Back to Blog
Introduction to cost-effective MSP solutions and direct sourcing
When it comes to managing temporary workers, companies are always looking for better ways to hire quality talent while keeping costs down. Two solutions have emerged as leading options: Managed Service Providers (MSPs) and Direct Sourcing—both of which we offer at CXC.
Let’s take a closer look at these possible approaches.
Overview of MSPs and direct sourcing in workforce management
MSPs work like project managers for your temporary workforce. They handle everything: finding workers, dealing with paperwork, managing payments, and ensuring all hiring follows the rules. Think of them as a one-stop shop for getting temporary workers into your company.
Direct sourcing, on the other hand, is when companies find and hire temporary workers themselves. Instead of going through agencies, companies build their own pool of talented people who are interested in working with them. For example, a company might create a talent network of former employees, contractors they’ve worked with before, and people who’ve shown interest in joining their team.
Each method has its own strengths:
- MSPs are ideal when you need to hire many workers across different departments and want someone else to handle all the complex details.
- Direct sourcing works well when you want more control over who you hire and prefer to build long-term relationships with your temporary workers.
Even more important? Both approaches can save companies significant money compared to relying solely on traditional staffing agencies.
Why cost-effectiveness is crucial for workforce management
Put simply, getting the most value for your money matters because hiring is expensive—approximately $4,700. This is exactly why picking the right hiring approach is so important. Companies need a system that not only keeps these costs down but also delivers quality workers quickly—here’s where cost-effective MSP solutions come in.
The right approach can save money in several ways:
- Cutting down the time it takes to find workers
- Reducing paperwork and administrative costs
- Avoiding expensive hiring mistakes
- Getting better workers who stay longer
To figure out if MSPs or direct sourcing is worth the money, companies should track specific metrics like:
- Cost per hire
- Time to fill positions
- Worker pay rates
- Manager satisfaction scores
- Worker retention rates
For example, using an MSP might cost more upfront, but this could save you money since they handle all vendor contracts, worker payroll, and compliance paperwork. Direct sourcing might take more work to set up your own talent pool and screening process, but could also save money in the long run by cutting out agency charges and finding workers who already understand your company.
Addressing key challenges in workforce cost management
Understanding how each approach saves money is just the start. To make the right choice, companies need to examine how cost-effective MSP solutions and direct sourcing address specific workforce challenges. Let’s explore the most common problems and their solutions.
High costs of traditional staffing agencies
Traditional staffing agencies typically charge 20–30% of the first-year salary for each worker they place. For a worker earning $100,000, that’s up to $25,000 in agency charges alone—not including additional mark-ups and service rates.
Direct sourcing cuts out these middleman costs. Instead of paying agency charges, companies can invest in building their own talent pools. While there are initial setup costs for technology and processes, eliminating agency rates and mark-ups can lead to substantial savings over time.
When compared to MSP models, direct sourcing can still offer cost advantages—though the difference isn’t as dramatic as with traditional agencies. MSPs can negotiate agency rates effectively, achieving savings of 10–20% compared to standard agency charges, and offer value through vendor management and compliance. However, direct sourcing can provide additional savings by eliminating even these reduced charges and giving companies more control over worker rates.
Slow time-to-fill for roles
When positions stay empty for too long, projects stall and productivity drops. For example, a software developer role left unfilled for a month could delay product launches and overburden existing team members.
MSPs speed up hiring by running simultaneous searches across multiple vendors, fast-tracking previously vetted candidates, and using smart matching technology to find the right fit quickly. When evaluating cost-effective MSP solutions, looking beyond just the service charges is important. Consider their vendor network quality, negotiated rates, technology platform, and automation capabilities. Their compliance management and ability to handle high-volume hiring across departments are also crucial factors in determining true ROI.
Direct sourcing, meanwhile, offers a different approach to reducing hiring time. It works by tapping into a pool of already-screened candidates, quickly reconnecting with previous contractors, and skipping repeated background checks for known workers. This method particularly shines when companies regularly need similar skills or specialised talent.
Challenges in talent quality and cultural fit
Poor cultural fit can cost companies significantly. For instance, a specialised role such as a project manager doesn’t align with a company’s working style, can delay projects and frustrate team members. Technical skills alone aren’t enough.
These challenges become even more pronounced in different labour market conditions. Companies often feel pressured to lower their standards or raise rates when talent is scarce. And when unemployment is high, sorting through hundreds of applications to find the right fit can drain resources.
Direct sourcing helps solve these challenges through customised talent communities. Unlike traditional hiring methods, companies can curate groups of professionals who match both their technical needs and working styles. They can sort candidates based on past project success, team feedback, and cultural alignment—data that generic staffing solutions rarely track.
Dependence on third-party agencies
Working exclusively with staffing agencies means companies often face unpredictable rate hikes and must compete for market-priced talent. For example, when demand for tech workers spikes, agencies can raise their rates by 20–30%, forcing companies to either pay up or risk losing talent—which can severely impact budgets.
Direct sourcing builds internal hiring strength by developing in-house recruiting expertise, creating candidate databases, and managing talent relationships directly. This internal control gives companies more flexibility in sourcing, engaging, and managing their contingent workforce.
