Contingent Workforce Management Models: A Comparative Analysis

This report is for enterprise leaders, especially those in talent acquisition, procurement, and HR, who are responsible for shaping how their organisations engage and manage contingent talent.

With around 30% of Australia’s workforce now classified as contingent, this segment has become a critical yet often overlooked component of enterprise strategy. Commonly referred to as the "invisible" workforce, these professionals frequently operate without the visibility, control, or integration required to support business goals effectively.

We provide a clear, comparative analysis of the primary contingent workforce management models used across Australian enterprises today. While traditional models—like vendor-managed services (VMS) or procurement-led solutions—have historically served business needs, our analysis highlights how they fall short in today’s fast-moving, compliance-heavy, and talent-scarce environment.

The bottom line? Most enterprise contingent workforce models weren’t designed for today’s reality. It’s not about ditching what works—it’s about interrogating whether your current approach is still serving your future goals.

Emerging models, especially Oncore's vendor-neutral prime contractor models, offer greater flexibility, improved compliance oversight, and streamlined integration with existing tech and processes.

This isn’t just a report—it’s a call to enterprise decision-makers to look deeper, ask harder questions, and challenge legacy thinking. If your organisation is still using a model chosen 10 or 20 years ago, it’s time to re-evaluate whether it’s still fit for purpose.

We invite you to bring this knowledge to the decision-making table—so you’re not just reacting to workforce trends but shaping how your business thrives in them.

👉 Looking for a full framework to design your CW program? Start here: Contingent Workforce Programme Strategy & Management

 

Contingent Workforce Models: What Got You Here Won’t Get You There

The contingent workforce is no longer a tactical side-stream—it’s a strategic pillar. With the sector now accounting for nearly one-third of Australia’s workforce, managing contingent talent effectively isn’t optional. And yet, many enterprise models still rely on outdated assumptions, fragmented systems, or legacy partnerships that no longer serve the complexity of today’s market.

Leaders across talent acquisition, procurement, and workforce strategy are facing a moment of truth.

The right management model can unlock flexibility, compliance, and performance. The wrong one? It can slow growth, expose risk, and drain internal resources.

Let’s break down the most common models—what they offer, where they fall short, and why it might be time to rethink what "best practice" really looks like.

Comparative Analysis of Contingent Workforce Management Models

 

1. Managed Service Provider (MSP)

🔎 Is your MSP optimising for your needs—or theirs?

A third party oversees your entire contingent workforce program—from supplier management to reporting and compliance.

 

---

.

2. Vendor Management System (VMS)

⚙️ Is your tech stack helping—or just adding layers?

Software that centralises contingent workforce processes across sourcing, tracking, and compliance.

 

---

 

3. Direct Sourcing

📣 Your brand attracts—but can your systems deliver?

Leverage your brand to attract contingent talent directly, bypassing agencies.

 

---

 

4. Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO)

🧩 Are you solving the right problem—or outsourcing it away?

A third party owns all or part of your recruitment, potentially including contingent talent.

 

---

 

5. Contractor Management Outsourcing (CMO) / Employer of Record (EOR)

🛠️ Compliance is critical—but are you sacrificing control to get it?

A third-party becomes the legal employer, handling payroll, compliance, and administration.

 

---

 

6. Hybrid Models

🧬 Does your hybrid model truly integrate—or just coexist?

Combine multiple approaches (e.g. MSP + Direct Sourcing, or VMS + RPO) tailored to enterprise needs.

 

---

 

7. Prime Contractor Model (Vendor-Neutral)

🚀 This is the model forward-thinking organisations are shifting towards—and for good reason.

One entity oversees the full contingent program while remaining agnostic about which vendors are used—ensuring the best-fit talent is sourced from a diverse supplier base or through your internal direct hiring program.

 

---

 

In a nutshell - the comparison:

 

The Bottom Line

Most enterprise contingent workforce models weren’t designed for today’s reality. It’s not about ditching what works—it’s about interrogating whether your current approach is still serving your future goals.

If your current model was chosen 10 years ago, it’s time to ask:
How much is it costing you to stay with the status quo?

The status quo is dead  - Terri Gallagher Workforce Futurist

 

The Future of Contingent Workforce Management: The Prime Contractor Model

As enterprises continue to navigate the complexities of managing a growing contingent workforce, the vendor-neutral prime contractor model represents the future of effective workforce management. This approach addresses the key limitations of traditional models while offering several distinct advantages:

1. Seamless Integration

The prime contractor model is designed for rapid integration into existing processes, minimising disruption while maximising visibility and control. Unlike traditional MSPs or VMS solutions that require significant implementation time and resources, this model adapts to your current workflows.

2. Enhanced Visibility

One of the greatest challenges in contingent workforce management is the "invisible workforce" problem. The prime contractor model provides comprehensive visibility across all contingent workers, regardless of their source or classification, enabling better strategic workforce planning.

3. Balanced Control

Unlike MSPs that often limit control or direct sourcing that requires significant internal expertise, the prime contractor model maintains organisational control while reducing administrative burden through centralised management.

4. Compliance Assurance

With Australia's complex labour regulations, compliance remains a critical concern. The prime contractor model centralises compliance management, ensuring all contingent workers meet legal and regulatory requirements through standardised processes and regular audits.

5. Vendor Neutrality

Unlike some MSPs that may favour their own talent pools, the vendor-neutral approach ensures unbiased access to the best talent available, optimising both quality and cost-effectiveness.

Recommendations for Implementation

For organisations considering implementing or optimising their contingent workforce strategy:

1. Assess Current State: Understand your existing contingent workforce size, location, and costs
2. Define Strategic Objectives: Clarify what you aim to achieve with your contingent workforce program
3. Evaluate Technology Needs: Determine what platforms will support your visibility and management requirements
4. Select the Right Partner: Choose a provider with proven expertise in your industry and market
5. Prioritise Change Management: Ensure smooth transition through effective communication and training
6. Establish Clear Metrics: Define KPIs to measure program success and continuous improvement

 

Conclusion: It’s Time to Rethink, Not Just Reassess

Is our current model helping us get ahead—or holding us back?

The contingent workforce is no longer a side-stream—it’s a core driver of enterprise agility, innovation, and scale. But too many organisations are still managing it with legacy models designed for a different workforce reality.

If your current approach can’t flex, can’t integrate, or can’t deliver visibility and control—it’s time to challenge whether it’s still the right fit.

The vendor-neutral prime contractor model isn’t just another option. It’s the next step in the evolution of contingent workforce management—combining the best of flexibility, compliance, integration, and control, without the baggage of vendor bias or fragmented oversight.

Speak to the experts today.