If you’ve ever been involved with a real estate transaction in California (and perhaps most of the US) you have hopefully gotten to learn about Agency.  In at least California you have to sign a disclosure document that clears up who is representing who.  The typical way things work is that the buyer has an agent helping them find a home.  Also the seller has an agent helping them sell their home.

It can get blurry when the agent represents both parties during a transaction.  At that point the agent discloses that they are in the middle and not out to get the buyer the best deal nor the seller the highest price.  It doesn’t remove their obligation to disclose material facts that impact the price.  But it becomes more of a partnership.  I’d argue that recruiters are in a more difficult position and it helps as either a candidate or hiring manager to understand where they are coming from.

Internal Recruiters

This article will be taken from the vantage point of the candidate, since that has been all of my experience.  When a recruiter reaches out to you, there will be some difference in how they work for you.  This depends on if they are an inside our outside recruiter.  By “inside” I’m referring to a recruiter that works for a specific firm.  Their only priority is that firm’s open roles.  The external recruiters typically have a group of firms they are working for.  As such they will have an ever changing list of roles.  They also might have a list of firms they are trying to land where they will promote you in order to show value and win the contract.

For the candidate, there are different benefits to each.  With the internal recruiter they know more about the hiring managers.  They also have a better knowledge of what a firm can do as far as perks.  But their interest in a long term candidate can often be short sighted.  From my experience they are far more likely to ghost a candidate.  And are also likely to send a canned “not moving forward” email rather than try to figure out a miscommunication.  By burning a contact, they lose out on that person’s contacts.  The candidate is not going to mention to a friend an opportunity that wasted their time or wasn’t handled in a mature and respectful manner.

Since external recruiters have a list of opportunities that changes they are far more likely to try and build a long term relationship.  They know that ever contact is a potential placement, plus each contact often has hundreds of other contacts.  There are a good number out there that don’t “get” this concept, but overall I’ve found that a good percentage understand how their interactions impact their long term success.

Ultimately all recruiters biggest priority is the firm they are trying to place the candidate with.  If they place a dud they put their relationship (and long term contract) in jeopardy.  But many also get that contracts come and go, but their reputation lasts a long time.  It makes a big difference to how well they can make contacts.  Me personally I have a list of 5 or 6 recruiters that are high on my list.  There is another 70 that I’ve interacted with, and 4 that are on my “crap” list that I won’t work with or refer anyone to.  I’ve also dropped the connect to the folks on this last short list.  I don’t want them reaching out to my contacts.

Recruiting versus Real Estate “Agency”

So how is the concept of “Agency” more complex for recruiters?  With Real Estate, the purchase process is a big deal and takes effort and risk.  And the decision is far longer lasting and you are dealing with having to sell if you are unhappy.  On the job search route, the switching costs are so much lower, and people will often reply for a large number of jobs testing the waters as well as “practicing” the interview process.

Yes, this post is Work In Progress . . .