3 ms·

I don't think it really works that way. Or at least it shouldn't if the company doing the hiring is smart. If a good candidate comes across a startup's desk,

by j_baker 16y ago

I don't think it really works that way. Or at least it shouldn't if the company doing the hiring is smart. If a good candidate comes across a startup's desk, are they really going to risk losing them by paying them $10k less to make up for the cost of the recruiter? If the company doesn't want to pay these kinds of expenses, they shouldn't use a recruiter. They shouldn't shortchange their people because of it. Besides, if the candidate truly is good, they will more than make up for the extra 10k.

raganwald 16y ago
There's no way to make the $10K go away. If I can afford to pay $90K for salary and a $10K fee, can I automatically afford $100K salary plus a $15K fee? If I can, why not pay $115K salary and a $20K fee? If the candidate is worth "stretching" to pay that extra $10K, wouldn't I rather deal direct with the candidate so that I can "stretch" from $100K salary to $110K salary rather than stretch from $90K salary to $100K salary? Sooner or later a company ready to make an offer runs into a limit as to how much can go on the table. The more in the headhunter's pocket, the less in the candidate's pocket. I am not aware of any company that is able to warp the laws of space, time, and the conservation of cash expenses.
- dustingetz 16y ago
  it might help to not think of your engineers as costs.
  - raganwald 16y ago
    Of course I don't. But nevertheless, calculate the expected return from Candidate X per year. Work out an expected horizon given that some candidates leave in a few months, some stay a few years, some stay indefinitely... Work out what you're prepared to invest to lease an asset of this magnificent quality. Now: there is an up front fee associated with leasing this asset. Is a fee on the order of 20% of one year's lease really immaterial? true or false, does the up front fee change what you

by j_baker 16y ago

raganwald 16y ago

There's no way to make the $10K go away. If I can afford to pay $90K for salary and a $10K fee, can I automatically afford $100K salary plus a $15K fee? If I can, why not pay $115K salary and a $20K fee? If the candidate is worth "stretching" to pay that extra $10K, wouldn't I rather deal direct with the candidate so that I can "stretch" from $100K salary to $110K salary rather than stretch from $90K salary to $100K salary? Sooner or later a company ready to make an offer runs into a limit as to how much can go on the table. The more in the headhunter's pocket, the less in the candidate's pocket. I am not aware of any company that is able to warp the laws of space, time, and the conservation of cash expenses.

dustingetz 16y ago
it might help to not think of your engineers as costs.
- raganwald 16y ago
  Of course I don't. But nevertheless, calculate the expected return from Candidate X per year. Work out an expected horizon given that some candidates leave in a few months, some stay a few years, some stay indefinitely... Work out what you're prepared to invest to lease an asset of this magnificent quality. Now: there is an up front fee associated with leasing this asset. Is a fee on the order of 20% of one year's lease really immaterial? true or false, does the up front fee change what you