Understanding the Different Types of Executive Search

Hiring senior leaders is one of the most consequential decisions an organization can make. Whether a company is early-stage or well-established, its approach to executive search significantly impacts process speed and cost, as well as long-term outcomes. Understanding the different executive search models helps hiring leaders make more informed decisions and choose the approach that is best aligned with their goals, timelines, and internal resources.

What Is Executive Search?

Executive search is a specialized form of recruiting focused on identifying, evaluating, and engaging senior-level talent. Unlike general recruiting, executive search often targets passive candidates. These candidates are leaders who are not actively seeking new roles but may be open to the right opportunity. This process requires market insight, discretion, and a deep understanding of both role requirements and organizational context.

At its core, executive search blends research, outreach, and assessment. Firms may map talent markets, benchmark compensation, and vet candidates beyond resumes alone. The structure of how these services are delivered and how clients pay varies widely, which is why understanding different search models is crucial before engaging an executive search partner.

Retained Search

Retained search is the most traditional executive search model and is commonly used for C-suite or board-level roles. In this structure, a company pays an upfront fee to engage a search firm, typically as a percentage of the role’s anticipated compensation. The firm then manages the entire search process from start to finish over a defined timeline.

Pros and Cons

When considering the retained search model, decision-makers often weigh predictability against flexibility. This model offers a clear scope and dedicated resources, but it also assumes a level of certainty around role definition and hiring urgency. Key considerations often include:

Pros: 

• Dedicated search team
• High-touch candidate engagement
• Perceived prestige
• Familiar, legacy model

Cons: 

• High upfront cost
• Limited flexibility if priorities shift
• Long timelines
• Access to strategic data from the search process is likely to be limited

These factors can work well for certain organizations, but they may be restrictive for others navigating change or growth.

Contingency Search

Contingency search operates on a success-fee basis, meaning the firm is paid only if a candidate is hired. This model is commonly used for mid-level roles or searches where speed is prioritized. Multiple firms may work on the same role simultaneously, creating a competitive dynamic among recruiters.

Pros and Cons

Contingency search can feel attractive because there is no upfront financial commitment. However, the incentives built into the model can influence how searches are conducted. Organizations typically evaluate this approach by considering:

Pros: 

• No upfront fees
• Faster initial outreach
• Lower perceived risk

Cons: 

• Less depth in candidate vetting
• Limited research
• More of a transactional engagement approach

Contingency search may favor speed and upfront results over strategy, which is not always ideal for executive-level hires.

Executive Search-As-a-Service

Executive search-as-a-service is a more flexible, modern approach that aligns search efforts directly with the work being performed. Instead of paying a flat fee or success-based commission, organizations pay for the actual hours spent on research, outreach, assessment, and advisory support. This model allows companies to engage executive search expertise without committing to a rigid structure and provides frequent, ongoing insights into progress.

Pros and Cons

The hourly model offers transparency and adaptability, particularly for organizations navigating evolving needs. Like any approach, it comes with trade-offs that leaders should consider:

Pros: 

• More flexibility
• Transparency
• Lower per-hire cost
• Ability to pause or pivot
• Regular updates as the process progresses
• Access to data obtained during the process

Cons: 

• Requires collaboration
• A less familiar model to some organizations

For many organizations, especially in dynamic industries, these advantages of this newer model outweigh the learning curve.

Comparing the Models

When comparing executive search models, the most important distinction is how risk, cost, and control are distributed. Retained search places financial risk upfront in exchange for exclusivity and structure. Contingency search shifts risk to the firm but often sacrifices depth and alignment in the process. Hourly search shares responsibility, allowing clients to stay closely connected to how time and resources are used.

Another key difference lies in adaptability. Hiring needs often change mid-search due to funding shifts, strategy changes, or evolving role definitions. Models with rigid scopes can make these changes costly or disruptive, while more flexible approaches allow organizations to respond in real time without restarting the process or absorbing unnecessary fees.

How the Executive Search-As-a-Service Model Drives The Best ROI for Your Organization

From a return-on-investment perspective, the executive search-as-a-service model aligns cost with value delivered. Organizations pay for research, insights, and execution as needed, rather than for assumptions made up front. This approach supports better decision-making, clearer prioritization, and a stronger partnership between internal stakeholders and external advisors throughout the hiring process.

Common Misconceptions About Executive Search Models

One common misconception is that higher cost in executive search automatically means higher quality. While retained searches can deliver strong outcomes, cost alone does not guarantee alignment, speed, or flexibility. Another misconception is that contingency search is “risk-free,” when in reality, the risk often shows up later through misalignment, turnover, or extended vacancies.

There are also assumptions about newer models. Some leaders believe executive search-as-a-service lacks commitment or rigor, when in practice, it simply changes how commitment is measured. Outcomes ultimately depend more on partnership and clarity than on the billing structure itself.

Conclusion: Choosing the Right Executive Search Approach for Your Hiring Needs

Choosing the right executive search model starts with understanding your organization’s goals, constraints, and internal capabilities. No single approach is universally “best,” but some are better suited to flexibility, transparency, and evolving needs. At Pursuit Sourcing, we use the more modern search-as-a-service model because it allows us to meet organizations where they are, deliver targeted expertise, and stay aligned with outcomes. We find this ultimately creating a more thoughtful, efficient path to executive hiring success.

If you’d like more practical guidance on executive hiring, we invite you to subscribe to the Pursuit Sourcing newsletter. In our newsletter, we share concise insights, real-world considerations, and market-informed perspectives designed for leaders involved in hiring decisions. It’s a simple way to stay current and make your next executive search more confident.

‍