Archive | February, 2012

Recruiters and the Compendium Conundrum…

29 Feb

At the risk of offending about 97.2% of corporate recruiters in the industry – It’s time I raised what I believe to be a very  important issue.  I’m all about breaking the stereotype, promoting a unique personal brand and offering a point of difference…. It’s hard enough as a recruiter to distinguish yourself from your competitors in a saturated market, and the last time I looked there was no mandatory uniform all recruiters must stringently adhere too with Orwellian conformity…

OK – enough of the gasconading (like that one?) and boring overuse of big words, I guess what I’m asking is… Why the hell do recruiters – almost to a man (or woman), insist on mincing round town with a great, big black compendium that SCREAMS ‘Look at me!!! I’m a Recruiter?’

For crying out loud… our industry has surely reached the stage where we can do without Compendiums.  We are not law enforcers who have to carry a gun, nor are we a Barrister who has to wear a wig, and we sure as hell aren’t the Arsenal Football Club post 2005 -  who seem compelled to forego winning any trophies…

No, we are Recruiters. We should be proud of expressing our individuality to both our clients and candidates…

I’ve heard all of the arguments for Compendiums before:

  • It’s company issued
  • It’s convenient and holds my pad, pen and business cards all in the one place
  • Makes me feel like part of the industry
  • It’s pretty…

Simple facts are, you might as well be wearing a High Visibility Vest printed with the words ‘Hi, I’m a recruiter…  just like that bloke over there… You see, the other one holding a Compendium…. Oh, look there’s another just like me… and another…. Golly, there are quite a lot of us aren’t there?’

Clients and candidates are always looking for that point of difference.  Sure, that point of difference probably shouldn’t be as shallow as a visual ‘What’s that you’re carrying in your hand there? Oh it’s a compendium… Is that like standard issue for you recruiters?’ type of point of difference, but to be honest any way you can differentiate yourself from your competitors in the market has got to be a good thing… right? Well maybe not any way… clearly there are a few things that are totally out of bounds… like… um… offering to drop your fees without dropping your level of service… but I digress.

I’m of the firm belief that a compendium serves no real purpose – simple as that.  All it does is identify you as a recruiter and allows me (the humble rec2rec) to pick you out on a crowded Collins Street and offer to buy you a coffee at Strozzi’s.

So, I hear you ask what are the alternatives? Well here are 3 just for starters.

  1. The Ipad – Or any other tablet device you may favour – after all, I’m not Appleist.

With the advent of cloud technology, social media and the like the ipad is the perfect companion for a client visit…

‘So, what you’re saying Mr. Client is that you want a candidate with 3 years local experience in the BI/DW space at one of the Big 4. Is that right?  As you skillfully search your database right in front of him, show him the summary and immediately email a profile… Who wouldn’t be impressed with that… right?

  1. The Ipad2 – Similar to the ipad, but better. It’s faster, slimmer, sexier, has 2 (count them 2) cameras and comes in 2 (that’s right 2) colours.
  2. The Ipad3 – Just released – and I hear rumours that it predicts clients’ questions and transmits well composed responses directly to the ear of the recruiter via a microscopic Bluetooth device. Not only that. It also has a built in lie detector for use during candidate interviews… Hmmm… maybe I am an Appleist.

My point is that black compendiums are obsolete, all too common. If we continue to carry them en masse as an industry we risk becoming marked as a cloned army, or, worse still being labeled ‘Dolly – The Recruiter’…

So Recruiters… I say join me in my campaign to ‘Ditch the Compendium’.  Tell your boss you lost it, it was stolen, or just break the zipper.  Believe me you will feel more energetic, experience a sense of lost freedom, and probably increase your billings… caution the author would like to add a disclaimer that there is no anecdotal evidence to suggest that breaking your compendium’s zipper will actually result in increased billings…

As a side note, I wonder if I will be writing a blog imploring recruiters to ditch the Ipad in 10 year’s time? Food for thought…

Craig Watson

Stick or twist – how long should an underperformer be given?

