The Recruiter Mail Box

Dear Recruiter,

I applied for a senior comms role with a not-for-profit. I sent my application late on a Sunday and got a call from the recruiter first thing on the Monday morning - the day of the application deadline.

We had a good conversation, she told me I was a great applicant and that the client would definitely want to meet with me. She hadn't received my cover letter and asked me to re-send, which I did. She replied thanking me and said she'd be in touch.

I didn't hear from her for about a week so I followed up with an e-mail to say I was still very interested in the role, hoped I was still in consideration and asked whether she needed any more information from me. She replied right away asking me to call her before 4 pm that day. When I called her, she proceeded to lecture me - as though I were an inexperienced job seeker - about how I had a good thing going where I was and shouldn't be looking to leave, especially since I have a couple of short contract stints on my resume. I was baffled by the tone of the conversation and her message, and when I said I was only following up based on our earlier interactions she had no recollection of them! Truly bizarre.

Dear Reader,

Thank you for your tale of Recruitment woe.

This story is  bizarre indeed and I'm sorry you had to go through it. I'd like to say it was probably a rare case of you getting a bad agent

In reality, it's all too common.

I hope that you have decided to end contact with this agency and have told anyone in your personal network not to use them either. There's a certain point where agents need to be responsible for their actions and it's the job seeker's responsibility to see it happen.

The sad reality is that there are a lot of bad agents out there. This is primarily because the bar to enter the profession is so low and the turnover so high that most agencies will hire more agents than they need, expecting a percentage of them to drop off within the first three to eight months.

By the time I left one of my agencies the entire office received an e mail from a division manager outlining a lunch encounter he had with one of the Green Peace people who solicit donations on the sidewalk during the day. Upon discussing, he found that most of these people are paid only in commission as a full-time job and some of them are pretty persuasive salespeople. Therefore, if you're out and about and happen to meet one, give them a card and tell them they should consider a career in Recruitment.

I wish I was kidding.

The bar is low.

The first sign that you were not dealing with a professional was this:

The Agent Should Never Speak on Behalf of the Client

If ever you encounter this, it's time to get inquisitive. Ask them what about your background they think will guarantee you an interview with the client? How long have they been working with the client? Are they working with the client on an exclusive basis?

Unless the agent has an exclusive relationship with the client, there is no way for them to guarantee how a client will react to an applicant and should not be offering false hope over the phone.

 

The second sign that you were not dealing with a professional was the lecture.

 

Granted, a good Recruiter should know their client, should know their candidate, should know the market and should know what makes a good resume. However, they should not be in the business of lecturing candidates.

 

This comes back to the old William Goldman saying I pulled for my first post:

 

 





Your reasons for wanting to find a new job are not an Agent's concern. Sure, we have probing questions to make sure you're not the type who hops ship every six months or can't hold down a job on your own accord, but by and large, the agent's job is listening to what they can do to help you get the job you are looking for.

 

If this happens to you, again, get inquisitive. Ask them what it is that is prompting this line of thinking and see what they come back with. Probably what happened was that this is what the client came back with and they were unloading it onto you.

 

 

The third indicator that you were not dealing with a professional is that the Agent didn't remember you.

 

Recruitment agents meet with a lot of people. As part of their KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) they need to meet with anywhere from five to ten new candidates each week. That's a lot of people to keep track of.

 

That being said, every agent should know who they have applied to their jobs. My educated guess is that this person was either tasked with meeting their weekly interview KPI's or to find a pool of candidates to submit to their open job order. They fed you a line about you looking great on paper to appease you and hoped you'd forget about them the same way they forgot about you.

 

There are two things going on here. One is that just because an agent says they are putting you forward for a job, it doesn't guarantee they actually will. Agents generally aim to submit three candidates to every open job. Hopefully you're one of them. If a better candidate comes in after they say they'll submit you, guess what?

