The Framework That Helps Law Firms Choose the Right SEO Delivery Model

Most attorneys approach SEO vendor selection as a cost question. It is actually a capacity question. The right delivery model depends on what your firm can realistically support — in terms of internal time, staff capability, and management bandwidth — not just what you can afford to spend each month.

Each model places different demands on your firm. An agency handles strategy, content, technical work, and reporting autonomously. A consultant provides direction but assumes your team will implement. An in-house hire requires you to recruit, manage, and retain a specialist. DIY means the attorney or office manager carries the full execution load.

The firms that struggle most are not the ones that chose the wrong price point. They are the ones that chose a model mismatched to their internal capacity. A solo practitioner who hires a consultant and has no one to execute the recommendations gets no results. A 30-attorney firm that assigns SEO to a paralegal with no training gets the same outcome.

Before evaluating vendors or comparing monthly fees, answer three questions honestly:

• Who on your team has time to own this? If the answer is no one, you need full execution — an agency.
• How fast do you need organic leads? If urgency is high, DIY and in-house ramp slowly. Agencies and experienced consultants move faster.
• What is your tolerance for managing the work? Low tolerance favors agencies. High tolerance opens consultant and in-house options.

The sections below break down each model — what it includes, what it costs, where it performs well, and where it fails. A decision framework follows at the end.

Understanding what each model delivers — not just what vendors claim it delivers — is the starting point for a sound comparison.

Agency

A legal SEO agency provides strategy, technical optimization, content production, link building, and monthly reporting under one contract. The firm pays a retainer and receives execution. Quality varies significantly across agencies; the distinction between a legal-specialist agency and a generalist shop matters more in law than in most industries because bar advertising rules, practice-area nuance, and local competition dynamics require genuine category knowledge.

Consultant

A consultant audits your current position, builds a strategy, and tells your team what to do. Some consultants also offer limited implementation — writing briefs, reviewing content before publication, or running technical audits. The use point of this model is expertise without full agency overhead. The risk is that your team's execution quality determines your results.

In-House Specialist

An in-house hire is a full-time employee — typically an SEO manager or digital marketing manager — who owns the function internally. This model gives maximum control and institutional knowledge accumulation. It requires a salary (industry benchmarks typically place legal marketing specialists at $70K–$110K/year depending on market and experience), plus tool subscriptions, and a manager capable of evaluating SEO performance.

DIY

DIY means the attorney, office manager, or existing staff handles SEO tasks directly. This is viable for solo practitioners in low-competition markets who are willing to spend 5–10 hours per week on the function and have a 12-month runway before expecting results. It is rarely viable for multi-attorney firms competing in major metros, where the technical and content demands exceed what non-specialists can sustain alongside a legal workload.

The matrix below uses honest ranges based on our experience working with law firms across these delivery models. Costs vary by market, firm size, and scope. Treat these as directional, not fixed.

Monthly Cost

• Agency: $2,500–$8,000/month for most mid-size firms; enterprise campaigns run higher
• Consultant: $1,500–$5,000/month for active engagements; project-based audits typically $2,000–$6,000 flat
• In-house: $6,000–$9,500/month all-in when salary, benefits, and tools are annualized
• DIY: $200–$600/month in tools; significant time cost not reflected in cash outlay

Time to First Meaningful Results

• Agency: 4–6 months in most markets (varies by competition and starting authority)
• Consultant: 5–9 months — dependent on how quickly your team executes recommendations
• In-house: 6–10 months — includes ramp time for the new hire to learn your firm
• DIY: 9–18 months — longer learning curve and inconsistent execution pace

Control Over Strategy

• Agency: Moderate — you approve direction, agency executes
• Consultant: High — you own decisions, consultant advises
• In-house: Highest — full internal ownership
• DIY: Total — for better or worse

Compliance Risk

All four models carry bar advertising compliance risk if the person executing the work does not understand ABA Model Rules 7.1–7.5 and state-specific advertising regulations. This is educational context, not legal advice — verify current advertising rules with your state bar. When evaluating any model, ask specifically how the person or team handling your content approaches attorney advertising compliance. Agencies and consultants who specialize in legal should be able to answer this without prompting.

The comparison matrix shows relative values, but the real test is fit-to-situation. Here are the scenarios where each model performs best — and where it typically falls short.

