Partnered vs Contingent recruitment

 

The headline difference

Contingent recruitment fills vacancies.
Partnered recruitment builds teams.

One is transactional. The other is strategic.

---

Side-by-side comparison

1. How you pay

Contingent

• Fee per hire, usually a percentage of salary

• Costs fluctuate month to month

• Budgeting is reactive and unpredictable

• Pressure to “close” quickly to secure the fee

Partnered

• Fixed monthly retainer

• Multiple hires covered under one agreement

• Clear capacity, SLAs and fair-usage caps

• Predictable spend and calmer planning

What this means for you:
No fee shocks, no rushed decisions, and far better financial control, especially when hiring at volume.

---

2. How recruiters work on your roles

Contingent

• Multiple agencies working the same role

• Recruiters compete against each other

• Speed often matters more than fit

• CV volume > quality

Partnered

• One dedicated recruitment partner

• No competition, no duplication

• Quality, alignment and outcomes come first

• Thoughtful shortlists, not CV dumping

What this means for you:
Better hires, fewer interviews, and less time wasted correcting misalignment.

---

3. Candidate experience

Contingent

• Candidates may be approached by multiple recruiters

• Inconsistent messaging about your business

• Variable quality of screening

• Higher risk of reputational damage

Partnered

• One clear, consistent story to market

• Objective, inclusive assessment

• Structured shortlisting and feedback

• Stronger employer brand by default

What this means for you:
Candidates experience your business as joined-up, professional and human, even if they don’t get the job.

---

4. Hiring manager experience

Contingent

• Re-briefing multiple recruiters

• Inconsistent candidate quality

• Little challenge or strategic input

• Recruitment happens to managers

Partnered

• Weekly progress rhythm and live role visibility

• Honest feedback if something won’t land

• Support with role clarity and expectations

• Recruitment done with managers

What this means for you:
Less firefighting, better decisions, and managers who feel supported rather than sold to. Time savings.

---

5. Insight and long-term value

Contingent

• Insight resets with every role

• Little incentive to think long-term

• No ownership beyond placement

Partnered

• Ongoing insight across all roles

• Early signals on market shifts and candidate sentiment

• Quarterly reviews, outcomes tracking and hiring forecasts

What this means for you:
Smarter hiring over time not just a series of disconnected transactions.

---

6. What happens after the hire?

Contingent

• Offer accepted = job done

• Little to no post-hire support

• Retention is your problem

Partnered

• The hire is the starting point

• Access to consultancy and coaching support (as agreed)

• Focus on landing, impact and retention

This can include:

• Coaching for new starters

• Support for hiring managers

• Advice on structure, role design and progression

What this means for you:
People stay longer, perform better, and settle faster.

---

The human difference

Contingent recruitment is built around fees.
Partnered recruitment is built around relationships.

At 2point0, our Partnered clients choose this model because they value:

• Straight talking (we’ll tell you early if something won’t work)

• Reputation before revenue

• Inclusive, objective hiring practices

• People-first outcomes, not just placements

We don’t do volume for the sake of it.
We don’t chase speed at the cost of quality.
And we don’t disappear once the contract’s signed.

---

So which model is right for you?

Contingent recruitment may suit you if:

• You’re making a genuinely one-off hire

• Speed matters more than long-term fit

• You’re happy managing multiple agencies

Partnered recruitment is right if:

• You’re hiring multiple roles or planning ahead

• You want predictable costs and fewer surprises

• You want a recruiter who challenges, advises and supports not just supplies CVs

If recruitment feels chaotic, reactive or harder than it should be, the model — not the market — is often the problem.

Speak to Paul or Nicola for further details and to see if this model is right for you.