For every direct hire placement, there’s typically a “guarantee” section in the contract.
Usually 90 days. Sometimes up to 6 months. Sometimes even longer. It promises that if the hire doesn’t work out during that window, we’ll fill the role again at no additional cost.
It’s standard. It’s expected.
But the more I think about it, the more I wonder: Why is the success of a hire solely on us?
Let me be clear: this isn’t a problem we have
Since Rogue started, only 3.76% of our placements have needed a backfill.
That’s not because we’re perfect; It’s because we’re honest, thorough, and only send people we genuinely believe are a match.
But here’s what I’ve noticed about the small handful of backfills we have had:
There’s a pattern. It’s not random. It’s not luck.
It usually comes down to:
A hiring manager who wasn’t clear on what they actually needed
A rushed or misaligned interview process
An internal environment that couldn’t retain someone, even when they were delivering
Or a company that thought they could just see how it plays out
That last one is the kicker.
Real example, real frustration
We once offered a six-month replacement guarantee to a client to help the business leaders feel more comfortable. One week before it expired, the candidate quit.
He was performing. He was adding value. And the quirks that made him different? They were known, discussed, and accepted during the interview process.
What changed? Leadership made a move that didn’t sit right. It crossed a line for him.
He didn’t leave because he couldn’t do the job. He left because the environment gave him a reason to.
And somehow, we were still on the hook for that.
Should recruiters be the scapegoat?
In a typical contingency setup, the company doesn’t pay a dime until the hire is made. But once they do, the expectations skyrocket. Even though we’re not in the room making the final decision. Even though we have zero control over what happens after Day One.
It creates this strange dynamic where the recruiter shoulders the risk, but the company holds all the control.
And when something goes sideways, we’re the first to blame.
But here’s what that setup ignores:
We’re not managing the team.
We’re not training your people.
We’re not deciding how you onboard, lead, or retain talent.
Our job is to bring the right people to the table. Yours is to build the kind of environment that makes them want to stay.
If you’re on the fence, don’t hire
I mean it.
If you’re unsure about the candidate, if your team has reservations, if the decision feels like a shrug...don’t do it.
Don’t fall back on,
“We’ll know in 90 days.”
Or
“If it doesn’t work out, the agency will replace them.”
That’s not a hiring strategy. That’s avoidance.
If you’re hoping a guarantee will clean up a messy process, all it does is kick the problem down the road.
And that’s not fair to the candidate either. Nobody wants to be a placeholder hire.
People aren’t products
We’ve gotten too comfortable treating employees like items with a return policy. Hire now, evaluate later. If it doesn’t work out, get a new one.
Except we’re not talking about toasters. We’re talking about people. With lives, families, goals, and real stakes in your decision.
So let me ask this:
What would happen if we threw out the idea of a “guarantee”?
Would teams spend more time defining what success looks like?
Would they build better interviews?
Would they take onboarding seriously?
Would they ask, “Is this someone we’re ready to invest in?” instead of “Eh, let’s see how it goes”?
Because when there’s no fallback, you actually have to own the decision. And that’s a good thing.
So what’s the point of all this?
It’s not to dodge accountability. Like I said, our backfill rate is under four percent. We stand behind the work.
But I want to challenge the default. I want to stop pretending that the success of a hire sits solely with the recruiter.
That’s not real. And it’s not healthy.
If we want to build strong teams, the kind that actually last, we need more ownership on both sides.
So maybe it’s time to rethink the guarantee.
Not because recruiters don’t care about outcomes. But because hiring well requires more than filling a seat.
It requires clarity. Commitment. And a company that’s ready to help someone thrive, not just show up.
There’s a better way
What I do want is real partnership.
Where we align before the search even starts. Where we collaborate on interview strategy, role clarity, and candidate experience. Where we both care about retention and both take responsibility for it.
When that happens, we’re not just filling a role. We’re helping your business grow the right way.
If that’s the kind of hiring relationship you want, let’s have that conversation.
See you next Monday,
Robin
#gorogue