

John agreed. In-house teams, she argued, risk falling into groupthink, losing the objectivity and creative tension that agencies provide. Agencies bring a breadth of perspective, intelligence and cultural input. While in-house teams go deep, agencies go wide. They are trained to solve problems across multiple clients, building a kind of creative resilience she likened to a well-exercised muscle.

Lee didn’t disagree. While Squarespace and some other major brands have successfully built in-house teams, he cautioned that this model isn’t for everyone. Moving in-house under the assumption that it’s cheaper is misguided. The human capital costs are significant, and creative talent isn’t motivated by money alone. In hybrid setups, where agencies handle major campaigns and in-house teams manage lower-funnel, less interesting work, brands may struggle to attract and retain top talent.

For Lee, in-housing should be driven by the pursuit of creating competitive and creative advantage.

The next provocation suggested that outsourcing creative is for brands that can’t find their own voice. John agreed - carefully - acknowledging that some brands do need external help to define who they are. Agencies can do just that, bringing clarity and focus. Lee, however, countered that creativity should sit firmly at the executive level.

Inamoto then veered slightly off-script with a question he joked might jeopardise his relationship with Cannes Lions: with all the changes the festival has undergone, is it still truly creative? John gave a wide birth to the question, while Lee offered a diplomatic yes. It did, however create a quiet buzz in the room, prompting the audience to think about their own answer to that question.

David Lee

The final provocation was: “In the age of algorithms, creativity in marketing doesn’t really matter to business growth.”

On this, there was consensus - probably by everyone in the room - in the opposite direction. Creativity, John argued, is more important than ever. In an increasingly noisy landscape, it’s what cuts through the “slop” and the flood of AI-generated content. It’s what differentiates.

How ever it’s defined - whether as “original thought and skilful action” or “the human expression of magic” - creativity clearly retains a kind of power that remains unquantifiable and impossible to ignore.

The audience Q&A provided some of the strongest closing moments. Lee’s top pitfall for in-house teams: hiring the wrong people. He admitted that all of his biggest mistakes came down to this. His advice - hone your talent-spotting skills. The wrong hire in the wrong role can prove costly in more ways than one.

Rei Inamoto & Judy John

For much of the session, the anticipated tension between in-house and agency perspectives didn't materialise. But, like a goal in the ninetieth minute of a football match, the final moments delivered.

Lee reflected that his best work has come during the past thirteen years at Squarespace. John agreed but added a sting: it has been his best work, but it would have been even better had he stayed in agencies.

A mic-drop moment, taken in good spirit. And perhaps a fitting end. A demonstration of how creative tension, handled well, can create a moment of magic.