It is a common misconception that only executive search roles are retained searches, and often recruiters are too willing to accept the contingent search in competition, without up selling the benefits of a retained search. Why is this?
It’s very easy to get excited when a client, whether old or new, calls you up saying they want to work with you. Most recruiters will immediately look to the positives; ‘Great! A new role, a new business, a new talent pool of people to talk to!’ and agree straight away, without really going into any depth about recruitment strategies with the client. Saying ‘yes’ straight away tars you with the same brush as all the other recruiters – working alongside multiple agencies and diving onto your database and LinkedIn to try and find people as quick as possible, and quicker than anybody else. This ‘fastest finger’ approach is transactional and, in my view, is exactly what recruiters should be moving away from.
We have seen a noticeable rise in automation and internal recruitment teams recently. Once live, most roles are given a ‘direct approach’ before going out to agencies, but I would question whether this approach adds any real value?
You could argue that having multiple agencies working on a role puts specialists in competition with each other, ensuring a very high level of candidate. It certainly does give time back to busy internal recruiters and HR departments.
The most common reason for an internal recruitment team to choose contingent is that they need to fill a role quickly. This is where the second most common misconception can cause problems; retained work IS quick – in fact, it can be just a quick as contingent if you have the right recruiter! If you’re a recruiter reading this, I can imagine your eyebrows just raised considerably – yes the methodology is more rigorous with processes like market mapping, but with time and upfront payment invested, a decent recruiter will immediately prioritise this role, focusing solely on that one campaign and spending the next few days going the extra mile until they deliver.
The simple fact for recruiters is: if you work on a contingent search your chance to fill the role is significantly lower than if you were to carry out retained search – although nothing is certain, you’re pretty much guaranteed you’ll fill the role.
My direct experience
In my opinion, it’s the duty of a recruiter to act as ambassadors for our clients. Although some of my colleagues may disagree, I would always consider lowering my rate for retained work as I much prefer to work exclusively so that I know I can deliver quality, quickly without half an eye on what the competition is doing, in the hope of beating someone else to the finish line.
Naturally the retained route is an easier option for a client to accept if they have a historical relationship with a recruiter, but in a market of increased competition a recruiter that is confident in their approach and knows their worth will differentiate themselves for better and not for worse.
