A Partner at our recruiting firm, Kaye/Bassman, recently sent out an article by Ken Forrester, managing director for a national recruiting firm, which caught my attention. The article touched on a topic that is all to real in our line of work; recruiters are great resources for hiring top talent but the placement fees are typically a pain point for clients.
“If you are not using headhunters as your primary recruitment weapon, then you are not hiring the best talent in-the-market.”
The reason most employers find this statement by Forrester to be true is because a majority of the time, top talent in-the-market are those who are not actively searching for a job; who we like to call a passive candidate.
There is a clear distinction in quality-of-hire between the best talent on-the-market versus the best talent in-the-market.
Most HR and employers are posting job openings on large job boards and recruiting websites. While this may get a response and ultimately a good candidate for the job, a job post will generally fail to grab the attention of the best candidates; those passive candidates not actively looking. In short, there is a difference in the quality of active and passive candidates. Typically there is a good reason that the active candidate is looking and that the passive candidate is not reading job postings.
We like to tell clients, the employers, that we understand where they are coming from because they are recruiting in addition to all of the other duties they are responsible for on a daily basis. For us, this is what we do all day, every day. We do the heavy-lifting of recruiting for clients by developing relationships with potential candidates and wasting 80% of our time so our clients don’t have to!
Back To the Fee
If you look at the opportunity cost and benefits gained from hiring top talent in-the-market a recruiter’s fees are cheap!
- The economic value of top-talent is more profits
- HR and a hiring authorities’ time can be allocated and spent on other, more pressing needs for your business
Savings realized in salaries paid to multiple average performers compared to one top-performer plus the profits generated by their superior performance are a drop-in-the-bucket relative to placement fees.