What's Changed In Recruitment?

[Countdown]

bad company said:

Fair question. I’d say it’d help me take a view on what they were looking for which was true.

Rather than finding out where they were applying to, couldn't you just ask the candidates "what they were looking for"? If II'm applying for a role at Capita for a Head of Finance why do you need to know it's at Capita? Other than to put other candidates forward?

bad company said:

Generally I wouldn’t contact the firm where they interviewed

If you don't think it's scummy behaviour why wouldn't you contact them?

bad company said:

but if I know that candidates Fred, John and Lucy were all interviewing at firm x I’d know that a vacancy would be coming up at one of their current firms when they resign.

That's at their current firms, nothing at all to do with where they are applying to, what roles they are applying for, and "who the recruiting manager at that place is". That is just scummy behaviour. Not all agencies do it (and to be fair it seems to be less and less common) but it does show the ones where they're quiet happy to work against the candidate just as long as they can get the commission

[bad company]

Countdown said:

bad company said:

Fair question. I’d say it’d help me take a view on what they were looking for which was true.

Rather than finding out where they were applying to, couldn't you just ask the candidates "what they were looking for"? If II'm applying for a role at Capita for a Head of Finance why do you need to know it's at Capita? Other than to put other candidates forward?

bad company said:

Generally I wouldn’t contact the firm where they interviewed

If you don't think it's scummy behaviour why wouldn't you contact them?

bad company said:

but if I know that candidates Fred, John and Lucy were all interviewing at firm x I’d know that a vacancy would be coming up at one of their current firms when they resign.

That's at their current firms, nothing at all to do with where they are applying to, what roles they are applying for, and "who the recruiting manager at that place is". That is just scummy behaviour. Not all agencies do it (and to be fair it seems to be less and less common) but it does show the ones where they're quiet happy to work against the candidate just as long as they can get the commission

1). Because knowing the firm they are interviewing at tells me what type of firm they want to work for. It also increases my intelligence of who’s recruiting for what.

2). I didn’t say it was ‘scummy behaviour’, you did. I wouldn’t contact them because if they’re already interviewing or have interviews arranged I’d be behind the curve so a good chance of wasting my time. I might make an exception to this if I had a remarkably good candidate for the role (as in the example I put up yesterday of the case when the partner had died) but generally not.

3). As you say nothing to do with the role their applying for but I’d definitely be interested in filling the role they would be resigning from. That’s where market intelligence comes in.

Edited by bad company on Thursday 23 August 20:47

[Badda]

Sa Calobra said:

Apart from having an additional logo along with Investors in People etc for gravitas I don't think REC actually did anything for us.


I doubt their marketing department has the full facts.

32bn is a massive amount annually. Company 'A' has a recruitment spend of say 100m and it's agency spend is 20m.

We always delved didn't we. Asking how much, with who etc etc. To try and soak up max business.

I'd say REC has taken the top line figures.

The vast majority of that 32bn figure will be temp agencies and contractors rather than perm fees.

[Countdown]

bad company said:

2). I didn’t say it was ‘scummy behaviour’, you did.

I did. Because I think getting information from a candidate and not telling them that you are asking so that you can put other candidates forward to the role they are applying for, without being approached the recruiting company, is scummy behaviour. I'd like to say I'm surprised by your attitude but I'm sure it's shared by other Recruitment Agents

bad company said:

I wouldn’t contact them because if they’re already interviewing or have interviews arranged I’d be behind the curve so a good chance of wasting my time. I might make an exception to this if I had a remarkably good candidate for the role (as in the example I put up yesterday of the case when the partner had died) but generally not.

How are you going to know if you "have a remarkably good candidate" without approaching the recruiting company first to get more information? The person that is applying for the role isn't going to give you a detailed breakdown of what the role entails. They''ll say something along the lines of "I'm applying for a Head of Finance role at XYZ Ltd". You'll only know whether you've got a good candidate if you contact the recruiting company, get a JD, and compare it against the people on your database.

But as you'll be "behind the curve" it will be more efficient just to email them to say you've heard they are looking for a HoF and spam them with CVs......

[bad company]

Countdown said:

bad company said:

2). I didn’t say it was ‘scummy behaviour’, you did.

I did. Because I think getting information from a candidate and not telling them that you are asking so that you can put other candidates forward to the role they are applying for, without being approached the recruiting company, is scummy behaviour. I'd like to say I'm surprised by your attitude but I'm sure it's shared by other Recruitment Agents

bad company said:

I wouldn’t contact them because if they’re already interviewing or have interviews arranged I’d be behind the curve so a good chance of wasting my time. I might make an exception to this if I had a remarkably good candidate for the role (as in the example I put up yesterday of the case when the partner had died) but generally not.

