Do you accept the fact that your client can reject candidates you present on your shortlist?

Yes? Then you lack ‘Recruiter Equity’.

View video on YouTube

Recruiter equity is the trust, the buy-in, the belief that your clients have in your ability and your judgment. It is the combination of your experience and your knowledge, and it gives you the power to advise clients and truly impact the outcomes of your interaction with them.

Most recruiters lack equity all together. The presenting of a shortlist for a permanent brief is a classic example.

The fact is, that if a client rejects or will not interview any of your shortlisted candidates, it can mean only one of two things — both bad.

1. You misunderstood the brief. You got it wrong.
2. The client does not trust your judgment.

It can mean nothing else.

Both of those outcomes is a disaster. And it means you did not get equity into the relationship with this client. Equity means ownership or a share of ownership. In this case joint ownership of the problem and the solution.  Recruiter equity is the key difference between winners and losers in this business. Do your clients trust your judgment? Do they interview every candidate you refer?

No? Then your recruiter equity is low – maybe non-existent. It takes hard work to build up your equity. It takes determination, study and practice. But it all stems from our attitude. Think about the best recruiters you know. The relationships they have with clients amount to shared equity. Sharing the problem. Sharing the solution. Sharing the rewards.

View the video for more on presenting the shortlist.

During my recent RCSA speaking tour around Australasia I spoke to over 500 Australian and 150 New Zealander recruiters, on the upbeat topic of ‘Riding the Recovery’.

I have to admit it was refreshing to talk about positive ideas and strategies to ensure we take advantage of the opportunities presented by an economic revival.

One of the key areas I covered was the use of Social Media as a sourcing and influencing tool for our industry going forward. I have already blogged on my finding that Australian recruiters use Twitter in tiny numbers and followed that up with a similar story on New Zealand. However, I also used this opportunity to survey (by show of hands, so not very scientific), the use of LinkedIn by New Zealand recruiters.

It turns out that in Auckland and Christchurch, only about 70% of recruiters have a LinkedIn Account (I have to say I am wondering what the other 30% are waiting for). However when asked whether their LinkedIn accounts were worked ‘actively’ with status updates, participation in groups and all the other available applications, only between 10% and 20% kept hands raised.

I am no LinkedIn expert, but it seems self-evident that it’s a great branding tool, a fantastic sourcing tool and an exceptional way to connect with otherwise inaccessible people-not to mention its research capabilities.

I have spoken to clients who acknowledge freely that the first thing they do when assessing a new recruitment service provider, is to review their LinkedIn profile, including an evaluation of history, stability and quality of the recruiters network.

Personally, I could do far more with my LinkedIn account. However I do review it every day, participate in groups, answer questions, update my status and add connections every week. I have also connected my blog and Twitter account to my Linked In page, making an attempt to integrate my Social Media messaging and content. And it works. Even though I am only using the free functionality of Linked In, so far I have hired new Aquent employees from LinkedIn, won clients, secured speaking engagements and generated publicity in many countries and many media.

So Kiwi recruiters, let’s get with the programme. Slow to buy into Twitter I can half understand.

But if you are not LinkedIn… you surely will be left out.

Over the past week I have conducted RCSA seminars for over 150 New Zealand Recruiters in Auckland and Christchurch. The topic was “Riding the Recovery” and part of my session was on Social Media and how we need to build that technology into our talent sourcing strategies.

Well, I grabbed this opportunity to conduct a little mini-survey on the Twitter habits of attendees. It was totally unscientific and very impromptu, so take from this what you will, but I was somewhat surprised to find that only 5% of the attendees (by show of hands) in Auckland, and probably even less in Christchurch, actually have a Twitter account at all.

I am not sure what I expected. Having done a similar survey in three large Australian cities late last year, I should have been prepared because the Australian average was only between 5% and 10% as well. But on the other hand, Australians and New Zealanders are massive early-adopters of technology, and at the general level have swarmed into Social Media use. Why not recruiters?

I think this is going to have to change – and fast. New Zealand recruiters won’t be able to rely on job boards for candidates going forward. The cream of candidates, especially passive ones, will need to be sourced through an increasingly fragmented variety of channels. In my view Social Media will be one of those channels.

