- Lump sum relocation transfers all execution risk to the employee. Failed assignments cost multiples of what a managed programme costs.
- The best global mobility providers manage household goods shipping, destination services, tax equalisation, cost of living allowances, and repatriation under one coordinated programme, not one check.
- Aires, Graebel, and Crown World Mobility lead for mid-market and enterprise clients who move fewer than 500 employees per year and need consultant-grade service, not just logistics.
- SIRVA and Cartus operate at significant scale but their model-shift toward technology platforms and volume pricing works best for very large programmes with standardised policies.
- Pricing is almost always quote-based. The real cost comparison is not provider fee A versus provider fee B; it is total assignment cost with versus without professional management.
The leading global mobility providers for most corporate programmes are Aires, Graebel, Crown World Mobility, SIRVA, and Cartus. Aires and Graebel consistently stand out for mid-market clients because they assign dedicated consultants rather than routing every request through a call centre. Crown offers deep destination services coverage across Asia-Pacific, EMEA, and the Americas. SIRVA and Cartus handle the highest assignment volumes globally but suit large, standardised programmes more than custom policy work.
Why Most Companies Still Get Relocation Wrong
The assumption embedded in most HR budgets is that relocation is a one-time payment. Give the employee $10,000, call it a lump sum, and the move is handled. That logic made sense when companies relocated a handful of people domestically per year. It breaks down completely on international assignments.
A lump sum tells the employee to self-manage household goods shipping, secure temporary housing, find schools for their children, sort out a local bank account, deal with a foreign tax system, and figure out a cost of living differential, all while starting a new role in a new country. The predictable result is that the employee spends their first six months distracted by logistics rather than performing. Assignment failure rates run high precisely because the operational burden lands on the person least equipped to handle it in that moment.
Managed programmes cost more upfront. They also produce measurable outcomes: lower early termination rates, faster time-to-productivity, and assignment costs that are actually auditable. A failed international assignment, when you account for replacement hiring, lost productivity, and the reputational signal to other mobile talent, runs to a significant multiple of the original assignment budget. The question for any HR leader is whether the total cost of failed assignments exceeds the management fee.
What Does a Global Mobility Provider Actually Do?
A relocation management company (RMC) coordinates every logistical and compliance element of moving an employee from origin to destination, and back again at repatriation. The scope varies by provider and programme design, but a full-service engagement typically covers the following.
- Household goods shipping: Surveying, packing, export customs documentation, ocean or air freight, destination customs clearance, and delivery to the new home.
- Destination services: Area orientation, home-finding assistance, school search, settling-in support, and departure services at the end of the assignment.
- Tax equalisation: Calculating the hypothetical home-country tax the employee would have paid, then grossing up the assignment package so the employee is neither advantaged nor disadvantaged by working abroad. Usually delivered in coordination with a tax advisory partner.
- Cost of living allowance (COLA): Data-driven compensation for the difference in purchasing power between the origin and destination locations, updated periodically.
- Assignment letter and policy administration: Drafting or reviewing the assignment letter, tracking policy exceptions, and maintaining a single record of entitlements.
- Repatriation planning: Reverse logistics, tax closeout, and re-integration support when the assignee returns home.
Not every provider delivers all of these in-house. Some outsource tax work to Big Four firms and household goods to preferred carriers. The integration quality between those partners, and who owns the assignee relationship when something goes wrong, is what actually differentiates providers.
Lump Sum Versus Managed Relocation: How the Numbers Compare
The pricing debate between lump sum and managed relocation comes down to who absorbs cost variance. Lump sums are administratively simple: one payment, no coordination overhead. Managed programmes involve a per-assignment management fee paid to the RMC, plus actual cost reimbursement for services used.
| Factor | Lump Sum | Fully Managed Programme |
|---|---|---|
| Cost predictability | High for employer, low for employee | Moderate; auditable against actuals |
| Assignee experience | High stress; self-managed logistics | Dedicated consultant contact |
| Tax compliance | Assignee’s problem | Managed with tax equalisation support |
| Policy consistency | None; every move is ad hoc | Enforced by RMC against policy rules |
| Assignment failure risk | Higher | Lower with professional support |
| Audit trail | Minimal | Full cost reporting available |
| Best for | Domestic, junior, or one-off moves | International, senior, or repeat programmes |
A middle ground exists: the managed budget model, where the RMC manages a defined budget on behalf of the employee rather than issuing a flat check. The employee gets flexibility; the employer gets visibility into spend. Many mid-tier providers have moved toward this as a default for domestic moves while keeping fully managed for international assignments.