How are you going to know if you "have a remarkably good candidate" without approaching the recruiting company first to get more information? The person that is applying for the role isn't going to give you a detailed breakdown of what the role entails. They''ll say something along the lines of "I'm applying for a Head of Finance role at XYZ Ltd". You'll only know whether you've got a good candidate if you contact the recruiting company, get a JD, and compare it against the people on your database.

But as you'll be "behind the curve" it will be more efficient just to email them to say you've heard they are looking for a HoF and spam them with CVs......

I know if I have a remarkable candidate by finding out all about the job first. it’s not difficult, probably advertised on the firm’s own website and elsewhere. As I said I almost certainly wouldn’t bother working the job as I’d be ‘behind the curve’. You seem to know better and suggest that I should spam with CVs even though I’ve explained that it’s unethical and illegal to do so without consent from the candidates.

I’ve gone to some trouble to explain the workings of recruitment but you and a couple of others seem convinced that you know how it should be done and how it is done far better than I do. What do you think major companies do when they lose a Director or key employee to another company? They could:-

a). Put an advert in the paper and hope the right person applies.

b). Advertise on Reed or Monster or another job board and again hope someone good sees it.

c). Contact one of the top search firms to identify and approach suitable candidates.

I think you and I both know the answer unless c is too scummy for you?

You even suggested that I told the candidate’s PA why I was calling. In the private sector that would be suicidal and could even lead to a negligence claim. The candidate want all contact with me to be regarded as highly confidential. I had to develop and retain confidence and respect in the area I worked in which was lawyers. If I had worked the way you suggested and think all agencies do the trust would have been lost.

I’d say that you know about as much about the workings of a recruitment firm as I do about town planning and noise. The difference is that I know I don't know how to do your job.

Edited by bad company on Friday 24th August 17:39

[Countdown]

bad company said:

I know if I have a remarkable candidate by finding out all about the job first. it’s not difficult, probably advertised on the firm’s own website and elsewhere. As I said I almost certainly wouldn’t bother working the job as I’d be ‘behind the curve’. You seem to know better and suggest that I should spam with CVs even though I’ve explained that it’s unethical and illegal to do so without consent from the candidates.

Two separate points here; assuming a candidate has naively told yu where else they are applying to, why are you then going on the website finding out more information about the job IF it isn’t for the purpose of putting other candidates forward [b] which acts against the best interests of the candidate that told you? THIS is the action that I keep referring to as scummy behaviour and yet, rather than admitting that, you keep coming up with vague excuses and fictional situations about where it might be acceptable. In short - do you tell the candidates that if they tell you where else they are applying you might put other candidates forward? Because not doing so is pretty despicable in my book

2nd point - Ive not suggested at all that you spam hiring managers. I’m just telling you for a fact that that is what happens.

Bad Company said:

c). Contact one of the top search firms to identify and approach suitable candidates.

I think you and I both know the answer unless c is too scummy for you?

C is absolutely fine, and NOBODY has suggested otherwise. You are taking a normal, acceptable practice and ignoring all the other scummier practices that go on around it

Bad Company said:

You even suggested that I told the candidate’s PA why I was calling. In the private sector that would be suicidal and could even lead to a negligence claim. The candidate want all contact with me to be regarded as highly confidential. I had to develop and retain confidence and respect in the area I worked in which was lawyers. If I had worked the way you suggested and think all agencies do the trust would have been lost.

Sorry but that’s complete rubbish. If you were calling me to discuss ppportunties that I might be interested in I wouldn’t be too bothered, neither would my PA, but that’s NOT what irritates and they AREN’T the calls that PAs are asked to stop. It’s irritating cold-calling asking me if we’ve got any vacancies.

I’m not sure if you’re deliberately or accidentally conflating the two. So, to clarify, do you think it’s OK to lie to PAs when you’re cold-calling?

Bad Company said:

I’d say that you know about as much about the workings of a recruitment firm as I do about town planning and noise. The difference is that I know I don't know how to do your job.

That’s not my job. I work in Finance.

[bad company]

Countdown said:

bad company said:

I know if I have a remarkable candidate by finding out all about the job first. it’s not difficult, probably advertised on the firm’s own website and elsewhere. As I said I almost certainly wouldn’t bother working the job as I’d be ‘behind the curve’. You seem to know better and suggest that I should spam with CVs even though I’ve explained that it’s unethical and illegal to do so without consent from the candidates.