But for recruiters, Twitter will be far more than a simple source of candidates to fill todays’ job order. More important than that is that smart use of Social Media is an opportunity to be perceived as an expert in your industry niche. Recruiters are going to need to use Twitter to foster relationships (and not to spam people by the way), build credibility, and actually interact with communities of people they might want to place in the future, or who are influencers in their area of interest. That will be increasingly powerful for those who get it right.

In my view it’s like this. Social media remains a TOOL – not a strategy – to reach people. There are still tons of people who will not be found on social networking sites. Recruiters don’t want to be seduced by Social Media and the hype surrounding it — but equally recruiters must acknowledge its’ role, and figure out how to work it into the talent acquisition mix

So Kiwis (and Aussies, by the way) get to it! Build social media into your communications armory. When that talent shortage comes roaring back, you are going to need it!

During my recent RCSA speaking tour around Australia I spoke to over 500 Australian recruiters on the upbeat topic of ‘Riding the Recovery’.

I have to admit it was refreshing to talk about positive ideas and strategies to ensure we take advantage of the opportunities presented by an economic revival.

One of the key areas I covered was the use of Social Media as a sourcing and influencing tool for our industry going forward. I have already blogged on my finding that Australian recruiters use Twitter in tiny numbers, but I also used this opportunity to survey (by show of hands, so not very scientific), the use of LinkedIn by Australian recruiters.

It turns out that in Sydney and Melbourne about 80% of recruiters have a LinkedIn Account (I have to say I am wondering what the other 20% are waiting for). However when asked whether their LinkedIn accounts were worked ‘actively’ with status updates, participation in groups and all the other available applications, only 20% kept hands raised.

In Brisbane, 70% have LinkedIn accounts but again, only 20% of those are ‘worked actively”.

I am no LinkedIn expert, but it seems self evident that it’s a great branding tool, a fantastic sourcing tool and an exceptional way to connect with otherwise inaccessible people –not to mention its research capabilities.

I have spoken to clients who acknowledge freely that the first thing they do when assessing a new recruitment service provider, is to review their LinkedIn profile, including an evaluation of history, stability and quality of the recruiters network.

Personally, I could do far more with my LinkedIn account. However I do review it every day, participate in groups, answer questions, update my status and add connections every week. So far I have hired new Aquent employees from LinkedIn, won clients and secured speaking engagements.

So Aussie recruiters, let’s get with the programme. Slow to buy into Twitter I can half understand.

But if you are not LinkedIn… you are lucked out.

There is an elephant in the room when it comes to the basic business model of our industry. People don’t talk about it much, yet it’s a fundamental flaw in the relationship between client and recruiter, and it drives poor service and lack of satisfaction for all parties.

Multi-listing of job orders across multiple agencies, and recruiters accepting briefs on a contingent and in-competition basis.

There are three primary reasons client multi-list job orders and expect recruiters to compete on the same order with a “winner take all” outcome for the agency that fills the role.

• Clients live under the erroneous belief that by pitting several agencies against each other, they some how “keep us honest” and will get better service because we will compete more aggressively
• Clients want to give the job out to several recruiters because this way they will “get a better spread of the candidates available”, and
• The third reason is the most damning. Clients do it because most recruiters don’t have the knowledge or the courage to tell them why it is NOT in the clients’ best interest to give a job order to more than one recruiter.

This goes to the heart of being a ‘consultative ‘ recruiter. Unless you want to be a transactional beast of burden, you must be totally articulate in positioning why a client is doing themselves tremendous harm by getting recruiters to compete. By all means let recruiters compete for a client. No problems there. But not on the same job. That’s just dumb business by all parties.

Let’s look at the first two client reasons listed above and examine what is happening when a client gives a brief to say, four recruiters.

The client thinks they get better commitment from each recruiter. In fact quite the reverse is true. We have to be prepared to look a client in the eye and say “Mr. Client when you give an order to four recruiters, you are effectively giving each recruiter 25% of your commitment. What makes you think that any one of those will give you more than 25% of their commitment in return?

