|
||||||
|
||||||
TOP STORIESTRANCHED: Life after CDOs, Week 1015 July 2008By CDO Joe COMMENTSown experience of HH's is mixed; some (or shall I say a very few) are very polite, straight-forward and honest. Others are simply vultures. Read all comments »Just when I thought I had seen every dirty trick in the murky world of recruitment, it seems we have now begun to plunge to new depths. A lot of this is supposition and I can’t verify a word of it, but if my suspicions are correct then we have entered a very dark period indeed. If you are sitting comfortably, then I will begin. Our story revolves around one of the headhunting firms that has displayed a number of high-profile roles through their own website and elsewhere. My involvement with the firm came through an ex-colleague, who gave me the name of a headhunter she recommended at this firm. I made the call, sent over my CV and gave a brief introduction to the consultant who had been recommended. Over a period of a number of weeks I chased the consultant I’d sent my details to and heard nothing. Given how busy headhunters are, this has become a common occurrence, part of the new reality that I have come to accept and deal with. This week, out of the blue, two consultants from the firm, who I hadn’t spoken to before, called and left urgent messages for me to contact them. I made the call and expected the usual polite invitation to come into their offices, walk through my CV and discuss roles they have on at the moment – putting a name to the face. Instead, I got a barrage of questions as to where I’d been interviewing and the names of the hiring managers I’d spoken to at these firms. Their excuse was that they needed to ensure that I don’t get my CV sent through to the same people from multiple headhunters. This is normally a sound policy and one that protects against embarrassing overlap. I may be being intensely paranoid (redundancy can have strange effects on one’s psyche), but I am almost convinced that this group of crooks are using potential candidates to scope out potential recruiters. The heavy insistence on knowing the names of the people who are recruiting, combined with an apparent lack of desire to get me into their own offices to outline my position, are very suspicious. Unless I am much mistaken, the recruitment model works as follows: headhunter retained by employer to find suitable candidates, suitable candidates approach headhunter and ultimately headhunter matches candidate with employer to earn a fee. The idea that headhunters are now using candidates to find recruiters breaks this simple paradigm. I appreciate that for many of you hardened bankers this will come as no surprise and may even prompt a smirk as just another demonstration of the dog eat dog nature of the financial sector. However, even as someone who until recently sold CDOs for a living, I think this behaviour shows a level of morality on a parallel with that of stealing gold teeth from corpses. Driven by my long-held natural cynicism about the headhunting profession, I made up a few names and sent them through, and if my suspicions are correct these consultants will waste a few precious hours trying to track down non-existent hedge funds and people at bulge-bracket banks with mildly comic names. What if I am wrong about this? I have been wrong before, and after this extended rant (even by my own standards) a large amount of hat eating would be required. On balance, though, my instinct tells me that shady practices are afoot and that the motto of the City, caveat emptor, now applies in spades to the field of recruitment. On a slightly more positive note, friends and contacts have been brilliant this week – nuggets of hope are beginning to appear amongst the sediment left by the credit crunch. More about these next week. Until then, I urge vigilance.
COMMENTSChasDarwin, Wed 16 Jul 08duh - has anyone ever got a job off this comment section? Maybe, but I wasn't trying too right now. It would be interesting if they had. Add your comment »jobhunters, Investment Banking / M & A, Wed 16 Jul 08Not a big issue..
Happy, Equities, Wed 16 Jul 08Joe, Like alot of people out there we have all been made redundant once in our lives. It's not a pleasant experience when you need to approach recruitment agencies and they make you feel like a no-body when you have many years experience behind you (especially when a girl/boy out of nappies interviews you!). I now live in Sydney but made a massive mistake by joining a recruitment agency (MP) when I first arrived. I soon handed in my notice after only 5 months when I also was one of those who had to ask those type of questions. I totally hated this approach. It's all just a numbers game with these people and the only happy people are the shareholders (well maybe not anymore). Joe, stick to the smaller guys who have survived the up's and down's of the markets or even better COME TO SYDNEY... Add your comment »Formerly unemployed, Trading, Wed 16 Jul 08Bored, If anyone is desperate it is the recruitment firms using these tactics.The "generalisations" that you speak of are mentioned because generally hh's act in this way. I think everyone acknowledges that good hh's do exist - but they are very much the exception. Expect to be seen in the same way as estate agents and traffic wardens until the recruitment industry is cleaned up. Add your comment »In-house headhunter, Hedge Funds, Wed 16 Jul 08To claim there's "nothing wrong" with the same CV being sent to the same employer 10 times is rather naive...If I received the same CV through multiple sources, it would without doubt negatively impact on my view of the candidate. First up, it smacks of desperation, naivity about the recruitment process, and an inability to choose the right intermediaries. Secondly, if I went on to hire the candidate, it would mean a fee dispute between all the recruiters who'd sent his/her CV over - something all hiring firms are desperate to avoid. I appreciate that being a job hunter in this market is tough, but to maximize your chance of securing interviews and offers, you need to work with the right recruitment intermediaries, and that means you MUST be selective. Add your comment »Derivatives Maniac, Derivatives, Wed 16 Jul 08HH have been doing this for ages. I had this kind of experience back in 2005 already - I usually like to fool them by giving them some crappy name.. From my experience the biggest agencies are the biggest cons. Add your comment »Axesss, Wed 16 Jul 08Would it be asking for too much if you (who had bad experiences with HH) can post the names of those unprofessional HH??
1Quant, Quantitative Analytics, Wed 16 Jul 08Folks,
Blame culture?, HR & Recruitment, Thu 17 Jul 08Always someone else's fault, eh chaps? I enjoy reading these articles immensely over a sandwich at my (HH'ing) desk - please keep the comments coming, you all seem to have plenty of time on your hands..... Add your comment »Blessed, Accounting, Thu 17 Jul 08There are good and bad elements in every profession, but unfortunately in this respeect the recruitment business sways more towards the bad.
|
||||||
| ||||||