Two separate points here; assuming a candidate has naively told yu where else they are applying to, why are you then going on the website finding out more information about the job IF it isn’t for the purpose of putting other candidates forward [b] which acts against the best interests of the candidate that told you? THIS is the action that I keep referring to as scummy behaviour and yet, rather than admitting that, you keep coming up with vague excuses and fictional situations about where it might be acceptable. In short - do you tell the candidates that if they tell you where else they are applying you might put other candidates forward? Because not doing so is pretty despicable in my book

2nd point - Ive not suggested at all that you spam hiring managers. I’m just telling you for a fact that that is what happens.

Bad Company said:

c). Contact one of the top search firms to identify and approach suitable candidates.

I think you and I both know the answer unless c is too scummy for you?

C is absolutely fine, and NOBODY has suggested otherwise. You are taking a normal, acceptable practice and ignoring all the other scummier practices that go on around it

Bad Company said:

You even suggested that I told the candidate’s PA why I was calling. In the private sector that would be suicidal and could even lead to a negligence claim. The candidate want all contact with me to be regarded as highly confidential. I had to develop and retain confidence and respect in the area I worked in which was lawyers. If I had worked the way you suggested and think all agencies do the trust would have been lost.

Sorry but that’s complete rubbish. If you were calling me to discuss ppportunties that I might be interested in I wouldn’t be too bothered, neither would my PA, but that’s NOT what irritates and they AREN’T the calls that PAs are asked to stop. It’s irritating cold-calling asking me if we’ve got any vacancies.

I’m not sure if you’re deliberately or accidentally conflating the two. So, to clarify, do you think it’s OK to lie to PAs when you’re cold-calling?

Bad Company said:

I’d say that you know about as much about the workings of a recruitment firm as I do about town planning and noise. The difference is that I know I don't know how to do your job.

That’s not my job. I work in Finance.

1). I ALWAYS look at jobs being advertised by competitors. As I’ve already said intelligence is everything in recruitment. As I’ve said several times that’s NOT because I necessarily want to put in other candidates. How many times do I need to explain the reasons for this?

You claim that other agents ‘spam hiring managers’, spam with what? If they put unrequested CVs in they risk breaking data protection laws AND if there’s no agreed contract with the hiring firm there’s little to stop the firm contacting the candidates direct without having to pay fees.

2). I never did cold calling, it takes up and wastes too much time. I’m sure a lot of ‘High Street’ recruiters do though. I see no reason not to tell the PA why your calling. If her boss has a recruitment issue she will probably put the recruiter through, if he’s not recruiting there’s no need.

If I called a client/hirer I always tried to keep the PA onside. They made great friends & allies.

3). From your PH profile. — Town Planning & Noise Guidance Advisor

Edited by bad company on Saturday 25th August 11:11

[Countdown]

bad company said:

1). I ALWAYS look at jobs being advertised by competitors. As I’ve already said intelligence is everything in recruitment. As I’ve said several times that’s NOT because I necessarily want to put in other candidates. How many times do I need to explain the reasons for this?

I’m genuinely not sure why you’re confusing separate things here. I doubt anybody would have a problem with you looking at jobs advertised by competitors. I’m not sure why you would bother given that they’re always anonymised but anyway....

The issue is getting information out of candidates on false pretences. Basically lying to them when you ask them where else they are applying - telling the candidate that you are asking “so you don’t put them forward for the same role again” when in reality you’re doing it so that you can call the hiring company and try to put other candidates forward.

That is what I keep calling scummy behaviour, nothing to do with “jobs advertised by competitors “ or any other scenario, and one that you keep trying to pretend is acceptable professional behaviour. It isn’t. If it was you’d be honest with the candidate.

Bad Company said:

You claim that other agents ‘spam hiring managers’, spam with what? If they put unrequested CVs in they risk breaking data protection laws AND if there’s no agreed contract with the hiring firm there’s little to stop the firm contacting the candidates direct without having to pay fees.

You’re kidding... you said that you managed an RA for X years and you think ^^^ is what happens? The spam CVs were anonymised before GDPR and they’re STILL anonymised. That means that the hiring manager couldn’t contact the candidate directly even if they were sneaky enough to do so (RAs aren’t THAT stupid) and it dosn’t contravene GDPR laws.

Bad Company said:

2). I never did cold calling, it takes up and wastes too much time. I’m sure a lot of ‘High Street’ recruiters do though. I see no reason not to tell the PA why your calling. If her boss has a recruitment issue she will probably put the recruiter through, if he’s not recruiting there’s no need.

The story keeps changing here. On the one hand you’ve occasionally lied to PAs in order to speak to the hiring managers. Then you’re not ringing them as a hiring manager but to discuss a prospective new position for them and you don’t want the PA to know because “she wont want to lose a great boss”

One of the many benefits of Caller ID is you can recognise/programme the numbers of agencies into your phone system so, even if they have your direct line, it can be diverted to voicemail.