How Global Mobility Providers Are Priced
Every major RMC prices on a quote basis. There is no public rate card. The variables that drive cost include programme volume (number of moves per year), service scope (domestic-only versus international), household goods volume, number of destination countries, and whether tax services are included or passed through at cost.
Most enterprise programmes negotiate a per-move management fee covering coordination, destination services, and reporting. Household goods shipping is typically billed at actual carrier cost plus a handling fee. Tax equalisation is usually a separate line item, often managed by EY, KPMG, Deloitte, or PwC under a referral arrangement with the RMC.
For companies moving fewer than 25 employees per year internationally, the economics of a full RMC engagement can feel steep relative to volume. Some boutique providers and immigration-focused firms cater specifically to this segment with modular, per-service pricing rather than programme-level fees.
If you are evaluating HR software costs more broadly, the hidden costs of HR software analysis covers the same pattern of sticker-versus-total-cost that applies here.
The 8 Best Global Mobility and Relocation Providers
1. Aires
Aires is consistently the strongest choice for mid-market employers running between 25 and 500 international assignments per year. The firm is privately held, US-headquartered, and has built its reputation on one thing: assigning a named consultant to every move and keeping that consultant accountable throughout the assignment lifecycle.
That model matters more than it sounds. At most large RMCs, the assignee interacts with a rotating team routed through a service centre. At Aires, there is a single point of contact for household goods, destination services, expense reimbursement, and escalations. The result is measurably faster resolution when things go wrong, and they always go wrong somewhere in an international move.
Aires covers domestic US and Canadian moves, inbound international assignments into the US, and outbound international assignments to most major destination countries. Their technology platform, ReloAccess, provides the assignee with a digital portal for tracking shipments, submitting expenses, and accessing policy details. Tax services are delivered through preferred partners rather than in-house.
Best for: Mid-market companies that want enterprise-grade service without enterprise-scale volume commitments. Particularly strong for US outbound to Europe and Asia.
2. Graebel Companies
Graebel competes directly with Aires on service quality and targets a similar segment, though it also handles large-volume programmes for multinational employers. Graebel is notable for operating its own household goods network rather than purely brokering third-party carriers, which gives it more direct control over shipment quality and claims resolution.
The company has invested in its mobility management platform and emphasises data transparency, giving HR teams real-time visibility into assignment cost accruals, move status, and exception reports. For companies that need audit-ready cost data for finance or board reporting, Graebel’s reporting capability is a genuine differentiator.
Graebel also runs a recognised consulting practice around mobility policy design. If you are building a global mobility programme from scratch or rationalising a fragmented existing policy, their advisory team can do the upfront policy work before the first move happens.
Best for: Companies that need both strong operational execution and policy advisory capability in one vendor. Useful when finance requires detailed cost-per-assignment reporting.
3. Crown World Mobility
Crown World Mobility is part of the Crown Group, which also operates a substantial household goods moving and storage business globally. That vertical integration gives Crown direct visibility into one of the most operationally complex parts of any international assignment: getting furniture and personal effects across borders without damage, delays, or customs penalties.
Crown’s geographic coverage is genuinely global, with regional expertise that is particularly strong across Asia-Pacific and EMEA. For companies moving employees into or out of markets like Singapore, Hong Kong, the UAE, Germany, or the Netherlands, Crown typically has local destination services partners with real on-the-ground capability rather than subcontractors found ad hoc.
Crown also has a strong repatriation programme. Many providers handle the outbound assignment well and treat the return as an afterthought. Crown explicitly plans repatriation from the start of the assignment, which reduces the knowledge loss and re-integration friction that typically spikes at the end of international assignments.
Best for: Companies with significant EMEA or Asia-Pacific assignment volume, or those who have had problems with repatriation attrition.
4. SIRVA Worldwide Relocation and Moving
SIRVA is one of the two largest relocation management companies globally by volume. The company operates moving brands including Allied Van Lines and North American Van Lines, which gives it extensive household goods capacity domestically and internationally.
SIRVA’s scale is its clearest strength. For very large programmes, standardised policies, and domestic US volume, SIRVA can deliver consistent execution at a cost per move that smaller providers cannot match. Their technology platform, SIRVA Now, offers digital self-service for assignees and programme reporting for HR.