22 Feb

The recruitment industry is littered with bad and expensive hiring mistakes. Nearly all agencies at some point have hired a consultant that doesn’t work out. Most of us have an example of the experienced consultant who promises the world, talks the talk, and  is always on the verge of a big fee, but month after month has little to show. Or the rookie who is full of enthusiasm but ultimately doesn’t have what it takes when asked to run a desk. The reality is that you can only be sure if someone is going to be successful when they are successful, and you need a period of time to properly assess this.  The question is how long ?

I have experienced recruitment agencies being guilty of both getting rid of people too early and hanging on to them too long. Three months seems to be  standard  as to when a decision needs to be made. This is true for most industries and is no doubt driven partly because that is usually the guarantee period offered with a placement. I doubt in a  lot of cases, and specifically in recruitment, whether it is really long enough to make a definite call. Most new hires will be savvy enough to go into a new job and begin by doing all the  right things. As such, the first few months probably won’t tell you much more than back up what you saw at the interview. It is great when a new consultant hits the ground running and put runs on the board almost immediately. But, for example, if  the they are new to a market and recruiting at a level where the lead time is longer , it can justifiably take some time before they start billing. I wonder how many consultants that have been let go at three months genuinely just needed a little bit more time ?

That being said, no business can support someone indefinitely if they are not performing. Managers who take the longer ball approach are not necessarily making a better call for their business. No one wants the person they decided to hire to turn out a dud, and all managers want their new recruit to work out. After all, there has been  a lot of time and money invested in the individual already and they don’t want to pull the pin too early. So they keep progressing .Maybe next month that big deal they have been working on might finally drop. Maybe ?

If it is difficult to make this call at the start, then it is even harder  when a good performer starts not to bill. Certainly a proven track record will put some goodwill into the bank, but how long can you sustain a dip in performance. After all, you can’t bench them for a few weeks and bring in someone else. A bad month may not be a great cause for concern, but a run of bad months is. Again, how long do you give someone to improve when they hit a dip ? Never one to miss the opportunity for  a sporting analogy my mind turns to Fernando Torres at Chelsea !

The question of when to stick or twist is a tricky one for managers. I expect that most experienced managers reading this will see the answer as measuring activity, not just billings. To a large degree that makes sense as activity (sales call, interviews etc..) is the oxygen of a good biller. If someone is putting the activity in, then the  results will happen….right ? Not always. Sometimes the issue is not just the amount of activity, but the quality of it. In the same way a lack of effort is not the only reason why someone may fail.

What are your experiences ? If you are a manager in an agency what is your approach. Consultants – how long do you expect to be given to prove yourself ? Football fans, will Torres ever be the player he was ?

 

Luke Collard

Tags:

Welcome to The Written Reference

15 Feb

Welcome to The Written Reference – a new weekly blog from the keyboards of R2R specialists Craig Watson and Luke Collard.

Passionate recruiters and social media enthusiasts, we have both been blogging about all things recruitment for the last year.  Encouraged by the feedback and  success of our individual blogs, we have now  combined our efforts. The result is The Written Reference.

The Written Reference  is a look at the recruitment industry, sometimes serious but often light hearted. It aims to engage and advise the recruitment industry in current and relevant topics. We encourage feedback and believe the issues and challenges in our industry are better tackled via interaction and comment.  If you like what we say, or think we are talking nonsense let us know. We hope you enjoy and  look forward to developing a ‘thought community’ that offers real value to recruiters in Australia and beyond.

 Happy reading

 Craig & Luke

Tags: ,

​Recruiters… Stand up straight and stop bending over

15 Feb

It’s tough out there in the commercial contingent recruitment world – I know, I live in it too.  Clients seem to hold regular reverse auctions for fees, playing one recruiter off against another 3 or 4. Candidates swear they are being transparent, then they continually move the goalposts throughout the process and competitors pull out all stops to make the placement – sometimes ethically and sometimes… well…completely unethically.  It can be disheartening, frustrating and bloody annoying.

