Hiring Models
When should a company stop relying on recruitment agencies?
The short answer
A company should reduce agency reliance when external support has become the default for recurring roles rather than a selective response to genuine exceptions. Warning signs include rising annual fees, repeated briefing, inconsistent candidate experience and an internal team that remains unable to build proactive capability. The answer is usually to rebalance the model, not eliminate every agency relationship.
Agencies are often added one vacancy at a time, so a scale-up can accumulate significant dependency without ever making an explicit decision to outsource a large part of hiring. Deciding when to step back requires looking at the pattern of demand across a year rather than the merits of any single assignment.
Review recurring versus exceptional roles
Separate roles that repeat every quarter from those that arise unexpectedly. When the same role families flow through agencies year after year, the company is paying repeatedly for market knowledge it could retain in a dedicated capability. Genuine exceptions, such as confidential or unusually niche searches, are different and should remain suitable for agency support.
Calculate annual spend rather than individual fees
Individual placement fees rarely feel unreasonable in isolation. The annual total, aggregated across role families, geographies and business units, often tells a different story. That aggregated figure is the correct benchmark when comparing with the cost of an embedded or internal capability.
Measure knowledge retention
Every new agency search restarts from a briefing meeting. Nothing about the market, the pipeline or the candidate conversation carries into the next hire. If the company is repeatedly explaining the same context to new consultants, it is paying for knowledge that cannot compound.
Preserve strong niche relationships
Rebalancing is not the same as eliminating. Some specialist consultants bring genuinely distinctive market access that is uneconomical to build internally. Keep those relationships for the work they do best, and move recurring hiring into a model that integrates and retains knowledge over time.
What this means in practice
Change the model when agency dependence is structural and a dedicated capability would create better long-term value. A scale-up should distinguish core hiring from exception hiring, then route each category to the model built for it.
The Saiyō view
Saiyō does not believe recruitment agencies are broken. They are designed for a pattern of hiring that becomes less efficient when specialist demand is continuous. Scale-ups should keep strong agencies for the work they do best while moving recurring hiring into a model that integrates, retains knowledge and provides more predictable economics.
Explored in depth
This topic is explored in more depth within Recruitment Agencies at Scale: Where the Model Works and Breaks.
Frequently asked questions
See this in practice
Move from the concept to the way Saiyō delivers it.
Related questions
Why do agency costs rise at scale?
Agency costs rise at scale because most fees are charged per successful hire, so total spend increases broadly in line with recruitment volume. There may be negotiated rates, but the commercial model remains transactional. As hiring becomes continuous, a subscription or internal capability can spread cost across a larger annual plan and lower effective cost per hire.
Read the answerAnswerHow many recruitment agencies should a company use?
A company should use enough agencies to cover genuinely distinct specialisms without creating duplicated effort or inconsistent representation. For most specialist hiring, a small panel with clear role ownership is stronger than a large uncontrolled supplier list. The correct number depends on geography, function and whether internal or embedded teams already provide core coverage.
Read the answerAnswerWhen is a recruitment agency still the best option?
A recruitment agency is often the best option for an unexpected vacancy, a genuinely niche requirement, a short-term hiring spike or a market where a specialist consultant has distinctive relationships. It can also be appropriate when annual hiring volume is too low to justify dedicated capability. The flexibility of paying for an individual outcome remains valuable in the right context.
Read the answerRelated guides
Choosing a Hiring Model for a Technology Scale-up
The right hiring model depends on the pattern of hiring, not the company size. Most mature scale-ups run a deliberate portfolio, not a single provider.
Read the guideAuthority GuideThe Economics of Technology Hiring
Cost per hire is only one variable. Real hiring economics balance total annual investment, speed, quality and the business cost of vacancies remaining open.
Read the guide