Agencies need to get rid of the keyword based search

[DodgyAgent]

I might be tempted to agree with you - except that every agency website sells themselves as being a resource provider with a stable of people ready to go, and not as a conduit between requirement and expertise. Your customers are buying a myth, most of the time, and Human Remains are not the best-placed people to understand that.

The agencies can sell themselves as they like but if the market does'nt want it then they wont buy it. From the clients perspective it is more important to "commodotise" and control recruitment through HR and keep the rates down than have a personal service.

[DodgyAgent]

Comparing dealing with agents and their 'box-ticking exercises' with dealing with HR Departments and their propensity for asking you to fill in mindless application forms containing such insightful questions as "tell me about a time when you had to convince someone you had a solution to a problem", I know which I'll choose every single time. HR departments are the main reason agencies exist; whilst there are undoubtedly good ones out there, for most companies, if recruitment of professionals were left to their HR Dept, people who can do and people who need doing would never meet.

Companies are now employing their own internal direct hirers. Most of these hirers are lower ranking recruitment consultants who's first mission is to exert control over the supply system. By and large it works because most candidates looking for jobs can be found without needing to go to agencies. For candidates however it does involve the tiring and drawn out process of having to apply for multiple jobs through every single proprietary application system. The duplication from a candidates pointo of view is horrendous.
At least an agent could and would take on these duties as part of what they do thus saving the candidates a great deal of time.

Furthermore once a CV is in the system it is often gone and because the recruiters are faceless individuals who hide behind voicemail systems it is impossible for candidates to know what is happening. It may well be similar with agencies but because the candidate is the agency bread and butter the need for engagement is much higher.

I am afraid that the processes and supply arrangements within internal hiring departments are far more important than finding the right candidates for the right jobs. You can tell this when these people get hysterical whenever an agency sends a CV direct to a hiring manager.

[Gentile]

Companies are now employing their own internal direct hirers. Most of these hirers are lower ranking recruitment consultants who's first mission is to exert control over the supply system.

Funny you should mention that; I've noticed a lot of weird swapping of hats going on recently. People that used to be agents, seem to have taken on roles working directly within HR departments of ClientCos as recruiters exclusively for the companies concerned. And ClientCos that have only ever previously engaged the services of contractors for their own internal projects before, seem to have started trying to act as pseudo-agencies themselves. They advertise roles on their own behalf, but when you talk to them the work is clearly going to be for a third party customer of the ClientCo, and on that third party's site. Lastly, and thankfully rarely, I've seen the odd Contractor Ltd wearing ClientCo hats; advertising roles that are for major third party organisations (usually in the Public Sector), but working through their Ltd (which when you check it out they've invariably been in business for a shorter period of time than you yourself have, and their registered address is also their home).

It's a weird old time right now in the contracting game. I've not seen things this mixed up since 2003, round about the end of the time the dot com bubble burst.

[northernladuk]

Companies are now employing their own internal direct hirers. Most of these hirers are lower ranking recruitment consultants who's first mission is to exert control over the supply system.

It's no wonder the lines between contactor and hidden permies is blurring. The clients are using a department to find a resource who comes in and does the work. It is only one step removed from HR doing it for perms. When actually get to the project that line has completely gone and they see you as permie. A dangerous precedence IMO.

[DodgyAgent]

It's no wonder the lines between contactor and hidden permies is blurring. The clients are using a department to find a resource who comes in and does the work. It is only one step removed from HR doing it for perms. When actually get to the project that line has completely gone and they see you as permie. A dangerous precedence IMO.

They are doing it mainly for perms these days. IT, Sales, Engineering the lot! They are recruiting agency recruitment consultants.
What must be embarrassing is when companies like British gas advertise for experienced Engineers on the same page as they advertise for recruiters. Always the recruiters are being offered more than the top engineers. These companies are being hoodwinked into believing that 65K is the going rate. The really good recruiters earn two or three times that much and the average ones can be picked up for £35k

[The Agents View]

They are doing it mainly for perms these days. IT, Sales, Engineering the lot! They are recruiting agency recruitment consultants.
What must be embarrassing is when companies like British gas advertise for experienced Engineers on the same page as they advertise for recruiters. Always the recruiters are being offered more than the top engineers. These companies are being hoodwinked into believing that 65K is the going rate. The really good recruiters earn two or three times that much and the average ones can be picked up for £35k

I've seen so many people go into these roles, it's unbelieveable - and for the company you have mentioned also.

The hilarious thing is that they take people who are so ridiculously poor, at such high rates. I have a friend, who is a really nice girl, but a USELESS recruiter. She's gone in there, taken a £60k salary. Her billings for the last 3 years in permanent recruitment - £55k, £50k, £68k. Most agencies wouldn't let her anywhere near anything wasn't a filing cabinet with those kind of numbers!

