> My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether?
Because it’s the mix that is advantageous, not either one (employees only vs contractors only).
Is there any data or studies to back that up though?
My guess is, like most of the norms and practices of corporate America, the answer is "We do things that way because other companies do things that way."
Kind of like the hilarious herd-like back-and-forth of these corporate back to office policies.
CEO: "Apple's going back to the office in September? Ok we should too! Send out the press release Karen!"
Karen: "Sir, Apple just pushed back to January."
CEO: "Then we should too! Send out a new press release, STAT!"
Because it’s the mix that is advantageous, not either one (employees only vs contractors only).