Disclaimer: This article contains generalizations that don’t apply to more than 99.9% of all people
Wait—Who Even Becomes a Recruiter in the First Place?
Before we dive into the three types, let’s address the elephant in the room: Why the hell would anyone choose recruiting as a career?
When most people hear “recruiter,” they think of two things: Army recruiters at the mall, or that annoying person on LinkedIn who clearly didn’t read their profile. It’s not exactly a childhood dream. No 8-year-old says “When I grow up, I want to cold-call strangers about job opportunities they didn’t ask for!”
So who actually ends up in recruiting, and how did they get there?
The Accidental Recruiter (Most Common) “I was an admin assistant and they needed someone to help with hiring” or “I graduated with a Communications degree and this was the job that called me back.” Most recruiters stumbled into it. They needed a job, recruiting was hiring (ironically), and suddenly they’ve been doing it for 5 years.
The “People Person” (Self-Identified) These are the folks who say things like “I just love connecting with people!” and “I’m really good at reading people.” They studied HR, Psychology, or Business and genuinely thought helping people find jobs sounded fulfilling. Some of them are right. Most of them burn out when they realize it’s actually a sales job disguised as altruism.
The Failed Sales Person (Career Pivot) They tried selling software, insurance, or real estate and hated it. But they learned they were good at closing deals. Recruiting is “sales but you’re helping people find jobs” so it feels less slimy. Spoiler: it’s still sales, just with different products (humans).
The Commission Chaser (In It For The Money) These people saw that top agency recruiters can make $150K+ and thought “I can do that.” They’re comfortable with rejection, thrive on competition, and don’t mind the grind. They’re rare, and they’re usually the ones who either crush it or flame out spectacularly within 18 months.
The HR Generalist (It’s Part of The Job) They wanted to work in HR—benefits, employee relations, maybe some light payroll. Then they got hired and discovered “Oh, recruiting is 40% of this role and I hate it but I need the paycheck.” They didn’t choose recruiting; recruiting chose them.
The Psychology Major Who Needed a Job (Extremely Common) “What do you do with a Psychology degree?” becomes “I guess I’ll try HR” becomes “Well, they’re hiring for a recruiting coordinator position.” Four years later they’re still there, vaguely depressed, wondering how this became their life.
Here’s the uncomfortable pattern: Very few people actively choose recruiting as a calling. Most end up there because:
- The barrier to entry is low (no hard skills required, just “people skills”)
- It’s always hiring (high turnover means constant openings)
- It sounds more meaningful than sales (“I’m helping people find their dream job!”)
- They didn’t know what else to do with their degree
The difference between the three types of recruiters isn’t just how they recruit—it’s why they’re doing it in the first place and what keeps them trapped (or thriving) in their particular model.
Let’s break it down.
1. The Internal Recruiter: The Overwhelmed Gatekeeper
Who they are: Susan works in HR at a 250-person company. She does payroll on Mondays, recruiting on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, handles benefits enrolment on Thursdays, and plans the company BBQ on Fridays. Recruiting is maybe 40% of her job. She makes $65K/year regardless of whether she fills 2 roles or 20.
The Psychology: Internal recruiters operate in a zero-reward, high-blame environment. When they successfully hire someone, the hiring manager gets credit for “building a great team.” When hiring takes too long or the candidate doesn’t work out, the recruiter gets blamed for “not finding good talent.”
They become risk-averse gatekeepers because:
- No upside for being bold – Hiring a “risky” candidate who fails reflects poorly on them
- Constant pressure from hiring managers – “Why is this taking so long?” “I need hourly updates” “This person wore green, reject them”
- Death by 1000 cuts – Candidates no-showing, lying on resumes, calling 40 times after being rejected
- Repetitive burnout – Same conversations, same job postings, same hiring manager complaints, over and over
Why they reject you for your font choice: They’re trying to justify their existence. If hiring was easy, the company wouldn’t need them. So they create arbitrary filters—font choices, keyword matching, personality tests—to demonstrate “rigor” in their process. It’s not about finding the best candidate; it’s about not being blamed when something goes wrong.
Confession: “Some days it’s hard not to take it personally when you bring in a candidate that interviewed well with you, but did not do well with the hiring manager. It feels like they are sometimes a representation of you.”
Translation: Their self-worth is tied to other people’s performance in interviews they can’t control. Recipe for misery.
2. The Agency Recruiter: The Commission Hunter
Who they are: Derek works at Robert Half. He makes $55K base salary plus commission. To hit his quarterly quota, he needs to place 3-5 candidates. If he crushes it, he might make $90K total. If he fails, he’s on a performance improvement plan. There’s a leaderboard in the office showing everyone’s numbers. His manager asks for pipeline updates twice a day.
The Psychology: Agency recruiters operate in a high-pressure sales environment disguised as HR. They’re not evaluated on candidate quality or client satisfaction—they’re evaluated on placements closed and fees collected.
