What’s Best for Your Hiring Process: In-House Recruiters or Agency Recruiters

Talk of hiring, and any hiring manager will be willing to give you an ear. When faced with many challenges during the process, many hiring teams work around the clock to get things right. The challenges vary from getting the right candidate for the open position and engaging with the qualified candidates without taking a lot of time.

These challenges are majorly encountered due to lack or no access to the right technology and equipment to facilitate a faster and smooth hiring process. The main factor that leads to this gap is the organization’s predominant dependency on the old hiring structures. They end up not getting the best talent and spending much more on the whole process.

Having looked at these challenges, let’s dive deep and understand how we can have a one-time solution by decrementing the differences between in-house and agency recruiters. An agency recruiter sources talent for multiple clients over an extensive range of industries. On the other hand, an in-house recruiter works for a specific organization and sources candidates for the same company when different roles are posted.

The Differences – In-House Recruiters Versus Agency Recruiters

A hiring manager is tasked by the mandate to do manpower hiring for the respective organization. Still, an organization has to consider the benefits of using an agency over in-house recruitment before deciding which path to follow. Be informed and make the best decision; we are going to enlighten you precisely on that.

1. Limited Talent Access Vs. Access to WIder and Diverse Talent Pools

For a hiring manager to get the best talent, they have to be exposed to an extensive database over a wide range of markets. This is a significant shortfall with regards to in-house recruitment. A recruitment agency is exposed to an unlimited talent pool. Hiring for different organizations implies that the data they have ideally has the talent that an organization needs. They receive a considerable number of applications compared to an in-house hiring manager.

2. Bias in Selection Vs. Objective Assessment and Selection

Many organizations are yet to realize that they miss excellent talent due to stakeholders’ influence on the in-house recruiter over some candidates that might have a connection or are known by them. However, as opposed to the remote hiring agency, this works from a neutral point without any influence or whatsoever and will select a candidate based on qualifications and the organization’s objectives. Biases due to the internal team’s effect might lead to an organization getting a candidate whose performance is questionable or can not just deliver what is required of them.

3 . Speed Vs. Precision in Hiring Per Role

There comes a time when several vacancies are to be filled within a short period. In-house hiring managers have ended up hiring non-performing candidates while rushing to meet the high volume hiring demands. As an organization, there is always a choice to get the best talent and precise candidates to job positions available by hiring through a remote hiring agency.

Typically, they use cutting-edge technology-hiring tools to sieve out un-qualified and wrong-fit candidates and only focus on those that meet the specifications. This saves time and efficiency in hiring for every role. In-house hiring managers go through the resumes or profiles of every single applicant, and the increasing workload affects the screening processes too.

4. Time Consuming Vs. Time-Efficiency

Remote hiring agency recruiters work as a team when getting organizations the talent they want and the advanced tools like the applications screening and objective focus systems to get to the high profile talent—this aids in utilizing time efficiently and getting organizations’ talent in good time.

On the other hand, your in-house hiring managers might not have the resources to efficiently use the time allocated and enhance their work. They end up consuming a lot of time and still may not hire the best deserving talent.

5. Longer Hiring Cycle Vs. Optimized Hiring Process

As a result of poor investment in technology and the skills required to optimize the hiring process, hiring managers end up taking a lot of time to fill a large number of vacancies; as an organization, you understand that time is precious and wasted; it is never recovered.

The time taken to get positions filled could have made a significant impact when filled promptly by an established remote hiring agency. Agencies can hire over a brief period due to the ultra-modern systems and skills they own. Agencies work more than twice the speed of in-house hiring managers.

6. Task-Oriented Vs. Outcome-Oriented

With a well-known saying,” the end is better than the beginning,” all organizations would love to see a good ending, making profits and ranking in news and pages.

If you love to see the outcomes of talent acquisition activities bearing fruit, it is worth trying to consult with agency recruiters. In-house recruitment has been here for decades, but if there are frequent skills shortages, then you should take time to find out hiring for which roles could benefit enormously by engaging dedicated agency recruiters.

7. Reference Check Limitations Vs. Effective Background Checks

It is always essential for an organization to have a detailed check on qualifications, driving records, employment verification, and credit history. The in-house teams have limited resources in this field, making the work cumbersome. It is better to use a remote hiring agency that could give clear reports on all background checks and references critical to an organization.

8. Scalability Challenges Vs. Optimized Scalability

When the work cycle is at the peak, and an organization requires more manpower hiring in a given time, it may pose a significant challenge to the in-house hiring managers and fail to deliver the results. An established remote hiring agency is well-equipped to see any organization scale higher and higher within the shortest time possible.

9. Less Accountability Vs. High Accountability and Succession Planning

A manpower hiring agency has high accountability for hiring per role, as they are paid only when their candidates selected for a role have the specified qualifications, certifications, experience, soft skills, and industry exposure. Also, succession is not a difficult task because of the extensive database they have access to that in-house recruiters do not.

When Hiring Through In-House Recruiters Is Ideal

While you could hire a manpower hiring agency for any position, there are certain scenarios in which in-house hiring managers could give excellent outcomes with greater ease. For example, when a vacancy being filled involves extensive coordination with managers and their preferences. In such cases, it is much easier for divisional managers of an organization to interact with in-house manpower hiring managers and co-schedule activities as best suits their calendars.

Also, there are certain teams for which hiring might always be done from specific academic institutes or talent pools. In such cases, hiring managers are mostly preferred as most recruitment processes for the roles are based on the same models and repetitive tasks.

Alliance Recruitment Agency

Alliance Recruitment Agency is a company offering manpower hiring support to organizations across the globe. We have worked with thousands of clients to successfully and efficiently complete 15,000+ hiring projects. It does not matter what challenge you might be facing with your talent acquisition when you work with us! You can rest assured that with our expert recruiters and consultants, wide access to talent pools spanning millions of candidates, and the latest technology and resources available, you get the best candidates for the most competitive hiring needs.

If you would like to know more about our manpower hiring services, contact us anytime. We have 24/7 active customer service.