There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
Nope. Literally no reason for recruitment consultants for anything other than extremely niche, high end roles any more. There will always be a need for a shit filter to chuck out the dross, but that's all 90% of recruitment agencies are. I can't speak for other industries, but IT is absolutely horrendous. I've lost count of the number of horror stories with recruiters I have seen over the years.
One good app will destroy them, look at where cabbies thought they were ten years ago because they could tell you how to get round a broken down Mondeo in central London on a Tuesday morning.
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones that screw the candidate over most for the lowest salary? ;-)
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones that screw the candidate over most for the lowest salary? ;-)
Err no - and if you knew how I worked then you wouldn’t ask that question ;-P
The ones who get the gig don’t bombard me with CVs but sift correctly against the needs, match candidates to the business culture, and do thorough background checking before they send me maybe three likely matches.
I work in recruitment...like anything it's just some are good and some ain't! I work for a company where you don't really sell hard, just a phone call from time to time to see if a situation has changed. I've personally done well from this approach but I know of some agencies who will call 2-3 times a day to see of anyone is needed for that day or rest of the week etc!
As for people "owning" a candidate is ridiculous. Unless that person has worked for a company through an agency and then tries to switch agencies for better money but for the same client then you have to wait 6 weeks to swap but if there with multiple agencies who are competing for the same role then it's fair game! They can't ask for money for a service they haven't provided.
We were sent a cv 4 months ago but the guy was too expensive. 4 months (and about 50 cvs)9 on and my needs have changed. The Cv has re-appeared from another agency and we’ve arranged an interview.
Original agency claims they want a fee if we employ him as the effectively “own him” for 6 months after introducing him. Even though the candidate has said he wants to work with the second agency ....
I had the same problem. Two agencies sent the same candidate for the role advertised. I refused to pay the second agency the £10k introduction fee and told them to sort it out with the first agency. Hadn’t signed a contract so they didn't have a leg to stand on. Think they were just trying it on.
£10 k ????? And they say Estate Agents rip preople off ! I wouldn't pay an agency £1k to "introduce" someone.
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
That's the disconnect. It's not a people driven business, it's a money driven one. Candidates want something different and clients want to avoid paying agencies fees where they can.
It's not a stretch to suggest that 99% of people hold negative views about recruiters and if you can build a machine that follows a set of rules and guarantees feedback it's already better than the majority of recruiters.
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones that screw the candidate over most for the lowest salary? ;-)
Err no - and if you knew how I worked then you wouldn’t ask that question ;-P
The ones who get the gig don’t bombard me with CVs but sift correctly against the needs, match candidates to the business culture, and do thorough background checking before they send me maybe three likely matches.
It's exactly how I work, focusing only on marketing and marcomms people (because I have done their job, and in small place like this after 20 plus years I can get a reference on anyone with a career path). I agree with the criticisms above but they are referring to what I call the "volume" end.
Anyway I am simply here to say that there is another side to the story. "HR" people. The vast majority of them are in my experience not just useless, but they can actually negatively affect the outcome of the process. I am dealing with just such an example right now, so I am here to vent about them. I have small sympathy with them in the sense that their personal contribution to an organisation is hard to measure and quantify, unlike the marketing directors whom I am directly seeking to assist. But most of them seek to justify their existence by bringing their 'expertise' into the process. This means pointing out potential "problems" ad nauseam. They fail to recognise that any idiot can say "no", the real skill is to say "yes" and then make the decision work and take due responsibility if it doesn't. And that is for the line manager, not the HR person, to decide. In the vast majority of cases, if the HR people were not involved, the outcomes would be more positive, more quickly.
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones that screw the candidate over most for the lowest salary? ;-)
Err no - and if you knew how I worked then you wouldn’t ask that question ;-P
The ones who get the gig don’t bombard me with CVs but sift correctly against the needs, match candidates to the business culture, and do thorough background checking before they send me maybe three likely matches.
It's exactly how I work, focusing only on marketing and marcomms people (because I have done their job, and in small place like this after 20 plus years I can get a reference on anyone with a career path). I agree with the criticisms above but they are referring to what I call the "volume" end.