In fact what you are doing Mr. Client, is inviting us to approach your crucial hiring decision on the basis of speed – instead on the basis of who can do the best quality job”.

It’s a compelling argument and most clients can see the logic when they think it through. Far from getting more commitment when clients get recruiters to compete, they actually get less commitment and lower quality service. At best they can expect a flurry of activity as the recruiters first refer who immediately comes to mind. But when the hard work needs to be done in terms of sourcing hard to find talent, the recruiters will drop off and focus on clients who DO give them commitment.

Once this is explained to the client, then a skilled recruiter will go on to ask the client for a “window” of opportunity to handle his role exclusively so that you can give the role 100% of your commitment and bring all your resources to bear to ensure the best quality outcome.

Then let’s address the second client reason. “I want to get a better spread of candidates out there.” Again you need to have courage to face the client down on this.

Ask the client what percentage of people he thinks are available to move jobs (who are suitable for his job) who are currently registered with any recruiter at all. Latest research suggests this number is less than 5%. We need to explain the active vs. passive job market. Explain that you need time to winkle this person out of a job where they may be now. (Advertising, networking, headhunting, database search).

Passive candidates do not respond to advertisements.

If the client gives the job to four recruiters, he is just fishing in the same limited, active job-seeker talent pond – and no recruiter will be committed enough to invest time searching beyond that pond.

A great recruiter has the credibility and the confidence to secure the role on a retained basis or at least exclusively so he/she can have the time to put a full range of appropriate strategies in place to find the right person.

Paying a contingent fee for a multi-listed job is like paying a bounty hunter in the days of the Wild West.

And if you pay recruiters like you pay cowboys, you just might get cowboys.

I have been reading quite a bit lately about creating a personal brand online. The subject fascinates me, not least because I see so many people making a total hash of it by the inane things they post on Facebook, Twitter, blog replies, and to a lesser extent, LinkedIn.

But recently I had such a powerful personal example happen to me, that I feel compelled to share it with you. This small Twitter exchange taught me a huge lesson in how quickly “Brand You” can be harmed by inappropriate online behaviour.

You see recentlyI was shocked to read a Tweet which, frankly, made a very disparaging remark, directed at me!

TweetDeck advised me I had several “mentions” overnight, and I glanced through them, smiling at some banter with followers, until I struck the Tweet that, for reasons still unknown to me, took a personal shot at me, by name. Look, it wasn’t a vicious remark. But it was personal, it was negative, it was totally unprovoked and of course, it was very public.

Now if this has not happened to you, I can confirm it is an unpleasant experience. The comment was untrue, and I hope it is not how anyone views me. So it rankled! I obviously clicked on the perpetrators’ Twitter page and found that I had never even heard of the guy! Never had anything to do with him in the real world or the online world, although I did work out he is a Twitter follower of mine (or was!). Nor was his comment in response to any Tweet of mine. It was not even directed to me, but to a third party, about me.

I searched for his LinkedIn page and found he holds a nothing-job in a widely unrespected company. I was not sure if this made me feel better or worse! I racked my brain as to why this stranger would attack me, publicly. I won’t lie to you. It stung. However after about 10 minutes I started to lose interest and decided not to respond in any public way. I resolved to forget about it.

But that’s when it got really interesting. Over the next few hours my Twitter DM inbox (Direct Message) began to fill up with fellow Tweeters who took great umbrage at the remark this guy had made. I had at least 10 in a single day, and the theme was “who is this guy?” and “Who does he think he is” and more specifically “What a rude jerk”, and interestingly “I will never use him or his company again.”

One follower –who I do not know personally at all, and only vaguely remember as an online friend, had done his research on the “offender” and Direct Messaged me to say that he was amazed this guy was in the advertising industry “because he has no idea of how to manage his personal brand”

And it was that remark that struck me hard. In a flash, I realised that it was not MY reputation that had suffered as a result of this online rudeness. It was the reputation and brand of the person who made the remark that had taken a huge hit. Just one Tweet and provoked such an active response from my followers, all echoing disapproval. The question is, how many people read that Tweet and thought “idiot”?

