d went out on my own. So I have been busting my buttons running my desk (and being a curmudgeon on twitter) more than I have been talking to recruiters about recruiting.
But recruiting is one of my favorite things, and I do like to talk about it. I like having my feet held to the fire by solid critique, and I like doing the same to others, but only in a way that lifts us (collectively) up. It is possible to seek accountability and critical thinking without resorting to mob tactics. It takes practice and determination and a willingness to put for the effort.
I think it is good for us (again, collectively) as an industry to require that accountability of each other and ourselves.…
e what flavor the recruiter comes in: corporate, agency, contractor, or an alien from outer space. But here's the truth: the ultimate test of great recruiting is the quality and longevity of the new employees.
So if a recruiter simply provides pipeline and no other consulting services in the selection and placement of the finalist, a guarantee probably is sufficient. It is certainly the minimum I would expect from a TPR to make placements at my company.
I agree that recruiters should not be held accountable for things outside of their control; but as a corporate recruiting manager I also think that I would strongly consider paying more for the services of a TPR whose efforts over time consistently resulted in employees with higher engagement and loyalty to my business than I would for a TPR who had varied results and a great guarantee.
Thanks for that clarification, Rayanne - it was important to state the difference between voluntary and involuntarty turnover..…