Two killer questions great recruiters ask every time

If you have plans to be a great recruiter, please, remember this and never forget it.

Filling a job does not start with finding good candidates for a particular job order. It starts with the quality with which you take the job order in the first place. It does not matter if you take the brief face to face (and you should, if at all possible), or over the phone. Filling the order starts with how well you qualify that order.

You have to make sure, at the very get-go, that the order you are so excited about, is in fact, fillable! Sound crazy? I don’t think so. My assessment is that most contingent recruitment firms fill somewhere around 25% of the permanent jobs they take. And they only achieve a 25% success rate if they are both very good and very lucky! Everyone denies that of course, but usually that’s because we don’t measure it, or because we are in big-time denial about the reality of our fill ratios.

What this means is that we end up spinning our wheels on 75 % of the permanent orders we take on.

Now it is true that you will be hard-pressed to fill 100% of your job orders in a contingent market. However, you will increase your hit rate exponentially if you learn to qualify your job orders. The key to this is to take charge of the order-taking phase and to act and believe as though you are the expert.

Another day, another blog, maybe, I will lay out how to quality a job order from beginning to end. But here let me share two golden question you must ask every single time you take a job order. It’s non-negotiable. Without asking these questions you are taking on the order ‘blind’. It is in fact inconceivable to me how any recruiter would expend one second of time on filling an order for a client, if they had not asked these two questions, and drilled down on the answers too.

These questions are designed to assist you ‘triage’ your job taking. Is this brief urgent?  How sincere is your client about actually making a hire? In other words, if you put a suitably qualified candidate in front of your client, would they offer them a job? Indeed, will they actually ever even interview them?

Basic you say? Hilarious, I say! Or maybe tragic is more accurate.

Every day I see even experienced recruiters taking on orders they will never fill. Unqualified orders.

If you want to put the title ‘Recruitment Consultant’, or anything vaguely similar on your business card, ask this;

Question #1: “Ms Client, how long have you been trying to fill this particular role and what steps have you taken so far to fill the position?”

Question #2: “Ms Client, if I found the perfect candidate this afternoon, could we get an offer by tomorrow morning?”

The answers to these questions will unlock a treasure trove of information for you. Yes they will provoke more questions and more answers, but once it’s been worked through you will know whether this job is real, whether this client is able to hire and committed to hire, and you will know the urgency of the need.

There are a myriad of variations in the answers you will get, but largely it plays out as follows:

In answer to Question #1, how long has the role been open and what has been done to fill it, you will hear that it’s been open 6 months, that it’s been offered 3 times, that it’s never been offered, that it’s with six other recruiters, that it has been advertised on 12 job boards, that no one has ever been interviewed for the role, that the search criteria have changed 4 times because the hiring manager can’t make up his mind on what he is looking for.  You will dig, you will ask more questions, but you will slowly uncover if the job is real and if it is, what has to change to make sure it will be filled.

Or, in answer to Question #1 you might just get the dream response, which is “the current incumbent resigned last night and I am desperate to get a replacement, and so I called you”. That is a beautiful sound. It is the sound of a client in pain, and a client in pain is a very good thing. Because we can ease that pain

When it comes to Question # 2 you are not really looking to have the job filled by tomorrow. You are assessing the clients’ seriousness. A typical response to this could be “Oh no we can’t give an answer by tomorrow because we are still assessing internal candidates”, or “Oh, we can’t move that fast because the CEO has not signed off on this hire as yet” or any number of other responses that tell you quite clearly: Do not work on this brief – because it is not real.

Remember, you are not a lackey to you clients’ whim. You are not in servitude, required to supply candidates on demand for your client to peruse eventually, if he feels like it, one day, maybe…

You are a professional recruiter and your time has value. If you are not working on a retainer (and your clients will not jerk you around if you are), you need to drill down on these 2 questions in depth, every time. Even then, that is only stage one of qualifying the order.

But please, at the very least, do that

Warum Sie nicht den idealen Kandidaten suchen sollten

Bei der Personalsuche haben Unternehmen oft höchste Ansprüche: Der Kandidat soll über ausgezeichnete Fähigkeiten verfügen, eine breite Ausbildung und viel Arbeitserfahrung aufweisen. Diese Konzentration auf den idealen Kandidaten ist falsch, viele Stellen bleiben deshalb oft für Monate unbesetzt.

Firmen werfen oft gutes Geld schlechtem hinterher, wenn sie den perfekten Kandidaten für eine vakante Stelle suchen. Wegen der immer noch spürbaren Nachwirkungen der Rezession in den USA und dem Glauben, dass es Talente im Überfluss gäbe, sind viele Personalchefs immer noch sehr wählerisch bei Neueinstellungen. Deshalb bleiben viele offene Stellen unbesetzt.

Wer kann es ihnen verdenken? Die Kosten sind sehr hoch, wenn Unternehmen den falschen Kandidat einstellen. Das gilt erst recht dann, wenn wir die versteckten Kosten berücksichtigen.

Wenn der richtige Kandidat nicht auftaucht, sieht die Lösung häufig so aus: Unternehmen suchen einfach immer weiter, setzen mehr Personal für die Suche ein, weiten die Suche aus oder beauftragen ein spezialisiertes Unternehmen, um die Chancen auf den idealen Kandidaten zu erhöhen.

Aber: Eine Stelle für Monate nicht zu besetzen oder die Suchanstrengungen zu verdoppeln ändert nichts an den Gründen, warum es so schwierig ist, den perfekten Kandidaten zu finden. Einer dieser Gründe ist, dass perfekte Kandidaten sehr selten sind. Zu selten, dass Unternehmen auf sie setzen könnten.

Die Spitze dieser Problematik ist die “eierlegenden Wollmilchsau” – die seltensten Kandidaten, geradezu perfekt in ihren Eigenschaften.

weiterlesen

A bad IT recruiter walks into a bar.

A bad IT recruiter walks into a bar. 

Bartender : “Hey can I get you a Bacardi and Coke?”
Bad IT Recruiter: “Let me look at my preferred drink list. Hmmmm, can I have a rum and coke?”
Bartender: “ Right, a Bacardi and coke!”
Bad IT Recruiter: “No, I don’t need Bacardi. The list says Rum and Coke.”
Bartender: “That is crazy! Who wrote the list?”
Bad IT Recruiter: “I can’t tell you.”
Bartender:  “Dude, you are nuts! You need to check that list again everyone knows that Bacardi is a type of Rum!”
Bad IT Recruiter: “Wow, you are not a very good bartender. Isn’t this a bar?”
Bartender: “You are sitting at the bar of Frank’s Grille. Didn’t you see the sign when you walked in?”
Bad IT Recruiter: “Oh that explains it. The bartender that could get me what I need is at a bar, not a Grille. You were not qualified in the first place! If you have any friends that work at a bar that severs rum, will you give them my number?”

Why hiring B players will kill your startup

B players and C players are far worse than D’s and F’s. In fact, in my experience, B players are the worst hires you can make.

Before getting into the details, it may be useful to level-set and explain what I mean by these employee stereotypes (although there have been some differences of opinion over the years.)

A player: Fully self-sufficient and takes initiative that positively impacts the company.
B player: Does some things well, but not fully self-sufficient, and not consistently strong.
C player: Just average, and does not excel in any area.
D player: Poor performer, and shouldn’t last long if you are a half-capable manager.
F player: Should be out…like yesterday.
Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2013/02/06/why-hiring-b-players-will-kill-your-startup/#m1Qy3BSw1UBmSor1.99