Clients requiring approved vendors to utilize bounty jobs

Hi Folks;
Happy New Year!
A large and steady client for over a decade is requiring its vendors to use the bounty portal.
As a seasoned recruiter I find no value in bounty and it takes out the human element and surtaxes my fee.
Has anyone had this experience and how did they remedy the situation?
Thank you!

Views: 1046

Comment by Mike Hard on January 6, 2010 at 5:10pm
I should have mentioned – my email is If anyone is open to it, I’d like to hear your feedback. I need to add a picture too - Slouch I'm working on that.
Comment by Slouch on January 6, 2010 at 5:13pm
Nice of you to join us here Mike. I'd love to meet you on the phone soon. Jeremy never liked talking to me.
Comment by Mike Hard on January 6, 2010 at 5:17pm
Hey Slouch - love to chat. I'll connect offline. I like talking - may be hard to shut me up.
Comment by Judy Lewallen on January 6, 2010 at 5:17pm
yes Mike I also appreciate the posts
Comment by Terry Penn on January 6, 2010 at 5:24pm
I just got email on a new opening with Bounty.
Comment by Joshua Letourneau on January 7, 2010 at 8:50am
Imho, BountyJobs is a great place to forward "overflow" or silver-medalists. Since you're not expecting feedback or anyone to get back to you anyway, you don't have much to lose.

Just beware of Contract Recruiters working at the "Clients" who are taking your same candidates (that you sub'd them) and re-submitting them to other jobs on BJ. Don't laugh - I had it happen to me. I packed up and rolled out when one of their VPs wrote me, "that's how life is in the recruiting world." Such a poor and laissez-faire outlook on our space was a negative signal, especially coming from Upper Mgmt. I knew it was just a matter of time before most of the investor capital was blown at that point.

I don't have to tell the real movers & shakers (the real headhunters) that search assignments coming in through any online VMS cannot, by definition, be an A-level search. That means you don't spin your wheels actively recruiting on them . . . but you have nothing to lose to run through your applicant database and see who might be a fit.

Mike, kudos on coming out - I don't need to tell you that BJ's reputation has went to you-know-what, but you seem well-served to start trudging up the steep incline of turning your market perception around. I wish you the very best and will stay tuned in. It appears you understand that without us, you have nothing but content (job reqs) sitting out there in the hopes that someone will work on them.

P.S. Let your business development people know that active recruiting doesn't happen in circumstances where there is little to no communication between Client and Headhunter. (i.e. 2-line email responses or mass emails 2 months after you've sent in a candidate isn't communication.) BJ will continue down the same old path unless this improves. Relationships and communication are everything in this business, which is again why I say Kudos to you for your mea-culpa.

P.S.S. Harvard and Yale are both impressive.
Comment by Salvatore Petrara, CPC on January 7, 2010 at 10:28am
Hey Jerry, likewise!
Happy New Year, good luck with your Colts!
It is good to see things picking up!!
As for Mike Hard you seem like a turnaround executive and I wish you much success and luck with BJ.
Perhaps you are what they need. No one can argue that the concept is a great one, a true exchange of buyers and sellers...
Albeit my exposure (although limited) has not been positive.
Perhaps you are the Mike Holmgren of internet marketing!!
Best of luck
Comment by PAUL FOREL on March 2, 2014 at 6:49am


Hello, I am new here and am just now seeing this post of yours.

" did they remedy the situation?..."

That's easy as pie, Salvatore!

You have two choices in this case- the same two choices you have always had when dealing with certain client issues that don't suit you:

1.  Overcome their objection to not having you as their assigned recruiting resource;


2.  They now become a source instead of a client.

We can go on and on with this by addressing the myriad of reasons the company has made this decision (and you should, by all means) but the bottom line is that if they do not see you as a value-added recruiting resource -however you might define that- then the very nature of executive search manifests itself in the most basic form possible: they become a company from whom you recruit for your clients who do value you as their vendor of recruiting services.

This is not rocket science, Salvatore.

Frankly, I'd rather eat oatmeal than allow myself to be herded into using one of these bottom-feeder recruiting tools.

Job Orders/Search Assignments are everywhere, Sal.

Go find yourself another client if you cannot fix this.


You need to be a member of RecruitingBlogs to add comments!

Join RecruitingBlogs


All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.

Just enter your e-mail address below


RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

© 2023   All Rights Reserved   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service