General discussion



By Ironspider ·
Ok, I'm sure this title has been used 100 times on here already, but being a headhunter myself, I'd like to make a few points.

1. Only about 20% of the positions in companies are actually posted, whether it's on the web, newspaper, forums, newsgroups, or what-have-you. The other 80% includes things such as exclusive job orders for certain recruiters, inner-office job orders, not currently funded job orders, and not currently brought to the attention of HR.

The exclusive job orders are given to headhunters that have built up a solid career of finding the kind of people that the hiring manager wants and are not shared with the public.

Inner-office should be self explanatory.

Not currently funded orders are just that, the budget hasnt been set yet, but HR has shared this job with recruiters as something that may happen in the future, thus the recruiter will try to find someone that fits to tempt the company into allocating money for that person.

Not currently brought to the attention job orders are such things as someone in the company is sitting there thinking "hmmm, if only I had such and such, I'd goto HR and request this position to be filled." Many times recruiters will present someone to a company and Bing! that person will be like "Hey!, I was just thinking I could use someone like that."--Instant fill of a job that didnt exist yet.

2. Recruiters can always call and talk directly to hiring managers. There's none of this submit to the company and hope your resume doesnt get lost or tossed because your cover letter didnt impress someone, and there's none of that "Login in to submit your resume here" (What? I have to create an account and fill out 16 pages of questions just to submit my resume?)

3. Any recruiter that doesnt spend at least 30 minutes to an hour exploring opportunities with you, finding out exactly what you do, what you want, and how the recruiter can make this happen, is worthless and do not work with them. Numerous IT recruiters [the ones I've had experience with at least, but not all of them] are just in it to quickly find a fit or to try to force a position on to a candidate.

So anyone that wants to continue to speak out against headhunters and say that there is no use for them, you're only selling yourself short.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

23 total posts (Page 3 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I have to agree

by Tig2 In reply to Flexibility, Yes, c arpet ...

Bend where you can but don't bend till you break.

I have had situations where I took less for a job I knew should pay more. The advantages were that I could improve an existing skill set and didn't have to worry about the next bowl of Friskies.

I clearly recall remarking to a recruiter friend near the end of 1999 that the bubble would break and over-paid people would discover that they were over paid. I never thought that those of us who had kept our salary expectations in alignment with national averages/skill set/accomplishments would also get nailed. I was very wrong.

Earlier, our original poster likened the process of job matching to a "dating site". Close. More like a marriage broker.

My fiance worked for the same company for over 28 years. That company split him out to a new company but working in the same location. He put up with a lot of cr@p projects and still got RIFT'ed when they decided that he was too expensive.

Now he is back at the same company that split him off. When that company kicked the split off to the curb, they thought that he would stay with them. It took a year or so to get him back.

I think he is making a major mistake but it is his career. I think he should have gone elsewhere, he doesn't. I support his choice.

His career has been a marriage. Not just dating, a marriage. He knows the faults, he is willing to accept them, and just gets on. As a contractor, I may not understand that, but I do respect it.

And it tells me that our marriage will be a good one. I don't have to worry about him- he's as loyal as they come.

An interesting connection.

Collapse -

Job Openings

by andrewwilliam333 In reply to Headhunters

Thanks for explaining this topic and I am impressing.
Andrew William

Job Openings

Collapse -

Value for money and quality of service

by aredirection In reply to Headhunters

There have been studies that match this phenomenon.
Adler (1985) ?consumers initially select an artist at random and, by chance, one artist ends up with more patrons than the rest, and this initial advantage leads to new consumers preferring that artist and existing consumers switching to him or her?. Substitute Agent for artist to get a sense of what might be going on.
The problem roughly equates to lots of managers tend to use certain agencies because other managers have used them and therefore they are a known quantity. The value or quality of service is subjective and difficult to measure so it becomes a leap of faith by the manager looking for an agency.
The problem in Australia is that there are barriers to entering the market creating a very inefficient market, and for some unknown reason HR likes to outsource this stuff so they can?t be blamed for any bad decisions. I believe this is the same if not worse in the US and the UK where the margins enjoyed by agencies are much higher which reflects an inefficient market. My current agency works as a payroll only; I have to find the job and they hold the contract and look after workers comp etc, and they charge a rate that is less than 7% to do that. I have had other agencies charging me out and taking close to 50%. That is just rude. When an agency does that; it is not my services that become too expensive, it is their margin that has put them and me out of work.
The other problem is that most ads are placed by HR staff, whom have little to no idea about IT. IE SQL experience is the same as SQL Server experience, ETL is the same as Datastage, Data Modelling is same as using Erwin once, etc ad nausea. Therefore someone who has 10 years data modelling experience on other tools will not get past the agent or past the HR staff member even though the technical manager looking for staff would love them. IE a good manager knows a good data modeller can learn Erwin within an acceptable period; however an inexperienced data modeller will create all sorts of havoc. But this is not understood by the HR staff or the agents. It is disheartening when you know a position is right up your alley but can't get past the fool who doesn't know the difference between an Architect and a Technician.
This is not a transparent or efficient market and therefore it will not work efficiently or effectively. However, that is what we have to live so we might as well get used to it.

Back to Software Forum
23 total posts (Page 3 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03

Related Discussions

Related Forums