Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Thomas Gray on September 6, 2008 at 11:27pm

Would you quit recruiting to earn only $50k per year to teach it at a Uni?

Erin Culp said:

Gavin-I'm reading replies and comments to your discussion...seems like lots of recruiters out there don't feel like they are as valued by their organizations as they should be. I've always wondered...why is there no degree program out there for Recruiting? Maybe if a Bachelors degree in Recruiting was available, Recruiters could get started in the profession with a little more credibility behind them and colleagues would start to recognize Recruiting as a profession, not just something individuals with "good people skills" get into.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erin Culp on September 7, 2008 at 1:03am

Touché Thomas! I'm a corporate recruiter now...so maybe!! It just seems like there should be an education path in college for such a mission-critical function of an organization.

Thomas Gray said:

Would you quit recruiting to earn only $50k per year to teach it at a Uni?

Erin Culp said:

Gavin-I'm reading replies and comments to your discussion...seems like lots of recruiters out there don't feel like they are as valued by their organizations as they should be. I've always wondered...why is there no degree program out there for Recruiting? Maybe if a Bachelors degree in Recruiting was available, Recruiters could get started in the profession with a little more credibility behind them and colleagues would start to recognize Recruiting as a profession, not just something individuals with "good people skills" get into.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gavin Chase on September 8, 2008 at 4:56am

Is there an issue around 3rd party recruiters gaining respect from their clients. Is this a failure of the recruiter in establishing credibility and expertise in their market or an inbred scepticism on behalf of the client as to the value a 3rd party recruiter brings?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gareth McKnight on September 8, 2008 at 12:58pm

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choose a good cultural fit for their office and their responsibility to give that person what they need so they stick around.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michaela Holmberg on September 8, 2008 at 1:06pm

I am in Agreement with you Gareth. I think that a company should offer at least a 3 month guarantee to demonstrate that they can give you quality work and they are assessing the whole candidate not just job related competencies. However, I think that we as recruiters need to be a little pickier on who we choose as clients as well. It's not good for business or your reputation if you put forward a really good good applicant and they leave after 2 months because of their supervisor. My point is that part of a recruiter's job is to work with the hiring manager as well, not just finding applicants.

The Adler company is a great source that does online seminars and workshops training hiring managers not just on being better interviewers but also on how to be better managers so they don't lose those diamonds in the rough.

Gareth McKnight said:

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choose a good cultural fit for their office and their responsibility to give that person what they need so they stick around.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rene Crites on September 8, 2008 at 6:40pm

I work for a small executive search firm supporting the hospitality industry. I support 2 very busy recruiters and manage our online sourcing including job boards, linked in, Zoom Infor, etc. My biggest challenge is that I wear alot of hats and have trouble ballancing and organizing my time. I am also the office admin so I struggle with what and where are the best places to invest my time in. I would love to start a blog on our company website but am not sure the best way to get it going and wonder if I will have the time to maintain it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gavin Chase on September 9, 2008 at 6:18am

Sounds like you are busy Rene! Many people start blogs with good intent and then let them sit there with no content for weeks, if not months. It may be better for you to find a general or specialist social network (similar to RecruitingBlogs or Future Career Network) and start a group or engage in content focussed on the hospitality market with links back to your company's website. That way you are starting to build a presence in your market. In time you could either develop a blog on that site or independently.....

Good luck

Rene Crites said:

I work for a small executive search firm supporting the hospitality industry. I support 2 very busy recruiters and manage our online sourcing including job boards, linked in, Zoom Infor, etc. My biggest challenge is that I wear alot of hats and have trouble ballancing and organizing my time. I am also the office admin so I struggle with what and where are the best places to invest my time in. I would love to start a blog on our company website but am not sure the best way to get it going and wonder if I will have the time to maintain it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gareth McKnight on September 9, 2008 at 12:33pm

Really good point Michaela, I think that us recruiters should be more selective in choosing clients also. I have encountered particular hiring managers or decision makers within organsiations that have caused real problems for candidates placed in the past, which with a three month guarantee provides a real headache. A quick question though; if it comes to late November and you (like every other recruiter) is eager to get through a few more deals to try and hit that yearly target, would you turn down business if an individual/company has a bad reputation? I would love to be able to say I would, but unfortuantely the figures don't lie and I would have to take on a client that I wouldn't normally or would prefer not to... What you think?


Michaela Favre said:

I am in Agreement with you Gareth. I think that a company should offer at least a 3 month guarantee to demonstrate that they can give you quality work and they are assessing the whole candidate not just job related competencies. However, I think that we as recruiters need to be a little pickier on who we choose as clients as well. It's not good for business or your reputation if you put forward a really good good applicant and they leave after 2 months because of their supervisor. My point is that part of a recruiter's job is to work with the hiring manager as well, not just finding applicants.

The Adler company is a great source that does online seminars and workshops training hiring managers not just on being better interviewers but also on how to be better managers so they don't lose those diamonds in the rough.

Gareth McKnight said:

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choose a good cultural fit for their office and their responsibility to give that person what they need so they stick around.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michaela Holmberg on September 9, 2008 at 1:30pm

That's a tough choice. Ideally, I would like to be successful enough to pick and choose my clients but that is not looking too probably any time soon. In my particular case, I am a calculated risk taker. Calculated being the important word. But when it comes down to it, the majority of the time I would take that client on. However, I would make sure to highlight my concerns with the company and the specific hiring manager. Making sure that they know my concerns are about their company's benefit. (There's nothing wrong with criticism as long as it's constructive).

