9 ms·

There are definitely good ones out there. And those that take the time to learn to write a little code have a much better chance of being on that list. We know

There are definitely good ones out there. And those that take the time to learn to write a little code have a much better chance of being on that list. We know a few good ones too. Few and far between, but clearly possible. One thing I didn't mention in the post is that, in a lot of cases, the incentive system for recruiters isn't necessarily aligned with the best interests of the companies and developers they work with. Recruiters are a bit like sell side realtors. The incentive for them is to push a lot of product. So, as a sell side realtor, my financial incentive pushes me to accept the first offer that comes through, whether it's a low ball or not, and move along. Only rarely do I dismiss that financial incentive for the benefit of my client, because 6% of $300k isn't much different than 6% of $320k. So, it's actually irrational for recruiters to spend a lot of time finding the perfect employee for their client, or the perfect job for their recruit, if it takes more time than normal. Unless, of course, you take a longer term view. Longer term, highly successful placements mean that you get more clients and more high quality recruits. But, again, it's hard to think long term when we change careers so often. Glad to know you're one of the good ones.

mooreds 14y ago
That's an interesting point. The way to combat that is with long term relationships. For example, I work as a software developer for a real estate brokerage, and have mentioned the sell side realtor scenario you bring up. The answer is always: yes, it is in the short term interest of the realtor to take the first offer. But in the long term (as they screw more and more people) they will be hurt by this behavior. In fact, there is long term incentive (because, in the US at least, people buy and sell homes multiple times over a lifetime) to get the best deal for the seller, so that they will: * refer the realtor * use the realtor again To bring it back to recruiting, if you had a relationship with the recruiter, and they knew you were going to go back to them in 1 or 5 years when you were ready to move on to your next job, they would have a rational interest in finding you the right job (and the same interests hold true if employers have a relationship with the recruiter). This relationship, if it exists, really turns the recruiter into a headhunter. (Aside, here's my favorite headhunter/recruiting information source: http://asktheheadhunter.com/ http://asktheheadhunter.com/ )

mooreds 14y ago

That's an interesting point. The way to combat that is with long term relationships. For example, I work as a software developer for a real estate brokerage, and have mentioned the sell side realtor scenario you bring up. The answer is always: yes, it is in the short term interest of the realtor to take the first offer. But in the long term (as they screw more and more people) they will be hurt by this behavior. In fact, there is long term incentive (because, in the US at least, people buy and sell homes multiple times over a lifetime) to get the best deal for the seller, so that they will: * refer the realtor * use the realtor again To bring it back to recruiting, if you had a relationship with the recruiter, and they knew you were going to go back to them in 1 or 5 years when you were ready to move on to your next job, they would have a rational interest in finding you the right job (and the same interests hold true if employers have a relationship with the recruiter). This relationship, if it exists, really turns the recruiter into a headhunter. (Aside, here's my favorite headhunter/recruiting information source: http://asktheheadhunter.com/ http://asktheheadhunter.com/ )