Bad Company said:

3). From your PH profile. — Town Planning & Noise Guidance Advisor

It’s not my real job. It’s meant to be a joke. I think at one point I was “Male model and celebrity fitness trainer”. I work in Finance.

[bad company]

Countdown said:

bad company said:

1). I ALWAYS look at jobs being advertised by competitors. As I’ve already said intelligence is everything in recruitment. As I’ve said several times that’s NOT because I necessarily want to put in other candidates. How many times do I need to explain the reasons for this?

I’m genuinely not sure why you’re confusing separate things here. I doubt anybody would have a problem with you looking at jobs advertised by competitors. I’m not sure why you would bother given that they’re always anonymised but anyway....

The issue is getting information out of candidates on false pretences. Basically lying to them when you ask them where else they are applying - telling the candidate that you are asking “so you don’t put them forward for the same role again” when in reality you’re doing it so that you can call the hiring company and try to put other candidates forward.

That is what I keep calling scummy behaviour, nothing to do with “jobs advertised by competitors “ or any other scenario, and one that you keep trying to pretend is acceptable professional behaviour. It isn’t. If it was you’d be honest with the candidate.

Bad Company said:

You claim that other agents ‘spam hiring managers’, spam with what? If they put unrequested CVs in they risk breaking data protection laws AND if there’s no agreed contract with the hiring firm there’s little to stop the firm contacting the candidates direct without having to pay fees.

You’re kidding... you said that you managed an RA for X years and you think ^^^ is what happens? The spam CVs were anonymised before GDPR and they’re STILL anonymised. That means that the hiring manager couldn’t contact the candidate directly even if they were sneaky enough to do so (RAs aren’t THAT stupid) and it dosn’t contravene GDPR laws.

Bad Company said:

2). I never did cold calling, it takes up and wastes too much time. I’m sure a lot of ‘High Street’ recruiters do though. I see no reason not to tell the PA why your calling. If her boss has a recruitment issue she will probably put the recruiter through, if he’s not recruiting there’s no need.

The story keeps changing here. On the one hand you’ve occasionally lied to PAs in order to speak to the hiring managers. Then you’re not ringing them as a hiring manager but to discuss a prospective new position for them and you don’t want the PA to know because “she wont want to lose a great boss”

One of the many benefits of Caller ID is you can recognise/programme the numbers of agencies into your phone system so, even if they have your direct line, it can be diverted to voicemail.

Bad Company said:

3). From your PH profile. — Town Planning & Noise Guidance Advisor

It’s not my real job. It’s meant to be a joke. I think at one point I was “Male model and celebrity fitness trainer”. I work in Finance.

1). I’m fed up with telling you that I don’t do that.

2). When did I say that I ‘occasionally lied to PAs in order to speak to the hiring managers’? If I’ve lied to PA’s it would be to get through to a potential candidate. Only needs doing once as if the target is interested they will give me a mobile number. How do you think search firms get through to the people they identify? If you reckon that’s scummy that’s fine but it’s the way it works. As I said before there’s a big difference between public and private sectors, I’ve recruited for both.

Apparently I then call ‘to discuss a prospective new position for them and you don’t want the PA to know because “she wont want to lose a great boss’. Where have I said this please?

You just seem convinced that all agents work in a way you describe. If I had as you put it ‘spammed cvs to hiring managers’ and peed off clients and potential clients by wasting their time (and mine) with pointless phone calls I would never have lasted. I was probably better off as I worked in a niche, the legal profession.

Edited by bad company on Saturday 25th August 14:36

[JLC25]

I sold software to agencies (normally smaller sized) for 5 years - there are still lots of people who are very good at recruitment, who care about the candidate, the company, and the industry itself. A large amount of "Tech" recruiters know nothing of the industry, and get stumped with the difference between things like Java and Javascript.

I once interviewed for a role working for a very, very large high street agency. In the tech space. Aced every-part of their long process, the roleplay interviews, the tests etc. Got me in face to face - asked me what i thought about recruitment. Told them in my experience less and less people are actually consultants now, and more interested in harvesting CVs and using underhand tactics to get people to interview etc. They told me it was a split of 85% business dev (finding CVs, clients etc) and the rest was the recruitment side - they rely on one or two big contracts to bring in money (normally these contracts belong to senior staff or directors), and then just harvest for their database - the commissions threshold was £3000 - very low (if you only spend 15% of your time actually putting in work for placements, it's the only way you'll see commission).

So, the TLDR? Use smaller agencies - they will care about company culture and building teams - they will find you the right fit and they will fight for the best salary.