Recruiters are a bane to the software development profession.
Finding good developers is extremely valuable to companies. The problem is that recruiters can’t even get that right. Even if they could, they’re so abominable to deal with that developers are scrambling for any other option.
In my professional career I’ve probably spoken to hundreds of recruiters, not even counting the spammy emails and unsolicited phone calls I ignore.
Pretty much any developer who’s been in this game for any period of time knows what I’m talking about:
- The job posts look just list technologies, bland requirements and say nothing useful about the position.
- They usually have no technical background and can barely pronounce the technologies they are looking for.
- They don’t know anything about the company except some excerpt from the website. You’re lucky if you’re actually working with a recruiter who’s even met the hiring manager.
All they do is take up posting space on the job boards, alongside real companies postings that are actually interesting.
In the trenches
Take this little gem from a contractor who had promised 4 weeks notice to his current employer:
“Couldn’t you just walk out?”
“Despite the fact I gave my word about a notice period?”
“Yeah, you’re a contractor, you could just walk out.”
“So you’re suggesting that I should start my professional relationship with you by doing something really unprofessional to someone else?”
“Well, yeah.”
Usually I don’t allot much time to recruiters, but in one instance I met one for coffee based on the recommendation of a friend. After discussing my work with C#, ASP .NET (along with a myriad of other Microsoft technologies), she checked her handwritten list and asked “So, have you worked with Visual Studio before?”. I replied “Um, yes. Well, usually when you use C#, it’s with Visual Studio…” She said, “Ok great,” and checked it off the list before offering, “You know, you should really put ‘Visual Studio’ on your resume. You know, just to highlight all of the different technologies you’ve worked with.” I could only nod along quietly, “Sure, right…”
Then she suggested that I take the job she was working on that would be a 20% pay cut AND be contract instead of full-time with benefits. She said, “Well, you know, sometimes it’s worthwhile to take a job for less money at a good company working for a good manager – someone you could learn a lot from.” I said “Oh, so what do you know about this company?” She then told me that she did not actually know anything about this company or manager since it was not her account, but maybe she could find out, if I was interested.
Wait, so I should consider a huge pay cut and loss of benefits because of a great manager, which you have no idea if you even have?
Something smells fishy
In their defense, some of them seem to have noticed a problem. Here, one recruiter claims that the profession was originally “to both find and court the ideal candidates for our clients.” but admits that they’ve wallowed into a position where “sourcing” (ie. finding) a candidate is their bread and butter. He goes on to say:
“Gone will be the days when finding the candidate somehow filled a gap in the recruiter job description – technology will take care of that.”
Indeed.
Says another recruiter:
Recruiters need to become experts in selecting candidates, they need to be better than the client at predicting which candidate will succeed in each role in each company.
Except how could they be? When the biggest problem companies face is finding skilled developers, how could a non-technical person ever tell whether someone was qualified?
No really, I’m asking.
I understand why candidates continue to talk to recruiters. As painful as it is, sometimes a position is only open through them. But why would a company want to pay exorbitant amounts of money (something like 10-30% of the annual salary) just to be put in contact with someone they got off Craigslist? Whose naked pictures do they have?
My experience with recruiters is completely different. The recruiters I meet are usually very good. They really act as the HR arm of their client. My impression over the last few years is that the recruiters in my country know their clients quite well, they know the team, and can tell you quite a lot (usually) about the company, people and the manager you are going to work with. Also, because the market is quite small, they will usually know quite a bit about your own company and be able to analyze the differences, highlighting the main advantages and disadvantages of each.
While the awkward technical question may pop here or there, I am actually pretty impressed with their behavior and non-pushing attitude, but I gather this is quite an exception..
Duck, then you are VERY lucky. I have never heard of this. I have seen some good recruiters … but very few.
Actually what’s really happened to recruiters is there are now always more than one for the same job since many jobs are hard to fill. The top recruiters who actually have contracted with the clients to fill the positions actually tend to know something about the jobs. Then there are many “recruiters” particularly with contract positions that just go hunt bodies and send them up to other recruiters and don’t have any contact with client and keep dropping the contract rates as they take they’re cut.
A quick note about my experience with some recruiters is that it is true that a lot of them fail to know or understand the basics of technology.
I had one make me take a JavaScript test for a web development role, which had networking questions, Java specific questions and also hardware questions.
I understand they may be trying to understand the competency of a person on a wider scope, but it’s frustrating to the end user of the test who knows they may or may not blow the question. Not to mention the time wasted by the test taker.
I can also echo the sentiments of the author in the sense that I’ve had a recruiter confuse Java with JavaScript.
I’ve found some of your criticisms of recruiters are true of hiring managers, and more so than of recruiters.
I’ve had hiring managers ask me to start immediately, even though they knew I was still working for someone else and I had told them that I needed to give two weeks notice. I’ve had this happen multiple times over the years.
Most hiring managers also don’t have any technical background, though some non-technical people are good managers without it.
The thing I find really unethical about hiring managers is when they lie to you about your position. On two occasions when I’ve had another offer or opportunity presented to me I’ve gone to my manager and asked him what my future was in my current position. Both times they told me I would be there long-term, and both times they abruptly terminated my contract a few weeks later. One manager had a job posting up for my position on the same day that offered $15/hour less than I was making. That was only a few weeks after he told me that he would keep me on for the rest of the year (several more months).
There are some recruiters that I avoid because they’ve been unproductive, but I have yet to run into an openly sleazy recruiter. And I’ve been a contractor for 12 years and have worked with dozens of recruiters. Hiring managers are another story. I’ve learned the hard way not to trust them.
