"RPO" and "recruitment agency" aren't two brands of the same product: they're two different billing and integration logics that answer different needs. Confusing them often means paying for the wrong model.
The traditional agency: success fee or exclusive mandate
A traditional agency operates as an external provider, mission by mission. It's paid on success (a percentage of salary, due once the hire starts) or through an exclusive mandate (absolute priority on a given role, usually at a slightly higher rate). Either way, the agency keeps control of its own method and isn't meant to plug into your internal tools or processes.
RPO: a recruiting team embedded inside your company
RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing, or embedded recruiting) works differently: the provider integrates into your teams, tools, and hiring processes, acting as a temporary extension of your HR function. Billing runs daily or monthly (at Walead, from €600/day), not as a percentage of salary.
RPO makes sense once hiring volume is enough to occupy continuous capacity: several roles in parallel, over several months, with needs that evolve as the company grows.
Quick comparison
Billing. Traditional agency: success fee (% of salary) or exclusive mandate. RPO: daily or monthly, regardless of how many hires close.
Right volume for. Traditional agency: one role at a time, one-off. RPO: several roles in parallel, over time.
Integration. Traditional agency: works as an external provider. RPO: integrates into internal teams and tools, close to the hiring managers.
Budget predictability. Traditional agency: cost proportional to the role's salary, unpredictable in volume. RPO: cost smoothed over the mission, adjustable to actual need.
How to decide
The question isn't "which model is cheaper" but "what's the actual pace of my need." One role to fill in the next two months: traditional agency. A sales team to build across several countries or quarters: RPO absorbs that volume at a lower cost per hire than stacking up success fees.