Many recruitment business owners will tell you steer clear of the contingent space… If I had a dollar for every one of my clients (remembering I am a rec2rec), who have told me ‘Oh Craig, we only do retained,’ or ‘we will work a contingent role, but only if it’s exclusive.’ I would be a very rich man…

Fact is 95% of recruiters are contingent recruiters. (Actually Andrew Banks – you know Andrew Banks, the good looking one from Morgan & Banks, Hudson, T2 etc. says that 99% of all recruitment assignments are contingent. I have decided to round down a bit…). Anyway, as I was saying 95% of you in the recruitment world are competing for the contingent dollar.  So the other 5% feel free to stop reading now… Oh, and if you do continue reading no need to comment – it will be irrelevant to the 95% of our industry that this blog is written for…
That’s right – I’ll say it again 95% of you out there are sharing the same pain… Being told on a weekly basis that the other recruiter is working at a lower fee and that the other recruiter has already presented your exceptional candidate – a candidate who, by the way told you they were working with you exclusively.

You continually struggle to understand the needs of your clients, form relationships, work those crafty, formula driven activity ratios like… If your monthly billing requirement is $30k and your average placement fee is $10k you need to make 3 placements a month… If you fill 1/3 of the roles you work, you need to be working 9 roles at any one time to hit your target.  If you generate a new job order every 2 clients visits and require 5 telemarketing calls to generate a client visit, that would mean if you only have 6 roles on you would need to make 30 TM calls to generate the 6 clients visits to pick up 3 job orders… Now, if the weather in Tenerife was 16 degrees hotter and x=13.3 you ratios change ever so slightly, but believe me – they do change…

Welcome to the ‘Contingent World’.  If we look around there are millions – ok thousands, or maybe hundreds – of training courses, conferences webinars etc. dedicated to improving the performance of the contingent recruiter. Gems like: Developing a Successful Temp Desk, or Improving Your Client Base… The impressive list goes on.

But, to be honest, if you are good at what you do – and have the backing of your employer – the simple fact is it is up to you to succeed.  Keep it simple and above all believe in the value and professionalism of the service you provide.

Here are 3 rules I take with me every day into the contingent recruitment world…

1.    Full Fees for Full Service – I strongly believe that in the contingent space it is important to be true to your standard fee structure. A recent conversation with a client went a little something like this…
‘Hi Craig, I’ve looked over your terms of business and your fee structure is 16% for this role. ABC recruitment have agreed to 14%, can you match that?’
‘Well, I’m happy to work on the role for 14%, but as the fee for the full service is 16% what part of the full service should we forgo? I’m happy to look at a shorter guarantee period?
There are 3 ways the conversation will go from here. No deal – and to be honest I would – in most cases – be happy to walk away from a client who is adamant about lower fees. Shorter Guarantee – and if the client agrees to this they are showing a propensity to ‘share the risk’ and deserve the lower fee. Full Fees for Full Service – you will be surprised at how many clients end up agreeing to the full fees/full service scenario after this conversation.
2.    Candidate Honesty & Transparency – Remember that any candidate you represent to your clients is a representation of your brand and reputation – make this very clear at interview, including your expectations throughout the process.  If my candidates act outside of these expectations they are no longer my candidates – one strike and they are gone.
3.    Act With Integrity – I know we are playing in the contingent, transactional space, but your personal brand, the reputation of your business and the integrity of your process is paramount (I like that word – paramount). You will develop referral based networks of candidates and clients – and believe me, this industry is smaller than you may think, and your reputation is harder to shake than your shadow…

There you have it… In short, the contingent landscape is a road littered with potholes, you can help fix them, jump over them, or fall into them…. Your choice.

Craig Watson

Tags:

Recruiters…Tied Up, or free the shackles

9 Feb

I’m back at work this week after a refreshing 3 week break – if you can call driving 4,500km’s from one end of Australia to the other, with a 2 & 4 year old in the back seat a refreshing break…

‘Are we there yet?’

‘Can we stop at McDonalds?’

‘Are we there yet?’

‘I’ve got to go to the toilet…’

‘Are we there yet?’ I’m sure you get the general idea….

Anyway, back at work I was tucking into my chicken salad sandwich and bottle of water in the food court – yes New Year’s Resolution still going strong 20 something days in! – and I noticed a phenomena that until now had completely passed me by…. Men were not wearing ties!

That’s right! Men… Were… Not… Wearing… Ties!! Before you ask, yes – this food court is in the middle of the corporate business district, and no it wasn’t a hot day.

I was so taken aback that I began counting the number of businessmen wearing ties and those who were not.  Final tally – with ties 17, without ties 74! (To the statistically minded that’s 82% not wearing ties).