Agency — Best Fit

Agencies perform best for firms that have a defined growth goal, no internal marketing staff, and a budget that supports sustained monthly investment. A three-to-five attorney firm in a competitive metro targeting personal injury, family law, or criminal defense queries will typically outperform in-house or DIY alternatives because the volume of content and link development required exceeds what part-time effort can produce. The tradeoff is that you are trusting an external team with your firm's voice — which makes onboarding rigor and communication cadence critical.

Consultant — Best Fit

Consultants produce strong outcomes for firms that have a capable marketing coordinator or associate who can execute, but lacks a strategic framework for SEO. Many mid-size firms in this position spend months running tactics without a coherent strategy. A consultant provides the architecture; your team builds it. This model underperforms when there is no internal executor — recommendations sit unimplemented and the engagement produces reports, not results.

In-House — Best Fit

In-house SEO is cost-competitive at scale — typically 15+ attorney firms with enough content surface area to justify a dedicated specialist. It also fits firms with complex practice area portfolios where institutional knowledge creates genuine content advantages. The management challenge is real: most managing partners are not equipped to evaluate SEO performance, which means in-house specialists can underperform without accountability mechanisms.

DIY — Best Fit

DIY is realistic for solo practitioners in secondary markets, particularly those who practice in a niche with low search competition and are willing to invest consistent time. It is also a viable supplement — not replacement — for any model: attorneys who understand how SEO works become better clients, better managers of in-house staff, and more effective at creating content that supports their campaigns.

Rather than starting with budget, start with capacity and urgency. Work through these four questions in order.

Question 1: Do you have anyone internally who can execute SEO tasks 10+ hours per week?

If no — eliminate DIY and consultant. You need full execution, which points to agency.

If yes — keep all options open and proceed to Question 2.

Question 2: How competitive is your primary practice area and market?

High competition (personal injury, criminal defense, family law in major metros) demands higher production volume — more content, more link development, more technical precision. DIY becomes impractical. Consultants require strong internal executors. Agencies and well-resourced in-house teams are better positioned.

Lower competition (elder law solo in a mid-size city, for example) gives more runway for DIY and consultant models.

Question 3: What is your realistic monthly budget for organic search?

Under $1,500/month: DIY tools plus occasional consultant project work. Agencies at this budget level are typically generalists with high client-to-staff ratios — proceed carefully.

$2,500–$5,000/month: Mid-tier agency or active consultant engagement is viable.

$5,000+/month: Full-service agency or in-house hire becomes cost-competitive depending on your management capacity.

Question 4: How long can you sustain investment before expecting measurable lead volume?

If your runway is under 6 months, SEO is the wrong primary channel regardless of delivery model — consider paid search as a bridge. SEO in any format takes time. Firms that abandon campaigns at month four rarely see the results that typically emerge in months six through twelve.

If you have a 12-month runway and realistic expectations, any model can work — match it to your capacity and budget answers above. If you want to see how our approach compares against these criteria, explore our specialized lawyer SEO agency model.

These are the objections attorneys most frequently raise when evaluating delivery models. Each deserves a direct answer rather than a sales reframe.

"An agency doesn't understand my practice area as well as an in-house hire would."

True in some cases, false in others. A generalist agency hired because they were the cheapest option will not understand your practice. A legal-specialist agency with documented experience in your practice area will often outperform an in-house hire who spent the first three months learning what depositions are. Vetting for category knowledge is the variable — not the model itself.

"Consultants are cheaper so they must be lower quality."

The opposite is often true. Senior consultants who work independently often have deeper expertise than mid-tier agencies because they built their reputation on results, not account volume. The constraint is execution capacity, not expertise. If your team can execute, a strong consultant can be your highest-ROI option.

"We tried an agency before and it didn't work."

This is the most common objection and the most understandable. In our experience working with law firms, most bad agency experiences trace to one of three causes: the agency was a generalist with no legal SEO knowledge, the engagement was too short to reach the results window, or expectations were not aligned at the start. A failed previous engagement is data about that specific vendor, not about the model category.

"DIY can't possibly work for serious firms."

It cannot work as a primary strategy for competitive practices. It can work as a supplement — attorneys who publish substantive content consistently, even without technical SEO infrastructure, build authority over time. The honest answer is that DIY is a slow path, not an impossible one, and it works best when paired with professional technical setup even if ongoing execution stays in-house.