Three Mexican fellas. All with guns. At least one is played by the always-excellent Danny Trejo. Everyone pointing at someone else. Nobody moves. Nobody wins. Perhaps a tired movie trope, but one that 2026 can’t resist playing out time and time again. I’ve avoided blogging about Iran to date because it’s all so bloody stupid that I just don’t want to. I’ve avoided it because it’s a distraction from some actual good stuff happening in our industry. I’ve avoided it because it’s a distraction from a stolen, made-up “country” committing genocide against people with every right to be there. I’ve avoided it because it’s a distraction from how close Trump was to Jeffrey Epstein; a man who also strongly supported the aforementioned stolen, made-up “country” (and yes, It’s going to be one those blogs I’m afraid). But, given that Nicola Willis has now acknowledged that the economic recovery is “delayed but not derailed”, I suppose I just have to write about it. I’ll try to be brief.
Thankfully, enough time has passed that most of us no longer check in everyday to see who said what, and who is currently claiming to be blockading who. The US and Iran have been in a ceasefire that both sides accuse each other of violating. Iran blockade a strait only for Trump, like a petulant 13 year old, to claim that it’s actually him who’s dumping the Ayatollah and not vice versa so there. I like to think he does this via a Hamburger-shaped telephone as his mum moans about the phone bill. Peace talks are happening in Pakistan. Iran won’t publicly confirm it’s attending. The ceasefire(s) expire while everyone is still pointing guns at each other and pretending they’re not blinking. Game theorists have a name for this: a prisoner’s dilemma. Both parties would be better off cooperating. Both parties would rather die than go first. So here we are.
And everyone is at it. Anti-abortionist Chris Luxon has just survived a confidence vote from his own caucus. He technically still has the job, although no one is convinced and the polling says he has no chance of winning an election. He’s holding the gun. His caucus is holding the gun. The electorate is holding the gun. And nothing good will come from any of it. As much as I’m a fan of proportional representation, it does tend to leave us in the “lose lose” category of Game Theory. Half of us want to provide Aston Martins to the unemployed, the other half want to treat their tenants like gulag prisoners, and neither side is backing down. Then there’s an election and the Mexican standoff is unfortunately settled by everyone’s favourite racist grandad, Winston Peters. A man who actually does have a bit of “Jack Palance” about him for all you movie nerds.
And then there’s candidates and clients. They’re at it as well. The last two years have created nervousness and uncertainty of both sides. Thankfully, things are starting to move, but like an abused wife learning to love again, both parties are approaching the situation with trepidation. Clients are slowly daring to believe that they can hire again. Of course they have been burnt before, so us recruiters are slowly, lump of cheese in hand, coaxing them to hire that perfect candidate. The candidate, having been carried through Covid, supported during the doldrums of 2024 and 2025, is plucking up the courage to change roles. This should be straightforward in an alternate universe, but of course it isn’t. Instead, after running the gauntlet of a protracted recruitment process, we get an offer. The client, still damaged from a tough few years, wants the candidate to leap at the offer. The candidate, scared of resigning, scared of change, scared of fuel prices, scared of clowns, spiders, cotton wool, dwarfs etc, wants time to think on it. To the client, this is the ultimate ego-knock; “They should be biting my hand off. I’m starting to question their judgement. Give them until Tuesday”. The candidate in return does that thing your wife does when you use her sister’s name and clams up; “Well I won’t be pressured into changing jobs. I’m quite disappointed in their approach to be honest”. Our third gun, the recruiter, meanwhile pretends to miss calls, makes up excuses, softens words, and does everything else to avoid the worst outcome of Game Theory. Lose lose.
Game theory tells us the rational choice in a Mexican standoff is to cooperate. To lower the gun first. To put your ego on hold. To have some f*cking faith in humanity. Taking longer than you said you would to accept a job offer doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re not keen. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re looking elsewhere. Some people just like to think longer than others. A client that doesn’t offer straight away isn’t always nervous or disinterested. And giving a candidate more time doesn’t mean that they’re ‘re losing the battle for power. Like Iran, there should be no battle. There are…reasons. Too many great placements haven’t been made because we’ve somehow dodged the win win; snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The world is telling us something right now. Nobody wins a Mexican standoff. They just choose how long to stand there.
^SW
