If your answer to “we need more creative” is “hire,” you might be solving the wrong problem
Most B2B SaaS teams hit the same wall around the same time:
- more launches
- more channels
- more pages
- more ads
- more sales requests
- more motion
- more “we need this yesterday”
So the founder move is:
“Let’s hire a designer.”
Sometimes that’s correct.
But if your workflow is a mess, hiring is just paying more money for the same chaos, now with onboarding overhead.
The truth:
most teams don’t have a design capacity problem. They have a design ops problem.
The real enemy isn’t lack of talent. It’s lack of a system.
Design output becomes unpredictable when you don’t have:
- one intake path
- a visible queue
- clear priorities
- WIP limits
- centralized review
- decision ownership
- SLA rules
Without those, the org runs on:
- Slack chasing
- random meetings
- unclear “done”
- scope creep disguised as “quick changes”
- “final_final” file hell
That’s not design. That’s operational debt.
The four stages almost every SaaS team goes through
Be honest about where you are.
Stage 1: founder-led design (fast, fragile)
- Decisions are quick
- Output is high
- Brand stays coherent
Until:
- requests explode
- stakeholders multiply
- everything becomes “urgent”
Then it breaks.
Stage 2: freelancers and contractors (flexible, chaotic)
This feels like relief at first.
Then:
- context gets lost
- quality varies
- timelines slip
- availability becomes a gamble
- the brand starts looking like five different companies
You can ship, but it’s inconsistent and exhausting.
Stage 3: internal team + endless backlog (talented, overwhelmed)
Now you have real designers.
But GTM demand expands faster than headcount:
- growth wants weekly refreshes
- PMM wants launch assets
- sales wants custom decks
- founders want “just one more landing page”
The design team becomes a ticketing system.
Morale drops. Quality gets rushed. Stakeholders start bypassing process.
Stage 4: actual design ops (predictable, scalable)
This is where output becomes boringly reliable:
- standardized intake
- visible capacity
- WIP limits
- review discipline
- version history
- SLA timers
- clear “definition of done” per asset type
Stage 4 is not “more designers.”
It’s a production system.
Your options (and the tradeoffs people pretend don’t exist)
Option A: Hire
Best when: you have stable demand, strong leadership, long-term roadmap, and you can recruit well.
Pros
- deep product and brand context
- long-term consistency
- tight collaboration
Cons
- slow to find, slow to ramp
- expensive (salary + benefits + tooling)
- management overhead
- throughput still capped unless ops are strong
Hiring is not a throughput hack. It’s an org commitment.
Option B: Freelancers
Best when: you have isolated tasks, clear specs, and you can tolerate inconsistency.
Pros
- fast to start
- flexible cost
- good for narrow execution
Cons
- context loss every time
- quality swings
- availability risk
- coordination tax grows with each freelancer
Freelancers don’t scale as a system. They scale as a spreadsheet.
Option C: Agencies
Best when: you need big campaigns, brand work, or specialized skill bursts.
Pros
- breadth of talent
- can handle big packages
- useful for rebrands or major launches
Cons
- calendar-based delivery
- meetings and stakeholders
- priority conflicts (you’re not their only client)
- cost markup
- slower iteration cycles
Agencies are not designed for weekly GTM throughput. They’re designed for projects.
Option D: Productized delivery (pods / managed production)
Best when: you want continuous output without building the org.
Pros
- predictable throughput
- less management overhead
- clear process and SLAs
- easier to scale across formats (pages, decks, ads, motion)
Cons
- you must respect the workflow (queue + WIP)
- requires good scoping and feedback discipline
- not ideal for open-ended brand exploration
Productized delivery wins when your pain is “we need more shipped GTM assets, consistently.”
The honest takeaway: you don’t need “more design.” You need predictable design.
Predictable means:
- you can plan around it
- you know what’s active
- you know what’s next
- you know when it ships
- you know where feedback lives
- you stop asking “status” like it’s a daily ritual
This is what removes the tax.
The scalable middle path: keep strategy in-house, outsource production like a factory
High-performing teams often land on a hybrid:
- in-house design lead owns brand, standards, and high-level direction
- production system ships GTM throughput: pages, ads, decks, motion, sales assets
- product team stays focused on product UX and core UI
This avoids two disasters:
- internal team drowning in GTM tickets
- random contractors inventing your brand every week
It’s the sane middle path.
The 6 building blocks of a “real” design ops system
If you want Stage 4, you need these. No exceptions.
1) One intake standard
Every request includes:
- goal
- audience
- channel
- examples
- constraints (brand tokens, format, dimensions)
- definition of done
Bad briefs are the #1 cause of slow output.
2) A single queue
One place where work lives:
- prioritized backlog
- active work
- status visibility
If you can’t see the queue, you can’t manage throughput.
3) WIP limits (active slots)
You can’t have 12 active tasks and expect speed.
WIP limits increase cycle time reliability and reduce rework.
4) SLA rules
You need delivery timers for common work types:
- ad concept
- landing section
- deck refresh
- motion loop
- cutdowns
SLAs stop stakeholders from nagging and stop designers from getting pulled into fire drills.
5) Review discipline
Centralized review with:
- consolidated feedback
- decision owner
- version history
Without that, “unlimited revisions” becomes “infinite thrash.”
6) A library of repeatables
Patterns, templates, and components for:
- hero sections
- feature blocks
- testimonial layouts
- ad formats
- deck slides
- motion loops
Your system gets faster when you stop reinventing everything.
Where Sako fits (and why it’s useful even if you already have designers)
Sako is built as a production system for GTM creative:
- request intake in one place
- a queue you can plan around
- active slots that enforce WIP limits
- SLA timers that make delivery predictable
- review + version history to keep feedback sane
- unlimited requests so you can keep momentum without chaos
If you already have a design team, Sako doesn’t replace them. It protects them.
It keeps them out of ticket hell and gives you predictable throughput.
A fast decision framework: hire vs system vs both
Use this to stop spinning.
Hire if:
- you have stable long-term demand
- you need deep product context daily
- you can recruit and manage well
- you already have clean ops (or a design lead who will build it)
Use a production system (like Sako) if:
- your demand is GTM-heavy and constant
- you need consistent output across formats
- you’re drowning in coordination and revisions
- you want predictable delivery without org bloat
Do both if:
- you want in-house brand leadership + external throughput
- you’re scaling fast and can’t afford slow iteration
If you’re stuck between “hire another designer” and “keep patching freelancers,” stop guessing.
What you need is a production system that turns requests into shipped work with predictable rules.
Start shipping with Sako.
Ready to transform your design workflow?
Start Shipping