And the worst thing? She is now in the supply chain, controlling agencies inputs as well as supposedly dealing with direct applicants. So any agent who wants to deal with them on her specific roles, may not speak to the line manager (at all) - has to get the job spec from her notes (something I know she is absolutely awful at doing) and then has to submit candidates to her for review. She is also in charge of contractors for her business unit as well.

I hope nobody wants to have a serious conversation about a job at this gas supplier any time soon....

[Gentile]

So any agent who wants to deal with them on her specific roles, may not speak to the line manager (at all) - has to get the job spec from her notes (something I know she is absolutely awful at doing) and then has to submit candidates to her for review. She is also in charge of contractors for her business unit as well.

Then again, to be blunt, that's one of the main skills top recruiters get paid for: the ability to cut through bureaucracy and obtain the direct ear of a hiring manager. Sometimes that involves bending the rules, by finding out who needs the work done and liaising with them directly, whatever the low-level bureaucrat trying and failing to control the process may feel about it. It's not an easy job by any means, but it is one of the key things contractors can't do for themselves, even if they have the necessary interpersonal skills. It's one thing a recruiter calling up to push a person with skills in front of a decision maker with a matching requirement; it's another prospect entirely to try and sound credible as a contractor whilst blowing your own trumpet.

[DodgyAgent]

I've seen so many people go into these roles, it's unbelieveable - and for the company you have mentioned also.

The hilarious thing is that they take people who are so ridiculously poor, at such high rates. I have a friend, who is a really nice girl, but a USELESS recruiter. She's gone in there, taken a £60k salary. Her billings for the last 3 years in permanent recruitment - £55k, £50k, £68k. Most agencies wouldn't let her anywhere near anything wasn't a filing cabinet with those kind of numbers!

And the worst thing? She is now in the supply chain, controlling agencies inputs as well as supposedly dealing with direct applicants. So any agent who wants to deal with them on her specific roles, may not speak to the line manager (at all) - has to get the job spec from her notes (something I know she is absolutely awful at doing) and then has to submit candidates to her for review. She is also in charge of contractors for her business unit as well.

I hope nobody wants to have a serious conversation about a job at this gas supplier any time soon....

I do not often agree with you.

[bobspud]

I've seen so many people go into these roles, it's unbelieveable - and for the company you have mentioned also.

The hilarious thing is that they take people who are so ridiculously poor, at such high rates. I have a friend, who is a really nice girl, but a USELESS recruiter. She's gone in there, taken a £60k salary. Her billings for the last 3 years in permanent recruitment - £55k, £50k, £68k. Most agencies wouldn't let her anywhere near anything wasn't a filing cabinet with those kind of numbers!

And the worst thing? She is now in the supply chain, controlling agencies inputs as well as supposedly dealing with direct applicants. So any agent who wants to deal with them on her specific roles, may not speak to the line manager (at all) - has to get the job spec from her notes (something I know she is absolutely awful at doing) and then has to submit candidates to her for review. She is also in charge of contractors for her business unit as well.

I hope nobody wants to have a serious conversation about a job at this gas supplier any time soon....

But the question is: Does she have great tits

A CV used to be a tool to be read and discussed between parties. It didn't need keywords. It gave a rounded personality of the candidate. As more and more people ask that you tailor the cv for every role, the content of the CV will gradually fade in favour of buzzwords and untruths placed there to get you past the idiots, so that you can have a real discussion with the hiring manager.

[The Agents View]

Then again, to be blunt, that's one of the main skills top recruiters get paid for: the ability to cut through bureaucracy and obtain the direct ear of a hiring manager. Sometimes that involves bending the rules, by finding out who needs the work done and liaising with them directly, whatever the low-level bureaucrat trying and failing to control the process may feel about it. It's not an easy job by any means, but it is one of the key things contractors can't do for themselves, even if they have the necessary interpersonal skills. It's one thing a recruiter calling up to push a person with skills in front of a decision maker with a matching requirement; it's another prospect entirely to try and sound credible as a contractor whilst blowing your own trumpet.

You are absolutely correct - and that is exactly what your top recruiters will do. But there are several problems with this.

1) Many of the businesses who go down this route, are so blinkered, that they'll refuse to pay, unless you're on the right lists. They only have to do this once, before a recruiter will steer clear of them.

2) Managers all too often get their fingers burned when they step outside of process - no matter how incompetent the individuals involved in the official process are. Again, they only really have to do this once, before they are completely closed to the idea.

I had someone call me the other week for a role they'd been struggling with. I've placed it, but I've since found out, that this guy had spent 3 weeks trying to convince the powers that be, that they should use someone new - he had to interview 9 people with absolutely none of the skills required. Sometimes, business sense doesn't come into it!

3) It's very very hard, for a contractor, to know who the top recruiters are - and whilst this is not a new problem - with the onset of these internal teams, it becomes even more important to find those who can break down barriers.