And so the lesson was learned. By me, if not by the person who chose to hurl cyber-insults. Online, we are what we write. In real life we can make a risqué joke to close friends because they “know” us and take the joke in context. In real interpersonal situations we can pass the odd sarcastic comment, accompanied by a smile, and the receiver feels no hurt because there is context and history, which makes it ok and appropriate. Dropping in the odd swear word while chatting with like-minded buddies does not raise an eyebrow because it conforms with the group culture.

Online we have no such protection.

All this got me thinking about my own online “brand”. I have 5,200 plus Twitter followers and get thousands of visitors to my blog each month, but a tiny percentage of those people are known to me personally. Yet many of the rest I have what I consider to be a great relationship with. We reply to each other’s Tweets, we DM, we offer advice, and we share good-humoured banter as well as seriously useful data. We pass on knowledge freely, and even do business together.

I thought about how I viewed these people. I have an image of them, they have a “brand “ with me based on their tweets, their humour, the quality of their information and their online generosity. And that ‘brand’ or ‘reputation’ is as real as if I had met them. And I will make decisions to trust them and buy their services based on the brand they have built up with me online, over time.

So the lesson is this. Consider “Brand You” before you Tweet how many beers you sank on Saturday night. Consider ‘Brand You’ before you use gratuitous profanities online. Consider “Brand You” before you post that heavily politicised or semi-pornographic video on your blog spot, after months of building up credibility as a professional recruiter.

And of course, consider “Brand You” before you hurl insults at people who might actually have a stronger online brand than your own.

Small glimpses of a recovery for both the Australian and UK recruitment industry may be coming into view, but times remain tight and recruiters have to scrap for every client, every order. One thing the recession has done, is highlight the paucity of true consulting skills across our profession. Years of talent shortages and desperate clients have allowed ‘résumé shufflers’ to succeed, even thrive, and the ability to actually connect with clients, service them as “trusted advisors” has been lost in many cases.

But as the saying goes, ‘on a rising tide, everybody floats. When the tide goes out you can see who has been swimming naked”. So I think its time for every recruiter to ask themselves a question. And you have to be totally honest when you answer.

Are you transactional or are you consultative?

In other words, do you provide resumes or do you provide expertise?Because your survival depends on your ability to provide something your clients currently lack. And with hundreds of competitors referring candidates indiscriminately, cheap job boards, and the emergence of social media as a talent source –resumes is one thing your clients do not.

If you are not sure whether you do provide additional value or expertise to your clients, try this hypothetical exercise.

Say you picked up the phone to your client today and said ‘Bob, I no longer actually provide candidates. I want you to remain my client on the basis of the other aspects of value you get from dealing with me’.

What response do you predict?

Now this is a powerful exercise because it makes you face up to whether your clients do in fact value the consultative aspect of your offering. This is actually the real stuff behind that well worn cliché ‘value add’.

Does your client value your counsel in hiring trends, interview techniques and candidate specific questions for upcoming interviews?

You must differentiate your offer through your fresh approach to this business. Becoming a ’subject matter expert’ is what your clients (and talent) will be expecting of you going forward.

Sure, its true, clients want us to deliver quality candidates, and that’s what they pay for. But they want it bundled up in “trusted advisor” wrapping paper.

So you have to be the recruiter who can advise on such issues as:

• Skill set availability – what skills are hot in the market and who has them
• Industry demand – which sectors are competing for the best talent
• Project “sex appeal” – what do the best talent like to work on
• Required turn round times –how quickly can we access key hires
• Salaries and benefits and trends in reward and compensation
• Retention and staff development strategies
• Corporate perceptions – of your client. In other words what can your client do to be a more attractive employer
• Hiring and retention ratios. What is staff turnovers like in their industry
• New techniques and tactics emerging – what are their competitors doing to attract staff? To retain people? To reward staff?

I believe that the role of the skilled recruiter who is trusted to provide knowledge, advice and guidance will become more valued by employers – not less valued.

But to get to that stage we need to be sophisticated in our selling, consultative in our approach and very clearly be able to point to how we add value through the process.

