Direct sourcing, job adverts or RPO: choosing the right hiring method

You know you have to recruit. The post is validated, so is the budget, and the team is waiting. But you don't know how to do it: publish an announcement and wait, mandate a firm, outsource all or part of the process, or go through acting while waiting for better.

What method of recruitment Choose? I-I-Idirect approach- What? The announcement? The RPO- What? The interim management- What? Each one responds to a specific situation, and choosing the wrong one does not just waste the budget: it can make you lose three months and the right candidate.

We have seen companies pay hunting fees for positions that an advertisement would have filled, and others publish ads for six months for a profile that never reads the ads. This guide is there to avoid both of you.

After more than 1,200 recruitments in 25 countries, we learned a few things about choosing the method. The right answer does not depend on what is fashionable, or what you have always done. It depends on three questions: who are you looking for, how fast, and what happens if you're wrong.

However, the choice of method remains one of the most misunderstood subjects of recruitment. Many companies choose by habit or budget reflex, without measuring what each option actually brings to them.

The main methods (and what they really do)

Let's leave the jargon aside and look at what every method of recruitment concretely bring.

Direct approach

What it is: a consultant mapping the companies in which the profiles are sought, identifies the right people and contacts them one by one, in a personalized way, to convince them to listen and then apply.

For which purpose: recruit executives and experts who are on the job, satisfied and absent from the jobboards. Get a precise reading of the market within a few weeks: how many profiles exist, what they win, which would make them move.

What's the point of it? current positions with many candidates available (the cost is not justified), volume (it is not scaled up), and immediate needs (it takes three to six weeks).

Honestly: l’direct approach is the most effective method for rare profiles, which pushes some firms to propose it for everything. It is not because it works that it is always necessary. We regularly refuse mandates for which a well-written announcement would have been sufficient.

Real example: An industrial SME asked us to hunt for a maintenance manager. Looking at the local market, we found that dozens of profiles were in active research. We proposed a targeted advertising campaign with a evaluation structured. The post was filled within five weeks, for one third of the original cost.

Advertising and sourcing

What it is: the dissemination of an offer on jobboards, your career site and professional networks, complemented by an active search in CVthèques. The candidates come to you; it is up to you to sort them quickly and well.

For which purpose: positions for which the active candidates are numerous and qualified: support functions, technicians, commercial field, first levels of management. Companies whose employer brand naturally attracts.

Honestly: The announcement costs little, but it takes time: sorting out two hundred applications, answering each one and conducting the first interviews is a real job. When it is not done, the candidate experience deteriorates, and your reputation with it. It also fails, almost always, for the profiles rarewho don't read it.

A sign that doesn't deceive: if your ad has been online for more than six weeks without serious application, it's not the ad that needs to be changed, it's the method.

RPO (recruitment process outsourcing)

What it is: a team of dedicated recruiters, made available to you for a given period, who work with your tools, under your brand and at the pace of your needs, while relying on the methods and network of the firm.

For which purpose: companies that recruit a lot over several months: site opening, rapid growth, transformation plan. To those who want to strengthen their recruitment team without lasting hiring.

Honestly: RPO is powerful when the volume is real and the company plays the game: access to managers, quick decisions, clear process. It disappoints when it is used for two or three isolated posts, or when managers do not free up time for interviews. The RPO is a partnership, not a service.

Real example: A logistics company opening a new warehouse was expected to recruit seventy people in four months, from the carist to the site manager. Two dedicated recruiters, located on its premises, conducted collective sessions, interviews and integration. The site opened on the scheduled date.

Temporary staffing and interim management

What it is: the rapid availability of an operational person for a fixed period. The interim covers execution and technical positions; interim management, management and management positions for missions of three to twelve months.

What they are for: to cover an absence, a peak of activity, an unforeseen vacancy or a transformation phase, without waiting for the outcome of a traditional recruitment. The transition manager also brings an external look and experience of comparable situations.

Honestly: They are solutions of continuity, no construction. A remarkable transition manager will leave at the end of his mission; the team knows it, and that limits what he can do. The good practice often consists in parallel launching the interim management and sustainable recruitment.

Real example: an ITE has lost its Director of Human Resources in full annual negotiation. A transition manager took over within eight days, led the negotiations and prepared the arrival of the HRD recruited in direct approach three months later.

Employee referrals and internal networks

What it is: your employees recommend people from their professional backgrounds, often against a bonus. Candidates arrive with a surety and a realistic idea of the company.

For which purpose: to companies whose teams are engaged and well connected to their market: tech, consulting, business. At intermediate posts where cultural compatibility weighs heavily. It often produces the most faithful recruitments.

Honestly: Co-optation reproduces your current teams, with their qualities and blind angles. It quickly drains its pool and does not work for profiles that no one in your home knows. Used alone, it ends up always recruiting the same profile, in the same network, with the same limits. Animate a program of cooption requires a real method: readable bonuses, quick returns to sponsors, transparent tracking.

Real example: one consulting agency recruited one third of its consultants by co-optation for two years, and then found that all its teams were similar. We supplemented the scheme with a direct approach focused on profiles from other sectors. The retention rate has remained high; the diversity of routes has increased significantly.

---

Match the method and the objective

The most important question is not "what is the best method?". It's "What position should I fill, and at what cost a failure?"

