Inspired Recruitment - experiences

[Liability]

Sorry to hear you've been stitched Conned Tractor - in answer to your first question - no. There are several reasons for this - firstly, it would ultimately price the service provider out of the role. More importantly, the level I operate at has budgetary responsibility - if they found out that my margin was any higher than I'd told them, they'd hit the roof!! Ultimately that's damaging to the relationship with my contractor, who more often than not, turns out to be my client shortly afterwards as well (at the very least they're a potential client!).

From my point of view, what would I prefer? A short term contractor, on a huge margin, with a big argument that I would ultimately lose? Or 5 people at a fair rate to the client and the contractor?

It comes down to integrity - OK, I'm expensive - but I'm honest about it, and I get the contractor the rate they want - if I charge 22% on top for my services, that agreement is between me, and my client....

TAV

Tav

Good post and point

This bit I don't have a problem with at all. If I get my target rate I dont care what you make - however going forward when cuts are about to be placed - it is generally the team[s] that cost the most [inclusive of the cut] that will get looked it. Double edge sword.

I dont know if you work for large corporations etc - but majority are now slashing rates to 12-17% for Perm roles and similar to contract. This is also spreading.

Good Id say.

I am also seeing companies realise now that using Agencies IS a waste of time - hence why a number are [or in the process] of setting up internal Talent Management teams which go out and scour the boards and get people themselves the cost savings are immense.

[Liability]

Would you really like a breakdown?

1 hour initial conversation - is she someone I want to have working through me?

1 day - travel to the east midlands, 2 hours meeting, travel back.

2 Hours collecting references to back up my claims that she's outstanding at what she does.

3 hours (of non company time) developing a pro-active approach which goes through email

approximately 4 weeks at a rough guess, of hitting 10 carefully selected director level individuals per day, these conversations generally last for about 20 minutes each.

2 hours - Prepping, writing up my thoughts, and presenting the CV to the client.

Paperwork for interviews, interview preparation, interview feedback, negotiation of rate, negotiation of contract details and terms.

In addition to this, remember that not every person I do this for ends in placement - so you have to offset this cost against the ones that do.

does that give you a little more perspective on things?

cheers
TAV

So in effect you are doing less than an Office PA and getting x3 even at your previous 50-60k per year?

[Sausage Surprise]

That's my chuckle for the day....now back to the Daily Mash

[The Agents View]

Tav

Good post and point

This bit I don't have a problem with at all. If I get my target rate I dont care what you make - however going forward when cuts are about to be placed - it is generally the team[s] that cost the most [inclusive of the cut] that will get looked it. Double edge sword.

I dont know if you work for large corporations etc - but majority are now slashing rates to 12-17% for Perm roles and similar to contract. This is also spreading.

Good Id say.

I am also seeing companies realise now that using Agencies IS a waste of time - hence why a number are [or in the process] of setting up internal Talent Management teams which go out and scour the boards and get people themselves the cost savings are immense.

I always look at this as my target audience. I have always maintained that if a client can source what they need from the job boards, why on earth would they go through me, and pay a premium for doing so? Other than the factoring and ease of supply area, that's not really where the value is.

It's examples like the ones that I've set out earlier that mean that we are a cost effective option. I rarely use job boards to source people - the reality is that the best contractors don't use job boards - they use the network that they've developed over the years - my focus is penetrating these networks so that when someone outstanding comes up, they get referred to me. That way, when a client ultimately can't find what they need from the job boards, that's the point that they come to me.

There's a very distinct difference between an "agency" and a consultant's approach - an agency just farms CV's - a consultant knows people personally who is available, and when, whilst also maintaining a collection of interims who are not available on the wider market.

It might be OK to use an agency at 10% when they take the risk, and source from a job board - but if you want someone really special, then you come to someone like me, and I find them by farming through my network - remember, people rarely recommend, or put their name against bad people.

Cheers
TAV

[pmeswani]

I always look at this as my target audience. I have always maintained that if a client can source what they need from the job boards, why on earth would they go through me, and pay a premium for doing so? Other than the factoring and ease of supply area, that's not really where the value is.

It's examples like the ones that I've set out earlier that mean that we are a cost effective option. I rarely use job boards to source people - the reality is that the best contractors don't use job boards - they use the network that they've developed over the years - my focus is penetrating these networks so that when someone outstanding comes up, they get referred to me. That way, when a client ultimately can't find what they need from the job boards, that's the point that they come to me.