 

 

The second is that, as a general rule, if an agent submits you to a job, you'll never hear back from them unless the client agrees to interview you. Agents live for Yes. Yes is where the money is. If a client says No, there is no incentive to get back in touch with you. In order to combat this, make sure to set follow-up dates with your agent. Ask them when you should follow-up with them, take note and make sure you do. Unless you give them a reason to remember you, most won't.

 

Keep these simple things in mind and hopefully your experience with Recruitment Agents going forward can be a positive and rewarding one.

 

Questions for the Recruiter Mail Box can be sent to michaelllippert@gmail.com or directly to Michael Lippert via LinkedIn.

What Are Your References Saying About You?

Here's something you maybe didn't know:

Before I call a single one of your references, they are telling me about you.

Giving references in Canada can be tricky and some companies shy away from it altogether. One wrong thing said against a candidate by an employer during a reference could result in defamation lawsuits or Human Rights issues. References are risky business.

Which is why they can also be misleading. Very few are willing to risk their company's well being over a bad reference. Most will either refuse or tailor the reference to discount all the negative feelings they may have had about a former employee. If I'm getting a bad reference, I usually assume it's because the referee doesn't know much about Employment Law.

Whenever a former manager of mine would get calls for references he would say he would only answer yes or no questions and not elaborate on any details further than that. He was protecting his own ass.

So, in the end, a good reference doesn't necessarily mean much. But that's okay. Like I said, even if your references are glowing, they may have said bad things about you before we've even chatted.

How?

Whenever I gather a reference I ask for five key pieces of information: 1) Name, 2) Company, 3) Title, 4) Phone Number and 5) E mail address.

Name is obvious. I need to know who I'm talking to.

For company, I want to make sure you're providing references from places you've actually worked. If you're sending me a reference from someone at a company that doesn't appear on your resume, I want to know why. Who is this person? What is your relation to them?

Company also helps me date your reference. If I ask for three references and all of them come from companies you haven't worked for in eight years, I'm going to start wondering why there hasn't been anyone since who felt you suitable enough to provide a reference for? Red flags are flying high.

 

Collecting Position Title is very important in reference taking. Maybe you've sent me three glowing references from your last company. But they were all your co-workers. One of them was your water cooler buddy who didn't even work in the same department as you. They all like you, but I expect your friends to all like you.

 

What about the person you reported to? The person who can speak directly to your work and how you were as an employee? If I ask you for three names and not a single one of them is a former supervisor, you're references are going to read as suspect. If you've been working for the past 5 years and you can't find a single supervisor to say something nice about you, you're going to come off like someone who doesn't get along well with management. You don't want that. We certainly don't either. 

 

 

As for the contact info, I want to make sure you're keeping up to date and in touch with your references. Why can you only provide e mail but not phone? Why does the e mail keep bouncing back to me? References are people you should still be in touch with and who should know I'm going to be calling. If I call a reference and they are caught off guard because they didn't know I'd be calling, I'm wondering why you don't keep in touch with your references. Are we going to have communication breakdown problems with you?

 

 

So before you send your references out, take a look at them and ask yourself what you think they say about you. Are they current? Do they include at least one person in a position of authority who can speak directly to your performance on the job? If not, it's probably time to reconsider who you're engaging to be references.

 

They're talking about you before I get a chance to talk to them. Make sure they're saying only the best.  

A Recruiter's Take On Walk-Ins

We don't like them.

A walk-in is how we refer to someone who, without an appointment, walks in off the street with a resume and demands to speak with someone.

Why don't we like them?

Because it's Thursday afternoon, I have a day and a half before the weekend to hit my weekly targets, the guy I had scheduled to start this morning didn't show, and my 20K placement for this month just e mailed to let me know he's going to move forward with an offer from someone else. Unlikely I'll hit my monthly sales target now. And what's this? There's a guy in the lobby that no one has heard of who wants someone to interview him?

 

 

Are these really the conditions you want to be interviewed under?

