Why working with a single recruiting firm is often the best choice
Different recruiting firms structure their work differently. Some operate on a fully retained basis. Others, like Trifecta, charge an engagement fee to begin the search and collect the remainder on successful completion. Still others work on a purely contingent basis, where a fee is only due if a presented candidate is hired.
Regardless of how fees are structured, there’s a related question worth addressing: exclusivity. And I’d like to make the case that in most situations, working exclusively with one firm is the right call — not just for the recruiting firm, but for the client.
I’ll start with the exceptions, because they’re real.
If you’re hiring for roles where the required skills are relatively common, exclusivity matters less. Staffing a sales team that doesn’t require industry-specific experience, for example, is largely a numbers game. The candidate pool is broad, and having multiple recruiters working in parallel can help with volume and speed. The same is often true for fields like software development, accounting, finance, and customer service.
But when the skills you need are in short supply, or when you’re hiring at a leadership level where the talent pool is smaller and more concentrated, working with multiple firms stops being helpful. It becomes counterproductive.
Here’s why. When the number of qualified candidates is finite, most of them will be contacted more than once. And the strongest candidates — the ones you most want to attract — are the ones most likely to be contacted repeatedly.
The first time, their interest might be piqued. The second time, they’re confused. By the third contact, they’ve decided to pass.
You risk alienating the very people you’re trying to hire.
There’s also a brand consideration. When multiple recruiters reach out about the same role, candidates notice. Some will conclude the company is disorganized. Others will assume the search has already failed once and the company is now scrambling. Neither impression is one you want to make.
Finally, there’s the question of thoroughness. It’s tempting to think that having multiple firms competing to be first will speed things up. It might. But speed and thoroughness rarely keep pace with each other. For a critical role, cutting corners to get to the finish line faster isn’t a trade worth making.
Splitting a search across multiple firms doesn’t give you more shots at the target. It just means more people are aiming in slightly different directions.