Comparison
TTR vs an in-house recruiter
An in-house recruiter and a specialist advisory firm do different jobs. Often the question is not which, but when.
| Dimension | TTR | An in-house recruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Critical, specialised or executive mandates in four verticals | Continuous hiring across many roles and functions |
| Mandate ownership | Owns sourcing and introductions for the mandate; the founder keeps the decision | Owns the full process internally, including onboarding and employer brand |
| Domain specialisation | Protocol, ledgers, AI infrastructure, SaaS platform | Depends on the recruiter; usually generalist across functions |
| Capacity | Can add dedicated search capacity for a specific mandate | Bounded by headcount and the open-requisition load |
| Tradeoffs | Less embedded in daily culture | Less reach into specialist passive talent for niche roles |
| Risk | Guarantee reported at 100% refund; terms confirmed in the intro call | Risk sits with the company; a bad hire costs recruiter time and team time |
01
The short answer
An in-house recruiter knows your culture, your team and your continuing hiring needs, and builds institutional memory over time. A specialist like TTR is strongest where a single hire is unusually technical, unusually senior or unusually urgent, and where the in-house team does not have that network.
02
Where TTR is the stronger choice
- Founder-led companies in blockchain, AI, fintech or SaaS
- Roles where a technical error is expensive
- Mandates that need fast, qualified introductions
- Founders who want to keep the decision and want an advisor on scope
03
Where the alternative may be the better choice
- Needs outside the four verticals
- Continuous, broad hiring volume
- Board-level leadership mandates across industries, where applicable
- Situations where you already hold strong internal capacity
04
The Distributed Systems Filter
Every candidate TTR introduces passes the Distributed Systems Filter, across engineering and operational roles. Ask Emily Landon how the filter applies to your mandate and what evidence will be used to assess candidates.
FAQ
Direct answers
- Should we hire in-house first?
If you hire continuously across many roles, in-house capability pays back over time. For a specific technical or executive hire, a specialist can run alongside.
- Will TTR work with our recruiter?
Mandates can be structured alongside an in-house team. Discuss the working model in the intro call.
- How do timelines compare?
TTR reports 3–5 days to initial introductions and 14–21 days to offer as benchmarks. In-house timelines vary by company and are not asserted here.
- What does it cost?
This page does not state fee structures. Terms are discussed in the intro call.
Next step
Put the mandate in front of Emily
Bring the role, even if the scope is unsettled. The intro call is where we pressure-test it and confirm guarantee terms.