As I walked back to the office I noticed more and more businessmen not wearing ties and it kind of got me thinking – why are city based male recruiters expected to wear ties?

Those in the Pro column may say it represents our corporate professionalism, it reflects our clients’ expectations, it demonstrates to our competitors that we are serious… Blah, Blah, Blah…

Let’s be honest, the only thing ties are, is bloody uncomfortable! Does a tie really demonstrate professionalism?  Does a tie really give you that vital edge over your competitor?  My answer is an adamant No!

Look, there are some situations where a tie is absolutely appropriate: weddings, formal parties and yes, some clients meetings.  You know, the stuffy ones where the client judges people on how they dress, where they went to school and what Masonic lodge chapter one belongs to…

Apart from neck discomfort – often resulting in a nasty rash – there are a number of reasons why a tie is more of a hindrance than a help…

You always spill your food on them.  Some see this as a positive as it can act as a bib replacement, but on the whole, if you are required by work to wear a tie, you spill food (or coffee) on it – and have no spare in the office – you look like a hobo. Plus, you will be judged even more harshly by our good friend the stuffy client – and worse, ties have to be dry cleaned… Think of the cost!

You have to match them with your shirt.  If you haven’t got a girlfriend/boyfriend/wife or mother with an eye for fashion you are screwed!
Speaking of fashion. Ties and their various designs go in and out of fashion more often than the yo-yo.  In the mid 90’s I bought 7 Looney Tune and Simpsons themed ties.  I was able to wear them for a total of six months, before they went horribly out of fashion.  What am I supposed to do with them now?  Seriously, they have no other discernable use, do I just keep them in my closet, hoping they will come back in fashion, or post them on Ebay as a group lot with no reserve?
Friday Night Drinks. On multiple occasions I have been turned away from bars on a Friday night simply because I was wearing a tie, or so the Bouncers will have me believe.
What knot? Not only do you have to match the tie with your shirt, keep the food off it and match the tie with the prevailing fashion – which bloody knot are you supposed to tie? According to the internet there are over a dozen ways to tie ties!!!! The ‘Four-in-Hand’, the ‘Half Windsor, Full Windsor, or Double Windsor’ the ‘Classic School Boy’ – the list goes on and on….. and on…

So, I say to you – think very carefully before you impose or enforce a Tie Policy in the recruitment workplace.  A tie does not impair, or enhance our ability to efficiently work with your clients and candidates.  A tie is not a status symbol, and a tie is certainly not comfortable… What a tie is…. Is superfluous to needs… much like a third nipple.

Craig Watson

Tags:

“Interviews are a waste of time” ??

9 Feb
 
At the end of last year I attended one of Bill Boorman‘s recruitment unconferences.   The basic concept is an open  and unstructured forum where recruiters can discuss and debate topics. The very  nature of the set-up attracts some interesting characters including a gentleman called Kevin Wheeler who offered a controversial idea that interviewing candidates is a complete waste of time.
My initial reaction was what a load of tosh. Interviewing is at the very heart of what we recruiters do.  If you don’t interview a candidate, how can you tell if they are right for the job ? What about the right culture fit? What about the candidate’s motivation?
He  went on explain that the results of an interview is worthless in  comparison to other recruitment techniques such as profiling, skills testing, psych testing, referencing etc. In his opinion most people who interview don’t do it very well and it allows for personal judgement and opinion to get in the way of more measurable, reliable, consistent  and less subjective results. At best, an interview adds no value to the selection process and at worse it leads to the wrong result. He painted a picture of the not too distant future whereby companies would map the background of their most successful employees which would form the basis of a software program into which a candidate’s information could be entered. The individual would be  scored against some pre-determined criteria and along with testing and referencing this would be enough to make a hiring decision. No interview– just see them on day 1.
He made some valid points.  If you have ever had the perfect candidate rejected because the hiring manager ‘just wasn’t sure about something’ in the interview, then the idea of getting rid of this subjectivity sounds great. It would certainly be a lot easier to punch a bunch of information into a programme and let it churn out the best candidate whist I made a cup of tea. It would also be a much cheaper way to hire. By the end of the discussion Mr Wheeler seemed to have convinced most people in the room, all experienced recruiters, that interviewing was pointless.
On the other hand I was far from convinced. If the interview is done by an experienced professional who knows what they are looking for, has the ability to ask the right questions, and get beyond the fluffy stuff they will come away with justified reasons as to why an individual either is or isn’t suitable. It will likely tell you much more than any test will. A good interview also serves to personally engage with the candidates and build some rapport.  I wouldn’t accept a job having not met, or at least spoken to my manager and seen the environment. Without the opportunity to engage the candidate in this manner, they may not be convinced your company is where they want to work. All the test results and algorithms in the world won’t change that.
It was to my surprise that Mr Wheeler convinced nearly everyone in the discussion that interviewing is a waste of time. What do you think? Would you be happy to employ someone having not met or spoken to them ? Does the human element just get in the way of logic and scientific reasoning ?
Luke Collard

