Outsourcing

Outsourcing L&D vs. building an internal training team — which works better?

Outsourcing L&D works better than building internally when teams need rapid access to hybrid learning expertise, certified facilitators, and global reach. The right choice depends on urgency, scope, and long-term strategy.

Compare staff augmentation, outsourcing, and managed learning services for a clear breakdown of trade-offs.

Why This Matters
Building an in-house team provides control but often limits agility and scale. Outsourcing offers immediate access to specialized skills in hybrid and virtual delivery, accelerating program rollout and reducing risks tied to hiring cycles or resource shortages. The right balance helps L&D leaders align investments with strategic priorities while keeping learners engaged across formats.

Generalist vendors also struggle to replicate true virtual classroom engagement, often defaulting to content delivery over interaction. InSync brings 25+ years of certified expertise in hybrid facilitation and producer-supported delivery, ensuring learners stay connected across all formats.

In practice: During a leadership academy rollout, an InSync client outsourced facilitation for 60 sessions across multiple time zones. Outsourcing allowed the program to launch on schedule while the internal team focused on coaching and mentoring follow-up.

Strategic Next Steps

  • Evaluate timeline — do you need delivery in weeks or months?
  • Balance control and cost — internal teams cost more upfront, outsourcing reduces overhead.
  • Blend models — consider building internal strategy while outsourcing execution.
  • Plan for scale — MLS offers a hybrid path, combining both approaches.

Take Action

Learn More