I’ve found that most recruiters are more ethical than most hiring managers.
Favorite crooked recruiter story, from like fifteen years ago:
While interviewing me, he spots this one gig on my resume and asks what specific department of the client I was working for. I tell him. He asks who the manager was, I say oh, do you know Jenny Smith, yeah, she was in charge of that… blah blah… cycle through a couple of times.
Around the third one–because I’m actually kind of slow–I get up and tell the guy (on the way out) I know he’s just trying to hustle my contact list. Dude whines about getting caught.
Sheesh.
I still don’t deal with that company, especially since I found out the guy didn’t get fired for that stunt.
I have experienced the same throughout my job hut in USA. Most of the times the preferred recruiter of hiring manager has some idea about the project , but not technically. And there are recruiters who hire for other recruiters, they even do not have any idea for who the end client would be and who the hiring manager is.
Talking about the resume, I have come across more than one recruiter asking me how many years of experience I have in “SDLC” and they want me to put that in my resume because the job required that.
In an ideal situation we should walk away from those positions, but unfortunately 80% of companies ( unlike Google and Amazon)hire through recruiters/head hunters.
“In an ideal situation we should walk away from those positions, but unfortunately 80% of companies ( unlike Google and Amazon)hire through recruiters/head hunters.”
What I love about this comment is: consider which companies have the smartest developers, build the best software and are the most innovative companies – 80% of companies or the Googles and Amazons of the world? Of course, it’s the (very few) Googles and Amazons of the world, so why don’t more companies try to copy their hiring style, which is NO RECRUITERS.
[...] reading for all those geeks who depend on recruiters for that dream job http://www.codeanthem.com/blog/2010/04/death-by-recruiters/ [...]
Amber, you have to remember that Google and Amazon are chalk full of “recruiters”, droves of them and most are on contract (I know this for fact about Google).
Even Amazon uses external recruiters.
These comments are fascinating and it brings to light something obvious yet unspoken so far:
There are no barriers to entry to the recruiting profession. That is why you have soup to nuts.
The recruiter you want honor’s their word, is straight in their communications, and lets nature take its course with minimal salesmanship pressure. The harder they think they have to sell the more likely it is not a fit for you (my philosophy).
To me, executive recruiting and recruting in general is simply being a matchmaker. A very old profession (but not the oldest!).
I do permanent placement and I want the job to be right and I want you to stick and grow there.
I personally cringe when I see a story like this. On one hand it is a sad commentary on the industry that I have been a part of for almost 15 years. On the other it highlights why professional recruiters, those that have a true relationship with their client, have developed an understanding of a market and earned trust and respect from job seekers (and clients) continue to thrive.
Their are many good recruiters out there that know how to do this job. I would suggest networking through other industry professionals (or even companies) to find them instead of wasting time with those that are giving the industry a terrible name.
Good one and so many of you are so right…. I agree, if you don’t understand technology (basics of coding) .. you shouldn’t be a technology recruiter….it goes the other way too as I hire a lot of .NET developers and one of the que I ask them is “What is a Windows Service” and half of them with 5+ yrs experience has no clue on what I asked……anyways… How about a candidate interview me for a change on the que I ask candidates?..:)
great article…
thanks
Rithesh , recruiter @kpmg
I think there’s another side to this story: I’m currently attempting to hire without using recruitment agencies, not because in my opinion the costs are way out of league with the service provided, but because the recruiters make every effort to brief the candidate before any interviews in terms of how they should come across.
I have interviewed myself many times over the years and not once learned anything of real value from a recruiter in advance about the position. Many times I have been prepped for what sort of person might be “best-fit” and how to tailor my own responses and questions. On one occasion I was even given the actual answers to an entire half-hour’s interview of specific technical questions that I would face (presumably from the previous candidates feedback).
As a hiring technical lead I really do not want candidates to walk through the door either knowing what questions they are going to face or more importantly how they should best present themselves. I want them to turn up fresh and keen and interested to find out about the role and the company for themselves. If they aren’t the right fit for the company and vice versa then hiring them could end up being a dreadful and potentially expensive decision for both parties – yet this is the ultimate goal of the recruiting agency, regardless of the best interests of the candidate and the hiring company.
So the benefits of involving a recruitment agency are actually quite negative in my opinion. Given that it takes very little time to skim over a CV and decide whether an application is appropriate and worth reviewing in further detail I just can’t see the benefits, apart perhaps from market exposure for a particular or restricted skill-set?
Anyone disagree?
Great blog by the way @codeanthem, I can certainly empathise with your dislike of non-technical people managing software projects too. I’ve had similar experiences and thoughts in the past http://www.andrew-eells.com/2010/02/08/agile-management/
Looking forward to the uncloaking!
It would be interesting to write about techniques for getting around recruiters, both as the hirer and the hiree. As a hirer I’m required to work with them. As a hiree I have to find a way to get my resume by their weird filter into the hands of a technical person who is qualified to evaluate my experience. I’ve even considered writing 2 resumes, one for HR and one to give the perspective employer when I actually meet them.
David, that’s not a remotely crazy idea. Two resumes, one full of buzzwords, the other full of actual information. Huh.
I really, really wish this was not true. My CV could be so much more informative if I took all the mentions of Visual Studio
As both my parents work in HR, I know that the problem with recruiters will only get worse. In the past, you had to have some sociology or psychology background to be a good HR manager or in charge of hiring.
Now you have people that don’t understand the technicalities and not even the “soft” aspects that they could evaluate you on. I mean you can tell someone is a good developer without knowing all the technologies they list.