Tags:

But…will it make the boat go faster?

9 Feb

I was in an interesting Client meeting last week, getting feedback on a candidate who had been through 2 interviews and had 3 reference checks taken.

‘Craig,’ the client began, ‘We’re not going to proceed with John….. We just don’t believe he makes the boat go faster…’

Did he just say what I thought he’d said? Make the boat go faster?? Last time I looked John was neither a Mercury 150hp outboard, nor an America’s Cup sailing want-to-be….

My obvious confusion must have been pretty… well… obvious. He continued.

‘It’s sort of become a motto around here to make sure we are moving towards continual improvement. Every time we look to make a strategic decision we ask ourselves – Will it make the boat go faster?…’

OK – I’m no Einstein, and certainly no Captain Jack Sparrow… My experience with water is limited to the occasional bath and the ‘slip ‘n’ slide’ I had in the back yard as a kid…. Remember those? ‘slip ‘n’ slides’?? And sprinklers for that matter??? Life pre-water restrictions was pretty sweet! Anyway, I digress…

The client went on to relate the following story to me… Sir Matthew Pinsent is an elite rower from England who competed in four consecutive Olympics, from 1992-2004, winning four gold medals. In the 2003 World Championships Pinsett finished a disappointing 4th. Pinsent and his crew questioned whether they wanted to continue and aim for a gold medal at the 2004 Olympics. They were aware of the extraordinary commitment they would need to make and all agreed that they wanted to go for it.

They needed to come up with a way of focusing their efforts towards achieving the single goal of winning a gold medal at the 2004 Olympics. All decisions and efforts had to be channeled to meet this challenge. They came up with a simple, but powerful, question that had to be answered every time a decision or action needed to be taken – ‘Will it make the boat go faster?’ If it didn’t make the boat go faster, it was quickly discarded; if it did, it was implemented.

The beauty of this approach was in its simplicity. The team was basically saying if we can make the boat go faster we can win a gold medal. They defined and refined everything that they believed would make the boat faster. They changed their collective mindsets, their approach and training and took absolute responsibility for their actions and behaviours. They also changed the result from 2003 – they won the Olympic gold medal in 2004.

OK, Recruitment Businesses – it’s pretty safe to say – aren’t boats, but the premise makes sense. My job is to find the best talent in the recruitment industry and present that talent to my clients.

Every one of my clients will have a business plan in place with goals, objectives and milestones laid out for their next financial year – including headcount.

So, for the sake of the metaphor, let’s assume that Recruitment Agencies are boats. Their primary goal is to win the race (increase market share, improved profit and productivity etc.).

As a candidate what skills can you offer them? How can you help them to achieve their goals, objectives and milestones. And…. Most importantly – will YOU make their boat go faster?

 

 

 

 

 

 

As always, I invite comment and contribution.

