Register early and save on ERE Expo 2010 Spring in San Diego from March 15-17.

Blog Network

How the recession will change the landscape of professional recruiting services follow this blog post

You don't need a crystal ball to see that a cataclysmic shift is happening within the recruiting space. The recruiting services landscape already looks starkly different than it did before the economic meltdown and is continuing to morph dramatically.

The primary value that a recruiter used to offer was finding candidates for their clients and selling those candidates on their client's opportunities. Everything else was added value. Fast forward to today, now finding candidates and selling them on their client's opportunities is the added value part and everything else is the real value. The reality is that finding people today is very easy to do courtesy of web technology and the abundance of resources and tools available. Anybody can do it and companies have access to the same internet tools as recruiters do. Consequently, recruiters will need to redefine their value proposition to remain competitive in this rapidly changing industry.

I think there are several key areas where this new value will manifest itself. For all intents and purposes, recruiting as we once knew it, is obsolete. And the future looks bleak for recruiters who don't augment their value proposition so that it includes some combination of the following value offerings.

Niche recruiting.

The recruiting industry as a whole is largely commoditized. However, this highly monotonous industry is starting to become more mosaic in response. This fragmentation is the result of a visible trend in high specialization recruiting. Recruiters will need to find a niche to stay competitive. It will be the recruiters who are subject matter experts with singular focus in a narrow space that will be the most valuable in the near future.

Why is having a niche so important? First, it creates a perception that the recruiter is a recognized industry expert. This status appeals to both prospective clients and candidates. Furthermore, it gives recruiters instant credibility with passive candidates which is important these days considering that candidate resistence to recruiters is at an all-time high. Clearly, the most effective way to pique the interest of a passive candidate is to speak their language and to be cognizant of their money skills. Niche recruiters can do this better than anybody else and that's why they are so valuable.

Unfortunately, finding a niche is very difficult. If you choose the wrong one, it's not easy to reestablish yourself in another. After all, the whole value of having a niche is long term exposure and staying power in a given area. Nonetheless, being identified with a niche is a necessity for any recruiter with an eye on succeeding in the business long term.

Network equity.

Tomorrow's recruiters will need to have colossal networks to offer any realistic value to their clients. By virtue of the relationship with a recruiter, clients will expect to gain equity in a highly valuable network.

There are so many important reasons for this and it's beyond the scope of this blog entry to cover them all. Suffice it to say, that recruiters with substantial networks can source better quality candidates and do so in a fraction of the time when compared to recruiters with negligible networks.

A large network will also bolster a recruiter's image and repute. A large network instantly conveys the impression of good standing within the professional community. Unfortunately, due to years of declining sentiment toward recruiters in general, a good reputation must be quickly established in order to overcome general recruiter resistance on both the client and candidate side.

Web 2.0 expertise.

For most recruiters, the extent of their internet tools proficiency is running Boolean search queries on job boards. That simply won't cut it anymore. The days of earning high fees for being the first in line to present low hanging fruit to clients is, thankfully, grinding to a halt.

Recruiters will need to master the use of web 2.0 tools to be able to offer any realistic value to their clients. They will need to be expert social networkers and cyber sleuths. Unfortunately, learning this technology is daunting and presents a steep learning curve for earlier generation recruiters. Sadly, I think web 2.0 is going to wipe this group out. But that's the hard reality.

Job Marketing.

Without question, a job marketing strategy is an essential aspect of any recruiting initiative today. Amazingly enough, this basic and vital recruiting function is rarely ever provided by recruiters and search firms. Recruiters will need to be able to write compelling job ads for their clients that stand out from all the others online. This adds a creative aspect to recruiting that was never required before in a traditionally conservative sales oriented industry. Without question, new generation recruiters will need to have creative mojo in the area of job marketing to be truly valuable to a client. They will also need to be savvy enough with web 2.0 to choose the right marketing channels in order to ensure their job ads reach the right candidate audience.

Long gone are the days of dull requirements-intensive job descriptions that describe the person who will do the job. Job ads of the future will describe the job and the opportunity inherent in it. They will communicate the job value proposition in a creative and compelling way. Companies will expect their recruiters to provide this service. Recruiters who are not creative by nature and lack strong marketing skills will need to outsource this process in order to survive. Clearly, job marketing will be part and parcel of recruiting services in the future.

Hiring process support.

Fact is, managers have a full-plate supervising the people they already have. Needless to say, most aren't enthusiastic about single-handedly managing the process of hiring new people as well. And for good reason. Considering that much of the hiring process is project management and documentation related, these activities lend themselves well to being delegated. Support in this area can provide tremendous value to a manager and I believe we will see some form of hiring process support commonly bundled with professional recruiting services in the future.

Some of these activities will include the consultation and documentation necessary to create a performance profile, writing the job ad, comprehensive candidate screening, interviewing technique coaching, assessment advice and tools, facilitating reference gathering and background checks, on-boarding support and a long-term performance evaluation road map.

Employee performance-based fee structure.

The Performance Payouts fee structure will become the industry norm. Companies will want to work with recruiters who are confident enough in their candidates to share the hiring risk with managers.

An employee performance-based fee structure means paying recruiting fees for a new hire's success on the job, not for a recruiter's success in finding the candidate. The key difference being that recruiting fees are paid for new hire results instead of candidate potential. It is a ‘try before you buy' fee structure in which incremental payments representing a percentage of the total recruiting fee are spread out over a specified period of time and paid only as new hires reach calendar milestones. I think it is safe to say that the days of large lump sum fees payable 15 days after a candidate's start date are on the fast track to the Smithsonian.

I believe those are several of the most dramatic changes that we can expect to see in the evolution of professional recruiting services. I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

 

12 comments

Log in or register to post a reply.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Could you please explain to me what web 2.0 is and where do I find more information on how to understand it.  You can reach me directly at sburke88@comcast.net.  Thanks!

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Based on the feedback to my blog post, it is evident that many recruiters are not particularily fond of and/or don't want to believe in the future of the employee performance based fee structure. While I respect the opinions of others, I've seen too much evidence to convince me otherwise. First of all, I use the Performance Payouts fee structure exclusively and I would qualify as a 'big biller'. My clients constantly tell me how much they appreciate this fee structure anf that they would never do business again with a recruiter any other way. This fee structure has inceased my buisiness income many times over because of the positive marketing impact it has. This fee structure greatly improves the relationship between the recruiter, hiring manager and candidate. I could go on and on about the many benefits of Performance Payouts but the skeptics will remain skeptics and I have far better ways of utilizing my time than trying to convince anybody of anything. However, for those of you who are on the fence regarding the notion, give Performance Payouts a chance and you will see your recruiting business skyrocket.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    You offer some good points here however, I disagree with the idea of an employee performance-based fee structure. I don't see this concept becoming the "norm" anytime soon.  It's like saying "I am not 100% sure of my candidate so (employer) why not just go ahead and pay me over a period of time - this way we can see if he/she works out". 

    A professional recruiters job is to recruit and place talent that meets or exceeds the employers expectations (skills, experience, education, culture, etc.) and to ensure a successful transition into their new job. We cannot guarantee anything beyond that - nor can the employer. 

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    That's an intersting perspective,Tom. How can you be sure a candidate meets or exceeds expectations till they have proven it?

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Agree with most of this post, with one exception, Employee performance-based fee structure.  Speading the fee out over an annual pay is not paying us for performance. If you really want to pay me for performance then give me a % of what that individual "made" or "saved" the company in real dollars.  Then I would say we are on level ground.  Anything less is just an extended guarentee.  In the last 13 years I have had only one candidate not last at least a year (replaced him and the replacement is still working there 12 years later), most have been long term employees and are now hiring managers that use my services, why should we change? 

    Let's face the real issue, company HR folks are overworked, underpaid and not specialists in all the fields they need to recruit and find "A" players for their employers.  The good TPR is the specialist that will "go on the hunt" and enjoy it.  They can find and "sell" the opportunites to the hidden passive candidates.   With Web 2.0, people think that everyone has a page or can be identified through the internet somehow.  The real story is the best are often not out there.  They don't have the time or inclination to go to LinkedIn, facebook or any of the dozens of sites available.  Who will ever find them?  It's the TPR that is on the phone working their networks of real live people, getting referrals, making cold calls, hunting in the dark corners and overlooked areas where the top talent hides. 

    Real value comes with finding those peple and convincing them that they need to at least listen to what is out there. 

    This is my 5th recession, the same has been said time and time again that this time things will change.  But when you boil away all the verbage about how things will "be different" it still comes down to who is willing to do the work, go the extra mile, and use the tools available to produce what others cannot. 

    Here are some of the changes I have been through that were going to "eliminate the need for third party recruiters"

    • The Internet
    • Corporate web sites (with employment pages)
    • Job boards
    • Resume databases
    • Web 2.0

    Happy Hunting! 

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Dorothy, Josh Letourneau said a while back here on ERE - "do what the machines can't do."  You know what that means.

    ;)

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Kevin,

    Good post.  I seeyour firm takes an innovative approach to recruiting similar to ours.  I agree that the economics have certainly shifted as it relates to where value is generated in candidate sourcing and job marketing. 

    Writing compelling messages is increasingly critical in the age of social media - and writing good ad copy is not a natural skill for many recruiters. 

    Also agree that hiring process support is essential, and the recruiter must be viewed by the client as a full partner in the success of the project (which is devilishly hard to accomplish on a contingency fee basis).

    Pay for performance is an excellent idea, but we have found that a long guarantee provides a similar alignment of interests with your clients.  

    Really our only area of disagreement is the niche issue.  While I see your point, in the small and midsize employer market that we work in, we have not had a problem diving into talent pools where we have not previously done work before.

    Nice discussion you started here, I'll be interested in hearing what others say.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Hi Bob.

    Thank you for the comments. Two observations:

    1. In regards to Performance Payouts, long guarantees are not equivalent. The client still needs to fork out a substantial recruiter fee in one-shot soon after a start date. Performance Payouts are much easier on a client's cash flow and they are therefore more tempted to greenlight a search or engage multiple simultaneous searches. While I'm sure you're cash refund policy is honest, it is a well-known fact that getting money back from a recruiter after it has been paid is a painstaking ordeal; one that nobody has the time or patience or desire to deal with. Performance Payouts takes that worry off the table. The whole logic of Performance Payouts is simple; if you believe in the candidates you are placing, you should have no problem sharing the hiring risk. For a successful recruiter with lots of assignments, the spread out fee structure is not even an inconvenience. Once you have enough placements in the loop, every month is payout month at one client or another.

    2. In regards to being a niche recruiter, it is VERY important and perhaps the most important of all of my points. However, you are likely correct that in a small market where clients don't have a lot of choices, a recruiter who is more of a generalist will do OK. But the logic is pretty simple in large markets, recruiters are a dime a dozen so why not choose one that has expertise and specializes in the industry of the position being hired for. Actually, this is not a position that is unique to me. You will notice that all of today's recruiting profession thought leaders are stressing the importance of finding a niche. And I believe they are absolutely correct that it is vital to recruiting success in the future. If you don't specialize in a niche, recruiters who are experts in the industry of the position being hired for will win the order every time. I should also add that in a day and age where personal branding is so important, having a niche really helps you to establish a unique and highly valuable brand.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Great post and very complete.  Yes, allof this is seen today and as a researcher I am involved with a lot of it.  My worry is that researchers will also have to be niched.  I can do this since I have past careers in healthcare, food & beverage and life science but many other researchers don't have this advantage.  I'd like to hear your thoughts on this as well as how researchers might be paid OR if they will exist at all.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Hi Dorothy,

    I don't think researchers will be 'phased out' per say, I do believe however that their value from a 'rate' perspective will continue to decline in response to the proliferation of web tools and resources. However, at the end of the day, somebody has to do the research legwork and researchers are needed for that so the rainmakers can focus on the building client relationships and high level recruiting.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Leap Career is a generalist bouquet we have helped 100% of everyone who has taken our services! Our only niche is a reengineered resume.  I received a resume from the Sr. Vice President of an $8B a year Fortune 500 company. Now, I've seen thousands, maybe tens of thousands of resumes in my career, and never had I seen a candidate with a more impressive list of achievements. This man had a history of turning around every company he's ever worked for. At his most recent company, he quadrupled their online sales, yet for OVER A YEAR, he was unable to land a new position.
    I was stunned. Here was an Executive who'd probably made a cumulative profit in the Billions for the companies he was with. Any Hiring Professional who'd read his resume should have called him IMMEDIATELY and made him an offer. The only reason I could conceive of for this man going a YEAR without being snapped-up is this: No one ever actually READ his resume.

    I convinced him to let me re-engineer his resume. He's now the CEO of a growing company, and quite happy in his new career. YOUR RESUME IS CRITICAL. Period.

    Jim Bradshaw
    Leap Career

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Excellent blog Kevin!