Activity versus Result... the task driven recruiter

In an agency recruitment environment, the old adage is activity = revenue. I would say that any recruiter worth their salt is doing the required amount of activity to reach their targets and meet their commission goals, but what happens in a mature environment where the focus is switched from result - to activity?

So often we see the task driven recruiter tick the pages of their KPI sheet, feeling they have achieved something, even when it has not led to any new or succesfully closed business! Why do managers take this route when it only works in certain high churn large agency environments?

A while back I had the privilege of working with a true industry professional who believed every consultant in the business had to be managed differently. Not left alone - but managed. They would go out of their way to ensure a process driven consultant was tasked with an end result, not small little checklists for every activity.

As a people industry, its so sad that we have such a high attrition rate - and it all starts and ends with activity managers. What would I look for in my next manager? Experience managing people not activity. Lots and lots of it (and I mean more than 4-6 years!)

Next Post >

Comment by pam claughton on April 27, 2011 at 8:04am: It's definitely a balancing act though, between micromanaging the activity and leaving it completely alone. If you can get in the habit of tracking daily activity while also focusing on quality, the placements will take care of themselves. As my first manager often said, "The numbers don't lie." I've found that to be very true, if you maintain a consistent high level of both activity and quality, you won't have to worry as much about slumps. It's also the best way to get a new recruiter billing, when they can see the correlation as their activity and quality increase, so does their billing.

Comment by Jerry Albright on April 27, 2011 at 9:43am: When one begins their recruiting career they simply have no clue of which activity will happen to be the one that brings the end prize. So you must, I repeat MUST have a focus on the numbers.

After time (years I would say.....) the recruiter has a better sense of where their particular efforts need to be. I do now - but I didn't in the beginning.

So for new recruiters - KPI's are all we have to ensure they are doing the work required to learn the profession. Any recruiter in their "formulative years" that complains about being held accountable to the work needed to build a well-rounded knowledge base is probably not cut out for this profession.

Comment by Brian K. Johnston on April 27, 2011 at 10:43am: Jerry, Your assessment is 100% accurate in my view....

Comment by bill josephson on April 27, 2011 at 11:39am: I agree that Jerry is correct. There are activity metrics which must be met leading to results. The issue I've found in this jobs market is it requires much greater activity metrics achievement to get results for a myriad of reasons.

Comment by Kevin Franks on April 27, 2011 at 11:48am: I don't disagree that the numbers/activity are important as an indicator of potential success but I have seen countless recruiters that could "work the numbers" but produced dismal results. In the end - you have to be effective, you must produce. Spending the hours, making the dial-outs, building the marketing list are all secondary to actually making placements. If a recruiter does not do that the numbers are irrelevant.

Comment by bill josephson on April 27, 2011 at 12:00pm: Kevin, you are right. Numbers alone won't ensure results/success. Ability/talent comes into play.

However, we all have metrics we need to meet to be successful. One person may do it with 20 recruit connects another needs 40.

Comment by Melissa Zentgraf on April 27, 2011 at 12:11pm: Wow. This is a huge topic for me right now.

So I'm a noobie (just made it to the 1 yr point, yay me!) and I totally admit to not knowing much. But I have worked sales in the past so I understand how a lot of recruiting is a numbers game.

But what kind of numbers? I'm getting flack right now because I "don't submit enough". I submit maybe a third of what others in our group do, but I had the most hires last quarter. Almost all of my candidates make it to final interviews and my results are fabulous, but I'm getting flack for my lack of activity.

I'm not saying that I'm some kind of wunderkind (I don't think that's allowed when you're 40). I also won't discount that I'm having a really good run. But I do think that I've worked out an approach that works well for me. It doesn't match at all what a recruiter is "supposed" to do (at least in my group) and so it looks like I'm not doing much. But the results say otherwise...

So, should I be forced to chuck the process that is working for me and allowing me to become successful just to fit someone's view of "learning the profession"? That's kind of what is going on right now. As I write this, I'm wondering how much of it is sour grapes that I was able to catch on as quickly as I did. I work my butt off (except when I'm reading recruiting blogs), but it's "duck like" work, all under the surface.

Comment by pam claughton on April 27, 2011 at 12:25pm: melissa,

Why don't you just up your submittals? Sounds like you've got the quality part down, so upping your overall activity will likely double or triple your placements. :)

Comment by Jerry Albright on April 27, 2011 at 1:28pm: Melissa - What you might consider is that you might be "over thinking" your submittals a little. Rather than going for a 1:1 ratio (sendouts to hire) you may want to back off that just a bit.

So rather than (I'm just making up numbers here...) introducing 4 candidates each month and getting 2 hires - how about introducing 15 candidates and make 3 or 4?

Though rather than just hammer on you to make more connections - if I were your mentor I would be showing you how to do it.

Remember - you're not hiring anyone. Your client is. Don't be overly critical of who you decide to move forward. Here is my criteria for introducing someone to my client: Do they feel they can do the job? Do you feel the same? Are they interested? Are they available? Do the fit the target salary range? If so - then any further decisions need to be made by your client - not you.

Good luck!

Comment by Brian K. Johnston on April 27, 2011 at 1:35pm: #'s matter when you first start out... Jerry said it perfectly, and I am betting he earns top $$. You can completely and totally "see through" the A players when you read through entries... Their is a quiet confidence about certain folks here (less than 5%). Great job Jerry!

Comment