The service model has moved progressively toward technology-mediated delivery, which suits high-volume programmes with clear policies but creates friction for employees who need judgment-based support, such as a senior leader relocating to a new country with a complex family situation. At scale, the named-consultant model that differentiates Aires is harder to sustain.
Best for: Large programmes (500-plus moves per year), domestic US volume, companies with mature and standardised mobility policies that need logistics execution at scale rather than high-touch consulting.
5. Cartus
Cartus, now part of Anywhere Real Estate, is the other market-volume leader alongside SIRVA. Cartus has long-standing relationships with large multinational employers and covers the full spectrum from domestic relocations to long-term international assignments.
Cartus’s supplier network is extensive. Their global supply chain of destination service providers, household goods carriers, and temporary housing suppliers is among the deepest in the industry, which means coverage in difficult markets where smaller RMCs struggle to find qualified local partners.
The core trade-off at Cartus mirrors SIRVA: depth of network versus intimacy of service. Cartus runs a large global programme efficiently. Individual assignees with complex circumstances may find the service experience less responsive than they would at a boutique or mid-tier provider.
Best for: Enterprise multinationals with established mobility programmes, mature tax and immigration frameworks already in place, and primary need for logistics execution and network coverage in diverse destinations.
6. Global Mobility Solutions (GMS)
Global Mobility Solutions positions explicitly as the provider for companies that move a smaller number of employees annually. Their model acknowledges that an employer moving 10 to 50 people per year does not need enterprise contract structures or a technology platform built for 10,000 moves. What they need is competent service, straightforward pricing, and a consultant who picks up the phone.
GMS covers domestic US and Canadian relocations as well as international assignments. Their consulting approach to programme design is pragmatic: they will tell you when a lump sum is appropriate for a given move type and when managed delivery is worth the cost. That kind of honest scoping is harder to find at providers that have a financial incentive to upsell managed services on every move.
Best for: Companies moving fewer than 100 employees per year, or those building a mobility function for the first time and needing programme design support alongside execution.
7. Weichert Workforce Mobility
Weichert Workforce Mobility is a mid-tier RMC with a strong track record in the US domestic market and growing international capability. Weichert competes on service quality and flexibility. They have built a reputation for working through policy exceptions without bureaucratic resistance, which matters when you are moving a C-suite executive or a highly compensated specialist whose circumstances do not fit a standard policy template.
Weichert also offers rental assistance and home sale programmes that are well-regarded in markets where selling a home before relocation is a material financial risk for the employee. Their destination services network is solid for North America and Western Europe.
Best for: US-heavy programmes with a mix of domestic and some international moves, particularly where senior-level exceptions and home sale assistance are frequent needs.
8. Altair Global
Altair Global is a technology-forward RMC that has invested significantly in its proprietary mobility management platform. For HR teams that want real-time data on every assignment, budget versus actual reporting, and a digital-first assignee experience, Altair’s platform is among the most capable in the mid-market segment.
The company covers domestic US, Canadian, and international programmes. Their client base skews toward financial services and technology companies, where data precision and compliance documentation are non-negotiable. If your HR team will be asked to produce assignment cost data for a finance or legal team on short notice, Altair’s reporting tools reduce that burden considerably.
Best for: Companies in highly regulated industries where assignment cost transparency and compliance documentation matter as much as operational execution.
How to Compare Global Mobility Providers: An Evaluation Framework
Most RMC selection processes focus on price. The more useful evaluation criteria map to where programmes actually fail.
| Evaluation Criterion | What to Ask the Provider | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Consultant model | Will our assignees have a named consultant throughout? What is the consultant-to-assignee ratio? | Named consultants correlate with faster issue resolution and higher assignee satisfaction. |
| Household goods network | Do you own your carrier network or broker it? What is your claims rate and average settlement time? | Damaged or delayed goods derail assignments. Claims data reveals operational quality. |
| Tax and immigration integration | Who delivers tax equalisation calculations? Are they in-house or outsourced? Who owns the assignee relationship when there is a dispute? | Tax equalisation errors create immediate assignee dissatisfaction and potential legal exposure. |
| Destination services coverage | Which destination countries do you cover with in-house or vetted local partners? Can you demonstrate the school search process in our top three destinations? | Weak destination coverage is the most common cause of family dissatisfaction and early assignment termination. |
| Cost reporting and audit trail | What does a typical cost report look like? Can we see a sample? How quickly can you produce actuals versus budget after a move closes? | Finance and tax teams need auditable data. Providers who cannot produce this create downstream compliance risk. |
| Repatriation process | At what point in the assignment does repatriation planning begin? What is your process for knowledge transfer and re-integration support? | Repatriation attrition, when assignees leave within a year of returning, is expensive and preventable. |
| Technology platform | What does the assignee portal cover? Does it integrate with our HRIS? | Integration with existing HR systems reduces data entry errors and improves policy tracking. |
When you run this framework against providers, the differences between lump sum administration and full managed delivery become concrete rather than theoretical. The same evaluation logic applies when buying other HR technology: a structured framework beats gut feel every time. The HR software buying checklist covers this in detail for HRIS and payroll decisions.
