Barbara,

Thanks for your note and your perspective, although I don't quite understand the elephant analogy.

This string reminds me when I worked for two large, national recruiting firms. I was an executive at those firms and one thing always made me laugh...both Presidents stood up and made lavish speeches about how we source the best candidates and we have the best clients. That was nonsense. We all; me, you and our clients (especially yours because they are highly sophisticated) have access to the same information. It's how we decipher, process and manage that information that separates recruiters...therein lies the value...nothing else. Our clients don't pay us to push paper. They pay us to source the best candidate, quickly; regardless of the source.

I see you have 15 years experience. I'll bet more times then are on your two hands you placed a candidate with a client when that candidate was already in their system. Guaranteed. We get paid what we get paid because we are nimble and efficient. Our clients usually aren't.

And I would submit that your clients are not as sophisticated as they may appear. If they were they would more than likely be on our side of the desk, where the money is.

For me, every candidate is on the market. If they are willing to listen, they are on the market. If you and Paul have ways to bubble those who resist and aren't willing to listen, then you and Paul would make far more money on the lecturing circuit. I would guess you're doing your job, pitching a different opportunity and healing a pain. But that doesn't mean the candidate isn't on the market, it means you're doing your job.

My blog was never about an abundant world of candidates, only qualified candidates. They are abundant and are easy to find. It's managing the process and building trust that separates us. It simply takes a special recruiter to bubble them to the surface. It appears that you are one of those recruiters.