Recruiter News  >  August 2006: Volume 3, Issue 8

The best active and passive candidates always have multiple opportunities. As a result they need more convincing that the job you're offering is better than the other opportunities they're considering. Recruiting is not about finding and hiring candidates who need another job. Anybody can do this. Recruiting is about influencing top candidates who don’t need your job to consider it anyway, and then keeping them involved at every subsequent step in the hiring process.

Getting top candidates to want to learn more about your opportunity is what it takes to be a top recruiter. You can’t do this by browbeating, pushing, or overselling. You do it by knowing the job extremely well, being a great interviewer, being a great listener, asking great questions, and being relentless.

Getting top candidates to want to learn more about your opportunity is what it takes to be a top recruiter.

When dealing with top people, expect resistance at every step. This is because top people don’t look for jobs or accept offers the same way most candidates do. Since they’re looking for a better job, not another job, they want proof that it is better. That’s why they need more information. This includes more details about the job, the company, and the people involved. They’ll balance long term growth against short term issues like compensation, job scope, and location. They’ll also decide with others, so you not only need to convince the candidate, but also all of his or her advisors.

Don’t get aggravated when issues and concerns come up. Expect them. Then handle them. Be concerned if they don’t come up. In this case the person you’re working with probably isn’t as good as you think, or they’re not interested in your job, or they don’t believe you can help them. In any case, you have a problem you need to address. (continued...)

As recruiters, we have a natural tendency to go easy on our candidates, especially during the first screening. We’d prefer to treat them deferentially, as if they were royalty and we were Barbara Walters. To avoid confrontation, we ask superficial questions and accept clichés for answers. Or worse, we simply tune out the answers we don’t want to hear.

Unfortunately, there’s a downside to "fluff" interviewing: we end up working with a lot of poor-quality job seekers who can potentially wreak havoc on our performance—and our reputation as recruiters.

Are You Playing Hardball—or Softball?
Every time I screen a candidate, I try to apply a healthy dose of scrutiny. If the candidate’s free of defects, great. But if the candidate fails the litmus test, you could be in for a bumpy ride in the form of a turndown, a falloff or an accepted counteroffer. By tightening up the initial screening process, you can save time and avoid a lot of headaches down the road.   (continued...)

Hi Danny,
While interviewing a candidate for a position in a small niche market, he was able to assume the client I'm working for. He informed me he had interviewed there about 2 years ago; both parties were interested, but couldn't come together on financial terms. He would still very much be interested in this opportunity. How should I present him to my client? Should I inform the hiring manager of their past encounter with him, if so how do I ensure my compensation?

Danny's response:
Ooh, this is delicate. This could blow up in your face and get really ugly, or you could make a big fee without doing all the front end work you normally have to do. Cool! Let's get busy.

First and foremost, you must be upfront about the fact that you know they danced together once before. You don't play the game of getting the interview scheduled, hope they don't recognize the name, and then claim "procuring cause." That is such a cheesy move, and you don't need it.

You call the client and you say in effect:

1. "Game over. Stop the Presses. I got the guy/girl you want to hire."
2. “I know this because you tried to hire them back in the day.” (Don't be specific.)
3. “I can't tell you more unless we agree that where there is a candidate that you spoke to years ago, who has not been contacted about this job, who obviously was not and is not on your radar screen, and who you would not have approached, this is someone I can introduce to you with this understanding... and I am happy to reintroduce, but I want to be perfectly upfront about it. Our understanding is that I will not have HR calling me mid-process asking for a discount because you 'knew him'. I don't get paid for finding candidates; I get paid for securing them. I have created interest, and dug deep into the candidate's current situation, and I believe he/she will now seriously consider the job. Knowing that I will charge my standard fee, may I disclose the name?

Done well, by this time, curiosity is killing your client, and they will agree. Two years is a perfect timeframe, if it were in the neighborhood of a few months to a year, it’s a tougher sell.

You're going to get this one.

Click on Miss J's photo to email your recruitment questions and problems to her!

As you all know, Miss J has always opened her slender arms and gently embraced technology. There are times when she just wants to grab it by the neck and throttle the life out of it! (by the way, the court- appointed anger management consultant is very happy with the progress your beloved pen-tress has made since that nasty little incident with the “you know what”).

Blackberry, raspberry, schmasberry! She will give it a go. Back in the days of the dumb terminal and the rotary dial telephone, Miss J plied her trade with great aplomb, charming would be clients with her witty repartee as she drew them unconsciously (no, she didn’t hit them!) into her portfolio of clients. How did she do this? Just by picking up the telephone and talking to them about the joys of taking contractors from her and the company she represented. Back in those heady days, prospects and candidates just picked up the telephone when it rang and talked, few had voice mails. Alas, those days have ground to a screeching halt with most people almost forgetting how to talk, letting their voice mails do the work for them. Thus we arrive at this month’s email cry for help, can you hear those agonizing screams?

Dear Miss J,
I am about to go mad! I have decided that, based on my ratios, I should be doing about 25 connects a day, so I am picking up the telephone far more than I ever did before. Help me! I am organized, I have the right attitude, and I have a great right arm for telephone hefting, so why, oh, why, am I foiled at every turn? The root of my misery? Voicemails.

Miss J, how can I move forward? Should I leave messages?

On Hold from Plain Dealing, KY

Dear On Hold from Plain Dealing, KY:
Can’t live with technology, can’t live without it eh? What happened to human beings just answering their telephones? If I get just one more recording telling me that I now have “10 options,” I will SCREAM. But, anyway, enough about me.

There is no right or wrong way when it comes to voice mails or leaving messages as most variations on the message theme work. They can all work but I do have a preference on the type of message I leave.

It goes without saying that you need to speak to a human, so I make it a point not to leave a message until I have tried the call a number of times on different occasions throughout the day. If I still get the voice mail I will then, and only then, leave my name, company name and number. I like to keep my messages short and to the point. Leaving too much information can get you nowhere.   (continued…)