Comments on: 10 Ways to Avoid Paying Search Fees

By: Robert Bennett

Robert Bennett — Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:34:00 +0000

I am certain there will ALWAYS be a strong need for TPRs in the near term and especially in the future. Very soon there will be a critical shortage of workers in almost all industries. The greater the shortage of workers the less viable ATSs, advertising, job fairs, etc., etc. become. The most valuable skill a TPR can bring to the table is the ability to sell and close the candidate on their client’s company. Sure, future technology based recruiting systems will be able to source more candidates… but so what! The more technology ‘hits’ a candidate takes the less likely he/she will respond. A good TPR can influence the passive candidate far more than the typical corporate recruiter. As long as TPRs are better sales persons than corporate recruiters they will always be relevant. I was a headhunter for 16 years, Division Manager for a national staffing firm for two years, Corporate Recruiting Director twice in two different industries for five years, contract technical recruiter for four companies covering eight years. No matter how skilled and creative I was in the corporate recruitng departments we still used TPRs when confidentiality, political, time, diversity, limitations of staff, etc. etc. mandated that we needed to. Also, I cannot tell you the number of times that hiring managers used TPRs
for no other reason than a skilled TPR called them to present a quality candidate. It drove me crazy as a corporate recruiter but I love it as a TPR.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Stephan St. Louis

Stephan St. Louis — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 09:54:00 +0000

I think Lou’s point was to wake up and smell the coffee, analyze and adapt rather than be left behind. You need to revise your definition of disservice…

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Tom Carter

Tom Carter — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 09:03:00 +0000

As a TPR and manager, I’ve encountered the news of our looming demise numerous times. Granted, many companies can eliminate their use of TPRs, but at indefensible cost to their companies, much of it hidden from the gaze of the CEO, COO or CFO. Closing the door to any source of talent is foolhardy for a company that depends on top people to achieve the mission.

At some point, relying on a flawed recruiting model tends to dilute the quality of the staff, with the concomitant reduction of quality of the firm’s products or services. There are examples everywhere. I advise my clients to use every means available to them in their search for top talent: internal recruiters, employee referral programs, re-contacting previous employees and many others, including TPRs. Conversely, companies needing warm bodies alone should not use TPRs – it’s a waste of money for them, and a waste of ability for the TPR.

Analogizing for a moment, consider that the hiring company is a commercial fishing boat, out on the water for tuna. After having used every technique they know to make a good catch with limited success, would they turn down the small ketch that pulls up alongside and offers one or two terrific fish at a reasonable price? I don’t think so. The best tuna don’t swim up to your boat just because you want them to.

There will always be a market for the good TPR who offers value through creativity, persistence, and a high level of commitment to the client’s success. My advice? Search for candidates that are hard to find – anyone can catch the easy ones.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Norm Talbot

Norm Talbot — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 05:32:00 +0000

Some of this works in a job market where there is an abundance of candidates, such as now, and internal recruiters need only advertise on web sites or do a little networking. It all changes when the availability of ‘quality’ candidates becomes less. There are many dynamics at work here, but the bottom line, according to many economists/sociologists, is that in the near future these dynamics will converge and job openings will far exceed the number of people available to fill them. It is already happening in some industries, but is too subtle for general awareness. As that happens the need for those TPRs who know and understand how to locate AND sell potential candidates for open positions will increase. The fact is that some very astute companies, who have a vision of the future, are already positioning themselves with TRPs to whom they will outsource their future staffing, knowing full well that there are some significant differences between the approach and efficiency between TPRs and internal recruiters.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Frank Risalvato, CPC

Frank Risalvato, CPC — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:00:00 +0000

I have glanced through all these threads and here’s my input:

If Lou is saying TPR is dying then (not sure this was his point) then Lou Adler is wrong.

Dead wrong.

Why? Because he need only apply HIS OWN FORMULA in reverse to prove himself wrong that TPR’s are a dying breed.

I will try to explain:

Lous’s own books preach the ‘Recruiting Sweet Spot’ The point in between Passive and Active candidates where the Semi Passive and Semi Active candidates represent the best targets both in terms of a recruiter’s ability to motivate such candidates as well as their likelyhood for placeability and accepting/entertianing another job.

With me so far Lou and friends? Good.

Now let’s use Lou’s OWN formula … and refocus it toward the direction of companies.

THE Same thing applies!

We have companies at one end of the spectrum which are TOO small to afford to use Recruiters and too unlikely to hire repeatedly enough each year to warrant the related expense. These are your ‘mom and pop shops’ with 2-4 employees or so.

Such companies with less than 10 employees generating $5 million or so and under in annual revenue. The smalles of the small, are unlikely to need or can sorely afford our services.

Now we proceed: Next comes larger-smaller companies. Those with 11-50 employees. Combined these two categories (small and larger-small) represent 85% of the companies where most Americans work … NOT LARGE Multi-Billion dollar Corporations … But small companies (bls.gov and NFIB will vouch for these stats).

At the other end we have medium to large multi- billion dollar corporations. Such companies conduct the most frequent hiring on an annual basis and have the largest amoungt of open high paying jobs … but also have the largest resources in terms of internal recruiting staff (often located in many regional offices).

So … At one end we have as recruiters the best prosepcts for working on large …juicy … six figure positions on a fairly routine basis. Trouble is this is where we can get ‘blind sided’ the most as well … by internal last minute candidates, shelving the search, promoting from within, other recruiters, the companies own HR dep’t … the list goes on and on. Once successful, our candidate may say no after long arduous months of recruiting …. highest risk … largest reward. I should know as 3 out of the last four such searches ended wasting extraordinary time on my staff’s part and myself all for naught.

Therefore the RECRUITING SWEET SPOT are larger/small companies that are:

A. Large enough o require hiring at mid five figure levels. (often having employees from 15 or 20 and greater)

B. Small enough that they don’t yet require or can ill afford a full blown HR department much less one full time HR generalist.

C. Therefore we have the best prospects for exclusive work arrangements where No HR can rear its head and surprise us … and quite often are provided direct acess to the top decision maker who is usually the president or co-founder.

D. They have the resources to pay us (usually I look for companies with $15 million minimum annual revenue and upwards).

E. If you don’t know the size visit the offices … if I see two or three lucury vehicles parked for the owners .. say maybe three Mercedes’ in a row … I know they can afford us (I call this the ‘parking lot evaluation method’ which works well when such companies are off D&B and other reporting agencies radar screens!)

I’d like to say THANK YOU to Mr. Adler. Inadvertantly he helped my business recognize tens and hundreds of thousands in revenue last few months by teaching me his ‘Sweet Spot’ theory when I read it at the beginning of this year.

Only thing is I decided to apply it in different direction than what he had intended !!!!!

The Placement Sweet Spot = Small/medium sized companies growing rapidly who must focus on BUSINESS and have no time get bogged down reading resumes or prescreening. So look for:

1. Companies with 15 employees to a few hundred

2. Revenues of at least $10 Million up to $100 million or so

3. No H.R.or a very weak HR department (No more than one HR Generalist or this is handled by an Exec Assistant that fills in with HR)

4.Direct contact with top decision makers including President/CFO, VP operations, etc.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Sherry Karr

Sherry Karr — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 07:17:00 +0000

Good point

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: K.C. Donovan

K.C. Donovan — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 05:35:00 +0000

Wow, I just read through this forum thread – and has Lou hit on a raw nerve or what?

As an amateur futurist, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Lou’s article, it seems to me that one needs to continually look at the competitive landscape or be left behind. No one wants to end up with a buggy whip franchise once Henry revs up his assembly line. It seems to me that Lou has succeeded in getting people to consider the future of our industry. Regardless of his motives (the sinister thoughts of many in this thread seem a little theatrical), this is a good thing. If you don’t think that internal recruiting organizations will replace the TPR world at some future point, at least a solid analysis of the possibility is warranted so that you don’t end up with a warehouse of implements that nobody wants.

Just to weigh in on the topic, not too many years ago, I headed up an internal recruiting team that as a line function replaced TPR’s 99%. It can happen, is happening and will happen. It’s how we deal with this as vendors that will determine the future industry landscape. I’m very curious as to the content of Lou’s future articles on the subject (As a competitive TPR, I just wish that he would keep his ideas to himself)!!!

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Steve Pruner

Steve Pruner — Fri, 04 Jun 2004 12:34:00 +0000

Lou,

I am not of the opinion that TPR’s are a dying breed that will wind up either helping the best companies eliminate the need for TPR’s or working with the worst companies who are not moving now to eliminate them.

You said, ‘Consider the centralization of the recruiting department, workforce planning, fourth generation ATS systems, and proactive employee referral programs.’.

Let’s consider those points:

1. There are lot’s of companies with centalized recruiting departments whose still use TPR’s.

2. Workforce planning? You still can find plenty of companies who practice ‘workforce planning’ and use TPR’s as part of that plan.

3. 4th generation ATS: Wheren’t there people saying that 2nd, and then 3rd generation ATS were going to put TPR’s out of business? (Why do you suppose that 3 generations of ATS systems have not done it yet?)

4. Same argument for companies who have proactive employee referral programs in place. They still use TPR’s

One of the main points in this discussion that has been totally left out is: the fact that we exist in a free country that practices capitalism. That means there will always be bright people out there that figure out how to provide better service at a lower cost.

For me, I think the outlook for TPR’s has never been brighter. The rising tide is lifting all boats!

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Sharon Douglas, CPC, PHR

Sharon Douglas, CPC, PHR — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 03:43:00 +0000

It amazes me that I was first introduced to Lou Adler at my local association of personnel consultants. I have since bought and printed everything the man distributes. It took me a while to respond to this article as I feel like I have been betrayed by a mentor of mine! In my personal experience of placing Accounting and Finance professionals, I have taken a partnership role with HR recruiters, and helped explain basic accounting terminolgy and helped them make matches of their own. My degree is in Accounting and I can screen where so many smooth talkers can get through many HR individuals only to waste the hiring authorities time. This of course is not always the case and I do not mean to undervalue solid HR individuals, only to say that for me personally, I can’t be snowed by a smooth talker with an excellent presentation. Many HR indivuduals realize this and find great value in what I bring to their organization. I am in shock that I am actually defending my profession to Lou Adler, the man whom we paid 1000′s to hear his pitch to TPR’s. Luckily, I am on the local board and will make sure that they and our state chapter know what is going on. I know you TPR’s know what I am talking about…Don’t bite the hand that feeds you, and you do not ever pee where you eat.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Pamela Petruschke, SPHR

Pamela Petruschke, SPHR — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 08:05:00 +0000

We are one company that I think has found a good blend between what my corporate recruiters can do and what agencies can do for us. I put our recruiters on the jobs we fill most often and are more critical to our success. They know our culture like no agency ever can – on the other hand I think agencies are invaluable in that they can work on jobs we either don’t have the time or inclination to work on – niche jobs spring to mind. While we do fill many of our jobs internally I can’t see us doing without agency help in the near future.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Eamonn Coleman

Eamonn Coleman — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 05:09:00 +0000

Sherry,

I think you said it…well enough to end this topic of us and them. Its simple, the need for executive search companies will never go away (I hope). But just realize that this has nothing to do with the abilities of internal recruiters or external recruiters, they all come up with junk and great candidates.

Eamonn

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Sherry Karr

Sherry Karr — Sat, 29 May 2004 03:44:00 +0000

Hmmm….one thing I kept thinking:
who is the first to get let go from the corporate offices when their is a downturn in hiring at a company:
Corporate Recruiters…

Many corporations do indeed have excellent internal recruiters. However, I have no fear of the need for third party recruiting ever going away. There will always be companies who prefer to handle recruitng in house..well kudos for them!

Not to cheapen what we do, but I liken it to the fact that I rarely hire a mechanic for simple repairs on my car becuase my husband can do it.

However, if he is swamped with other things, and the car needs some work, darn tooting I am going to shell out the cash.

Even corporate recruiters at a lot of companies are allowed to work with outside agencies. I work with one company now that has some very excellent recruiters on board. They are top notch! But they know that I have more time to do the deep digging for appropriate candidates for their hard to fill positions.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Lou Adler

Lou Adler — Fri, 28 May 2004 12:18:00 +0000

Mark and all – whoever said that corporate recruiters were sourcing active candidates? This is the shift every one of you is missing. Corporate recruiters are now being trained to find less active and passive candiddate using networking. Corporations now buy more competitive intelligence then independent recruiting firms. Corporate recruiters are now getting the names of top performers through their employee referral programs and contacting and recruiting these people.

Give it up guys – you’re not seeing the real world. It’s 2004, not 1994. By 2005-06 the shift will be even more obvious. Take steps now or you’ll be history.

Lou

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: T Tallis

T Tallis — Fri, 28 May 2004 09:38:00 +0000

Decaf is terrible.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Frank Risalvato, CPC

Frank Risalvato, CPC — Fri, 28 May 2004 07:00:00 +0000

Here in the Northeast, our company is experiencing a FOUR FOLD increase in high-end exclusive, high quality search activity.

This has resulted in about one million dollars of salaries (as measured in Job Position salary) per recruiter on a semi weekly basis with many bulk requests coming in for 300-$500k in open reqs simultaneously.

My biggest problem is NOT FEE. My current problem is finding COMPETENT RECRUITING TALENT to hire into the IRES, Inc. team.

I have scores of ads out on Monster and all the other web boards for recruiters we need ranging from Atlanta to Dallas, and Chicago to Boston but no luck.

Now I’m taking a different approach and considering local executive secretaries who exhibit potential and train them from scratch instead.

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Eamonn Coleman

Eamonn Coleman — Fri, 28 May 2004 06:18:00 +0000

When a look at these respones two words pop into my head: the first word is circle….

Fortunately all of the mentioned services / systems and people have a value, its the value thats created to the individual recruiter that is important, not the opinions of others.

The person that posts their resume on a jobboard or is unemployed is (to many) a substandard candidate. When they are employed with their next company, or have a different job and no longer have their resume out on any internet site, they will again be a valuable member of the workforce, possibly a superstar.

To many this is self evident, unfortunatley its flawed logic. Percentages are often mentioned, I wonder what the rotation of that percentage is..

The Cicadas are here…

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: Ted Warziniak

Ted Warziniak — Fri, 28 May 2004 02:07:00 +0000

So Lou Adler believes that companies can avoid paying search fees and he even predicts the end of Third Party Recruiting as we now know it! Pause, while I count to 10…..Without going into a long refute of his premise, allow me to just remind everyone how the computer was supposed to make each and everyone of our desks paperless and our lives less complicated!! Technology will remain a valuable tool but will never replace the human component. One must consider the messenger when reading this article…a consultant/recruiter who has a good message to sell to companies…NO FEES…boy will that bring in the business. By the way, here is a guy who is making a living going around the country with his ‘Tour’ speaking to recruiters about recruiting techniques…Talk about biting the hand the feeds you…All I know is I would like to compete against a company that automated their hiring…technolgy has its place but I personally contend that many companies will never be able to fill every position from within……Just as the internet was over-hyped so is the ATS’s and other technology. Our world is made up ‘diverse’ individuals and there will never be a computer program or system that will be able to measure all of the subtleties that distinguish top performers from bad hires…I guess there will be companies that take the McDonalds approach..if we can relate hiring in the Lou Adler world to food, prep….filling but not very good, however I prefer to eat at better resturants where quality is important, and I am willing to pay for that….

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

By: T Tallis

T Tallis — Thu, 27 May 2004 09:20:00 +0000

Mark,

I think the ATS and automation evangelistas ( ‘a’ on purpose ) think almost anything is possible: you can keep track of inactive people, data mine the aloof, have electronic conversations with the uninterested and overconfident.

You can design surveys and forms, have the too-busy fill them out completely, get the overwhelmed and overpayed send you updates with little tiny details to fuel your weathervane, so you can assemble a TPR version of a little ‘carnivore’ living data web.

I think what is forgotten about is people forget. They change their minds. They call you names, then next week they call you better names. The delete and then undelete. They blow off and then beg 5 months later. They say no when they mean maybe, and say maybe when there’s no hope.

The ATS is dead. Long live the ATS!

You can read the original article at:
http://www.erexchange.com/a/d.asp?cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629

Post your own Article Review
http://www.erexchange.com/p/g.asp?d=M&cid=78B84E90CA17404A86EB3A815BBA4629