Headhunters: Worthless? Yes/No?

April 14, 2008 4:16 PM

Headhunter filter: Do they actually help people get hired? Or are they just blood-sucking low-lives?

It's finally happened - I've been let go from a law firm that's had a dwindling amount of deals come in. It was only a matter of time until I was shown the door.

In any event, I'm working to get myself back into the workforce, sending my resume every which way (feel free to toss me some suggestions =) ), but most of the people who get back to me are those cloyingly sweet people from recruitment agencies. I've gone to my fair share of recruiters in New York, and it's the same song and dance: "This is unlike anything you've done, but it's with so-and-so firm and it'd be too great of an opportunity to pass up!"

I know they're in it for the cash-money, so of course they're going to try to send you to interviews for positions that you have no interest in. But I'm curious if people have actually gotten what they wanted from a recruiting agency/headhunting company.

Please tell me I can and should expect more from these people.

posted by chan.caro to work & money (17 comments total)

Yes.

Keep in mind at all times: the headhunter works for the one who pays him. He gets paid when he places people, so it's true that they do help people get hired. But he's paid by the employer, not by the new employee, so he doesn't necessarily really care a lot about the people he's trying to place.

On the other hand, they're also not actively trying to screw anyone over. In a lot of cases they don't get paid until 6 months or a year after placement, and only if the employee turns out to be satisfactory. It does them no good to place a person and have it not work out, even if they did get paid, because that employer probably wouldn't work with them again.

It's to the headhunter's advantage to have a large stable of work-seekers, because it increases their chances of being able to fill positions for the employer, who is the one who pays them. Thus it is in their interest to sweet-talk anyone who comes along who is even halfway qualified.

It isn't a waste of time to work with headhunters, but do keep in mind at all times: your interests are not congruent to their interests.
posted by Class Goat at 4:22 PM on April 14

I haven't ever used one, but my college housemate did when he was trying to get a job after finishing his master's. I think it was good for him. He was a computer scientist who was by temperament pretty shy and kind of a procrastinator. His headhunter called him with new interviews all the time and gave him a ton of crap if he didn't think he was interested, and then if he interviewed and got an offer the headhunter gave him even MORE crap if he said no.

Given the fact that as far as I know this roommate never actually got around to finishing his master's thesis, I think having the headhunter pestering him all the time really helped him a lot. It just got him off his ass and forced him to hit the pavement. Furthermore, he interviewed at a bunch of companies he might not have heard of otherwise.
posted by crinklebat at 4:35 PM on April 14

Blood-sucking low-lifes.
posted by rokusan at 4:55 PM on April 14

My fiance was in a position to hire someone recently and it seems like his experience mirrors Class Goat's comment: they threw any half-qualified person at the company hoping one would stick. And they were charging an outrageous amount to do so.
posted by desjardins at 5:01 PM on April 14

They're really no different than car salesmen or any other salesmen. They are trying to get you into a job - any job - so that they can get paid. They are certainly not guidance counselors.

To get you into the job, they'll do pretty much anything, including trying to convince you you want something other than what you said you wanted. They'll do a lot of "Hey, just go on the interview. What's the worst than can happen?" cajoling and spit out a lot of "No, wait, this company is really great, and you can get in on the ground floor!" fuckery.

So, when talking to a recruiter, it's really important to know what you want and to be firm. Don't allow any openings for them to sneak any pushy rhetorical tendrils into and waste a whole lot of your time. I recommend you do as much talking via email as you can (although they seem to hate that), and when you do talk to them on the phone, start by stating that you only have ten minutes or something like that.

So, they are quite the bitch-ass hassle, but recruiters do have a lot of connections you don't, so at least in the software industry, they're worth the hassle. I got my current job through one, and I have an offer from another company that I also got through a recruiter.