 

I get the logic behind why people walk-in. Somewhere out there, someone is telling people that one way to get a job is walk in to offices with a resume and demand to be seen.

 

It could work.

 

But here's a secret. The ratio between the number of people who walk off the street with a resume that actually get a job to those who don't is very, very low. In most cases, you're probably killing your chances before anyone has met you. You'd better have some serious talent if you decide that this is the approach for you. Unless you're anything less than this: 

 

 

You're probably not getting a job.

 

In most cases, you're going to potentially create a bad first impression by interrupting someone's day without warning. Our thinking is, if you're any good, you wouldn't need to be walking in off the street. We would have heard of you by now. The expectation that the interview will be a waste of time is raised considerably when you've walked in.

 

Here's another secret: if you walk in, someone will probably sit down with you. However, rarely will it be with a seasoned Recruiter. In the past, whenever we'd to get a call from reception asking who'd be free to take a walk-in, the general response would go something like this:

 

 

Who usually got assigned the walk-in? The junior Recruiter who just started and needs to ramp up their talent pool by doing practice interviews. We don't expect much from walk-ins, may as well let the juniors hit their targets and make their mistakes with them.

 

Of course, we'll assign someone to make sure that you don't actually have the cure for cancer or any other such superpowers that may be of value to our clients. More realistically though we expect that you're there to waste our time. You'll need to put in double the effort to convince us otherwise. If we wanted to meet with you, we would have returned your call or responded to your e mail. Walking in isn't really going to change that.  



What Is A Purple Squirrel?

A Purple Squirrel looks like this:

And they always translate into this:

But trying to find them makes Recruiters feel like this:

At the end of the day, all any good Recruiter is looking for are Purple Squirrels.

Purple Squirrel is a term used in the Recruitment Industry to describe the hardest kind of candidate to find: The perfect one.

If a client calls and says they need a CFO with eight years of experience who is also fully skilled in Java Development, must be Trilingual and needs to start next Monday, that's a Purple Squirrel. Why? Because good f@#%ing luck finding that. This is the kind of candidate that Recruiters could spend their entire career searching for and still come up empty handed.

And for a lot of Recruiters who don't have the skills to hunt Purple Squirrels, a very short career it will be.

The reason is that Purple Squirrel jobs are generally the ones clients are most willing to shop out to Recruitment Agencies. They are the jobs by which most young Recruiters will be judged. In short, Recruiters live and die on the backs of Purple Squirrels.

Cute, aren't they?

Purple Squirrels often act as the gateway into establishing a relationship with a client. Clients get an endless number of calls from Recruiters every week, all promising the same things: the best talent pool, the best guarantees, the best candidate screening tools, etc. They're all the same. What really differentiates one agency from the next, is how skilled their Recruiters are at catching Purple Squirrels. So, to test the waters, the client with throw them one and see what happens.

Most clients, especially in Toronto, are not going to throw out jobs to Recruiters that they could easily fill themselves. They're going to send out the job that every other Recruiter in the city has worked and that all have come up blank on. If you want to party at the top, you need to prove yourself at the bottom first.

The general mentality is that, if you can find a candidate to match an unrealistic job description, you can probably find just about anything and it's worth a client's time to know you. Catching a Purple Squirrel is almost an automatic invitation onto a client's vendor list and into their good books. That is, if you don't get on their nerves first. 

These are the positions that separate the great Recruiters from the ones just passing through.

Ed - I am pleased to announce to all the fans and followers of this blog, that this post acts as a direct tie-in with a new Canadian television series, co-written and directed by yours truly, set in a Recruitment Agency, entitled Purple Squirrels. If you like Notes From the Recruitment Desk, you're going to love Purple Squirrels.

Be sure to follow us: 

Twitter: @PSquirrelsTO
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/purplesquirrels    
Web: www.purplesquirrels.ca

Canadian Television Will Never Be The Same

Please Leave A Message and I'll Call You Back As Soon As I Can

In my life as a Recruitment Agent, I've worked for a British company, an American company and a local company. The local company was by far the best because they understood the mentality behind providing service in Canada.

What our British and American counterparts don't understand is that we Canadians are a fickle bunch and need to be handled with care and caution.

The British way of doing things is to bully their way into the marketplace. If you don't want to work with us, that's fine, we'll work with the competition across the street, steal all your best talent and put them to work there. That'll show you.

The American's believe that if they deliver all their pitches like infomercials, clientele will be lining up around the corner to buy their product. This is, after all, a nation of people who buy Miracle Spring Water off of their television for one guaranteed low price.

But Canadians don't respond well to either of these techniques. They respond well to good, convenient customer service that is available to them WHEN THEY NEED IT. This last point is key. Their attitude is, we'll let you know when we need you, otherwise go away. We've got better things to do.

One of the things that always catches outsiders off guard about working in Toronto is how passive aggressive we all are.

No one likes to pick up their phones, few like to return voice mails and if you earn the distinct privilege of working with your desired client, the moment you step outside of their comfort zone (IE start to become an inconvenience), there will be no warning. They'll simply stop taking your calls and stop responding to your e mails. Don't like it? Too bad. You blew it.

If clients are like that to us, then guess what?

We're going to be like that to you, the candidate.

Why? Because similar to how our clients get frustrated when we hassle them too much, we get equally frustrated when hassled by you too much.

Last week I left a voicemail for a candidate who was one in a stack of twenty. I made the call, left the message then got up from my desk to tend to some other business. When I returned half an hour later I had three voicemails from this candidate waiting for me. That's an average of one call every ten minutes. I will never call this person back.

When your follow-up is that aggressive, you don't look like a keen performer who is interested in the opportunity. You look desperate and in need of any job. You generally will not find Desperate and in need of any job listed as a required skill on a job description, so why give that impression before we have met?

You must instead trust that one message will do, that it is safe in my voicemail and that I will follow-up at my next available convenience. End of story. If you haven't heard from me within 24 to 48 hours, then sure, give me another call. Anything more is excess.

A similar rule applies to following-up post interview. If you e mail me once before week's end, I'm going to think that you're organized and on top of things. If you follow-up every day for two weeks I'm going to think you're sitting at home, desperate for any job that comes your way. I don't want to hire that person.

Remember, if you are being recruited, chances are that you are but one candidate on a pile of twenty to thirty. Every Recruiter is looking for an excuse to exclude you from that pile. If the initial impression of you is If this guy is this big a pain in the ass before I've even met him, I don't want to think about what he'd be like to work with, that's a good enough excuse for me.  

The Hidden Downside of Working With A Recruitment Agency

Here's a scenario:

You met with a Recruitment Agent who promised you the sun, the moon and the sky.

The week after the initial meeting your phone rings. It's the Recruiter. They've got a gig for you. It's only for a couple weeks. Could potentially extend to a month or two. Fairly standard work, but for a reputable company and decent money in your pocket. You'll take it. You sign on the dotted line and kick back, relaxed that your unemployment blues look to be coming to an end.

You do the gig, love the people, love the company, but they don't have anything more for you to do outside that initial two week engagement. You thank them, they thank you and you go about your merry way. Your Recruiter says they are working diligently on finding you your next gig. You don't hear from them in six months.

The unemployment blues are starting to get you down again, when a sliver of light peaks through the cracks. The company you temped at six months ago gives you a call. They currently have a full-time opening and loved your work so much they want you to come in and meet with them about it.

You ace the interview and they're ready to move forward until they get a call from your Recruiter. They've caught wind that the client is preparing to send you an offer, the agency has you under contract and they're looking for a finder's fee on your head.

The client refuses to pay. The agency says "tough shit" and you, once again, are out of a job. The company that swore they would do everything in their power to help you secure a job, has just screwed you out of one.

This Actually Happens

 

Provisions are sewn into every agency contract that will prevent you from doing work with any one of their clients without them collecting a fee on your head. It doesn't matter that you only worked for them for two weeks. It doesn't matter that they haven't called you in six months. If that client wants to consider bringing you back, the agency isn't going to let you go without collecting a fee, which, in most cases, and with good reason, the company will refuse to pay.

 

This is the Catch 22 that you must confront every time you decide to deal with an agency, especially on a temp or contract basis. Without the agency you may never have gotten the gig. Because you got the gig you won't be able to work full-time for that company unless they pay your agency the standard fee. Bummer.

 

The Moral of the Story: Before signing any agency agreements, make sure to read all of the fine print and decide if it is really worth agreeing to not work directly with a client without the agency managing the relationship. This is why it is especially imperative to trust your Recruiter and ensure that they have your best interest in mind. If they don't, the only loser will be you. 



The Most Essential Piece of Career Advice You Need

Never Burn Bridges

 

 

It's that simple. You'd think this would be a matter of common sense, but unfortunately, in a lot of cases, it is not.

 

I get it. Finding a job requires a lot of rejection and some people aren't as equipped to handle rejection as well as others.

 

 

But please, before you call up a hiring manager and tell him that his wife looks like a dead horse or hope that her first child is born crippled because you weren't their first choice for the job, please, REFRAIN.

 

Take a moment. Work through it. Get over it.

 

 

To harbor resentment is only to hurt yourself in the end. Not only will it reinforce in the mind of the hiring manager that they made the right decision, it will guarantee that they will never call you again, even if the right position opened up.

 

So you weren't their first choice. That's okay. You could have been their close second and if you're good enough, they'll find a way to make it work eventually. I once knew a girl who went into an interview at a law office and aced it. They decided to go with another candidate for the job, which came down to nothing more than experience. She thanked them and wished them well. A week later they called her back to inform her that another position had opened up and they wanted her to come back to talk about it.

 

She's worked there ever since. 

 

Never Burn Bridges.

 

True Story

 



A young gentleman came into the office several weeks back for an interview. It was for a junior technical position. He'd been working part-time in a non-technical role for some time (not really a red flag anymore in this day and age) but on paper he had what we needed.

 

He interviewed and was deemed not a fit by the hiring manager. Never fear, I thought, this hiring manager can be picky and a challenge. I'll keep him in mind for other things.

 

As luck would have it, the next day a new position arose which did not require the one skill that the candidate had fallen short on. I advised the talent. If he worked this job for sixth months and proved himself he'd be able to transition into the one he applied for. Simple. I asked him to write me a paragraph outlining his experience to be submitted to the hiring manager for reconsideration. Everyone wins, I thought.

 

That was until I got an e mail from the upset young gentleman who insisted that he get the position he applied for, re-sent me the job description that I wrote, insisting I read it again and asked me why half an hour of interview time was discounted because of one skill he didn't have.

 

Before I could respond, he was on the phone. He tried to apologize, saying he was having a bad day; saying he was stuck in traffic; saying that his friend had been in an accident. All to which, my sympathies aside, my reply was the same: Not My Problem.

 

 

What was once a kid who knew a lot about hardware that I wanted to do what I could to help, was now a risk and a potential liability. Would he start smashing monitors or printers on the job every time he had a bad day? Would he be able to take criticism from a supervisor without wanting to drop everything and walk off site?

 

Not good questions to be inspiring before the second interview.

 

Needless to say, that's a bridge burnt for that kid; not a good thing in an economy where there is probably a hundred other people in line behind you for the same job.

 

Maybe he wouldn't have gotten the job anyway, but now, moving forward, if one of my Recruitment peers asks me if I've ever heard of someone, and that young gentleman's name comes up, I will say, "Yeah, let me tell you a bit about him."

The Recruitment industry is small. We talk.

 

Never Burn Bridges 

The Job Titles Are Out Of Control

One of the worst kinds of candidates for a Recruiter to deal with are those that are hung up on job titles.

Let me get this out in the open:

Job Titles Are Irrelevant

In most cases anyway.

The job title is the first thing any applicant sees when looking at a job, and sometimes, for candidates caught up on chasing titles, it's also the last.

I understand. Everyone wants to feel as though, when they are moving positions, they are moving up and becoming more senior. I've had Technical Support Team Leads who have said they didn't want to talk to me about anything less than a Management position.

Be wary of assuming this kind of attitude. Had this person stopped to talk to me or read the job description, they would have realized that the Team Lead position I was calling about was more senior, included greater responsibility, would have allowed them to put new technologies on their resume and would have been an increase in pay.

Oh well. That's one less resume on the pile.

Because not all job titles are created equally. One company's IT Manager is another company's Senior Help Desk Support Technician. One company's AVP is another company's Team Lead and so on.

I once scheduled a meeting with a Director of IT at a Toronto law firm. I went into the meeting well groomed, well prepared and with the gleam of dollar signs in my eyes.

On site this man informed me that he was the company's only internal IT resource. Here I was thinking I was meeting a senior decision maker. Turns out he was a Senior Support Analyst who knew how to look after the admin side of being a Manager. The meeting was a bust. Shouldn't have listened to the job title.

Granted, some companies do take job titles very seriously for the purposes of internal administration. The job title is used to determine which pay band a position will fall into. A Manager is worth this, a Director is worth this, an AVP is worth this, etc.

But more often than not our society's obsession with titles has reduced most of them to no more than irrelevant verbage. I've met Managers who don't manage anyone, Directors who don't direct anything and AVPs who don't assist anyone. For some banks, a Manager title doesn't indicate much more than that you're one or two steps higher than the person who cleans the washrooms.

When I got my first job out of school in Toronto, my boss asked me what I wanted my title to be. I chose Sales Executive. No need for anyone to know that we were two guys working out of the back of a house and that I was an Administrative Assistant at best. I never sold anything. I never negotiated a contract. I never executed a single project. I had a nice title though.

And that's what most job title's amount to. They are instant psychological gratification to make employees feel better about their position. You can call your Receptionist a Manager of First Impressions or Director of First Contact but, at the end of the day, to quote Shakespeare, a rose by any other name...

So next time a Recruiter calls, don't get caught up in the job title. Instead concern yourself with the scope of the duties and responsibilities, the size of the environment, the potential for growth; anything tangible. And at the very least, if the only thing standing between you accepting an offer is whether or not it has the word Senior in your title, ask if it can be changed. Most companies won't lose good talent over one word. Don't be so quick to lose a good job over the same thing.

Incorporated or Sole Proprietorship and Which is Best for Me?

Good question.

The default answer that every Recruitment Agent in the city, if they're any good, should give is:

Incorporated!

Why? One reason.

Financially, it's best for them if you are incorporated.

Alas, you are not in the business of doing what is best for someone else. You are in the business of doing What is Best for You, which is why you need to be informed on what your options are before going on contract with an agency.

In any contract scenario you have three choices.

1) Go on company payroll.
2) Work as a Sole Proprietor

OR

3) Work through your own Incorporation.

Agencies cringe at the thought of contractors going on their payroll because when they do, they lose money. If you're working on contract as an employee of an agency, that means the agency needs to set you up on their payroll and perform all applicable deductions for you.

That costs them money. They don't like that.

A Sole Proprietorship is like having your own business, but as far as the law is concerned, you are that business. That means your name and the name of your Sole Proprietorship are one in the same. You are the sole proprietor after all.

This means you can contract out as a company, and that all the money, all the assets and all the liability are yours. You're still a burden because payroll needs to deduct CPP and EI, but not as much of one.

For you, this option is cheaper than becoming Incorporated (last time I checked it was in the $60 dollar range), you can do it online, and it comes with several tax incentives that regular working folks don't get.  

I recommend this option for people who want to take on contracts, but don't intend on being a long term contractor. That way you don't incur the risks associated with owning a Corporation but still get to reap some of the same benefits as owning a business.

If all you do is dream of contracts however, Incorporation is the best option.

It's more expensive, but the tax benefits are plenty, you'll command a higher hourly wage, you get to own their own business like this guy:

Or this guy:

And, most importantly from the agency's viewpoint, you're not a payroll burden. You do all of your own deductions. All we have to do is make sure that your invoices get paid and that the money is going into your company's bank account.

I know what you're thinking:

But Mike, if I'm less of a burden as a Sole Proprietor than an employee and I'm less of a burden as a Corporation than a Sole Proprietor, shouldn't my hourly rate be different?

You Betcha! 

One of the key mistakes new contractors make when working through an agency is that they don't ask what the difference in pay is between an employee, a Sole Proprietor and an Incorporation. 

Before you take on your next contract with an agent, ask them what the difference in rate is between the three. If they tell you that it's the same for all, call bullshit and run for the hills. That agency is trying to play funny business, and funny business is not What is Best for You.

Contract or Permenant and Which is Best for Me

There is not a single Recruiter in this city that will not ask you whether you would prefer Permanent or Contract work.

If they don't, Run Away And Find A New One As Fast As Possible!

 

The reason we ask is because Contract and Permanent jobs are two different things. As I outlined in my last post, the Contract and Permanent versions of the same job may be handled by two totally different Recruiters. This means, before we speak, you need to have put some thought into this question.

 



A lot of people, when asked, will give the generic answer: "I'm open to either."

This answer translates into One of Three Things:

1) I haven't put any thought into it.
2) Send me whatever you get and I'll decide then

OR

3) I don't care, just get me a f#%&ing job already!  

So let me explain the key differences between the Contract and Permanent ways of life so that you're prepared to be more than generic next time a Recruiter asks you what you are looking for.

Permanent

The appeal of a Permanent position is that of stability. People feel that if they have a yearly salary, a benefits package and are on a company's payroll that they are more stable than someone who gets paid on an hourly basis for a set term.

There is some truth in this. The Permanent employee does enjoy much greater room to grow and evolve within a company than a contractor would. Not many contractors start in the mail room and work their way to the VP position.

And getting invited to the office Christmas party has it's perks.

But the idea of stability in Permanent work is more of an illusion in 2014 than ever. Every day companies decide to outsource departments, pay off high wage employees, or any other general type of "Restructuring."

Say you were offered a Permanent job at $70,000 a year plus benefits. After a year and a bit you're called into the boss' office where he regrets to inform you that your position has been made obsolete.

You could have been doing the same thing on a year long contract for $50/hr. Do I need to do the math for you?

The cost to you would be an accountant to do your taxes (which, you'll be able to use to your advantage if you are a Sole Proprietor or Incorporation; but that's for another post) and an insurance company if you want benefits. If you have a spouse with a benefit plan you can get on, even better.     

Which brings us to:

Contract

The Major Upsides to being a Contract employee are:

1) More money.
2) More flexibility and freedom to set your own schedule.

The Major Downsides:

1) You are pretty much stuck in a niche with no room to grow into new positions.
2) You have to know how to and be willing to constantly sell yourself. 

Now imagine a world where you set your own price. A world where you are so in demand that you get calls of job offers every day. A world where you could decide to take the summer off and there's nothing anyone could do or say about it.

Those are the benefits contractors get once they make a name for themselves. But they've got to be willing to put themselves out there and do what it takes to build a reputation in the industry. Contracts live in a world without a safety net. They don't always know where the next contract is coming from. And if they don't put their name out there, they'll never make it.

This is why agencies separate Permanent and Contract Recruiters. They are two totally different mindsets.  

