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 Sandra McCartt on April 20, 2012 at 2:12pm: The problem with you tunnel vision elitists is you don't know the difference between an argument and a comment. You don't seem to be happy enough with your chosen road to Rome to just travel it, you seem to a have some burning need to spout off to the rest of the world that if they are not doing it the way you are they just aren't as good as you are. What kind of damaged ego needs to do that? When anybody starts spouting off about being better than anybody else because of when they get paid, i know they are full of it.

In fact, as to Amy's example of attorney's being one of the few professions who get paid before they deliver. Most of the best litagators work on contingency. Retainers are just for filing expenses. Many of us work on contingency with understanding of billing for advertising expense but we don't get paid unless we deliver and we do. Doesn't make us better or worse than others who travel different roads to Rome. Thinking you do a better job because you get paid upfront is just arrogant bullshit. Not an argument just a comment on your ego problem..that is all.

Comment by Mitch Sullivan on April 20, 2012 at 3:39pm: Nobody said anything about anyone being any better or any worse than anyone else. That was your inference, Sandra.

All I said was that retained delivers a better quality of service to the client and the candidates. What I haven't done either is feel the need to resort to personal insults.

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 20, 2012 at 4:19pm: Contingency vs. Retained as it equates to Quality

Contingency-

Competition spawns the highest level of performance. Sports aside (where it’s obvious), Professionals who have to compete, hone their craft to attain peak performance, or they get “weeded out”.

Competition, considered a pillar for an efficient Capitalist System

Retained-

Paid up front before results are in, eliminate all the competition through a contract agreement so unpartisan comparisons regarding actual quality and performance are impossible;

Monopolistic in nature, which are recognized worldwide as rarely a benefit to consumers

Hmm… sounds like the fox guarding the hen house and a sure recipe for mediocre performance in or out of recruiting.

Fortunately, most retained engagements are not performed in mediocre fashion because in reality, it’s about the recruiter not the business model.

“Good” and “bad” apples in every batch, regardless the moniker (contingency, retained, recruiter or headhunter) you sport.

Now be honest Mitch, this has all been just Shtick right? Nobody with a lick of intelligence could honestly paint in broad-strokes the generalities you’ve spewed in this post.

I get it… you enjoy being the “fly in the ointment”, the kid who would “kick” the beehive when nobody was looking then screams… RUN!

The center of attention… always quick with “who… me?” when called-out, followed by selective memory when recounting events.

Read your comments and if you don’t believe you are being condescending and inflammatory, I question the “quality” of your social skills (woops, was that a “personal insult” or just an inference?).

Comment by Amy Ala Miller on April 20, 2012 at 4:21pm: Some recruiters (and clients) don't feel that retained delivers a better quality of service to the client and candidates. It can, but there's no guarantee. Having an exclusive relationship, regardless of when the check is cut, can help - still no guarantee. A retained recruiter can still be out-hustled by a hungry contingent recruiter if they're not careful...

Comment by Mitch Sullivan on April 20, 2012 at 4:42pm: "A retained recruiter can still be out-hustled by a hungry contingent recruiter if they're not careful..."

Not on the same vacancy they can't.

Comment by Mitch Sullivan on April 20, 2012 at 4:49pm: So what you seem to be saying Nick is that several hungry recruiters all sourcing from the same candidate pool and all pitching the same job in a different way is somehow a recipe for filling the job the most effectively.

Now THAT is an interesting take on recruitment.

Maybe you could try looking at recruitment from both the client's and the candidate's perspective rather than just your own.

Comment by bill josephson on April 20, 2012 at 4:59pm: A retained assignment means you likely have a time period of exclusivity and the client has demonstrated a seriousness to hire with up front money.

If a company gave the assignment to both me and a retained search firm and 100% positive the client was serious to hire, I could outwork the retained search recruiter.

But speaking for myself in these economic times, I'd much rather have the up front money as then I'd be close to 100% certainty the company would really pull the trigger on a qualified candidate instead of tire kicking, changing the job specifications, internal candidate and just wanted to make an external comparison, lost the contract so don't need the person, 15 people in on the interview process, etc.... bull that's heard daily today.

Again, I've found it impossible to take anyone's word for anything seriously today--regardless of corporate title/level. Lack of being on the same page and insubordination by lower downs is the catch word of the day.

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 20, 2012 at 4:59pm: Amy- “A retained recruiter can still be out-hustled by a hungry contingent recruiter if they're not careful..."

Mitch- “Not on the same vacancy they can't”.

Thank you for making my point so succinctly Mitch…

Company has no chance of seeing a candidate outside the retained recruiter scope, even if the candidate is a far better match…

If I were a hiring company, I’d be jumping for that deal (lol). This has “Quality” written all over it!

Comment by Nick Lagos on April 20, 2012 at 5:05pm: So what you seem to be saying Mitch is that one satiated recruiter, sourcing from the same candidate pool (or smaller, economies of scale) and pitching the same job in a different way is somehow a recipe for filling the job the most effectively.

Now THAT is an interesting take on recruitment.

Maybe you could try looking at recruitment from both the client's and the candidate's perspective rather than just your own.