Craig Watson

Tags:

Advance (recruiters), Australia’s fair

9 Feb
I originally came out to Australia for what was meant to be a year, but 10 years or so later I am still here. I have spent that time going back and forth between England and Australia, working for a variety of different recruitment companies and in different sectors. Over this time, one thing has become very apparent to me with regards to the recruitment industry in both countries – Australia is a much better place to do work. This is a personal view point but the path I have taken has been well trodden by UK recruiters for many years and that trend seems only to be getting stronger…so obviously I am not alone.
The shortage of recruiters in Australia means that I am continually sourcing talent from the UK and having conversations with recruiters who are based there about moving to Australia. After we have got beyond the improved climate and potential for a much improved lifestyle the conversation turns to why it is different recruiting in Australia. Based on my experience, this is what I tell them:
The ”fair go” Australian attitude means that people here will more readily give you a chance to prove yourself. In England, I would often find myself having to beg a receptionist to put me through to a hiring manager and then have to beg again for a meeting which would only happen because I had bored them into submission. A painful and unrewarding experience all round. In Australia, the majority of times I call a new client I get through to the hiring manager directly, they are happy to speak and as long as I am credible and pleasant they will agree to see me. It doesn’t even feel like a sales call. In fact the meeting will more likely be in a coffee shop than a boardroom.
Australian’s are intrinsically more genuine, more honest and more respectful. In terms of recruitment this makes for far less messing about with uncommitted time wasters (the scourge of every recruiters life!). You can leave any bravado at the door and you will find yourself being able to be far more consultative and not just a sales person / job filler.
The shortage of skilled recruiters in Australia means less competition with other recruiters working in the same sector as you. The usual state of play in England is that most market sectors are far too over subscribed with recruiters all going for the same piece of pie. So yours will likely be the tenth sales call that hiring manager has received that day. Whilst the Australian recruitment landscape is competitive there are not as many providers – it easier to get heard when the background noise is not as loud.
The economic climate in Australia is amongst the healthiest anywhere in the world and, with the caveat that I am not an economist, it should continue to be a rich playground for recruiters. Compare this to England (or other parts of Europe and the US for that matter) and you have a further reason why recruiting in Australia is a more pleasant experience.
The Friday night drinks trolley can appear as early as 4pm …and includes nibbles !
If you are a recruiter who wants to be recognised as an expert and respected as a peer by your clients, play on a level playing field and, let’s be honest, would prefer your job to be easier then there is no better place to ply your trade than the lucky country down under.
Footnote: whilst this blog may not appear so, I am at heart an Englishman. I cried when we won the Ashes and will be supporting England over Australia in the Rugby World Cup !
Luke Collard

Tags:

“Have you got any roles in internal recruitment ?”

9 Feb

I speak to agency recruiters all day ……some approach me looking for a new role and others are recipients of a headhunting call. Something that I am hearing more and more these days is the following sentence (or a version of):

“Have you got any roles in internal recruitment”
Fair enough. However, the majority of people that give me this response are not able to provide any well considered reasons for wanting to jump the fence to an internal role. In fact, in nearly all cases the individuals do not demonstrate a good understanding of the role of an internal recruiter beyond what the title suggests. When I dig a bit deeper into their reasons, the answer is usually something based around not wanting to do sales or working towards targets anymore. What I suspect is really sitting behind their thoughts is a belief internal recruitment would be a much easier job. In my experience this could not be further from the truth.
OK, there may not be a billing target to stress about but there are certainly very demanding expectations of fill rates. OK, there may not be a requirement to business develop but you still need to build relationships with your hiring managers, which is essentially the same thing . Furthermore, internal hiring managers will be far more demanding on you than an external client because they absolutely depend on you to deliver. As an agency recruiter you will probably not be the only person engaged by the client and therefore their need for you to deliver is less. At the end of the day it is far easier to walk away (or hide!) form an external client than it is a hiring manager sitting in the same office as you.
***************
I speak to managers in recruitment agencies all day…..some approach me looking for new staff and others are recipients of a sales call. Something that I am hearing as commonly these days as ever is the following (or a version of):
“They need to sell”
Absolutely fair enough. However, a good deal of these managers do not seem to be able to provide much more on their wish list than that. In fact, in a lot of cases they do not seem to have thought much beyond what they are looking for in a prospective employee than their ability to sell. What I suspect is really sitting behind their thoughts is a belief that a good sales person will make a successful biller.In my experience, whilst that is sometimes true, there are many more attributes that someone hoping to be a successful recruiter needs.
OK, there may be billing targets to achieve and a key part of this is an ability to develop new business. But if you are just a great sales person you will not be able to place the business you pick up. As an agency recruiter you will probably not be the only person engaged by the client and therefore you need to deliver.
  ******************
 Here is a thought…. Agency recruiters, be more realistic about what your job is. Developing relationships is an essential part of working in any professional consultancy, not just recruitment. No one has ever died from making a sales call (as far as I know anyway). In my career I have only been hung up on once and I found it genuinely funny, because it was.
At the same time, managers of recruitment agencies be more realistic about what you can expect from your staff. No one wants to come to work in what should be a professional consulting role to spend 80% of their time being flogged to make pointless sales calls to hit some irrelevant target.
Hopefully we can then retain (and attract) great talent that this industry desperately needs.

