Comparison
Gamfi and an incentive agency
This is not a comparison of two tools but of two models: a service ordered for each edition of a programme, and software in which you run the programme yourselves. In this setup an agency has four advantages we will not take away – one of them follows straight from tax law. Below is the table, and further down what we do not have and when it is not worth coming to us.
| What we compare | An incentive agency | Gamfi |
|---|---|---|
| The working model and the cost | ||
| What stays with you once the engagement ends | partly.Depends on the contract, not on the model. The participant data is yours – an agency processes it on your instruction and has to return or delete it at the end. Check two points: whether you get the raw set of results or only a report, and whether you are left with somewhere the programme can be run on from. | partly.For as long as you hold a licence, the programme sits with you: the configuration, the rules and the data in your own instance. Once the contract ends you take the raw data and the configuration away in an export – the platform stays on our side. We do not sell ownership of the software. |
| Cost with a seasonal programme and with the editions that follow | partly.A break between editions costs nothing – you pay for the project, not for the time. But every further edition means a new brief and a new quote. | partly.Your own team sets up the next season with no extra platform charge, but the fee also runs while the programme is idle. With a once-a-year programme that is the agency advantage; with a continuous one it is ours. |
| Running the programme | ||
| A ready concept, mechanics and the visual treatment | yes.Comes with an idea, not just a tool. For an organisation that does not know what will work in its industry, that is real value. | partly.We have the mechanics and the patterns from rollouts. The creative work and the content you do yourselves, or you order it from us as rollout support – and then it is a service of ours, not a feature of the platform. |
| People to look after participants and to keep the programme alive | yes.A helpline, queries, complaints, but also reminders, teasers and a phone call to a region that has not joined in. That is the largest part of the work an agency is paid for – and without it a programme goes quiet in the second month. | no.We give you the tools for the communication and a view of who is taking part. People we do not give: nobody on our side will ring a region or pick up a call from a participant. |
| Logistics for physical rewards | yes.Some agencies have reward logistics centres of their own. Physical delivery is a supply chain operation, not software. | partly.The order and its status are visible in the platform, and a complaint is raised and tracked there too – but the conversation with the participant is run by your team or by the partner that hands the reward over. We have no warehouse of our own and will not have one. |
| The reward catalogue and how appealing it is | yes.Their own contracts with retail chains and buying power from dozens of programmes. A participant is not buying a platform, they are buying a reward. | partly.The catalogue is put up by the partners we work with. You do not negotiate their terms through us the way you would through an agency running several dozen programmes. |
| Who answers for it when the programme does not deliver | yes.You set an agency targets and you have somebody to talk to when it did not come off. The responsibility sits with the service provider. | no.We answer for a working platform, not for the result of the programme. Decisions about the mechanics, and about whether the programme stays alive, remain with you. |
| The result calculated on data from your systems, not on submissions from participants | partly.An agency programme usually stands on points and submissions. Agencies with an IT team of their own do connect to your systems, but that is sometimes a separate project – ask which case you are in. | yes.The target and the progress are calculated on sales from your system; those come in through a documented API, notifications or a file. We do not sell ready-made connectors for particular systems – we do the connecting during the rollout. |
| Bonus and commission calculated on your organisation's rules | no.This is not what an incentive agency does. Bonuses and commission stay with the finance team, usually in a spreadsheet, alongside the reward programme. | yes.Thresholds, multipliers and commission splits set once calculate themselves, and an employee sees the breakdown of the amount. We run this area together with the motivation, not separately. |
| One system for several programmes and areas | partly.Each programme is usually a separate project, often with a different supplier: sales with one agency, employee matters with another. | yes.Sales, onboarding new joiners and development you run in one place, on one set of people and permissions. |
| Sight of the results and cuts of the data of your own | partly.An online panel is standard today, agencies included. It shows, though, what the agency set up in it – a cut of your own, or an export into your own tools, is usually not something you will add yourselves. | yes.The data is yours, so you do the cuts and the exports at your end, without ordering a report. |
| Changing the rules while the programme is running | partly.Goes through a work order. We do not give a response time, because we found no source for it – your contract with the agency may state one and it is worth checking there. | partly.Your own team changes the thresholds, the rewards and the scope, on the day the decision was taken. A new rule that is not in the configuration is work on our side. |
