|
|
|
|
|
by sumeno
3412 days ago
|
|
This assumes that the Venn diagram of "top candidates" and "people actively looking for jobs" overlaps significantly. The best candidate for a job may not be looking for a job so companies pay recruiters to find them. If the quality that companies were getting from regular applications was better than the quality they get from their recruiters why would companies pay to have recruiters? |
|
If there's an awesome job available out there, with way above average pay, benefits, great opportunities for advancement, good work/life balance, etc., you'll fill it with a top talent. You're not going to need a recruiter. Word will get around even to people who are not actively looking, trust me. Similarly, if you have an "average pay for an average worker" kind of job, you'll find that average worker.
When you have a ho-hum average job but you want top talent, then you're going to need that recruiter because the job needs to be actively sold.
I invite anyone who works at a company that pays 3X average salaries or is well known for being an unbelievably great place to work to reply and tell me they have trouble hiring.