Back in December, I worked with a client that had a really bad reputation for being a micromanager, controlling and quite demanding when it came to doing things her way. I did some research on her before I started working with her to see what types of things set her off, who she like and didn't like and why and in general what her overall vision for her office was. Once I found that out, I started researching candidates and spoke to them in the same manner she would speak to them in (short, blunt and to the point). I ended up finding 2 candidates that really responded well to that and were also qualified to do the job. One of the candidates was hired for the position and is still there.

Not sure if this helps, but if you're ever faced with working with someone that you don't want to work with, I have found that some initial research can go a long way.

Gareth McKnight said:

Really good point Michaela, I think that us recruiters should be more selective in choosing clients also. I have encountered particular hiring managers or decision makers within organsiations that have caused real problems for candidates placed in the past, which with a three month guarantee provides a real headache. A quick question though; if it comes to late November and you (like every other recruiter) is eager to get through a few more deals to try and hit that yearly target, would you turn down business if an individual/company has a bad reputation? I would love to be able to say I would, but unfortuantely the figures don't lie and I would have to take on a client that I wouldn't normally or would prefer not to... What you think?


Michaela Favre said:

I am in Agreement with you Gareth. I think that a company should offer at least a 3 month guarantee to demonstrate that they can give you quality work and they are assessing the whole candidate not just job related competencies. However, I think that we as recruiters need to be a little pickier on who we choose as clients as well. It's not good for business or your reputation if you put forward a really good good applicant and they leave after 2 months because of their supervisor. My point is that part of a recruiter's job is to work with the hiring manager as well, not just finding applicants.

The Adler company is a great source that does online seminars and workshops training hiring managers not just on being better interviewers but also on how to be better managers so they don't lose those diamonds in the rough.

Gareth McKnight said:

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choose a good cultural fit for their office and their responsibility to give that person what they need so they stick around.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thomas Gray on September 10, 2008 at 10:18am

Gareth, I too have worked for companies that offer the 90 day g-tee in the past and it usually is something that becomes lopsided. No matter how good your scrutiny of the candidate is you can not control how they are treated or if some terrible family emergency takes them to another continent to care for their ailing aunt and it should not be your job to do that. Your job is to provide a focused and thorough search of the marketplace to uncover the candidate that the client would not otherwise find through typical means. It is the companies job to hire them. If on the otherhand you recruit a peer or the manager of the candidate you place and as a result your placement then leaves you are responsible no matter how long they worked there.

The problem that I have seen with a 90 day warranty is that eventually you have an unethical recruiter on the other end of it and at the candidates whim and request he/she is willing to place the candidate again on day 91. Tell me your client would be willing to accept that.

I am not saying that you should have no warranty. I am saying you should have a warranty that covers your area of influence in the candidates employment.

Gareth McKnight said:

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choose a good cultural fit for their office and their responsibility to give that person what they need so they stick around.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gavin Chase on September 11, 2008 at 1:01pm

As part of my research around a subject for the Fordyce Forum Im thinking I like to know more about the structure of the US recruitment market in relation to the 3rd party recruiter. I'd be interested to here about professional organisations for the recruiter, whether recruiters tend to be single office, owner managers, franchised, public listed etc.

Where can I go to get this information?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Careers In Holland on September 25, 2008 at 3:45pm

I'll be devil's advocate here: who, in the end, is really responsible for the hire, the agency or the company recruiter (or (line)manager)? Who should know best what type of person, which skills etc. fit the company best, end of the day? Who should be the expert on the company culture and have the best feeling about a candidate with that in mind? I shurely hope hiring- and line management will do a good job interviewing and assesing candidates themselves, and don't just rely on the (agency) recruiter. I for shure will never pretend to know what's best for my client. And for exactly the same reason I can and will not give a three month guarantee. Yes, cooperate and work together, do everything you can to get the right feeling and knowledge about your client and your candidates, do interviews, assessments, reference checks. But don't sit on the chair of the hiring manager. Do it because you're passionate about you job and want to give your best regardless.

p.s. we do give a 50% refund for resignation within 1 or 2 months after hire :)

Michaela Favre said:

I am in Agreement with you Gareth. I think that a company should offer at least a 3 month guarantee to demonstrate that they can give you quality work and they are assessing the whole candidate not just job related competencies. However, I think that we as recruiters need to be a little pickier on who we choose as clients as well. It's not good for business or your reputation if you put forward a really good good applicant and they leave after 2 months because of their supervisor. My point is that part of a recruiter's job is to work with the hiring manager as well, not just finding applicants.

The Adler company is a great source that does online seminars and workshops training hiring managers not just on being better interviewers but also on how to be better managers so they don't lose those diamonds in the rough.

Gareth McKnight said:

I work for a specialised IT recruitment agency and we offer a three month guarantee to our clients. I agree with your assumption that this can be "impossible" to find the right candidate at times, however this does increase the quality of your work as a recruiter. If there is a three month guarantee this ensures that you are not simply interested in getting someone (anyone) into the role, but instead getting the right person. Although there can be diffiuclties with providing a guarantee I feel that eventually clients actually start to value the service that you are providing and will inevitably come back to you when they are next looking to add staff.

Thomas Gray said:

I agree whole heartedly here. People leave people they don't leave companies.

The key thing to tie this to is the extreme number of companies that want you to guarantee the success of the candidate you place. They ask for the impossible with a 90 day or any number of days unconditional warranty.

You are not able to make sure that the candidate that you place will show up on time and not be subjected to cruel or unusual work stress. how can you possibly guarantee that they would stay in that position?

Michaela Favre said:

I believe that as a recruiter, it's our responsibility to provide more than one quality candidate to our client, but the onus on retention is on the manager. It's their responsibility to choos

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page