Two Models, Different Incentives
Retained executive search and contingency recruiting are not variations on the same service. They are built on different incentive structures — and those incentives produce different outcomes. Contingency recruiting pays only on placement. This creates pressure to move fast, present broadly, and close offers before the company has fully assessed the candidate. Retained search is funded by an upfront commitment from the client. This removes the incentive to rush and aligns the firm's interest with the quality of the outcome, not the speed of the placement.
Understanding the structural differences explains why the performance data consistently diverges between the two models — and why the choice of model matters more than the choice of firm for executive-level searches.
Performance Comparison
Retained vs. Contingency: Key Metrics
Why the Durability Gap Exists
Intake depth determines candidate profile accuracy
Retained firms invest 90+ minutes in intake before sourcing begins. Contingency firms typically spend 30 minutes reviewing a job description. The quality of the intake directly determines the quality of the candidate profile — and the profile accuracy determines placement durability.
Passive candidate access changes the talent pool
The best executive candidates are not looking for their next role. Retained firms have the relationship infrastructure to reach them. Contingency firms primarily source from databases of active job seekers — a pool that is smaller and less qualified for senior roles.
Assessment depth reduces mis-hire risk
Retained searches typically include structured competency assessments, culture-fit evaluations, and reference checks designed to probe specific dimensions. Contingency placements are often limited to interviews — which are poor predictors of executive performance in isolation.
No incentive to rush means better candidate alignment
Contingency firms under competitive pressure (competing with other firms and with internal recruiters) routinely present candidates before they are fully assessed. Retained firms present fewer candidates, later — but with higher confidence in each presentation.
"A contingency search that closes in 45 days and produces a mis-hire costs more than a retained search that closes in 40 days and produces a durable placement. The model fee structure is the second-order cost. The placement durability is the first-order outcome."
When Contingency Is Appropriate
Contingency recruiting is appropriate for roles below the VP level, where the talent pool is larger, the assessment process is simpler, and the cost of a mis-hire is lower. For VP and C-suite roles — where the talent pool is constrained, the assessment is complex, and the cost of a failed hire ranges from $200K to $1M+ — the retained model produces better outcomes and lower total cost when all factors are considered.
Majhi Group operates exclusively on a retained model for VP and C-suite searches. The 90-day replacement guarantee exists because the process is rigorous enough to make durable placements the norm — not the exception.