What defines a good recruiter? Is it the dollar amount of billings they can generate in a year? Is it the quality of jobs they can provide? Is it the way they prep a candidate for a company? Is it the amazing talent they identify?

If you were to ask someone working for a large search firm, they more than likely would say that a good recruiter is a BIG biller. If you ask a candidate, it might be the quality of the jobs or their ability to assist the candidate in navigating the interview, offer negotiation, and onboarding process. If you ask a client their answer would likely be the talent they can provide.

What if out of all these reasons, the only one that doesn't matter is the first one? Don't get me wrong, recruiters need to generate money to "earn their keep" at a company, but what if that is the absolute least important thing to define a good recruiter? Most recruiters would balk at that.

Too many recruiters define their worth and ability as a recruiter by the fee they receive for filling their positions. Recruiters banter back and forth in forums and office meetings about not ever docking their fee or being willing to renegotiate after an agreement is signed regardless of client or candidate situation. There are many recruiters out there who will never go below 25% or won't touch a position that is less than a $30,000 fee that never actually EARN the fee they are paid. Yes, as a recruiter, I said, they don't deserve their fee. 

These recruiters hamstring their clients and put them between a rock and a hard place because the client needs the talent. In the modern era of recruiting, the recruiter has most likely only spent 20 minutes on the phone with the candidate doing a "pre-screen". The recruiter may or may not have done a fast skim of the candidate's resume, paying zero attention to detail. The candidate more than likely came in from a generic ad that the recruiter placed to cast a net. There, most likely, has been almost zero vetting performed to ensure the candidate has the credentials their resume lists. The recruiter bumbles through the process to have the desperate client make an offer, but to meet the demand of the candidate's salary requirement the client has to offer $20,000 above what they budgeted for the position. Then the recruiter gets mad because the client asks them to help them out by coming down a bit on their fee. Sound familiar? As recruiters, we see and hear about it all the time.

The problem: many recruiters are poorly trained and often entitled. The solution: stop hiring recruiters that are money-driven. Start hiring recruiters that care about the impact they make on clients' and candidates' lives. Recruiters that genuinely care about the relationships they build and providing superior service to both their clients and candidates are going to beat out your money-driven recruiters in longevity and loyalty every time. Recruiters that listen to the needs of their candidate: won't place a candidate, with a high school athlete whose games the candidate likes to attend, into a position that requires them to work 90 hours a week. They won't place an up-and-coming superstar with an entrepreneurial mind into a mailroom clerk position with no ability to move up.

The recruiter that has great soft skills and a creative mind will work with all involved in an offer to come up with the best possible outcome for all involved. These recruiters will get to know a candidate, their family situation, their candidate's ideal job, and work toward those parameters. They will also get to know the intimate workings of their client companies. They will have a relationship with more than just the HR person that they blindly shot a resume.

Regardless of your background, whether you are a search firm, client, or candidate looking to take on a new recruiter, the best two questions you can ask are: 1. "Do you care more about the impact you will make or the size of the fee?" and 2. "Do you work for love or money?". If you take the time to ask this question, your experience working with recruiters will greatly improve.

by H. DuVall