Global Mobility for Companies With Fewer Than 25 Annual International Assignments
Small-volume programmes are the hardest to manage well. The economics of a full RMC engagement feel disproportionate when you are moving six people per year, but the consequences of a failed international assignment are identical regardless of programme size.
The right answer for small-volume programmes is usually not a full enterprise RMC contract. GMS and Altair Global both offer modular service arrangements that let companies buy destination services, household goods coordination, and policy administration separately. Some immigration law firms with global mobility practices also provide light coordination services for companies in this position.
A hybrid model works well here: use a specialist immigration attorney for visa and work permit support, contract a local destination service provider in your primary assignment destination, and manage household goods through a vetted carrier directly. The coordination burden falls on your HR team, but the per-assignment cost is lower than a full RMC fee. As volume grows past 25 international assignments per year, the coordination overhead typically justifies a full RMC engagement.
If your international workforce strategy involves hiring abroad without relocating employees, an employer of record model may be more appropriate than a relocation programme. The best EOR platforms for US companies hiring internationally covers the leading options in that adjacent category.
Tax Equalisation Support: What to Demand From Your Global Mobility Provider
Tax equalisation is the policy mechanism that ensures an internationally mobile employee pays no more and no less in total tax than they would have paid staying home. Without it, employees in high-tax destination countries are effectively penalised for accepting assignments, and employees in low-tax destinations receive an unintended windfall. Neither outcome supports a functioning mobility programme.
Delivering tax equalisation requires calculating a hypothetical home-country tax, grossing up the assignment compensation to cover actual host-country taxes, and filing tax returns in potentially two or more jurisdictions. It also requires coordinating with payroll to withhold and remit the correct amounts throughout the assignment year. That coordination is operationally complex and highly consequential when it goes wrong.
Most RMCs do not deliver tax equalisation in-house. They partner with a Big Four firm (EY, KPMG, Deloitte, or PwC) or a specialist mobility tax firm. What matters is who owns the assignee relationship when there is a dispute, who is accountable for a missed filing deadline, and how cost of living allowance adjustments are factored into the equalisation calculation. Ask for that SLA in writing before signing an RMC contract.
How Global Mobility Connects to Internal Talent Strategy
The most forward-looking mobility programmes treat international assignments as a talent development tool, not just a logistics problem. An employee who completes a two-year assignment in a priority market returns with market knowledge, relationship capital, and cross-functional experience that is difficult to develop any other way. The repatriation failure mode, where that employee leaves within 12 months of returning because there is no role that values what they learned, is a strategy failure as much as an operational one.
Connecting your global mobility programme to internal talent marketplaces and skills data makes both systems more valuable. When the mobility team knows which roles in which markets require specific language skills or regional experience, they can identify internal candidates before going external. When talent teams can see which employees have international experience, succession planning becomes more accurate.
The best AI internal mobility platforms cover how skills-based tools support this kind of cross-functional talent movement. If your HRIS already carries employee skills data, linking that to your mobility programme is a relatively low-effort integration with material returns.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a relocation management company and what does it do?
A relocation management company (RMC) coordinates the end-to-end logistics and compliance elements of moving an employee from one location to another on behalf of their employer. Services typically include household goods shipping, destination services such as home-finding and school search, temporary housing, expense management, tax equalisation administration, cost of living allowance calculation, and repatriation support. The RMC acts as the operational layer between the employer’s mobility policy and the vendors who execute each element of the move.
What is the difference between lump sum relocation and a fully managed programme?