Like Class Goat said, yes.
posted by ignignokt at 5:23 PM on April 14

I work in IT, and to me a head-hunter is invaluable because many good companies don't advertise their positions, they ask recruitment firms for applicants. I've gotten in a lot of doors that wouldn't have been open otherwise.

On the other hand, they're selling a product, and that product is you. It's in their best interests to find you a job that pays you well, that you want to stay with. Don't think you owe them anything, and don't compromise on what you want in a job just because they have an opportunity for you. They stand to make a lot of money off you, make them work for it.
posted by blue_beetle at 5:39 PM on April 14

chan.caro, YHMeFiMail.

Short answer: Useless, but they opened the door for me to a law firm job that I otherwise would have never even known about. (It was never posted as an open position...)
posted by QuantumMeruit at 5:48 PM on April 14

As an educated professional (chemical engineer / pharmaceutical engineer), I have in the past used a professional placement firm (aka headhunter) to advance my career and obtain a new position. The service was free for me, although I do know that my current employer paid the firm a fee for their assistance. If I remember correctly, it was approximately 20% of my first year's salary. At any rate, the firm I used was one the specialized in my field and did a fantastic job. They worked with both me and my employer to find me the ideal position and ensure an easy transition. They even followed up with me after I started my job to make sure that I was satisfied. It was definitely a positive experience, and I will probably utilize them again when ready to make the next move for further professional advancement.
posted by galimatias at 5:50 PM on April 14

For many of the best jobs the only route in is through a headhunter.
posted by caddis at 5:55 PM on April 14

I'm a headhunter, and last I checked I wasn't a lowlife. I like to think I do good work for my clients and charge fair market value for my services (and I only get paid if the client makes the hire). Galimatias' experience is what I strive for.

There are crummy / skeezy recruiters out there, but nobody is forcing anyone to work with them. Do your research; ask colleagues if they've worked with any good recruiters in the past and ask for a referral.

By the way, sending your resume every which way will probably make it less likely that a recruiter can help you. If their clients have already got your resume on file, they won't be able to represent you.
posted by sevenyearlurk at 6:04 PM on April 14

The majority are blood-sucking low-lifes.

They are still a valuable tool for people looking for a job, as long as you understand that you're just a piece of meat to them. Don't take it personally and don't let them be your only option.
posted by unixrat at 6:56 PM on April 14

In case you couldn't tell from the comments, they vary.

There are a lot of self-serving sleazebags in the recruiting field for every industry, I'm sure. Even if they're not disreputable, the vast majority are going to treat their business as...a business, and focus on generating the events that get them paid. You do need to make sure you don't over-estimate the real depth of their care and attachment for you.

There are definitely some, though, who genuinely take what they're doing very seriously. They take pride in fitting the right people into the right roles, and tend to build long-term relationships with both individuals and with companies.

There are several things that a good recruiter can do that you can't easily do for yourself. The first, of course, is put you in touch with a job opening that's not advertised, but they can also provide an important channel for additional insights you could _never_ get on your own. A good recruiter won't spill the secrets of the company they're working for, but they can tell you that "the last three candidates they liked, but didn't pick, didn't have enough management experience", or "that first round of interviews went well, but they need to see more from you on the creative side".

Maybe most importantly, when it comes down to the final negotiations, they can bargain aggressively for you without creating a tense situation as you're entering a new position. I've bargained for my own packages with companies, and I've had recruiters do it for me, and trust me--it's much better to have someone else do it for you (if they're a good negotiator).

The best indicator, I've found, is personal references. If a recruiter has a good reputation, or better yet, has successfully placed people you know, then they're probably a very good bet. If you've never heard of them, and they don't give you a used-car-salesman vibe, then it's almost certainly worth taking a chance, but just don't forget that they're really in business for _themselves_, not _you_.
posted by LairBob at 8:56 PM on April 14 [1 favorite]

My experience with recruiters has been varied, but know this: They get paid only when you get a job. Their interest is getting you hired somewhere, whether or not it's the right fit.