Anyway I am simply here to say that there is another side to the story. "HR" people. The vast majority of them are in my experience not just useless, but they can actually negatively affect the outcome of the process. I am dealing with just such an example right now, so I am here to vent about them. I have small sympathy with them in the sense that their personal contribution to an organisation is hard to measure and quantify, unlike the marketing directors whom I am directly seeking to assist. But most of them seek to justify their existence by bringing their 'expertise' into the process. This means pointing out potential "problems" ad nauseam. They fail to recognise that any idiot can say "no", the real skill is to say "yes" and then make the decision work and take due responsibility if it doesn't. And that is for the line manager, not the HR person, to decide. In the vast majority of cases, if the HR people were not involved, the outcomes would be more positive, more quickly.
There, I feel better now...
Agree re HR and when you ask them for advice on a difficult people issue, most at the company I work for delegate it to “management discretion”
I use a few recruiters to find me decent retail designers. There is one particular one I us and she is always bang on with our requirements, however in the past when I have been looking for work that is when they tend to tell a few porkies, I wont go into details but they were next to useless and just liars.
My top five industry bottom feeders are, in no particular order.
No i don't want to join some Micky Mouse company in Otford!
The only time I’ve used one, the fucker rang my boss at the time for a reference. I was not happy
A sales recruitment consultancy called certus
I thought the whole operation was school boy
Get greeted by some attractive woman who feigned interest in my day before unleashing the big hitters
Big hitters proceed to bombard me with similar roles to the one I wanted to leave despite telling them I’m looking for something different. Finally get something I want to go for and I’m pretty confident I can get, only to be told hedge my bets with other roles. Fair enough if they’re other roles I want but these weren’t
Leave, only to then be bombarded by their Reading office and other consultants trying to get me interviews in other roles I don’t want. They obviously don’t communicate, and the best thing is that I never really got an official brief of what the roles are, but every single one of them ends the call saying
“They’ve got trendy offices and they all go for a drink on Friday”
No wait, fuck it, now you’ve said that I’m sold. That’s what I want. A trendy office and the opportunity to run through banal chit chat with people I won’t like. That’s exactly what I’m looking for
As As AFKA says good and bad in every industry though
My only experience clouds my judgment a bit
Mind you, having an attractive woman unleash her big hitters at you is always hard to refuse.
No i don't want to join some Micky Mouse company in Otford!
The only time I’ve used one, the fucker rang my boss at the time for a reference. I was not happy
A sales recruitment consultancy called certus
I thought the whole operation was school boy
Get greeted by some attractive woman who feigned interest in my day before unleashing the big hitters
Big hitters proceed to bombard me with similar roles to the one I wanted to leave despite telling them I’m looking for something different. Finally get something I want to go for and I’m pretty confident I can get, only to be told hedge my bets with other roles. Fair enough if they’re other roles I want but these weren’t
Leave, only to then be bombarded by their Reading office and other consultants trying to get me interviews in other roles I don’t want. They obviously don’t communicate, and the best thing is that I never really got an official brief of what the roles are, but every single one of them ends the call saying
“They’ve got trendy offices and they all go for a drink on Friday”
No wait, fuck it, now you’ve said that I’m sold. That’s what I want. A trendy office and the opportunity to run through banal chit chat with people I won’t like. That’s exactly what I’m looking for
As As AFKA says good and bad in every industry though
My only experience clouds my judgment a bit
Mind you, having an attractive woman unleash her big hitters at you is always hard to refuse.
the big hitters were called Josh and something else, not the big hitters you're thinking of :-(
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
I think a lot of the comments on here prove that it certainly ain’t a people business! The only people they’re looking out for are themselves. AI will definitely eat into huge chunks of the industry. There’ll always be a place for the specialists, who look out for the recruiter/recruitee, but tech will definitely find a big place.
Totally disagree, just because you have a bad experience doesn't mean it's not a people business. It's people dealing with people, it's a people business.
