Is building eLearning internally really saving your organization money?

Many organizations turn to in-house eLearning development to reduce costs and maintain control over training content. While internal development can offer flexibility and familiarity, it also carries hidden expenses that are often underestimated during planning.

Understanding the full scope of in-house costs helps organizations make smarter, more sustainable decisions about how they build and maintain training.

Below is a clear breakdown of what contributes to the true cost of developing eLearning internally.

1. Accessibility and compliance responsibilities

In-house teams are fully responsible for meeting accessibility and compliance requirements. This includes:

• Designing content aligned with WCAG standards
• Creating captions, transcripts, and alternative text
• Testing courses with assistive technologies
• Updating content as regulations change

Without dedicated accessibility expertise, remediation can become time-consuming and costly.

2. Tools, software, and licensing

In-house development depends on a range of digital tools that carry ongoing costs, such as:

• Authoring software licenses
• Graphic design and media tools
• Stock image, video, or audio libraries
• Learning management systems
• Collaboration and review platforms

Subscription renewals and upgrades can add up quickly over time.

3. Multimedia production and quality limitations

Creating high-quality visuals, audio, and interactive elements requires both time and skill. In-house teams may face:

• Limited design or animation expertise
• Inconsistent branding or visual standards
• Basic interactivity due to tool constraints
• Longer production timelines

These limitations can affect learner engagement and the perceived value of the training.

4. Staff time and opportunity cost

In-house development relies heavily on internal staff, including instructional designers, subject-matter experts, and project managers. Costs include:

• Time spent researching and outlining content
• Hours dedicated to design, writing, and review
• Time diverted from primary job responsibilities
• Delays caused by competing priorities

Even when no external invoice exists, staff time represents a significant financial and operational investment.

5. Instructional design expertise

Effective eLearning requires more than transferring content into slides. Organizations must account for:

• Learning strategy and objectives
• Assessment and scenario design
• Learner engagement techniques
• Knowledge checks and feedback loops

When instructional design expertise is limited, teams may spend additional time revising content or risk producing training that does not meet learning goals.

6. Maintenance, updates, and long-term sustainability

eLearning is not a one-time effort. In-house teams must plan for:

• Ongoing updates due to policy or process changes
• Version control and republishing
• Revisions based on learner feedback
• Staff turnover that disrupts content ownership

Without a maintenance strategy, courses can quickly become outdated or unusable.

Conclusion

In-house eLearning development offers control and flexibility, but it also carries real costs tied to time, expertise, tools, and long-term upkeep.

Organizations that understand these factors are better equipped to decide when in-house development makes sense and when other approaches may be more effective.