Comparison · Checked 2026-08-25
Outsourcing vs hiring directly
Hiring directly is cheaper per person once you exclude the value of management, HR and retention overhead you take on. Outsourcing is cheaper on total effort — no local entity, no local HR, no attrition backfilling. The right model depends less on rate per seat than on how much of the operational lift you want to keep.
Option A
Outsourcing
CareerBuddy recruits, employs, and operationally manages the team. You own the roadmap.
Learn more →Option B
Hiring directly (in-house)
You recruit, employ (through your entity or EOR) and manage the team end-to-end.
Compared, criterion by criterion
How they line up
| Dimension | Outsourcing | Hiring directly (in-house) |
|---|---|---|
| Recruitment | Included in seat cost | You run it, or pay per placement |
| Employment layer | CareerBuddy | You (entity or EOR) |
| Retention / backfilling | CareerBuddy backfills within seat cost | You bear attrition and backfill cost |
| Total cost (senior engineer, Nigeria) | $6,500–$9,500/mo per seat, all-in | $4,000–$6,000/mo salary + management + benefits (~$1,500) + attrition load |
| Management bandwidth needed | Product / delivery only | Product + local management |
Who each option fits
Pick the one that matches your situation
Outsourcing fits when
- You want capacity without the local employment / HR overhead
- You want a single accountable partner if a seat needs to be replaced
- You're testing a function before committing to a permanent structure
Hiring directly (in-house) fits when
- The function is core to your product and worth building deep expertise around
- You have (or want to build) local management capacity
- You want maximum flexibility in seat definition and compensation
Not sure which one fits?
Tell us the country, the roles and the headcount. A real person replies within 24 hours with the option we'd pick — and the numbers behind it.
Or compare prices first on our pricing page.