I have a big bit of news which, out of respect for those involved, I can’t share with you this week. Apologies. Instead, I’d like to share one of my less popular views. Given that most of my views fly in the face of sound reasoning, that’s quite a statement. As we wait for the dust to settle on my actual news, let me share a recruitment opinion that no other recruiter has as ever agreed with me on. Not even recruiters I’ve worked with or hired, past and present. Here we go.
I think calling a candidate or client after a placement has been made to “see how it’s going” is a waste of time. So much so, that I rarely, if ever, do it. And when I do, I probably have an ulterior motive, or I just really like talking to that person. There. I said it. Following on from this, I also think free replacement guarantees aren’t just annoying and unfair, they’re also unethical. I’ll come back to this point later on. Firstly, let’s look at “post-placement care”.
It’s very fashionable to be caring these days. Experience has taught me that those who outwardly express how caring they are, via LinkedIn for example, are often the most awful people in real life. My issue today isn’t with the falsities of human nature as highlighted by social media (as we all know and agree on this). It’s actually the potential impotency caused by the candidate “check-up”. No, not that kind of impotency. That’s largely unrelated. For those who don’t do this for a living, here’s how it’s meant to go; A recruiter places a candidate in a role. Sometime during that first week, and again a month or two later, and again just before the free replacement guarantee ends, the recruiter calls the candidate to see how they’re doing. Working to the same time frame, the recruiter does this to the client also. The rationale for doing this? Well, let’s turn this blog into a multiple choice:
- They really care for the outcome of the placement and want to make sure everyone is happy (although there is nothing that they can do if someone isn’t)
- They want to identify if there are any issues (told to them in confidence by either party) which they can iron out (except they can’t as both parties told them the other party is a w@nker in confidence)
- They want to persuade both parties to stick together for three months so that the free replacement guarantee doesn’t kick-in
Would you like to guess which is the most common motivator for a recruiter?
Before you all think I’m a total bastard, let me give some context as to what typically happens when we check in on candidates. In the most part, everyone is happy. If they weren’t, we wouldn’t last long as recruiters. Therefore, our call is one of courtesy. However, it’s also like your mum asking if you fancy spaghetti hoops for dinner. The answer is either “yes” or the response is “tough sh*t“. Quite frankly, once someone starts a job, it’s just a bit late to sort out any issues. Especially when every conversation is in confidence. I bought a new car recently. If there was a problem, I’d call the dealership. What I don’t need is a car salesman interrupting my day when I’m bashing one off to Anne Robinson and The Weakest Link. Horses for courses however.
Ah but Sean… If a candidate tells you that he, she, or they are not happy about the nickname their new boss has bestowed upon them, you can have a discreet word with the manager and sort it our for Wingnut. Alas, in all my years I’ve never had a candidate allow me to do so. What they say is “my boss makes fun of my comically big ears, but please don’t mention that to them. I’ll deal with it”. So, we sit there impotent. Armed with information, but unable to do anything about it. Thanks for giving me sleepless nights Dumbo. It’s not that I don’t care about the happiness of both clients and candidates. I actually really do. However, I have never been able to make a real difference to someone’s happiness after the fact. In nearly 20 years, no one has given me tangible information that I can share with the other party in order to increase happiness without breaking the confidence of whoever told me the issue. Candidates have moaned about clients and clients have moaned about candidates, but neither party allow us to share their feelings. The most we get is a client saying “see if you can find out if they mind me taking the p*ss out of their FA Cup-sized ears”. The candidate then says they hate it but don’t tell the boss. Dammed if we do, dammed if we don’t. I would rather concentrate by efforts on getting the placement right in the first place. Massaging the situation to get to the three month mark helps no one except the recruiter’s commission check.
This blog is already longer than it should be, so perhaps we can look at free replacements in greater depth another time. Briefly however, free replacements only work with items which can be owned. Jumpers, phones, cars, crotchless underwear. If it doesn’t work, send it back and get a new one (has to be crotchless ‘mind). When you’re dealing with a sentient being, the issue may not be with the product (in this case, a candidate). It’s just as likely to be the hiring manager. Why are we replacing someone for free when you treated them so badly? We either agree that it’s different and scrap free replacements, or we keep them and bring back slavery.
I actually feel a bit better now. More actual industry news next week.
^SW
