Building a team across borders often means choosing the right hiring model, one that fits both your legal structure and growth goals.
Two of the most common options are using an Employer of Record (EOR) or working with a staffing agency. Each serves a different purpose in workforce management, and understanding those differences is key to scaling the right way.
This article breaks down the distinctions to help you choose the model that works best for your business needs.
Read more: Turkish Employment Law Made Simple: The EOR Advantage
Definition: Employer of Record vs. Staffing Agency
When comparing an Employer of Record vs. staffing agency, the distinction begins with their core function. An Employer of Record (EOR) legally hires and manages employees on behalf of a company that does not have a local legal entity.
The EOR becomes the official employer for tax, payroll, and compliance purposes, while the client company oversees day-to-day work.
In contrast, a staffing agency focuses on the front end of the hiring process. It sources, screens, and recruits candidates to fill temporary, permanent, or contract positions for client companies.
The staffing agency may or may not be the legal employer, depending on the employment arrangement.
A staffing agency helps you find the right person; an EOR takes over once you do, taking over the employment paperwork, payroll, and legal compliance so you don’t have to.
Read more: EOR Solutions: The Key to Scaling Your Global Business
1. Hiring Process: Who Controls the Talent Pipeline?
The hiring process varies greatly depending on whether you use an Employer of Record (EOR) or a staffing agency but not just when they step in. It also affects how much control you retain, how fast you hire, and the type of talent you attract.
With an EOR, your company leads the sourcing. You might find candidates through your internal HR team, referral networks, or external recruiters.
Once you’ve made your selection, the EOR takes over: managing onboarding, drafting local contracts, handling payroll, and ensuring compliance all without requiring you to establish a legal entity in the hiring country.
Staffing agencies, on the other hand, take ownership of the front-end process. They tap into their candidate pools, conduct initial screenings, and present pre-vetted talent. This is especially valuable for companies without strong local hiring infrastructure or those racing against tight project timelines.
The choice isn’t just operational. It’s strategic. If retaining hiring control and candidate fit is critical, an EOR model keeps you at the helm. If speed and local market access matter most, a staffing agency can bridge the gap fast.
2. Legal Responsibilities: How EORs and Staffing Agencies Differ
An Employer of Record (EOR) takes on full legal responsibility for the employee. This includes issuing employment contracts, processing payroll, handling tax filings, and ensuring compliance with local labor laws.
The EOR becomes the legal employer on paper, minimizing legal exposure for the client company such as valuable in countries with strict employment regulations.
By contrast, a staffing agency typically limits its role to sourcing talent. In many cases, the client remains the legal employer, meaning they carry the responsibility for tax compliance, benefits, and employment risks once the candidate is hired.
If you’re hiring abroad, an EOR can help you stay on the right side of the law without the red tape. Staffing agencies shine when speed matters more than long-term infrastructure.
3. Compliance and Risk Management: EOR vs. Staffing Agencies
An Employer of Record (EOR) takes full responsibility for ensuring compliance with tax, labor, and employment regulations in each country where you operate. For companies navigating unfamiliar legal systems, a good EOR can prevent expensive mistakes before they happen.
Staffing agencies, on the other hand, may assist with compliance only when they are the direct employer typically for temporary roles. For permanent hires, legal obligations often remain with the client company, which may increase exposure to compliance risk.
When hiring across borders or in highly regulated sectors, businesses often prefer the legal assurance of an EOR. But for projects with lower regulatory stakes or a tight hiring timeline, a staffing partner may be sufficient.
4. Payroll and Benefits: What’s Handled by EOR vs. Staffing Agencies
An Employer of Record (EOR) takes full charge of back-office HR functions. This includes issuing salaries, calculating and filing taxes, managing statutory contributions, administering benefits like health insurance or paid leave, and ensuring everything aligns with local regulations.
By contrast, a staffing agency typically handles payroll only for temporary workers it employs directly. Benefits coverage is often minimal or non-existent, especially for short-term placements. For permanent hires, payroll and benefits usually fall back to the client company.
5. Scope of Employment: Long-Term vs. Temporary Staffing
An Employer of Record (EOR) is typically used for long-term or permanent hires, especially when companies are expanding internationally and want to build distributed teams without setting up legal entities in each country.
EORs are also well-suited for hiring remote employees across multiple jurisdictions, providing continuity and compliance in full-time arrangements.
In contrast, a staffing agency generally focuses on short-term placements. These include temporary contracts, seasonal work, or project-based roles that require a quick turnaround.
Many staffing agencies maintain a database of ready-to-work candidates, making them ideal for businesses that need to fill positions fast without committing to long-term employment structures.
6. Entity Requirements for Staffing Agencies vs. EOR Services
One of the biggest structural differences between an EOR and a staffing agency lies in the need for a local entity. When working with an Employer of Record, companies can legally hire talent in foreign countries without having to establish their own subsidiary or branch office. This is particularly helpful for businesses testing a new market or scaling quickly across borders.
On the other hand, staffing agencies typically expect the client to already have a registered business in the hiring country. The agency supports recruitment but doesn’t serve as the legal employer—so tax registration, local compliance, and employment contracts often remain the client’s responsibility.
7. Cost Comparison: Employer of Record vs. Staffing Agency
EOR services are typically priced based on a fixed monthly fee per employee, which varies depending on the country and the level of HR support provided—such as payroll, benefits, and compliance. This model offers cost predictability, especially for companies managing international teams at scale.
Staffing agencies, however, often apply a success-based fee structure charging a percentage of the employee’s annual salary or a one-time fee per placement. While this can be efficient for short-term hires, the upfront cost may be higher, especially when filling senior or specialized roles.
8. Candidate Control and Employer Branding Impact
When using an EOR, the legal employment relationship is with the EOR itself, not the client. This means the hiring company has limited exposure during onboarding and throughout the employment lifecycle.
While convenient, it can dilute the employer brand and make it harder for employees to feel connected to the company’s mission and values.
In contrast, staffing agencies often position the client brand more prominently during recruitment. This visibility allows companies to showcase their culture and value proposition directly, which can improve candidate engagement and long-term alignment.
Ideal Use Cases for EOR vs. Staffing Agencies
Employer of Record (EOR) solutions are most effective for companies entering new markets, hiring remote employees in countries where they lack a legal entity, or managing cross-border compliance. They’re especially useful for long-term employment when legal, tax, and HR complexities need to be handled seamlessly.
Staffing agencies, on the other hand, are well-suited for businesses that need to fill positions quickly—especially in local markets or for project-based roles. With a talent pipeline ready, they cut hiring timelines from weeks to days.
In practice, some companies combine both approaches: using staffing firms for candidate sourcing and relying on EOR partners for onboarding, payroll, and ongoing compliance.
Choose the Right Hiring Strategy
Employer of Record and staffing agency models each bring unique strengths to your workforce strategy. If your goals involve entering new markets, simplifying compliance, and managing global teams long-term, an EOR could be the strategic fit. For short-term projects or fast local hires, a staffing agency might be the better route.
Still weighing your options? Get in touch with Gini Talent to find the approach that aligns with your business goals.
Explore Country-Specific EOR Options
Looking to hire in a specific market? Choosing the right Employer of Record often depends on local regulations, tax systems, and employment norms which vary widely from one country to another.
To help you make an informed choice, we’ve curated region-focused EOR guides that highlight top providers based on local expertise and global reach.
Browse our EOR recommendations by country:
