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.