2 ms·

Fair point - my firm tends to work contingent / contained (similar to retained, but for less senior candidates), and we always get our clients on a contract fir

Fair point - my firm tends to work contingent / contained (similar to retained, but for less senior candidates), and we always get our clients on a contract first. All the t's crossed and i's dotted. I've never done the whole cold call -> submit public resumes (and never will).

brudgers 9y ago
There are better and worse recruiters. The classic model is two tier: retained and contingent. That's how the recruiting industry likes to think of itself. The reality of working with recruiters as a candidate is how I recognized the third tier. It's most of the interactions that most candidates have for reasons implied by Spolsky's description of the job market [1]. The low end recruiters are recognizable with simple questions. "What is the name of the company?" is a good first question. "Are you retained or contingent?" is a good follow up. A person with a professionalist attitude will have no trouble answering either. In part because they are in the business of providing information to candidates. In part because they have a contract in place. In part because they have done their homework and are contacting the candidate because the probability of fit is higher than average. I once had a job where I was unhappy and so I put myself through the pain of answering calls from recruiters. One of them seemed reasonable enough and we had a couple of conversations. It was a Wednesday afternoon and I was sitting in my office and got a call on my cell. I stepped outside to hear about the job the recruiter had found. The recruiter built it up and then said "The firm is X, have you heard of them?" I'd worked at X for a few years a few years earlier. X was listed on my resume. My resume was one page. [1]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/09/06/finding-great-developers-2/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/09/06/finding-great-deve...

brudgers 9y ago

There are better and worse recruiters. The classic model is two tier: retained and contingent. That's how the recruiting industry likes to think of itself. The reality of working with recruiters as a candidate is how I recognized the third tier. It's most of the interactions that most candidates have for reasons implied by Spolsky's description of the job market [1]. The low end recruiters are recognizable with simple questions. "What is the name of the company?" is a good first question. "Are you retained or contingent?" is a good follow up. A person with a professionalist attitude will have no trouble answering either. In part because they are in the business of providing information to candidates. In part because they have a contract in place. In part because they have done their homework and are contacting the candidate because the probability of fit is higher than average. I once had a job where I was unhappy and so I put myself through the pain of answering calls from recruiters. One of them seemed reasonable enough and we had a couple of conversations. It was a Wednesday afternoon and I was sitting in my office and got a call on my cell. I stepped outside to hear about the job the recruiter had found. The recruiter built it up and then said "The firm is X, have you heard of them?" I'd worked at X for a few years a few years earlier. X was listed on my resume. My resume was one page. [1]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/09/06/finding-great-developers-2/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/09/06/finding-great-deve...