Let’s not fool ourselves. We are not a loved profession. Clients often use us begrudgingly, some even with open hostility. I have sat in client board-level meetings and heard with my own ears, the resentment felt towards our industry. I have listened, squirming, while clients plan to avoid using recruiters and any third party staff providers.

Even before the downturn, the evidence was all around us. The rise of internal recruitment teams, the clear strategy to reduce use of outside agencies, the development of employer branding strategies, the money spent on corporate recruiting websites and on developing internal recruiting software. And of course, the increased use of referral programmes and rewards for internal hires.

Increasingly, clients do not see value in what we do. Research tells us they think we are too expensive, they don’t like our pricing and they are pushing back on it like they never have done before. Clients think we are too slow and they also believe all recruiters have access to the same talent pool as each other, and also as they do. In some cases they are right.

And then the recession came along and just added fuel to the fire. Now employers talk openly and aggressively about cutting recruiters out of their hiring strategies altogether. In a recent Tele-Seminar I did, hosted by Mark Whitby , we had 500 people on the call, and a big percentage of those wanted an answer to this question…

“How can we convince clients to use our services instead of doing it themselves?”

Well, the first thing to understand is that this move to eliminate the use of recruiters gains momentum during every downturn. The market softens, clients see more talent availability, the CEO demands spending cuts, and suddenly every employer is confident they can save a bundle by doing all their hiring themselves.

It’s a well-worn pattern. And it is a threat to recruiters. Well, it is if we allow it to be. Our challenge is to make sure we offer something different. Something clients can’t do themselves at all, or can’t do themselves at a reasonable cost to their business.

But its also important we are articulate enough and confident enough to communicate to clients the three primary reasons why doing the recruitment internally is a costly and self-defeating exercise.

• Getting the client to understand their true cost of trying to hire themselves
• Explaining to clients the true significance of our value-adds
• Explaining to clients about passive candidates and how we access them

Most employers have never really analysed how much it costs them to take on recruitment themselves. They look at our fee, recoil in shock, and say it must be cheaper doing it internally. We have to be skilled in communicating to clients the full range of both direct and indirect costs that make up the real cost of hiring. Direct costs include many of the obvious things, such as advertising, the cost of executive and support staff time on screening, interviewing debriefing and reference checking, These add up fast and can way exceed the cost of any agency fee on their own. But you also need to factor in indirect costs such the opportunity cost of the senior executive spending time reviewing 50 resumes instead doing the job they are really employed to do. During the last recession I had a chart, ready to present to clients, outlining all the cost of “going it alone”. I had dollar figures against each activity, and very soon the cost of recruiting by the company far exceeded that of an agency fee. And what if the chosen candidate turns the job down or leaves after a few weeks? What is cost to the company of doing the whole exercise again?

The second theme that a skilled recruiter needs to communicate to a client who may want to avoid using our services, is the ability to showcase the many value adds that good recruiters offer their clients. This may include salary surveys, compensation advice, and market insights, but it will extend further to helping to define the role being recruited, acting as an advocate for the client with hard to hire candidates who are spoiled for choice, and playing the role of third party mediator to ensure an offer will actually result in an acceptance. These are invaluable components of our service, which are built into our fee – we don’t charge more for them – but many clients do not have these benefits explained and highlighted by the recruiting firms themselves.

Finally, passive candidates. And this is the clincher because when all is said and done, it’s access to great candidates that drives clients to use recruiters in the first place. Employers can naively believe that by placing an ad on a job board they have “done what any recruiter would do”. Not so. Job boards, by definition, only tap into the active job market. Nothing wrong with that, but it’s the cream of the entire available market that every client really wants to choose from. And only great recruiters are using all channels all the time to farm the talent pool. A good recruiter is always sourcing, 365 days a year. And while job boards may be part of the talent sourcing mix, there will be a huge range of other tactics, including social media, networking, database search, research and head hunting, and many more mechanisms designed to ensure the very best talent are unearthed.

When you think about it, it really is no contest.

A good recruiter saves a client time and money, provides a raft of benefits and value-adds that go way beyond actually providing resumes. And on top of this we ensure access to a talent pool that is increasing difficult for employers to reach.

Your job? Believe in our value and communicate it hard!