This creates perverse incentives:
- Volume over quality – Spray and pray. Submit 50 mediocre candidates because one might stick
- Transactional relationships – You’re inventory, not a person. Once you’re placed (or rejected), they move on
- Short-term thinking – Get the placement, collect commission, worry about retention later
- Internal competition – Fighting with teammates over who “owns” candidates and clients
Why they ghost you after one conversation: You’re one of 47 candidates they’re juggling this week. If you’re not an immediate fit for their open req, you’re dead to them. They don’t have time for relationship-building—they have quota to hit.
The toxic pissing contest: Agency culture is boiler-room sales: daily standups where you justify your existence, leaderboards ranking performance, managers breathing down your neck. One recruiter admitted: “I would only recommend recruiting full time to someone who enjoys sales and the constant grind of it.”
Most agency recruiters are either:
- Grinding themselves to death trying to hit quota (50-60 hour weeks)
- Planning their escape (fantasizing about going solo or switching to internal recruiting)
- Already dead inside (staying for the steady paycheck despite hating every day)
The golden handcuffs: Derek’s been at Robert Half for 5 years. He makes $85K now. He has a mortgage. He knows he could make more going solo, but what if he goes 4 months without a placement? The agency takes 60% of his fees, but at least he gets a base salary and health insurance.
3. The Independent Recruiter: The Solo Operator (The Wild Card)
Who they are: You. No boss, no office, no base salary. You find candidates, pitch them to companies, collect 15-20% placement fees. You might make $0 for 3 months, then $40K in one month. You work from coffee shops and respond to emails in your underwear.
The Psychology: Independent recruiters operate in a high-risk, high-reward, zero-bullshit environment. Every placement is 100% commission. Every hour you work is either making you money or wasting your time. There’s no hiding behind “I’m working on my pipeline” or “I’m building relationships.”
This creates a completely different mindset:
- Quality over quantity – You can’t afford to waste time on bad matches. Every conversation has to count.
- Relationship-driven – You don’t have Robert Half’s brand, so you NEED people to trust you personally
- Agile and efficient – No bureaucracy, no approvals. You can move fast and pivot instantly
- Extreme accountability – No one to blame when it doesn’t work. It’s 100% on you.
Why you’re either feast or famine: You’re trading stability for upside. Some months you place 3 people and make $60K. Other months you strike out completely and make $0. Most people can’t handle that volatility psychologically.
The freedom and terror: You wake up every day with complete control over your time and complete responsibility for your results. No boss telling you what to do, but also no safety net catching you when you fail.
The imposter syndrome: Without an agency brand behind you, you constantly wonder: “Why would anyone work with me?” You’re competing against Robert Half’s 75-year reputation and the company’s internal recruiters. Your only advantage is that you’re faster, cheaper, and actually give a shit.
The reality check: When you tell agency recruiters about going solo, 70% say “WAIT, YOU CAN DO THAT?!” They’ve been so conditioned to think they need infrastructure that they never considered just… doing it themselves. The other 30% are too scared of the risk.
The Incentive Structures (Why They Act The Way They Do)
| Type | Gets Paid When… | Main Fear | Main Motivation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Internal | They show up to work (salary) | Getting blamed for bad hires | Not getting fired |
| Agency | They close placements (salary + commission) | Missing quota | Hitting leaderboard, keeping job |
| Independent | They close placements (100% commission) | Going broke | Making money, proving it works |
Internal recruiters become gatekeepers because they have no incentive to take risks.
Agency recruiters become spammers because they have incentive to maximize volume.
Independent recruiters either become hyper-focused on quality (because they can’t waste time) or flame out completely (because they can’t handle the volatility).
Which One Actually Works For You?
If you’re a candidate:
- Internal recruiters are gatekeepers—bypass them and go straight to hiring managers when possible
- Agency recruiters see you as inventory—use them but don’t expect loyalty
- Independent recruiters might actually care—but verify they’re legit and not just winging it
If you’re a hiring manager:
- Internal recruiters are overworked and doing 5 other jobs—lower your expectations
- Agency recruiters will flood you with mediocre candidates—set clear boundaries
- Independent recruiters can be fast and efficient—but you’re taking a risk on someone with no brand
If you’re thinking about becoming a recruiter:
- Internal = stability, benefits, soul-crushing repetition, no upside
- Agency = higher pay potential, toxic culture, golden handcuffs, constant pressure
- Independent = freedom, terror, feast or famine, 100% on you
The Uncomfortable Truth
Most recruiters—internal and agency—hate their jobs. They’re burned out, underpaid relative to the value they create, and trapped in systems designed to make them miserable.
The independent recruiter model offers a way out: keep 100% of the value you create, work on your own terms, build real relationships. But it requires tolerating massive uncertainty and betting on yourself when no one else will.
The psychology of each role isn’t about good people vs. bad people. It’s about what the incentive structure rewards and punishes.
Internal recruiters aren’t gatekeepers because they’re power-hungry—they’re gatekeepers because not getting blamed is their primary job requirement.
Agency recruiters aren’t spammers because they’re lazy—they’re spammers because volume is how they survive in a quota-driven meat grinder.
Independent recruiters aren’t hustlers because they’re greedy—they’re hustlers because if they don’t close deals, they don’t eat.
The system shapes the behavior. Change the system, change the behavior.
No responses yet