A Permanent Recruiter is a Corporate Matchmaker

A Contract Recruiter is Jerry Maguire

If you have questions on the subject of Contract, Permanent and what would be best suited for you, ask your Recruiter. You have their time and attention, use it.

It is not a decision to be made lightly.

Why Do I Have A New Recruiter Every Eight Months?

Good question.  

This is an IT Recruitment Agency

This Agency is set up under the Account Manager Model:

 

Meet Kyle, Kelly and Kofi:

 

Kyle works tirelessly cold calling up to 70 people a week trying to generate new business which he will pass to Kelly to manage. Kofi Recruits for the jobs that come from Kelly's clients. They are a tight knit unit. There isn't much a good Account Manager and Recruiter, when paired to each other's strengths, can't achieve.   

 

Kelly's clients love her and keep coming back. She knows how to get the information from them that Kyle needs to make a good match and Kyle knows where to find the talent and how to quickly narrow down a large pool into the few that will be presented. Kyle and Kelly generate a steady stream of revenue.

 

But while the Agency has a steady stream of revenue coming from them, they aren't seeing enough growth. They want to take the company to the next level. They opt to implement the 360 Model: 

 

 

In this model each member of the team is a 360 Agent and is given a specific "vertical" under which they will build their business.

 

A 360 Agent is someone who does both Account Management and Recruitment. They own the entire process from developing the business to finding the talent. They're that good.

 

 

The idea is that, if the only thing Kofi recruits for are Developers he can sell himself to clients as an expert in that space. Any time a Developer job comes in, it will be owned by Kofi, who should also have the talent at hand. He interviews five new developers a week after all.

 

But uh oh, there's a problem.

 

Kelly loves working with clients but wouldn't know the first thing about where to find talent and Kofi, although loving to dig through the job boards has, no desire to make business development calls. They both quit. Poor Kyle, now redundant, goes with them. 

 

That's fine. Management thinks. We would have had to retrain them anyway.

 

So this is Joey.

 

Joey Recruiters on the Development desk. That means he Recruiters Java Developers, .Net Developers, PHP Developers, you name it. Whether it's a permanent position or a contract, Joey will have the person you're looking for.

 

Joey is so loved by so many clients that he's swamped. So the Agency hires Janet

  

Janet is going to be taking over the contract business. and Joey is now going to manage the permanent business on the Development desk. 

 

Joey and Janet get along great. They help each other out with tips on who's available for each other's jobs and they have no problem handing off the business based on who's vertical it falls under. They're a tight knit team.

 

One day Joey and Janet hear rumblings from management. With Joey and Janet averaging $20,000 per month in client revenue off their current targets, if we add four other people to the Development team, with the same targets, we'll quadruple our revenue. We do this under every vertical and soon we'll have:

 

 

Joey and Janet now work with Jorge, Jill, Jacob and Jackson.  

 

Joey runs the Perm .Net Desk, Janet runs the Contract Java Desk, Jorge runs the Perm Java Desk, Jill runs the Contract .Net Desk, Jacob runs the PHP Desk and we're still thinking about what we're going to have Jackson run. Maybe we could split the Perm .Net Desk again somehow?

 

 

One day Joey thinks, Hey, although the company's numbers are going up, the number of jobs I can own own on my desk is going down. I gave the last three I got in to Jill. If I can't own the job, I can't get 100% of the placement fee, which is making it hard for me to hit my numbers every month. This makes Joey sad.

 

 

So Joey quits and sets up shop across the street where he is wooed by better commission, better salary, better benefits and the chance to once again own all his own business.

 

Others follow.

 

By this time next year the entire team has turned over due to resignation or dismissal on grounds of inadequate performance. Management thinks: The clients don't seem happy that they need to talk to a different agent for every job and turnover is at an all time high. What if we implemented a model where we separate Recruitment and Business Development?

 

They do.

 

 

Meet Sarah, Sam and Scott.