Some have seemed really great, friendly, and respectful of my best interests. Others have acted like used car salesmen - pushy as all hell. One such example:

Recruiter: "You have a second interview with that company I sent you to. Do you have any other prospects right now?"

Me: "Yes, I've got an interview with another company a few days later."

Recruiter: "If you were made an offer before then, would you still go to that other interview, or will you accept right away?"

What kind of a dumbass question is that? I'm not looking for a disposable fast food job - this is a career decision... it has an insanely significant life impact. Of course I'm going to interview with every damn company I can (within reason) before choosing a job.


Recruiters can be useful in that they help you find jobs you might not have found otherwise. This pushy recruiter, in fact, pointed me to a job with a company who lists openings on its website, but didn't list this particular job for whatever reason so I'd never have found it any other way.

However, you need to realize their motivations, and don't let them push you into accepting something too quickly. As long as you're assertive enough to handle that, recruiters can be great.
posted by twiggy at 11:58 PM on April 14

Many corporate recruiters try to insert themselves into the middle of a hiring process in which they are not wanted: they find a job posting somewhere, find a resume somewhere, and then cold-call both parties to try to connect them up. In my experience, such cold calls never lead to anything, as the company doing the hiring often isn't interested in unsolicited leads from agencies.

And many recruiters don't know what they're doing, or have poor people skills, or both. My favourites include the IT/web recruiter who didn't know how to pronounce "Adobe", or the recruiter who called me at 7:00 in the morning. (And there was the recruiting firm that had three of its staffers contact me on the same day about the same job... I could go on and on...)

On the other hand: there are recruiting firms that have been in the field a long time and have trusted contacts in various hiring companies. And there are some jobs that can only be obtained through recruiting agencies: in Ontario, for example, many provincial government agencies only hire through recruiters.

In summary: recruiters often bad, sometimes good, occasionally necessary.
posted by davetill at 4:43 AM on April 15

As in many business there are good ones and there are bad ones. Like with estate agents/realtors, not all headhunters are lowlifes, some are merely slimeballs.

It's important to realise who you're dealing with and what their role really is. Most headhunters are nothing of the sort, they're merely recruitment consultants. A headhunter is an active position, they will actively go out to find a candidate for a role, to approach people and to tempt people away. Contrast this to most recruiters who will passively sift through their files and try to match people they have with who the employer is looking for.

The higher up the food chain you go, the more professional these people are. As has been said already, many are paid long after the role is filled based on candidate performance and longevity. I know that the person who placed me was on a sliding scale of reward which completed only after I'd been here a full 12 months.

Try to meet them, try to connect with them and while all companies might claim to have a policy about only hiring through agents, don't believe a word of it.

If the right candidate walks through the (metaphorical) door as a result of a personal introduction or a cold call then what firm is going to decline them and the chance to not have to pay the headhunter's fees?
posted by unsliced at 6:58 AM on April 15

Previously. This is more about getting help writing your resume, but a number of people in the article are head-hunters. Not exactly the same, but there are definitely similarities.

In that link, they guy in question makes an interesting point:

I have heard comments about resume writers - just recently I read an e-mail post on a forum that said that resume writers turn out canned resumes from templates, and aren’t worth it. I would have let that opinion sway me 100% a year ago - I didn’t want to spend the money to get my resume professionally done. You know where that got me?

A few months down the road, with interviews at only two companies. And no job offers (I got the the third interview with each company).

The problem was evident - my resume was keeping me out of interviews. The math is simple - 3 months * $5,000/month (could be more, could be less, put in your own number to see what its worth) … not having a resume that got me interviews cost me at least $15,000. So you tell me how much I should have paid to get my resume fixed and start getting interviews!

So replace "resume writers" with "head-hunters" and there's one answer for you.
posted by nushustu at 8:10 AM on April 15

Perhaps useful: How to Judge a Headhunter
posted by sevenyearlurk at 10:49 AM on April 15