Using multiple agencies: do you want a partnership or a race?
A Recruiter’s perspective on why using one trusted partner is recommended
There’s a long-standing belief in hiring that refuses to go away: that the more agencies the better the results. On the surface, it sounds logical. More agencies means more reach – right? More CVs. More competition. Surely that must improve your chances? But after years in recruitment, we’ve seen the opposite play out time and time again. When a role is released to multiple agencies simultaneously, hiring often becomes reactive, noisy and unnecessarily complicated.
The real difference isn’t in the number of agencies involved. It’s in the depth of the partnership you have with just one, their understanding of you and the honesty they will give.
When Recruitment Becomes a Race
The moment a role is sent to multiple agencies, the dynamic changes. It stops being about understanding the business and starts being about speed. The question quietly shifts from “Who is right for this role?” to “Who can get a CV in first?”
That pressure influences behaviour. Recruiters move quickly, sometimes too quickly. CVs may be forwarded before conversations are fully explored. Candidates are presented before cultural fit has been properly assessed. The focus becomes submission rather than solution.
What often follows is duplication. The same candidate appears from two different agencies. HR is pulled into ownership discussions. Time is spent clarifying who spoke to whom first. None of that moves the hiring process forward and is never in the candidates best interest, their experience is immediately a negative one.
However, when one trusted agency is appointed, the dynamic changes entirely. There is space to fully understand the brief, challenge assumptions where needed, and approach the market strategically rather than urgently. The recruiter is not racing competitors; they are representing the business properly. They are an extension of your brand after all.
The Operational Impact No One Talks About
One of the biggest hidden costs of using multiple agencies is the impact it has on line managers. Firstly, they need to brief details of the role multiple times and then when several recruiters are working the same vacancy, line managers inevitably become the point of escalation. They receive calls asking for “just five minutes.” They are asked to clarify details that have already been shared. They are forwarded speculative CVs. They are pulled into conversations about candidate ownership.
Instead of focusing on managing their teams, delivering results and developing their sector, they end up managing recruiters. With a single, agreed recruitment partner, communication becomes streamlined. There is one briefing conversation, one feedback loop and one accountable point of contact. The role remains visible and prioritised, but without the surrounding noise. Line managers can lead, rather than coordinate.
Why Candidates Engage Differently
Perhaps the most overlooked impact of multi-agency hiring is what happens in the market.
When agencies are competing on the same role, recruiters can become cautious about how openly they promote the opportunity. There is a genuine concern that a candidate may go direct or approach another agency. As a result, adverts can become vague and initial conversations guarded.
Candidates sense that.
When an agency is trusted exclusively, it can confidently advertise the company name, the location and the real opportunity on offer. It can have transparent, informed conversations with potential applicants. It can invest time in properly positioning the business.
The difference in candidate engagement is significant. Instead of speculative interest, you speak to individuals who understand exactly who they would be working for and why the role matters. That leads to stronger interviews and better long-term hires.
Competition vs Accountability
Some argue that using multiple agencies “keeps them on their toes.” The theory is that competition drives performance.
In practice, it often reduces commitment. If an agency knows there is only a fractional chance of success whilst other active roles are exclusive, the depth of time invested inevitably shrinks. The role becomes one of many, rather than a priority.
True accountability does not come from competition. It comes from ownership. When one agency is trusted with a vacancy, expectations are clear and performance is measurable. The recruiter is fully invested in delivering the right outcome, not simply being first.
A Strategic Choice, Not a Reactive One
Recruitment should not be about who can move fastest. It should be about who can represent your business properly and introduce the right person. Choosing one trusted recruitment partner creates consistency, clarity and confidence — internally and in the market. It reduces noise for your managers, removes commercial confusion and strengthens your employer brand.
So perhaps the better question isn’t how many agencies you use.
It’s whether you are building a partnership — or creating a race.
Because in hiring, partnership almost always outperforms speed.
For a no nonsense and well informed chat regarding how we can help you recruit in the lending and saving space, please reach out to tim.betts@ultimatebanking.co.uk