Want to know why some recruiters forge long and successful careers and other struggle and fade away?

Want to know why a handful of people have survived, even thrived, during this downturn, while most have lived hand to mouth or given up?

Recruiter Equity.

I believe that all the training you have had as a recruiter, is a total waste of time, unless the skills and techniques you learnt are built on a platform of self-belief.

In business, as in life, you get treated the way you allow yourself to be treated. We all know individuals, who are always ‘the victim’. Bad things are ‘always happening to them’. If something could go wrong with a client or candidate – it will. It’s all so unfair! But the reality is, that it is their behaviour and their demeanour and their attitude that’s the problem. They are failure-magnets.

You see, the foundation point for a great recruiter is self-belief. You are the expert. Your client may be an Executive Director of a listed company or the CEO of a multi-national conglomerate, but who knows more about the permanent recruiting market? You or him? Who interviews hundreds of candidates each year? Who negotiates salaries every day? Who knows what motivates staff in today’s market place? Who knows permanent market-rate salaries, or how to handle a counter-offer situation?

You do!

You are the expert. Believe in that and behave as though you believe that. If you do, your client will believe in you. But if you behave like a processor of resumes or a clerical resourcer, that is how you will be treated.

Remember, you have the power to set the tone of the relationship with your client. Too many of us are forever apologising for our industry, and trying to justify our role. I have even heard consultants say that they feel our fees are expensive and find it hard to justify the service we provide. Rubbish! We must put that behind us. We must be proud of what we do and fiercely protective of our value. Any other way means you lose respect – and therefore control.

Your relationship with your client is one of equality. It is not a ‘master/servant’ relationship. Through your credibility, your communication skills and your self-belief you impose on your client a process, which you know, will benefit him or her.

Approach all contact with clients with respect, definitely, but always on a professional-to-professional basis. If you are subservient, apologetic or lacking in confidence, the client automatically takes control and you will be lost.

To be a winner in the recruitment business, you must have the attitude of a winner. You need the skills of course, but only through the right attitude can you grow what I call your “Recruiter Equity”.

Recruiter Equity is the trust, the buy-in, the belief that your clients have in your ability and your judgment.

Recruiter Equity is the combination of your experience and your knowledge certainly, but it’s also the personal confidence you show in delivering that expertise. It gives you the power to advise clients, and truly impact the outcomes of your interaction with them.

Equity means ownership, or a share of ownership. In the case of Recruiter Equity, I mean the joint ownership of the problem and the solution. Recruiter Equity is the key difference between winners and losers in this business. Do your clients trust your judgement? Do they interview every candidate you refer? Do they build questions into their recruitment process based on your advice? Do they adjust their hiring process and refine their letter offers, and add extra benefits, because you counsel them that this is the way to attract better talent?

No? Then your Recruiter Equity is low – maybe non-existent. It takes hard work to build up your equity. It takes determination, study and practice. But it all stems from our attitude. Think about the best recruiters you know. The relationships they have with clients amount to shared equity. Sharing the problem. Sharing the solution. Sharing the rewards.

But if you want to build Recruiter Equity, your service needs to be consultative rather than transactional. In other words do you provide resumes, or do you provide expertise? Because your survival depends on your ability to provide something your clients currently lack.

And with cheap job boards, thousands of job-hunting talent, and hundreds of competitors referring resumes indiscriminately, resumes is one thing your clients do not lack.

Does your client value your counsel in hiring trends, salary packaging and interview techniques for example?

You see you are the expert – yet for some crazy reason we do not ACT like that in front of our clients. You have knowledge and expertise and contacts they desperately need if they are going to win the war for talent and hire the best people available. Hiring managers need your knowledge. It’s just that we have not yet learned how to sell that fact to them.

And so, I believe, the client – deep down, WANTS you to control the process. Do you go to your doctor and tell her what tests to run and what drugs to prescribe? No. Do you go to your lawyer and tell him what words he will use in your legal documents? No. You trust and expect them to drive the solution to your medical or legal issues, to advise and to lead.

This is how great recruiters succeed in our business. Belief in our value and ability to control client interaction.

Recruiter Equity. Wouldn’t THAT be cool?