Anthony Meaney’s tag over at recruiting.com points us to an interesting rant about IT Recruiters, interviews, attire, and more.
Truth is, I respect this post: Are IT Recruiters Worthless (part 1) because the author (Sean McCown) does a good job of respecting the recruiter’s role, while simultaneously showing clear oddities (and downright stupid things) recruiters do.
For me, if an IT recruiter can’t stand the heat, they should get out of the kitchen. Find something you LOVE and recruit for that.
In the haystack was this needle of how McCown views the role of IT recruiters:
Well, there are really 2 main functions of a good recruiter.
The first is to really dig into the company’s needs and know enough about the topic to pull in the most qualified people. The perfect technical recruiter in my field would be an ex database professional who just decided to play for the other team? you know, someone who really knows [databases] and can ferret out the good SQL guys from the bad ones.
The second, and this is probably more important the first, is to shut up and get out of the way when he knows absolutely nothing about IT or [databases]. His job at this point is to be the keeper of the company’s phone number and pass it along to you and setup the interview, then get out of the way. Don’t try to pretend you know what you’re doing, and don’t try to teach me anything. So basically, know your limitations. If you know you don’t know anything about it, then just pass on the number and let the pros take this one.
These points are duly noted. And, I will admit that when working with superstar candidates, there’s hardly anything for me to do but make the calls, arrange the interviews, and get out of the way.
But, as shameless as McCown is (and I am guessing he is probably as good with SQL as he claims to be–I don’t think Infoworld would let any hack write a blog for them), not every “Tom, Dick and Moron” out there is a superstar candidate either. After all, “it’s not like there’s any kind of licensing procedure, or [IT] class they have to go through” before they can claim mad hax0r sk!llz.
To refocus his own statement to my perspective I would say:
“The problem is that” when you’re looking for superstar talent, “the really good ones are about 1 out of every 500 or so. Most of them simply don’t have any IT background and they do nothing but get in the way.”
So, because we have been burned by people who sounded too good to be true, or clashed with the culture of the client company (or we felt threatened that they would show up in cutoffs and fishnet stockings or wipe a booger on the hiring manager) we do the next best thing a human does:
Panic…. then become an absolute control-freak.
This is because contingency recruiters have absolutely nothing except their reputation and performance. If the candidates they send out simply appear different (I mean that in all the ugly non-PC ways it can be meant) than what the recruiter promised the client, the recruiter loses the deal, and the commission–which is often their sole income.
You would freak out a little, too, if you lost your job over an LEFT JOIN that should have been a LEFT-OUTER JOIN thanks to a late night coding spree and a vending-machine a little short on Dr. Pepper. Oh, and you don’t get fired because the error is in the production release, mind you, not even in beta… but just in your own development machine.
My problem is that the superstars don’t make themselves known very well. Often edgy and grumpy and less-than-impressed to be spending time talking to a recruiter, superstar candidates with an attitude end up receiving less-than-stellar service from their recruiter (who will often baby-talk you and try to drag you across town for 8am interviews because they can’t trust you).
My dad’s advice all those years ago still rings true:
People are excellent mirrors. If you want to see someone smile, smile. If you want someone to help you, help.
To you, McCown (and any other superstars out there) I’m interested in helping you INSERT @SELF INTO tbl_cushy_nw_job anytime.
Popularity: 5% [?]
