The Startup and the Web Agency
A Short Story About Your Future (Or Maybe Past) Self
You follow the playbook. Send the RFPs. Review the agency portfolios. Your comms partner helps with the interview process. Your head of marketing has been through a few website builds before. A few of the agencies are even from glowing referrals. Your team chooses the best agency of the group, makes the deposit, and signs the $75K contract.
Twelve months later, your site isn't ranking. You asked Bob VC at the golf course what he thinks of the new site and he says "looks good" but you can tell he's not impressed. An applicant emailed saying the careers page isn't working.
The agency takes two days to respond to requests. Every update is a “ticket.” Every ticket is a delay. You haven't heard from the agency owner in months and you're on another Zoom call listening to a smiley, young, and uncertain account executive promising they'll have an answer as soon as they can talk to the team.
What happened to the ROI that flashy 70-page proposal
promised?
Why does the senior dev always seem so grumpy and short during
meetings?
Why is everyone nodding their heads but nothing ever gets done
the right way the first time?
Oh look - it's the monthly agency invoice. $3,465 this time.
And everything on it feels like it's 10 times more than it should
be.
You think about firing the agency and finding a better one.
This isn't rare. This is the norm.
Let's Get Real - The Reality of Web Projects
A great number of website projects between startups and agencies are a symbiotic failure - low competence paired with high confidence, resulting in poor decisions and mutual blind spots.
Founders (and their support teams) often don't know how little they know, so they overestimate their ability to hire, scope, and evaluate a web project.
Agencies, especially the scrappy or overextended ones, think they can manage anything, then spiral when reality hits.
Why Founders Wind Up In This Situation
-
They've never scoped a serious web project before but assume it's similar to past marketing work.
-
They rely on internal staff with only shallow web experience (e.g. marketers, comms, ops) to lead or vet the project.
-
They trust “full-service” vendors (like PR firms) to guide them, even if those vendors don't know what great web work looks like either.
-
They shop based on vibes, portfolios, or pitch performance, not technical depth or execution ability.
-
They think “design” means pretty visuals, not structured UX or scalable systems.
-
They don't know what questions to ask—so they ask none, or the wrong ones.
Why Agencies Wind Up In This Situation
-
They're trying to close deals to stay afloat, so they say yes to bad scopes, fuzzy goals, or underpriced work.
-
They frontload leadership in the pitch, then hand off to juniors after kickoff.
-
They don't push back on weak direction, because they fear losing the client.
-
They follow “design trends” instead of solving business problems.
-
They treat all clients the same, not accounting for startup-specific needs like funding timelines, investor optics, or technical scalability.
-
They prioritize team utilization over results, leading to bloated timelines and minimal ownership.
End result: both sides are overconfident, underprepared, and reinforcing each other's blind spots. The irony? Both sides think the other is the problem. Neither realizes they're reinforcing the same failure loop.
The pattern is clear.
And Venture Shape can help you stop it before it starts.