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
Nope. Literally no reason for recruitment consultants for anything other than extremely niche, high end roles any more. There will always be a need for a shit filter to chuck out the dross, but that's all 90% of recruitment agencies are. I can't speak for other industries, but IT is absolutely horrendous. I've lost count of the number of horror stories with recruiters I have seen over the years.
Nope, there are plenty of people and business making huge money for low skilled, high volume roles.
I occasionally use recruitment agencies for hard to fill mid to senior roles.
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones that screw the candidate over most for the lowest salary? ;-)
Err no - and if you knew how I worked then you wouldn’t ask that question ;-P
The ones who get the gig don’t bombard me with CVs but sift correctly against the needs, match candidates to the business culture, and do thorough background checking before they send me maybe three likely matches.
It's exactly how I work, focusing only on marketing and marcomms people (because I have done their job, and in small place like this after 20 plus years I can get a reference on anyone with a career path). I agree with the criticisms above but they are referring to what I call the "volume" end.
Anyway I am simply here to say that there is another side to the story. "HR" people. The vast majority of them are in my experience not just useless, but they can actually negatively affect the outcome of the process. I am dealing with just such an example right now, so I am here to vent about them. I have small sympathy with them in the sense that their personal contribution to an organisation is hard to measure and quantify, unlike the marketing directors whom I am directly seeking to assist. But most of them seek to justify their existence by bringing their 'expertise' into the process. This means pointing out potential "problems" ad nauseam. They fail to recognise that any idiot can say "no", the real skill is to say "yes" and then make the decision work and take due responsibility if it doesn't. And that is for the line manager, not the HR person, to decide. In the vast majority of cases, if the HR people were not involved, the outcomes would be more positive, more quickly.
There, I feel better now...
Agree re HR and when you ask them for advice on a difficult people issue, most at the company I work for delegate it to “management discretion”
I certainly wouldn't disagree with you two on the general criticism of HR.
I do however know very well an HR Director who operates somewhat differently to the norm!!
Here's a brilliant example, literally from an hour ago
I get an email from a recruiter giving it a load of spiel about a development role (despite there being no development experience on my CV in the c. 20 years I've been doing this fucking job). I open the mail and there is *literally* not a single technology on the spec that I have worked with, have experience of, or have listed on my CV. The topper? I review my notifications on LinkedIn and find out this chump has viewed my profile this morning, prior to sending the email
Now, that's one of two things. Either:
A - He is literally just randomly firing mails out to all and sundry because he has no clue what he's recruiting for, or B - He's doing the usual recruiter bullshit of seeing if I know anyone who might be interested, and willing to do his job for him
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
Nope. Literally no reason for recruitment consultants for anything other than extremely niche, high end roles any more. There will always be a need for a shit filter to chuck out the dross, but that's all 90% of recruitment agencies are. I can't speak for other industries, but IT is absolutely horrendous. I've lost count of the number of horror stories with recruiters I have seen over the years.
Nope, there are plenty of people and business making huge money for low skilled, high volume roles.
You're not getting it. I'm telling you that there is no REASON for recruitment agents to exist at that level. Just because they still exist doesn't mean its a worthwhile industry - it just means its dead and doesn't know it yet. AI will kill it stone dead, once firms realise they don't have to pay some shyster 3 grand for a shop assistant - Amazon will have a tool for that soon.
instead of paying some fucknut £8k for sending me an email id rather pay the candidate a bit more
Without sounding flippant...
Why don't you?
I'm not a recruiter FYI, just worked in the industry for 14 years trying to get consultants to change their ways (and to shift the perception of the industry)
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
Nope. Literally no reason for recruitment consultants for anything other than extremely niche, high end roles any more. There will always be a need for a shit filter to chuck out the dross, but that's all 90% of recruitment agencies are. I can't speak for other industries, but IT is absolutely horrendous. I've lost count of the number of horror stories with recruiters I have seen over the years.
Nope, there are plenty of people and business making huge money for low skilled, high volume roles.