| Tax, law and risk | ||
| The role of tax remitter on the rewards | yes.The remitter is the agency that hands the rewards over and funds them from its own account – that is how the Supreme Administrative Court ruled in 2020. Working the tax out, withholding it, paying it to the tax office and filing the PIT-8AR return come off your plate. | no.We are not the remitter and will not be. The remitter role is taken by your own organisation or by the entity handing the rewards over; we agree the settlement model during the rollout. |
| The rules of the programme and how it is classified: a competition or a premium sale | yes.Years of practice in writing programme rules that stand up to an inspection. That is knowledge from dozens of programmes, not a feature of a tool. | partly.We will mirror the mechanics to fit the classification you adopt, but we will not write the rules for you and we do not step into the role of a tax adviser. |
| Control over participants' personal data | partly.The data is processed by the agency and its subcontractors. Large agencies have certificates and processing agreements for that – it is worth asking about them, just as you would ask us. | partly.Your own instance, permissions per role, sign-in through company accounts, data held in the European Union, ISO/IEC 27001:2022. To be straight with you: with physical rewards a participant's data also reaches the partner handing the reward over, so the chain has more than one link on our side too. |
does it · does it partly or conditionally · does not do it
Four advantages an agency has that we will not take away
We are not claiming an agency is a middleman you can do without. In four areas it is better and it will stay better, because those areas follow from what a service is, and software is not that.
It takes the remitter duty on itself
The Supreme Administrative Court ruled in 2020 that the remitter of the flat-rate tax on rewards is the agency that hands the rewards over and funds them from its own account – not the client placing the order. Working the tax out, withholding it, paying it and filing the annual PIT-8AR return then come off your plate, and no platform will do that. The condition lies in how the contract is built: if the agency merely hands the rewards over in your name and at your expense, the remitter can be you. That has to be checked in the particular contract, not assumed.
It sells the idea along with the delivery
The concept, the mechanics and the visual treatment, out of experience from dozens of programmes. If you want to buy a ready-made idea rather than somewhere to run your own – this is the right address.
It takes responsibility for the outcome
You set an agency a target and hold it to that target, together with keeping the programme alive and with participation. We answer for a working system; whether the programme stays alive is answered for by your team.
It has buying power on the rewards
An agency serving dozens of programmes buys rewards on different terms than a single organisation. It is worth asking for the offer broken down into lines and comparing.
Where we are no different from an agency
We sell services too, and they are paid for separately: help with launching the programme, content and material for the platform, rules drafted to fit the classification you adopt. In the first season most of our customers take them; in the ones that follow they no longer do – and that is the whole difference this page is about. Not whether the service exists, but what is left when it ends: a working platform with your data and your configuration, which you go on running yourselves. We have set out the scope of that support on the Implementation and support page.
Where the project model starts to weigh
Three costs that show up not in the first edition of a programme, but in the third.
You pay for the same setup all over again
The mechanics, the programme rules and the visual treatment are built from scratch for every edition, because the previous one stayed on the agency side. The longer the programme lives, the more you pay for recreating what already worked for you once.
Our conclusion from the service model, not a fact with a citation: we found no source giving how often incentive programmes in Poland are renewed and what a further edition costs. It is worth asking about that directly when you get the offer.
Ask what form you will get the programme history in
The participant data is yours – that follows from data protection law, not from a supplier's goodwill. The question is a different one: whether at the end you get the raw set of results or a summary in a slide deck, and whether you are left with a working place to build the next programme on. Put that question to every supplier, us included.
We are not putting a claim here, because we have no evidence for one: we found not a single public account of what happens to participant data once a contract with an agency expires. That is why we recommend putting the question to every supplier, ourselves included.
You learn the result on the reporting cycle, not when you need it
Reporting at an agency is a service, so it has its own rhythm. When halfway through a quarter you want to check whether the programme is doing worse in one region, you ask for a report and you wait. That is not a fault of the agency, but a feature of a model in which the data sits on the other side.
