I've been involved in an ongoing debate and for some reason can never make any headway with the situation. Let me provide a little background info...
I work for a successful company as the Recruiting Supervisor (and full time Recruiter).
Historically...we have had divided roles w/ a team of Recruiters and a team of Acct Managers (Client Managers). The Acct Managers get the jobs and the Recruiters find the candidates to fill those jobs. That's how it's been here for over 8 years.
In the last year there have been more and more "gray area" when it comes to Acct Managers recruiting candidates. They (Acct Mgrs) have been allowed to now recruit candidates for other Acct Mgrs jobs, and fill those jobs with their own candidates...this only happens when "times are tough" and there aren't many jobs to fill. Hence...Acct Mgrs have spare time to spend recruiting - even though if you ask me...it's unnecessary.
Here's my problem with the situation: When times are tough and there aren't a lot of jobs...guess what...the Recruiting Team is struggling to make ends meet too. Taking our potential placements away only makes that WORSE.
BUT...I asked a question that I thought was fair, and the response is where I really get frustrated and upset. My question was: Can the Recruiting Team bring in new business and run a client account? Answer...NO. If you (Recruiting) open an account we need you to team up and introduce an Acct Manager to the client immediately. The Acct Manager will take over and run the Client.
I'm sorry...but that doesn't make any sense to me.
So...the Acct Managers (because times are tough and business is slow) are allowed to recruit on open jobs, but Recruiters are NOT allowed to own their own accounts. If we (Recruiters) DO get our foot in the door with a client and can possibly generate new business - then we must partner with an Acct Manager that was too busy recruiting to generate their own new business.
How the hell does this make ANY sense? Am I missing something?
Sounds (to me) like it's okay for Acct Mgrs to work both sides of the desk, but in no way will a Recruiter be allowed to do the same. I don't understand this at all.
Thanks for the reply, but honestly at this point in my life I am not interested in opening up my own shop. I have a very young family (5 month old and 4 yr old) and I enjoy the stability (and good income) I receive for working for a well established firm. Call me scared...and you'll probably be correct. It's just not (IMO) the right time for me to take on a venture like that.
Then unfortunately you are going to continue to suffer working under those AM's and the owner...Maybe look at working for a different firm...You can approach your owner on the idea of you selling biz, but if they have that type of mindset, you are probably going to be dealing with recurring issues of some sort related to your comp and workload being less than the more tenured AM's.
Do you do permanent placement? Not sure if this varies much geographically, but in my area, greater Boston, most agencies that do permanent placement have full desk recruiters, meaning you do both pieces, you generate and manage clients and you recruit candidates to fill the jobs. You also work on your colleagues jobs by sending your candidates to their clients as well as your own so you can leverage your efforts. The only time I see the division you mention is typically with contract recruiting, not permanent.
So, if you are doing contract, you may want to consider switching to perm placement and an agency that will let you do both sides. You'll make a lot more money and have more fun! I've always done both sides, and wouldn't have it any other way.