You're not getting it. I'm telling you that there is no REASON for recruitment agents to exist at that level. Just because they still exist doesn't mean its a worthwhile industry - it just means its dead and doesn't know it yet. AI will kill it stone dead, once firms realise they don't have to pay some shyster 3 grand for a shop assistant - Amazon will have a tool for that soon.
As with any sector, there are good ones and bad ones. I'm still awaiting mine to let me know my start time for my new role tomorrow... contracts were signed around 3 weeks ago and the guys are keen to get me in; currently even having to talk around the recruiter to be able to sort a few things directly. I dread to think how much the company and he himself is earning from this, albeit probably cutting down a long recruitment process into a short one.
Surely it can't be long until a similar set-up to PurpleBricks 'estate agency' hits recruitment hard, work from home-esque recruitment consultants who will only do well if they really want to. Chuck in an app that can confidentially hold certain information and be used for notifications and confirmation of interviews etc.
As with any sector, there are good ones and bad ones. I'm still awaiting mine to let me know my start time for my new role tomorrow... contracts were signed around 3 weeks ago and the guys are keen to get me in; currently even having to talk around the recruiter to be able to sort a few things directly. I dread to think how much the company and he himself is earning from this, albeit probably cutting down a long recruitment process into a short one.
Surely it can't be long until a similar set-up to PurpleBricks 'estate agency' hits recruitment hard, work from home-esque recruitment consultants who will only do well if they really want to. Chuck in an app that can confidentially hold certain information and be used for notifications and confirmation of interviews etc.
There are already multiple apps and businesses like this around. They complement the industry rather that compete against it if I'm being honest.
Job boards were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they helped them thrive CV databases were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they helped them thrive LinkedIn was meant to kill recruitment consultants, it helped them thrive Internal recruitment teams were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they are shit and helped them thrive AI is meant to kill recruitment consultants, the good ones will embrace it and guess what...they'll thrive.
Like any industry, the companies that adapt will thrive, the ones that don't will die.
As with any sector, there are good ones and bad ones. I'm still awaiting mine to let me know my start time for my new role tomorrow... contracts were signed around 3 weeks ago and the guys are keen to get me in; currently even having to talk around the recruiter to be able to sort a few things directly. I dread to think how much the company and he himself is earning from this, albeit probably cutting down a long recruitment process into a short one.
Surely it can't be long until a similar set-up to PurpleBricks 'estate agency' hits recruitment hard, work from home-esque recruitment consultants who will only do well if they really want to. Chuck in an app that can confidentially hold certain information and be used for notifications and confirmation of interviews etc.
There's loads out there, but they tend to bankrupt themselves very quickly because they have zero understanding of the costs associated with recruitment. Invoice factoring (up to 30% of contract value), recruiter commission, salaries, rent, database licences, corporation tax, advertising / social media etc.
There's also not many companies who will pay a fee, regardless of size, to a company that may not fill the vacancies.
I know the comparison to estate agents is used regularly, but other than quality of salesmen, the two industries are very different and neither should try to replicate each other.
There is a huge disconnect between what recruiters think is a good recruiter and what a candidate / client thinks is a good recruiter.
Ultimately, if you’re a candidate engaging with a recruiter you immediately become a commodity.
The good news is that recruiters are killing their own industry with that attitude as it makes them completely replacable once Artificial Intelligence matures.
Wrong, recruiters won’t ever be replaced by AI. It’s a people business that machines can’t replace.
Nope. Literally no reason for recruitment consultants for anything other than extremely niche, high end roles any more. There will always be a need for a shit filter to chuck out the dross, but that's all 90% of recruitment agencies are. I can't speak for other industries, but IT is absolutely horrendous. I've lost count of the number of horror stories with recruiters I have seen over the years.
Nope, there are plenty of people and business making huge money for low skilled, high volume roles.
You're not getting it. I'm telling you that there is no REASON for recruitment agents to exist at that level. Just because they still exist doesn't mean its a worthwhile industry - it just means its dead and doesn't know it yet. AI will kill it stone dead, once firms realise they don't have to pay some shyster 3 grand for a shop assistant - Amazon will have a tool for that soon.
Laughable
Just what my uncle said when he trained as a draughtsman in the mid eighties. Then CAD came and fucked him out of a job after years of college.
Just what black cabbies said before Uber.
Just what car assembly line workers said just before they replaced them all with robots.
Just what bank clerks thought before ATMs came out.
All of those jobs are more skilled than recruitment consultants. Start looking for something else quickly - won't be long before there's an app to replace your job.
Comments
The best ones work for me on my rules and take time to understand my business. The worst ones work to their own rules and couldn’t give a shit about my business. Guess which ones get the gig?
The ones who get the gig don’t bombard me with CVs but sift correctly against the needs, match candidates to the business culture, and do thorough background checking before they send me maybe three likely matches.
As for people "owning" a candidate is ridiculous. Unless that person has worked for a company through an agency and then tries to switch agencies for better money but for the same client then you have to wait 6 weeks to swap but if there with multiple agencies who are competing for the same role then it's fair game! They can't ask for money for a service they haven't provided.
It's not a stretch to suggest that 99% of people hold negative views about recruiters and if you can build a machine that follows a set of rules and guarantees feedback it's already better than the majority of recruiters.
Anyway I am simply here to say that there is another side to the story. "HR" people. The vast majority of them are in my experience not just useless, but they can actually negatively affect the outcome of the process. I am dealing with just such an example right now, so I am here to vent about them. I have small sympathy with them in the sense that their personal contribution to an organisation is hard to measure and quantify, unlike the marketing directors whom I am directly seeking to assist. But most of them seek to justify their existence by bringing their 'expertise' into the process. This means pointing out potential "problems" ad nauseam. They fail to recognise that any idiot can say "no", the real skill is to say "yes" and then make the decision work and take due responsibility if it doesn't. And that is for the line manager, not the HR person, to decide. In the vast majority of cases, if the HR people were not involved, the outcomes would be more positive, more quickly.
There, I feel better now...
My top five industry bottom feeders are, in no particular order.
Lawyers
Architects
Builders
Recruitment Agents
Estate Agents.
I do however know very well an HR Director who operates somewhat differently to the norm!!
;-)
I get an email from a recruiter giving it a load of spiel about a development role (despite there being no development experience on my CV in the c. 20 years I've been doing this fucking job). I open the mail and there is *literally* not a single technology on the spec that I have worked with, have experience of, or have listed on my CV. The topper? I review my notifications on LinkedIn and find out this chump has viewed my profile this morning, prior to sending the email
Now, that's one of two things. Either:
A - He is literally just randomly firing mails out to all and sundry because he has no clue what he's recruiting for, or
B - He's doing the usual recruiter bullshit of seeing if I know anyone who might be interested, and willing to do his job for him
Pricks.
Why don't you?
I'm not a recruiter FYI, just worked in the industry for 14 years trying to get consultants to change their ways (and to shift the perception of the industry)
Surely it can't be long until a similar set-up to PurpleBricks 'estate agency' hits recruitment hard, work from home-esque recruitment consultants who will only do well if they really want to. Chuck in an app that can confidentially hold certain information and be used for notifications and confirmation of interviews etc.
Job boards were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they helped them thrive
CV databases were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they helped them thrive
LinkedIn was meant to kill recruitment consultants, it helped them thrive
Internal recruitment teams were meant to kill recruitment consultants, they are shit and helped them thrive
AI is meant to kill recruitment consultants, the good ones will embrace it and guess what...they'll thrive.
Like any industry, the companies that adapt will thrive, the ones that don't will die.
There's also not many companies who will pay a fee, regardless of size, to a company that may not fill the vacancies.
I know the comparison to estate agents is used regularly, but other than quality of salesmen, the two industries are very different and neither should try to replicate each other.
Just what black cabbies said before Uber.
Just what car assembly line workers said just before they replaced them all with robots.
Just what bank clerks thought before ATMs came out.
All of those jobs are more skilled than recruitment consultants. Start looking for something else quickly - won't be long before there's an app to replace your job.