What to do when a role is advertised by many agents?

[The Agents View]

Here's a novel idea.

When someone calls you about the role, be honest with them. State that they definately have competition on this role, and that you had to look after yourself and apply to everyone.

Assuming this is the first agency to contact you, then let them know that you would like one single point of contact, and then list the reasons you are perfect for their role.

Then ask for their honesty. You have subconciously ignited the competitive spirit in the belly of the agent, who will put you forward to stop anyone else doing so. From there, the sales job is yours to manage.

If a second agency contacts you - simply state that you have already been put forward for the role, but dig for a feel of the agents relationship - the really good recruiters out there will suggest that they give the client a quick buzz and find out what the state of play is - then if they've missed out, will simply back off (I've had to do this twice in the last week - it's annoying, but FAR better long term).

Hope this helps
Let us know how you get on.

TAV

[expat]

Post #3 had a good point from northernladuk, not picked up by anyone else:

Try find the main supplier and go with them is what I would do in your position.

If the agent you go with is not the tier 1 supplier, it may be that your guy is only a tier 2 supplier to the tier 1 supplier - who will try to fill it with his own resources first. If he succeeds, you will not even be considered, no matter that your agent has "put you forward": he has only put you forward to the tier 1 supplier, not to the client.

If there are many more contracts than there are contractors, that's not so bad, it just means another cut from the rate. If there are more contractors than contracts, it means you were never in for that contract.

[Wanderer]

Find out who the client is and go direct.

Failing that, find out who the preferred supplier agencies are and go to them.

Or just apply to all of them and let them fight it out to see who takes the smallest margin.

[northernrampage]

If a second agency contacts you - simply state that you have already been put forward for the role, but dig for a feel of the agents relationship - the really good recruiters out there will suggest that they give the client a quick buzz and find out what the state of play is - then if they've missed out, will simply back off (I've had to do this twice in the last week - it's annoying, but FAR better long term).

Hope this helps
Let us know how you get on.

TAV

I did something similar today. One agent told me he was trying to get me an interview (I couldn't do the time), so he mentioned he'd call me back. Heard nothing but will chase.

Then I applied for another job on jobserve, but after checking with 2nd agent it's the same role. I just apologised for wasting his time... but he said he'd call me back later to see if I had been put forward as if not he'd try to get me an interview.

I don't think agents mind if you're honest, I've asked others to check in the past for me. It's if you don't tell them it doesn't look good, IMHO.

What I am finding now is that some agents are trying to avoid telling me who the digital agency actually is... which is really frustrating as I don't want to say where I'm interviewing. Think they are worried other agents will find out about the company needing people or something. Or maybe they are fishing me in a different way.

[expat]

Find out who the client is and go direct.

Failing that, find out who the preferred supplier agencies are and go to them.

Or just apply to all of them and let them fight it out to see who takes the smallest margin.

That's called a free market. Agents only believe in that when it comes to bringing down contractor rates. When it means agents competing to attract contractors, it is anathema.

The oft-touted risk that your CV may be binned by a client who receives it from several agents is only a risk because the client may not want to be hassled by the agents, who can't accept that you have compared the offers and made a free choice. I.e it is only vindictive slime pissing in your soup just because it isn't their soup, that will cause you any problem there.


Agents are not your friends.

[The Agents View]

Agents are not your friends.

No - I suspect agents are not YOUR friends, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

There is no choice here - if the agency has followed the right path (ie, signed terms of business, followed due dilligence, passed the name of the client to you, described the job etc) then the client is duty bound to go with that agency - there is no "shop around for the lowest margin" because that's the way agencies work - we all attach terms of business to CV's that are sent - by opening the attachment detailing the candidate, they are then legally bound with inferred agreement with the terms on that email, which states that nobody else can represent the candidate to the client for the same job, for 6 months.....

Is that clear?!?

[expat]

No - I suspect agents are not YOUR friends, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

There is no choice here - if the agency has followed the right path (ie, signed terms of business, followed due dilligence, passed the name of the client to you, described the job etc) then the client is duty bound to go with that agency - there is no "shop around for the lowest margin" because that's the way agencies work - we all attach terms of business to CV's that are sent - by opening the attachment detailing the candidate, they are then legally bound with inferred agreement with the terms on that email, which states that nobody else can represent the candidate to the client for the same job, for 6 months.....

Is that clear?!?

It is perfectly clear that that is how agencies want to work. I am not suggesting otherwise, I am saying that it is morally wrong. That agencies succeed in imposing this perversion on the market does not make it right.

It is a perversion of a market, just as much as if Sainsbury's were to refuse to show me a lamb chop for my possible purchase, until I signed to say that I wouldn't buy from Waitrose instead.

Even if Waitrose and Tesco did exactly the same, that wouldn't justify them saying "that's the way we work", it would still be restrictive.

Same with agencies and contractors: make a market and the participants can choose the best offer. Those doing business always like having a monopoly, obviously; but they should not be allowed to.

And agents are not my friends because I don't like parasites, especially dishonest ones.

[The Agents View]

It is perfectly clear that that is how agencies want to work. I am not suggesting otherwise, I am saying that it is morally wrong. That agencies succeed in imposing this perversion on the market does not make it right.

It is a perversion of a market, just as much as if Sainsbury's were to refuse to show me a lamb chop for my possible purchase, until I signed to say that I wouldn't buy from Waitrose instead.

Even if Waitrose and Tesco did exactly the same, that wouldn't justify them saying "that's the way we work", it would still be restrictive.

Same with agencies and contractors: make a market and the participants can choose the best offer. Those doing business always like having a monopoly, obviously; but they should not be allowed to.

And agents are not my friends because I don't like parasites, especially dishonest ones.

We're not talking about Lamb chops here though - we're talking about the effort and dedication it takes to go through a number of different steps, to ultimately secure a sale worth generally in the region of £100,000, with (as an example) £20,000 worth of profit for the agency (which pays for everything from lighting and heat, to salaries during due dilligence, insurance and the cost of administering your pay packets).

Your lamb chops have been taken from a farm where thousands of sheep are packed together and slaughtered - they're basically a generic product - they've not been specifically matched to you, checked for good quality, referenced from the other sheep, before being presented to you - in the supermarket, you see what we see - the rack of say 100 chops, which you then inspect 1 by 1 to check whether they're the ones you want for tea. If you decided to employ a personal shopper to do this for you, you'd pay for it, and be asked for exclusivity. Essentially, we are quite simply personal shoppers for clients, and the source (sauce) of a sale for the contractor.

As for being a parasite, or dishonest, I don't believe I know you - therefore please leave your unfounded, unsubstantiated insults where they belong - directed at the agent that is shafting you.

[Dr Evil]

How about just acting with a little integrity, you can generally get a good feeling of what sort of person the agent is. Accept the fact that they are people who are at work trying to make a living (the same as you are) and understand their point of view.

I always ask the agency the name of the client with the promise that I won't disclose it elsewhere if asked about that role (and I don't).

As for multiple agencies, I tend to go with the ones that I get on with best on the phone, the intelligent sorts who know the market and their client as these are the ones I will likely build the best relationship with (for this and future work).

Be honest and let them know that you expect honesty from them. In my own experience, this approach works and means you start off in the right way from the first phone call right through to interview and hopefully day 1 of the contract.
IMO.

[d000hg]

£20,000 worth of profit for the agency (which pays for everything from lighting and heat, to salaries during due dilligence, insurance and the cost of administering your pay packets).

Money. For. Old. Rope.

Question (since this has gone OT already): do agents normally work to a salary, or salary + fixed commission per placement, or salary + % of agency profit on placements, or commission only?