Wednesday, 27 June 2007

Recruiters - Don't complain about a lack of candidates!

If you know me, have read any of my published content in the trades or seen me present, you will know I am the biggest supporter of the traditional recruitment industry and have a passion to protect it from the press group monopoly on candidate flow and the trend for employers to go it alone using the latest employment technologies.

Imagine then my disappointment when I distributed my CV to a number of rec2rec and technology agencies, as a candidate through their standard application process, in a quest to establish if there were any businesses they were talking to and could place me with that needed the short-term or flexible support of someone like me; 10 years traditional and on-line recruitment experience at a sales and senior level, ex MD of the REC's technology subsidiary, ex REC's Acting Technology Director and all-round staffing and employment technology/innovation specialist.

There were 4 types of response from the agencies I approached.

1. Immediate phonecall to introduce themselves and their business, then a fact find to establish what I was looking for and how they could support me. - To those, if you are reading, I salute you. You represent everything I have grown to admire about the recruitment industry and I look forward to working with and recommending you to my peer group.

2. Personalised email thanking me for sending my details but confirming I fell into a category they didn't support or I was looking for an opportunity outside their geographical boundary. - I can accept this as a reasonable response. After all time is money and they were good enough to say straight away that we couldn't help each other. I would say however, that I probably know many people that do fit into their categories and geography so if they used me correctly by staying in touch as an introduction point, I could probably facilitate a couple of fees a year for them.

3. Automated email confirming that my details have been received and would be databased for reference against suitable opportunities. - Not on face value negative, however, I know what this means. Because there was not a specific vacancy available at the time my CV was received, I was going into a database, many of which are not proficiently searchable, so in most cases I will be approximately 200kb of space taken up on their server and will never be seen again.

4. Nothing, nada, zip, tumbleweed rolling across a desert with an eary sound in the background. - An appalling response. Now considering most agencies when questioned will say that the biggest issue to their business is finding candidates, why oh why, would you not engage with one, one who I like to think is a strong candidate, who is placeable, connected, experienced and regularly in the press applauding the industry!

To those who provided the 2, 3 and 4 responses, what happened to specking candidates out? Is this a thing of the past or is the focus on the fee rather than candidate.This got me thinking. When some recruiters complain about a lack of candidates, do they mean a lack of candidates that perfectly fit the actual roles they have available at that very moment in time?

We know from the unemployment rates that the majority of job seekers in the UK are placeable, so I wonder if the focus was more candidate orientated, is there more value to be achieved all round!Here's a thought and perhaps a challenge to directors in the recruitment industry that follows the mystery shopper principle. Why not submit your CV to your own business via your website and see what response you get. You might be surprised!

Finally, to the agency that sends their automated responses with the subject header 'Resonses' with a missing 'p' and from an email address that starts 'reject', you might want to assess the experience you provide to job seekers!

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

HI Colin
And,as we know, the experience with the actual hiring organisations is usually worse - up to 70% do not respond at all.

Sorry to hear of your travails with the industry - it would be interesting for you to put some percentages to the 4 levels of response.

Good luck.

Al

Anonymous said...

Well Colin

I think you summed it up very well, which is why some consultants excel and others fail.

I have always said the more time you are the phone talking to candidates the more money you will make.

Thats the difference between the top billers and those who complain they have no candidates

Anonymous said...

Colin

Not wanting to be too cruel to you but:

1. Have you ever ran a desk in recruitment or just worked in sales?
2. How many agencies realistically would be able to place someone with your skills?
3. We all like to think we are placeable but are we?
4. Are you that marketable? If not, you don't help pay the mortgage so you get no call.

Careful on comenting on spulling when u use words liyke specking - is it a real word?

Peter

Anonymous said...

I would just like to congratulate Peter Gold on his reply to Colin's comments on "Recruiters - Don't complain about a lack of candidates".

Colin you are correct there is not a lack of candidates as plenty come through the door there is a skill shortage. You would not employ someone to do a job they could not do and for agencies they will not entertain candidates they can not place.

I think you have lost the appreciation for working in an agency thats if you ever have worked as a recruitment consultant, have you not heard of KPI's? Do you not know that this industry is now based around targets of how many placements you get and how much money you can make.

A question for you, if you had 5 candidate CV's in front of you for only 1 job, but only 2 had the right skills to do the job, would you interview the other 3 because they took the time to send there CV to you? (I will await your posted response to this question)

You run a business to make money fact of life you dont work for nothing nor would you waste your time doing something that wont make you money.

Another question for you, if you feel that you are such a placeable candidate A) Why didnt you put your details on Monster or JobSite where 80% of the employer world will have access to your details
B) Did you actually phone up the agencies that you posted your CV to, to see if they have anything suitable for you?
C) If you felt you were that placeable how come you have had to go to agencies in the first place surely just sending your CV to companies would have been enough?

I was working for the 6th largest recruitment agencies in the UK and became a successful consultant after 3 months because I cherry picked my candidates and listened to my clients needs.

If you came to me as a client would you want me to waste my day talking to 50 candidates who would not be suitable for your vacancy or send you unsuitable candidates, the whole point of recruitment agencies is to take the stress and hassle from the client and by doing that you have to proirtise your day.

I couldnt really understand your comment where you said that your CV will just go into a database when from what I can see from your web site is that you are offering just that software to companies? if you have a problem with being put into a database why offer it as a service?

Colin Minto said...

Thanks to everyone who commented on my post, it appears that some agree with me and some don't.

Also, please don’t feel that you can’t include your name when commenting. Blogging is about sharing information and stimulating constructive and sometimes lively discussion and debate so it’s always better to know who you are communicating with.

I just wanted to clear up the confusion that some who commented might have experienced.

In the original post I stated that I found it acceptable to confirm a candidate is not suitable for their current vacancy stock especially if it is done verbally, which leads me to believe that some of your comments might have been made without fully understanding the point I was making.

My point was that I find generic automated emails and no contact at all extremely disappointing, given that many recruiters will state 'lack of candidates' as their key business issue.

Whatever the face value suitability of a candidate, in my mind there is really no excuse for not responding professionally. I challenge anyone to support a process that effectively means that someone contacting their business for support in finding gainful employment is treated poorly.

Many agencies talk about attracting the passive candidate and networking sites are the flavour of the month, so it puzzles me why some recruiters don’t attempt to start a communication relationship with all candidates? Candidates that at some stage in the future might be ideal for a role that is given to them and candidates that might be able to refer the ideal candidate to them if asked to do so.

I fully understand the recruitment industry (and ran £150M+ worth of national account business to ensure my branches provided a consistent service to multi-sited clients), the financial motivations that drive it, the fact that recruitment agencies are not charities and I wouldn't expect agencies to interview a candidate for a role that is obviously not suitable for it. I do not dispute any of this.

I do have an issue however, when some recruiters complain they cannot source candidates, when a large percentage of ones they do attract do not get the courtesy of a professional form of contact.

Surely no-one can argue with that!!!! Can they?

I look forward to your further comments.

Anonymous said...

Hi

We have developed a very useful software for recruiters i.e. Resource Datamine. It integrates all the aspects of hiring process and automates every step of recruitment.Automated Recruitment Process ensures complete consistency & transparency in the recruitment process.

For more information, visit at Resource Datamine.

we are sure that it will defitely prove to be useful for the recruiters who are looking forward to streamline and refine their recruitment process.

Marcia Prera
(webmaster@resourcedatmine.com)