Luke Collard

Tags:

When negotiations go bad, who really loses out ?

9 Feb

As regular followers of this blog will know, I work as a Rec-to-Rec consultant (i.e. I recruit recruiters for recruitment companies – say that after a few glasses of wine!). I recently received a call from the owner of an agency explaining that he had heard good things about me and could I meet with him to discuss helping him find new consultants. As always, I was upfront about my fees and in return for some commercial advantages and as a gesture of good will I agreed to a 1% discount, which was subsequently confirmed in an email.

So off I toddled the next day to his offices, which were very smart and based at the expensive end of town (..obviously he was not short of money). Considering there is a chronic shortage of experienced consultants in the market, my advice was that he should consider individuals at a more junior level as long as they displayed the right qualities. I offered him that advice because it made sense and he agreed.

The following week I sent him John’s CV. Although John only had 6 months experience he was very bright and I was confident he would develop into an excellent consultant quickly. I knew this because I had interviewed John thoroughly and already taken a reference. My client was happy to interview him and the very positive feedback after that first meeting indicated that he thought the same. Both parties were keen to take things forward so a 2nd interview was set up for the next day and again the result was very positive. So far so good.

Then the trouble starts:

“John is good but he is not very experienced so is going to take a lot of training”

(Yep, you knew that and that is why his salary expectations are very modest).

“I also have a couple of other candidates I am speaking to who I have sourced myself”

(Funny, you didn’t mention that before)

“I am interested to take him but I don’t want to pay much of a fee, in fact I will only pay $2k”

(approx an 80% discount !)

“And I wouldn’t want to pay him more than $..k”

($10k less than he asked for )

I instantly lost all credibility for the client. Firstly, for trying to negotiate a ridiculous and unrealistic discount on fees at the back end of the process (that I am certain he would never agree to do with his clients). Secondly, for trying to under offer a good candidate that he wrongly thought he could take advantage of. Thirdly, for the aggressive and patronising manner in which he did it.

Normally I would have walked away there and then. However, I like John and the last thing I wanted to do was stand in his way of securing a role with a company he liked. So I agreed to meet the client half-way. My caveat was that he would have to make an offer by the end of the day. It got to 5pm (Friday) and nothing – he had not even been good enough to come back to me.

This is not sitting very comfortably with me and neither is it sitting comfortably with John (I told you he is a good bloke). So we agreed that before I left for the weekend I would speak to some other clients who may be interested in him. Unsurprisingly in this candidate short market there was interest and to cut to the chase, by the end of the following week John had an offer at his desired salary. Fees had already been agreed with this client and there was no attempt to negotiate us down. I had still not heard back from the original client so I emailed him (admittedly with some delight) to advise that John was now off the market. I was surprised by his response:

“What if I had wanted to offer him a job”

(Well you should have done then, and not been so bothered about trying to get something for nothing)

“I find this rude and unprofessional”

(Do you really !)

So the upshot is that a guy who has a need for consultants, and will continue to struggle to find them in a very tight market, loses out. Furthermore, his behaviour during the process means that he now becomes a source of candidates for me to headhunt. All because he wanted to get something for nothing and thought as the client he could call all the shots.

Footnote:

One of the  principles of any successful business is the need to keep costs low. Good business leaders should always be prepared to negotiate a more favourable price. However, in any negotiation there is a critical point at which the price becomes too low and the vendor (recruiter) will walk away. If a client’s reluctance (or stubbornness) to meet the recruiter at a fair price, and negotiate in a professional manner, means they miss out on someone that would have added value to their business, surely that is not good business leadership.


Tags:

← Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 440 other followers

%d bloggers like this: