Both work. The question is which fits your situation. We break down the differences, costs, and outcomes of each recruitment model.
The retained vs. contingent debate is one of the longest-running conversations in executive search. Both models work — the question is which fits the role, the urgency, and the level of confidentiality you need.
Contingent search is paid only on success. It works well for roles where the market has reasonable supply, the brief is well-defined, and you’re comfortable working multiple firms in parallel. Expect breadth, speed, and a transactional posture.
Retained search is paid in stages, regardless of outcome. It works for confidential roles, scarce skill sets, or any search where the cost of a bad hire vastly outweighs the cost of the engagement. Expect deeper market mapping, named candidate development, and a single firm fully aligned to the outcome.
The mistake we see most often is using contingent for searches that need retained discipline — usually because the budget conversation feels easier upfront. The downstream cost of a slow, mediocre fill on a senior role is almost always greater than the retainer would have been.
If this is showing up in your own hiring, we can run a short diagnostic and tell you what we'd do.
Precision recruitment for critical hires on tight timelines. Delivering excellence in talent acquisition across the energy sector.