There's a very distinct difference between an "agency" and a consultant's approach - an agency just farms CV's - a consultant knows people personally who is available, and when, whilst also maintaining a collection of interims who are not available on the wider market.

It might be OK to use an agency at 10% when they take the risk, and source from a job board - but if you want someone really special, then you come to someone like me, and I find them by farming through my network - remember, people rarely recommend, or put their name against bad people.

Cheers
TAV

The only reason why they chose agencies rather than go direct via job boards is be cause they don't have the resources to filter through 100's of CV's that they get. Unfortunately, a lot of companies wish they had the resources so that agencies who screw up time and time again would lose a lot business and eventually go bust.

[The Agents View]

The only reason why they chose agencies rather than go direct via job boards is be cause they don't have the resources to filter through 100's of CV's that they get. Unfortunately, a lot of companies wish they had the resources so that agencies who screw up time and time again would lose a lot business and eventually go bust.

Do you think that every contractor has a presence on the job boards?

Do you think that they all know how to get themselves found through the search facilities?

Do you think those facilities always work?

Don't get me wrong, the CV boards have their place - it's just not really an area that an established, decent agent would use to source people - alot of the time it's the benched, unreliable and uninspiring contractors on there, and to be honest, they're not the contractors you want to work with if you're charging for a premium service - it's the ones who actually make the difference.

The above might just be my market place - I'm sure that you can find a number of good, non-busy developers, architects, technical specialists right now - just not the type of change and delivery specialists I work with.

TAV

[The Agents View]

So in effect you are doing less than an Office PA and getting x3 even at your previous 50-60k per year?

And the last time an office PA actively sought out a contract opportunity for you was??............

[Liability]

I always look at this as my target audience. I have always maintained that if a client can source what they need from the job boards, why on earth would they go through me, and pay a premium for doing so? Other than the factoring and ease of supply area, that's not really where the value is.

It's examples like the ones that I've set out earlier that mean that we are a cost effective option. I rarely use job boards to source people - the reality is that the best contractors don't use job boards - they use the network that they've developed over the years - my focus is penetrating these networks so that when someone outstanding comes up, they get referred to me. That way, when a client ultimately can't find what they need from the job boards, that's the point that they come to me.

There's a very distinct difference between an "agency" and a consultant's approach - an agency just farms CV's - a consultant knows people personally who is available, and when, whilst also maintaining a collection of interims who are not available on the wider market.

It might be OK to use an agency at 10% when they take the risk, and source from a job board - but if you want someone really special, then you come to someone like me, and I find them by farming through my network - remember, people rarely recommend, or put their name against bad people.

Cheers
TAV

Yep Fair Point - but then you go into Search and Selection and High End People Placement.

Now that is a diffferent business entirely. There are some solid CXO and Senior Appointment specialist over the City and they work in a total different way - similar to your example. But when they place people it takes upto 3-4 months through conversations and meetings and all. An example here is my Wife's boss - who now runs the Global Business Recovery unit for a Top 4. It took them 9 months to get this guy. The effort that must have gone into it must have involved 3-4 people at the search and selection place Id say.

You could argue they put in the effort but it is a different line of business.

[Liability]

And the last time an office PA actively sought out a contract opportunity for you was??............

You missed the point. The discussion was around "effort and work".

[The Agents View]

Yep Fair Point - but then you go into Search and Selection and High End People Placement.

Now that is a diffferent business entirely. There are some solid CXO and Senior Appointment specialist over the City and they work in a total different way - similar to your example. But when they place people it takes upto 3-4 months through conversations and meetings and all. An example here is my Wife's boss - who now runs the Global Business Recovery unit for a Top 4. It took them 9 months to get this guy. The effort that must have gone into it must have involved 3-4 people at the search and selection place Id say.

You could argue they put in the effort but it is a different line of business.

Think of me as a contractor S&S if you wish - I actually do it back to front and search out the contract role for the candidate, rather than the other way round.

Remember though, the S&S market charges in thirds generally - they'll work out the total fee, and split it - 1st payment to engage and shortlist. 2nd Payment on production of CV's. 3rd payment on placement. Also bear in mind that they generally charge 35% average fee - some more, some less. It's a completely different business model. My engagement point is generally at the start of that 9 months though, for the interim who covers the position whilst the S&S business does its stuff - sometimes a senior appointment can take 12 months - so if they don't have anybody in place, an interim is often the best way.

TAV