A lump sum gives the employee a fixed cash amount to manage their own relocation. A fully managed programme has an RMC coordinate and pay for relocation services directly, with the employer reimbursed at actual cost plus a management fee. Lump sums are simpler to administer but transfer all execution risk to the employee. Managed programmes cost more upfront but produce lower assignment failure rates, policy compliance, and auditable cost data. Most mobility professionals recommend lump sums only for domestic, junior-level moves where the logistics are straightforward.
How is global mobility outsourcing priced?
Global mobility outsourcing is almost always quote-based. Pricing depends on programme volume (number of moves per year), geographic scope, service mix (domestic versus international), household goods volume, and whether tax and immigration services are included or passed through at cost. Most providers charge a per-move management fee for coordination plus actual costs for household goods shipping, destination services, and temporary housing. Tax equalisation is frequently a separate engagement with a tax firm arranged through or alongside the RMC.
What does tax equalisation mean for international assignees?
Tax equalisation ensures an international assignee pays the same amount of income tax they would have paid if they had stayed in their home country. The employer calculates a hypothetical home-country tax, withholds that from the employee’s compensation, and covers any additional taxes owed in the host country. If the host country has lower taxes than the home country, the employer retains the difference. The process requires annual tax filings in multiple jurisdictions and ongoing payroll coordination throughout the assignment.
What is an assignment letter and why does it matter?
An assignment letter is the formal document that defines the terms of an international assignment: duration, compensation, allowances (housing, cost of living, school fees), tax treatment, repatriation entitlements, and the conditions under which the assignment can be terminated. It is the legal and operational backbone of the assignment. RMCs typically help draft or review assignment letters to confirm they align with the employer’s global mobility policy, local employment law in the host country, and tax equalisation calculations.
Which global mobility providers are best for a small number of international assignments per year?
For companies moving fewer than 25 employees internationally per year, Global Mobility Solutions (GMS) and Altair Global offer the most flexible engagement models, including modular per-service pricing rather than programme-level contracts. Aires is also accessible at lower volumes and provides named-consultant service without requiring minimum volume commitments. Companies with very low volumes (under 10 moves per year) may find a hybrid model using specialist immigration counsel and a local destination service provider more cost-effective than a full RMC contract.
What does repatriation support include in a global mobility programme?
Repatriation support covers the logistics and re-integration elements of an employee’s return to their home country at the end of an international assignment. Logistics components include household goods shipping back to the origin location, temporary housing if the employee’s home was sold or leased during the assignment, and expense reimbursement for travel. The more critical and often neglected element is re-integration support: helping the employee identify a suitable home-country role, transferring market knowledge to the organisation, and providing career counselling to reduce post-assignment attrition.
How does global mobility connect to workforce planning?
Global mobility data, specifically which employees have moved to which markets, what skills they developed, and what the assignments cost, is a direct input to workforce planning. Organisations that connect mobility data to their people analytics and talent intelligence systems can identify high-potential employees for future assignments, model the cost of building capability in a new market through internal mobility versus external hiring, and track the post-assignment career paths of returned assignees. Most HR teams do not yet make this connection systematically, which means they undercount both the cost and the return on their mobility investment.
Choosing the Right Global Mobility Provider
The provider decision reduces to one question you need to answer about your own programme: are your assignments complex enough that the execution risk of a lump sum or self-managed approach exceeds the management fee of a professional RMC? For any international assignment involving a senior leader, a family with children, a move into a high-tax jurisdiction, or a destination with housing market friction, the answer is almost always yes.
Aires, Graebel, and Crown World Mobility are the right starting point for most mid-market and enterprise programmes. They deliver named-consultant service, cover the full scope from household goods to repatriation, and have enough geographic reach to handle the destinations most companies actually use. SIRVA and Cartus are worth evaluating when programme volume is high enough that standardised, technology-mediated delivery produces meaningful cost savings, and when the HR team has the internal capacity to manage exception cases that the service model does not catch.
The strategic framing matters more than the vendor selection. A lump sum programme with no data, no policy compliance, and no repatriation plan is not a mobility strategy. It is a payment. Building a programme that connects assignment investment to talent outcomes, succession plans, and auditable cost data is what separates companies that use mobility as a competitive advantage from those that treat it as a budget line. If you are at the point of designing or rationalising a programme, requesting a programme design proposal from two or three of the providers above is the right next step. The quality of that proposal, and whether it asks the right questions about your talent strategy before quoting a price, will tell you more about the provider than any reference call.