Here's a quick reference:

Do you still hesitate? Ask us for an opinion without commitment

---

When to combine methods

The most effective recruitment often is not based on a single method, but on two that work together.

interim management + direct approach: Cover the position immediately, then take the time to recruit the right person. The HRD mentioned above? It's exactly that device.

Announcement + direct approach: Launch the ad to capture active candidates, and in parallel approach the existing profiles. You compare the two pools at the same time, and you know very quickly which one bears its fruit.

RPO + executive search : a dedicated team absorbs the volume of team positions while a senior consultant devotes himself to the few managerial positions that condition everything else. This is the classic pattern of a country opening.

The rule: each method must meet a need different. If you use two for the same job, you're probably making things unnecessarily difficult.

---

Budget and deadlines: the reality

Let's talk about constraints, because the choice of a method is made in the real world, not in the abstract.

Orders of magnitude (France, frame post, standard perimeter):

Note: These ranges are indicative. Actual costs and delays vary depending on the profile's scarcity, location, level of pay and your own decision time.

The real cost to be considered is not that of the method, but that of the vacant position and of an error in recruitment: an ill-selected manager usually costs much more than a year's fees. Choosing the cheapest method is economical only if it works.

---

The mistakes we see most often

Publish an ad by reflex. The ad is perfect for some positions and useless for others. "That's what we usually do" is not an argument. If the profile does not read the ads, six weeks of broadcast will not change anything.

Choose according to the decision-maker's preference rather than the position. Some managers like to work with a firm; others want to keep everything in-house. None of these preferences should dictate the method.

Too much reliance on automated tools. The sourcing platforms and screening tools have progressed, and they save time on current positions. But they do not convince anyone, do not detect motivation or cultural adequacy, and sometimes exclude the best profiles on form criteria.

---

A simple decision grid

Before stopping your method, answer these questions:

1. Are the right candidates actively seeking? (If they are in office and satisfied, the announcement will not be enough.)

2. How many jobs, over what period? (An isolated post? About ten? A whole site?)

3. What happens if the position remains vacant for three months? (A embarrassing delay? A project that's stopped? A risk to the company?)

4. What are your real constraints? (Budget, delay, confidentiality, availability of managers for interviews.)

---

The right question changes everything

There is no "best" method of recruitment in absolute terms. There is only the right method for your position, time and constraints.

But here is what more than 1,200 recruits have taught us: the correct method does not simply fill the position. It changes what you know about your own attractiveness.

When you discover, after three weeks of direct approach, that the best candidates decline because of your telework policy, you stop asking yourself "where are the candidates?" and you begin to wonder "why don't they come?".

It's the strength of a well-made choice. Not just a job. A new understanding of your labour market.

An ad shows you who's looking. A direct approach shows you who exists. Only the right method shows you what to do next.

by Mehdi Benali
Partner, Executive search, Cadran Talents

Not sure about the right approach?

We help companies choose and conduct the right method of recruitment, in France and in more than 25 countries. Whether you need a direct approach in Lyon, an RPO for a site opening or a transition manager within ten days, we build the device with you.

A single contact person. Consultants who know your area. And a team that isn't afraid to tell you when another method would be better for you.

Let's talk about your need.

---

Frequently asked questions

How many candidates do you need to meet?

Recruitment does not seek completeness, it seeks the right person. Usual reference points: direct approach, three to five candidates presented after forty to eighty profiles approached. Announcement, five to eight interviews after the screening of applications. Executive search, a shortlist of three to four finalists. Beyond that, you're wasting time without gaining quality.

Remote or face-to-face interviews?

The visio works well for first exchanges, distant candidates and multi-country recruitment. The presentel remains valuable for final interview, management positions and corporate cultures where the relationship counts a lot. Most of our processes combine both.

When should a firm and internal recruitment be combined?

Pre-internal Cabinet: when the profile is rare and you don't know where to find it. Internal before the firm: when there are many active candidates and your team has time. Both in parallel: when the deadline is short and the position conditions a project.

What is the difference between direct and executive search?

The direct approach covers managers and experts: mapping, personal approach, shortlist in three to six weeks. The executive search is intended for managers and management committees: exclusive mandate, comprehensive research, enhanced confidentiality, in-depth evaluation and support until the position is taken.

How do we know if we have chosen the right method?

Some signs: the candidates met correspond to the briefing from the first interviews. The announced deadline shall be respected. The candidates' feedback on the process is positive, including those that are not successful. Most importantly, the recruit is still there a year later.

Can artificial intelligence replace a recruitment firm?

It transforms the way we Look for: faster identification, sorting of applications, summaries of courses. But she can't. Convincing a candidate in office, neither assess a motivation nor feel that a brilliant profile on paper will not hold in your team.

Automated screening tools can predict apparent suitability. They cannot tell you that a candidate hesitates because of a family project, or that he or she has left his or her last position for a reason that directly concerns you.

To sort quickly, tools help. To just recruit, nothing replaces a real conversation.

Can we combine several methods of recruitment?

Absolutely, and it's often recommended. A interim management followed by a direct approach, a parallel announcement of a targeted hunt, or an RPO for the volume associated with an executive search for management: each combination meets a specific need. The essential thing is that each method serves a different purpose.