Recruiting is a game of failure.

Ike Davis, 1^st baseman for the NY Mets hit his 2nd home run this year, a 3 run homer against the Atlanta Braves last night, possibly reversing a “slow start” to his season in grand fashion. To wit, Gary Cohen, one of my favorite sports announcers of all time commented (paraphrase here) “Ike handles both his successes and failures the same way, his demeanor does not change, he’s got the perfect personality for Major League Baseball”.

He went on to say “After all, baseball is a game of failure!”

Shocked at the statement at first, I quickly recognized how true it is. Get up to bat 3 – 4 times a game, swing the bat a minimum 12 but more often over 20 times a game, get 1 hit per game, and you are on a hitting streak to the joy of your team and fans alike. 1 Hit in 20+, IF you’re doing well!

That’s a “hit” mind you, not a home run.

The parallels’ to recruiting are obvious. Barbara Bruno (renowned recruiting trainer) uses a ratio of 20 conversations per day equals a productive day when starting out in recruiting. That’s “conversations” not calls. For 20 conversations, one could make 100+ dials in a day.

That’s “every day”.

Those outside recruiting, if they knew the “ratios” we live by would call us “crazy”, asking why would you do that… why (or how) could you stick with it, with a “failure” ratio like that?

At 4:30 AM this morning, while laying in bed awake pondering my children’s future, the bills I had to pay, the candidate I was interviewing at 8, the client meeting at 12, and whether I’d ever have enough money to retire some day, (I’m guessing I’m not alone in this ritual these days) that little voice in the back of my head reminded me, …with 1 swing of the bat today, you could change… “Everything!”

One good swing today could be the difference between a banner month, or a flop. One good swing today, could be the difference between another Disney Vacation, or a weekend at the in-laws (how’s that for incentive).

One good swing today…

Of course, we take steps to mitigate the peaks and valleys, and it’ll take more than “1 good swing total”, to close a deal, but truth is, few jobs I’ve had in my career (and I’ve had more than a few), offer the “subtle rush” locking in a solid appointment, or “adrenaline rush” closing a big deal brings.

Few jobs anywhere, offer the employee the opportunity to change “everything”, on any given day.

All you have to do, is bring with you the demeanor of a Major League Ball Player, recognizing, you’ll need to “swing, swing, swing” each and every day, knowing you will not get a hit with each up at bat, and knowing (viscerally) that that’s OK!

If you ask me, Recruiting is a game of failure, same as Major League Baseball. Like Major League Baseball, not many have the skill to survive the cut, with fewer the skills to play with the All Stars. Nor do most have the demeanor to “turn” a slow start to a season (or quarter) knowing, success can only be achieved, if you are willing and able to keep getting up to bat each and every day accepting the seemingly daunting ratio’s, and “swinging” through the blisters, and the years, till you get to the point where you really “know your pitch”.

For then and only then, will you be able to consistently “hit them out of the park”.

Next Post >

Comment by Jerry Albright on April 19, 2012 at 9:06am: I am not interested in retained search. On more than one occasion I've had the opportunity to do it - but am not the least bit intrigued by it.

I guess it started decades ago. It was always expected that I would be paid once the yard was completely mowed - or the driveway snow free. No one paid me to get started back then - only to finish. So it's how I've always expected my transactions to go.

Now - to Mitch's point. As a kid I didn't fear some other kid sneaking over and mowing the back yard while I was riding my bike to the gas station to get a tank full of gas to get started. So the idea of no competition is appealing......

But retained isn't for me. I like having the right to bail out if so desired. I exercise that right frequently enough to know it's a necessary option.

Comment by Vaughn Welches on April 19, 2012 at 9:20am: Nick, love the phrase "know your pitch" . . . so true. With my son having been in baseball for so many years I have had opportunity to learn a few things about the game. Ted Williams said in an interview that the most important thing in hitting is having good vision. He claimes that he could actually see the ball bounce off the bat when he hit it. They took him to the ballpark and with a bat covered with pine tar, he would hit live pitching and then tell them where the pine tar mark was on the baseball. He was right 5 out of 7 times! And this was after he was retired. Pete Rose said he could see which way a ball was spinning as it came towards the plate and he would adjust his swing. In this baseball analogy, good vision to identify the pitch can be a huge part of being successful in this business.

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 19, 2012 at 9:30am: JERRY… didn’t you like my story… (lol)

I'd just like to add to the Headhunter vs., Recruiter / Retained vs., Contingency thread

I don’t agree Mitch with your “Headhunter” comment. To decree your definition for the tag “Headhunter” to be ordained then exclusive, followed by broad stroking “most” today carrying the moniker as “opportunists”, is presumptuous; kind of like calling all Brits “SimonCowells”.

Your definition pretty much describes one component of the service I (and many of my colleagues I’m sure) provide my clients feeling contingency is not a synonym for shoddy.

Any exclusivity I enjoy is earned through fair completion with other firms, and my clients consistently select candidates I introduce over my competition because I introduce the ‘better fit”.

Niche focus may allow for my thoroughness (over say a generalist), but I see knowing virtually all the talent in the “space” you claim to serve (and them knowing you) a prerequisite for success in this highly competitive market.

Though I would not turn down a retained agreement (bird in the hand and all that) the paradigm of Headhunter with exclusive access to talent (little black book) which fueled retained firms for years is a pre-social network throwback, and most retained search firm owners I network with on this side of the Pond, have seen the pendulum swing in favor contingency under extreme market pressure struggling economies spawn, a sentiment I heard stated several times throughout this thread.

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 19, 2012 at 9:37am: Thanks Vaughn for the Ted Williams / Pete Rose stories. One of the toughest things for a recruiter is time management. And if you're spending your time working the wrong projects (outside the strike zone (sorry)), you can't survive this business. Thanks again!

Comment by Mitch Sullivan on April 19, 2012 at 9:38am: Nick, if you already know all the talent in your niche sector then you're not a Headhunter, you're a Talent Pool Manager.

I agree that Headhunter sounds a lot sexier though.

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 19, 2012 at 9:53am: lol

Mitch your quote-

“I think the popular (and most enduring definition) of a headhunter has always been someone who identifies and sources all (or most) of the available candidate pool and then assess that candidate pool and presents the best of them to the client.”

Since now you seem bent on clouding the issue through the use of semantics (Talent Pool Manager… ugh!)

Clarify for me…do all Brits aspire to be SimonCowels or is it just you? (lol)

Comment by Jerry Albright on April 19, 2012 at 11:11am: "Hi. I'm Jerry. I live in Avilla, Indiana and am the proud father of 3 (gifted) children and committed husband to a (gorgeous) adoring wife."

The past several years I've resisted the urge to feel obligated to introduce myself based on how I earn a living. It seems so pedestrian to me now.

Comment by David Wagner on April 19, 2012 at 11:18am: Listening to all of these posts brings the question down to: How do introduce yourself to strangers? Do you call yourself a "headhunter" or "recruiter". I been using the term "headhunter" now for a long time. It just seems to fit better. Even though I do describe my business as a recruiting business.

Comment by Vaughn Welches on April 19, 2012 at 11:26am: Interesting question, David!

Once a client (with whom I later did a lot of business) thought I was just getting resumes from a job board and he called me a "Paper Shuffler", and I don't think he even capitalized those letters! My personal favorite title is usually Executive Search Consultant/Agent, or Executive Staffing Consultant. Best might be to try to connect with people at different levels of company structure. But, those "titles" always seemed to work well for me.