Given limited information Domic is correct. However, neither is right or wrong, but both need to come to a common understanding in order to move forward. Both should meet with the PR manager bringing their requirements and decide a plan of action to move forward to get those needs met. Someone common to both departments (operations manager or similiar) would ultimately have the call on this one if both parties cannot agree (think arbitration). Steve: Solutions 1 and 3 are the same, its just the different people have different strengths. Neither side is going to become an expert in the other, especially since the mindset and skillsets are quite different. However, successful managers are successful because the are adept at communicating and working with others. Solution 2 works well IF the PR person foots the bill and both managers can communicate clearly as to the role of the dedicated employee. Just because PR signs the paycheck doesn't mean IT has no say in what can and cannot be done to the systems. Without 1/3 already being in place and good communication occuring, 2 accomplishes nothing. If your contacts PR/Marketing people and they are banning you from even speaking to IT than contrary to Dee's comment, the issue is on the PR side since IT doesn't even know that you exist. PR should detail their needs, go to IT first and see what kind of in-house capabilities exist and "what it would cost" then go look at "off-the-shelf" and do a cost benefit analysis. However, even if the third party looks good, IT still needs to be involved to provide a technical perspective and asses any hidden costs of deployment (if internal) or to at least point out why, in this case, a parallel system is not optimal.