Organisations need to track key metrics to measure the success of breaking away from agency dependence, whether via MSPs or direct sourcing. Beyond the basic measures of time-to-fill and cost-per-hire, they should monitor how well they maintain quality without agency support. This means tracking contractor retention, hiring manager satisfaction, and overall savings compared to previous agency spending.
Evaluating cost-effectiveness through metrics and technology
While tracking these metrics is essential, organisations need the tools and technology to gather and analyse this data effectively. Let’s explore how modern solutions help measure and maximise the return on workforce investments.
Leveraging analytics for cost insights
Modern MSPs such as CXC combine traditional vendor management with direct sourcing capabilities. This gives organisations the best of both worlds.
Our platforms can track both agency-sourced and directly sourced candidates in one place, comparing costs and performance in real-time. For instance, the system might show that directly sourced developers cost 15% less to hire than agency-sourced ones, helping companies adjust their strategy accordingly.
These insights are possible because of advanced technology platforms. MSP platforms automate expensive manual processes like timesheet approval and compliance checks. Their analytics tools spot cost-saving opportunities, such as which suppliers offer the best rates or when taping into the direct sourcing talent pool is cheaper. Meanwhile, direct sourcing technology helps maintain engagement with proven contractors, reducing the need to pay agency fees for repeat hires.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) goals
Building a diverse workforce has become a critical business priority, proven to drive innovation and better decision-making. However, many companies need help to balance DEI objectives with cost management, especially in contingent hiring.
Direct sourcing offers a cost-efficient path to diversity. Instead of paying premium fees to multiple agencies for diverse candidates, companies can build and nurture their inclusive talent communities. This approach reduces hiring costs and creates sustainable, diverse talent pipelines for future roles.
Do note that the cost-effectiveness of diversity hiring through MSPs versus direct sourcing varies by organisation type and size:
- Large enterprises with high-volume hiring often find MSPs more cost-effective because they can get better rates when hiring many workers simultaneously and streamline their hiring processes across the whole company.
- In contrast, direct sourcing works better for organisations needing specialised skills or those with limited budgets, as it eliminates third-party fees and allows companies to build direct relationships with diverse talent communities. Organisations with high turnover benefit from direct sourcing’s ability to maintain a continuous pipeline of candidates, reducing recruitment costs and time-to-fill positions.
Hidden costs and ROI measurement
While MSPs’ base fees are clear, several hidden costs can impact their true ROI. These include implementation fees for new technology platforms, system customisation charges, training staff to use MSP tools and ongoing contract management expenses. Some MSPs also charge extra for reporting, compliance checks, or managing changes to worker requirements.
Direct sourcing helps companies avoid many of these hidden costs. Organisations invest in one talent platform they control instead of paying for multiple vendor systems and relationships. There’s no need to pay for vendor management or contract negotiations, and companies can update their hiring requirements without incurring extra fees. As mentioned earlier, direct sourcing does require investment in recruitment staff and technology to maintain candidate relationships, but these costs are often more predictable than MSP fees.
Comparing MSPs and direct sourcing for scalability and industry-specific needs
Before choosing between MSPs and Direct Sourcing, organisations need to consider both their size and industry requirements, as these factors significantly impact cost-effectiveness.
Scalability in workforce solutions
The size of operations directly affects which solution provides better value. Small organisations hiring fewer than 50 contingent workers annually often find direct sourcing more cost-effective, as MSP implementation costs and management fees might outweigh the benefits. However, when operations grow beyond 100 contingent workers, MSPs become more cost-efficient because their vendor management systems and consolidated billing justify the investment.
The volume also affects ongoing costs. Larger organisations can negotiate better MSP rates due to their higher hiring numbers, while smaller companies might get more value from investing in their own direct sourcing technology and talent pools.
Industry-specific applications
Certain industries lean more towards one solution. For example, highly regulated sectors like healthcare and finance often benefit from MSPs’ compliance management capabilities, which offset their higher costs. Manufacturing and logistics companies with consistent staffing needs typically find MSPs cost-effective for managing large-scale, multi-location hiring.
In contrast, technology and professional services firms often achieve better ROI through direct sourcing. Their need for specialised skills and emphasis on cultural fit makes building dedicated talent pools more valuable than managing multiple vendor relationships. Companies in fast-growing sectors like renewable energy might start with direct sourcing and add MSP services as they scale.
Conclusion: Choosing the most cost-effective workforce strategy
Both MSPs and direct sourcing have clear strengths when it comes to managing a workforce. MSPs are excellent for handling large-scale hiring, managing compliance, and simplifying vendor relationships. Meanwhile, direct sourcing helps reduce agency costs, build stronger relationships with workers, and give companies more control over their hiring process.
For many organisations, combining both approaches offers the best results. MSPs can take care of high-volume or highly regulated roles, while direct sourcing works well for hiring specialist talent or workers who need to fit in well with a company’s culture. This balance helps companies stay flexible while managing costs effectively.
We’re proud to share that CXC is one of the few providers that can deliver both solutions under one roof. We help organisations make the most of MSPs and Direct Sourcing by creating tailored strategies that fit their unique needs. Whether you need support managing global compliance, building your own talent pools, or streamlining your hiring process, CXC has the expertise to guide you every step of the way.
Looking to improve your workforce strategy? Contact CXC today to combine cost-effective MSP solutions and direct sourcing for a cost-effective, efficient hiring process.