What Gamfi does not have and will not have
If what you are looking for is not on the list below, a conversation with an agency will be better spent time for you.
- We will not step into the role of tax remitter on the rewards. We do not hand rewards over and we do not fund them from our own account, so we cannot be the remitter. That duty stays with you or with the entity handing the rewards over.
- We do not run a helpline for the participants in your programme. Queries and complaints are handled by your team in the platform. The people for that work we do not supply.
- We do not have a reward warehouse of our own. Physical rewards and cards are handed over by catalogue partners. That is a deliberate decision, not a stage of development.
- We do not answer for the result of the programme. We answer for a working platform and for correct calculations. You will set an agency a target and hold it to that; with us that responsibility stays with you, and it is worth knowing before signing, not after.
- We will not give you people to keep the programme alive. You can see with us which region has not joined in, and you have the means to write to it – but nobody on our side will ring them. In the agency model somebody will.
Separately, so as not to confuse a gap with a price list: the programme rules and the creative work are not in the platform, but you can order them from us as a service. A tax opinion we will not stand in for under any arrangement.
When Gamfi is not the right fit – choose an agency
Seven situations in which the project model is simply the better choice. The last one applies to large organisations with a working programme, so read to the end.
- One edition of a programme, with no sequel. A short push over a few months that is not meant to be repeated. Rolling out a platform will not pay for itself against that.
- There is nobody at your end who will take the programme on. No owner for the process is a stronger argument than any feature at all. An agency gives you people, we give you a tool.
- The programme rests on physical rewards that need a warehouse. If the heart of the programme is shipping objects, what you need is a logistics operation, not a system.
- You do not want to take the remitter role on yourselves. Especially with programmes for a partner network, where the tax classification is disputed. What you need then is an entity that will formally step into that role.
- You do not have an idea for the programme yet. What you are buying then is a concept and industry experience, not somewhere to run that concept.
- A few dozen participants in a one-off push. At that scale the barrier to rolling out a platform is out of proportion to the value of the programme.
- You have a programme that works and you are mid- year. This applies to large organisations with a distributed network too, which is our typical customer. Participants are used to one place, the history is building up somewhere else, and moving that mid-season is a risk with no reward. Let us talk towards the end of the agency contract, or about a parallel arrangement in which the platform runs one area and the agency stays with the rest.
The questions that usually come up
Can we have both: an agency and Gamfi?
Yes, and at some of our customers that is exactly how it looks. The agency answers for the concept, the creative work and the reward logistics; the platform runs the mechanics, the calculations and the data. Then, once the engagement with the agency ends, you are left with the history of the programme and the configuration, rather than only a summary in a slide deck.
Who pays the tax on the rewards if we run the programme on your platform?
Not us. The remitter role is taken by your own organisation or by the entity that physically hands the rewards over – in practice the catalogue partner. We agree the way it is settled during the rollout, together with your finance team. We are not a tax adviser and we will not stand in for that kind of opinion.
Our programme is for a partner network, not for employees. Does that change anything?
In tax terms it does, and it is worth knowing before you choose a supplier. Rewards for distributors and franchisees are something the tax authorities try to classify as disguised remuneration; the administrative courts have rejected that many times, but the area remains disputed. If you do not want to take that risk on yourselves, you need an entity that will formally step into the remitter role – no software solves that, ours included.
We have three years of the programme with an agency. How do we move in without killing participation?
Not mid-season and not all at once. Two routes we see at customers: coming in as the agency contract ends, or a parallel arrangement in which the platform runs one area – targets and calculations, for example – and the agency stays with the creative work, the rewards and looking after participants. The history and the results of previous editions come into the platform as far as you get them from the agency; that is the first question worth putting to them.
Who corrects a wrong calculation, and how quickly?
The rule is in the configuration, so your own team corrects it, and the calculation runs again for everyone it affected. The event log shows what changed and when. If the cause is an error on our side, we correct it – the terms and the response times we write into the contract, not onto a website.
Who on our side will run the programme on the platform?
The programme owner – usually the person who talks to the agency today. IT once, when the source of results is connected. If there is nobody in the organisation who will take the programme on, an agency is the better choice, and we say so plainly further down.