An HR manager, people ops lead, or COO at a company of 20–200 people that has
hired internationally — contractors in one country, full-time employees in another.
Before Deel, this involved a law firm, a local accountant, a foreign entity, and
a spreadsheet of exchange rates. Deel collapsed that. They can now hire in a new
country in days instead of months. They are not naive about the complexity they're
offloading — they understand that Deel is doing what they used to do badly.
Intention
What are they trying to do? —
Outcome
What do they produce? —
Goals
→Hire and pay people in new countries without a legal entity or a six-month setup
→Maintain compliance with local labor law without becoming an expert in every jurisdiction
→Give contractors and employees a self-service experience for contracts and payments
Frustrations
—Pricing that compounds as headcount grows internationally — Deel per-seat costs
—become significant faster than expected
—Misclassification risk that exists even with Deel's protections — the tool reduces
—risk but doesn't eliminate the underlying legal uncertainty
—Contractor invoicing that some workers do confidently and others find confusing —
—the self-service experience has a learning curve that becomes a support burden
—Edge cases in specific countries where Deel's coverage is thinner than the sales
—conversation implied
Worldview
Global hiring is a competitive advantage for companies willing to navigate the complexity
Compliance is the floor, not the ceiling — meeting local requirements is the minimum,
not the definition of a good employment experience
The contractor vs. employee distinction is a legal category with real consequences —
it's not a cost optimization decision, it's a legal obligation
Scenario
They've found the right candidate for a senior engineering role. The candidate
is in Colombia. The company has no entity in Colombia. Three years ago this would
have ended with "we can only hire in the US." Today they're opening Deel to
create an EOR hire. They'll have a compliant employment contract, local payroll,
and statutory benefits handled by Deel's Colombian entity. The candidate starts
in 12 days. They've done this 4 times before. They're comfortable. They still
read the contract before sending it.
Context
Manages 10–60 workers through Deel across 5–15 countries: a mix of EOR employees
and independent contractors. Processes payroll via Deel monthly. Uses Deel's
contract templates for contractor agreements. Manages expenses and bonuses through
the platform. Has connected Deel to their HRIS for headcount tracking. Reviews
compliance alerts in the Deel dashboard. Has had one worker misclassification
conversation that Deel helped navigate. Would use Deel for US payroll if it
were price-competitive with Gusto or Rippling.
Impact
→Country coverage expansion that includes the edge cases (specific benefits,
→leave requirements, termination procedures) removes the "Deel covers X country
→but not this specific requirement" gap that requires outside counsel
→Misclassification assessment tools that evaluate worker relationships against
→local jurisdiction criteria help companies make informed classification decisions
→rather than hoping the contractor label holds
→Contractor self-service that includes payment tracking, invoice submission,
→and status visibility reduces the "when do I get paid?" support queue
→Pricing transparency tools that project annual Deel costs as headcount grows
→help HR make the build-entity vs. use-EOR ROI case with real numbers
Composability Notes
Pairs with `gusto-primary-user` for the US payroll + Deel international = full global payroll stack.
Contrast with `greenhouse-primary-user` for the full talent acquisition → offer → onboarding workflow with international complexity.
Use with `rippling-primary-user` for companies managing both US and international HR through separate systems.