The inexorable rise of non-agency recruitment is countered by a big “nothing” from Agencies.

When you spend every waking minute analysing the possible outcomes for the recruitment industry over the next decade and you have a brain so limited in capacity as mine, you end up hearing the old cliché ringing in your ears:
“You can’t halt progress!”

I believe this to be true and short of a post apocalyptic return to the Stone Age, which actually seems frighteningly more likely than it did a week ago, I suspect that In-House, Social Media et al will continue to rise and rise.

So what have Recruitment Agencies done about it?

Well…er…nothing! Well they’ve talked about it a bit!

There are several initiatives underway that by playing a small supporting role to the traditional agency-client model, can only make using the recruitment sector a more attractive, effective and efficient proposition for Employers. For Agencies they offer a viable alternative to the cold-call and a type of new business radar hitherto unavailable. These include: TalentPuzzle and Vacancy-Clearing but I suspect none have received the open-armed support of the agency sector they might have hoped for. (Full list posted at http://vacancy-clearing.com )

It does surprise me too that any proposition that involves Recruiters paying even a small amount plummets off the scale when it comes to making a commitment. This is why Vacancy-Clearing has adopted a free-for-recruiters strategy. I wonder how the IOR (Institute of Recruiters) whose LinkedIn group rocketed to 4600 members will fare when it starts to ask for subscriptions.

If you operate in a market that has its fair share of rogues then you are bound to carry with you a healthy dose of scepticism. I don’t blame Recruitment Consultants who do. However compare that attitude with the whole-hearted way in which Employers are embracing and investing in In-House and Social Media. They are forging ahead whilst we are still frozen in the headlights.

I blogged to this effect suggesting Recruiters needed some concerted effort to improve their channels to market and received this reply from a well-known American blogger and recruiter: “Sounds like socialism. Not in my life-time sport!” Well she is from Texas!

So what are Recruiters going to do about it: cooperate and adopt new channels to market or bury their heads?

Comment by Paul Alfred on March 16, 2011 at 2:31pm: Recruiters are slow late adopters David ... As in the book the Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. They need to see something being used like when Job Boards were free and proved ROI - When Job Board portals started to charge a fee Recruiters jumped along for the ride... This is one of those industries where new Portals Web 2.0 Services B2B need to prove themselves.

Comment by Alex Kovalenko on March 16, 2011 at 10:28pm: Its never been easier to find candidates, but its never been harder to connect with them and see if there is a fit. The process will never be automatic. So many web sites over the last few years came in and promised - "NEVER PAY RECRUITERS AGAIN" - the same web sites that either go bankrupt or turn into job boards. My 2 cents..

Comment by David Palmer on March 17, 2011 at 5:27am: @Paul You are so right ..as we are discovering!

@Alex Why is it now harder to connect to candidates? Who is suggesting the process could be automatic?

Comment by Sandra McCartt on March 17, 2011 at 11:20am: David,
Good recruiters are not frozen in the headlights. We are very busy. Companies may be jumping into social media but so are recruiters. If we are having any problem filling a spot we reach out to a split partner. We are not using sites like bounty jobs where companies set low fees like the 10% fees that are showing up on your site. Something like what you are proposing may be fine for recruiters who don't have anything to work on. All I can tell you is that in Texas it doesn't take us long to look at a hot horse shoe. Cutting fees or a discount service is a hot horse shoe in my opinion.

Comment by Jerry Albright on March 17, 2011 at 11:29am: The only place I'm "burying my head" is in the workload on my desk. Work that I'm sure several other "early adopters" of so called "social recruiting" have absolutely failed at.

Nice ad by the way.

Comment by David Palmer on March 17, 2011 at 11:51am: @Sandra

I had a sleepless night about my previous outburst! Apologies for that.

The 10% Fees on our site are in fact Split-Fee proposals from Recruiters looking for partners. We are nothing like Bounty Jobs, in fact their model I believe has a fundemental flaw and that is that it disrespects what Recruiters do. We charge the job advertiser/Employer to access our Recruiter network and we have no other form of revenue. It's free for Recruiters.

Comment by David Palmer on March 17, 2011 at 12:01pm: @Jerry @Sandra

Good recruiters are busy here too but you/they represent the tip of an iceberg that is lumbering along and the sun is getting hotter. Soon there'll only be the tip left - its the others that have the problem.

Comment by Jerry Albright on March 17, 2011 at 12:13pm: I think the true problem - if one needs to be identified - is on the client side. Sure there are thousands of ways (new, old) to identify candidates. We all gravitate to those approaches that fit our situation.

Our clients on the other hand continue to see they same "average" service (if not worse) from one recruiter to the next. Email a few lines about why this person is a great fit - and attached the Word resume the same way it's been done for nearing 2 decades now.

Sourcing has not been a problem for me. Ever. I speculate it never will be.

Comment by Amber on March 17, 2011 at 12:33pm: David - Is the 10% what the split partner receives, or is it the full fee being paid by the client so the split partners each only receive 5%? And are all the jobs in the UK and Europe?

Comment by David Palmer on March 17, 2011 at 12:44pm: Hi Amber,

10% to introducing Agency. This is our minimum. All jobs are in Europe. We're still trying to get going over here. We have a USA site all ready to go but it's waiting until we get Europe right first. Although I suspect Euopre lags behind you when it comes to embracing the Split-Fee model.

Comment