There are many ways to describe what I do for a living, but there are certain terms that I absolutely detest like headhunter, ambulance chaser, and the lesser known, yet equally offensive "noodle thrower". By definition the last title is a reflection of some search firms that throw "noodles" or resumes against the wall just to see which ones stick. What we do is quite different from that and can be better explained by digging into the difference between an active and passive contingency search.
An active contingency search is quite easy to define. This is a company that is actively engaged both internally and externally with a search firm to fill an open position. In most cases everyone is on the same page -- human resources, the hiring manager, and our internal team. A great level of detail is known about the position and we have a lot of confidence in knowing what we are looking for.
A passive contingency search is much more complicated and many companies do not even attempt to wrap their minds around what this would look like. There are three basic examples:
1) A position that is perpetually open. The idea of hiring salespeople usually fits into this category. You can also sub-categorize this into different levels such as a salesperson who can bring an immediate Rolodex, someone who is going to need some grooming, a veteran presence to mentor others, etc. The bottom line is that a company will ALWAYS look at this profile no matter the situation.
2) A confidential search where a company may be looking to replace an employee. This can be for performance-related reasons, bad culture match, or simply the desire to move into a different directions. For this level of passive search, you must really trust the search firm you are partnering with so that the story is consistent and remains quiet until more detail can be shared.
3) An opportunity hire or a projected growth hire. This is one of my favorites as candidates are drawn to these types of opportunities and companies. The type of position that may be required in 6-8 months, but the company has enough foresight to plan ahead and find good talent before the need is too great.
Although these definitions seem pretty self-explanatory, many organizations are hesitant to engage with an external search firm until they have exhausted all internal resources or simply get to a point of desperation with the search. While we will still engage with a client at that point, it makes much more sense for us to be involved early on in the process. We might have that "perfect" candidate in other discussions and you could risk losing an opportunity to speak with them if you wait too long. Or perhaps the external search firm could help you tell the story from an objective third party perspective.
The bottom line is that we are trying to reach trusted adviser status with our clients and when that occurs, it could make a lot of sense to consider more opportunities to work is this passive silo more often. Especially since the contract I am describing is 100% contingency involves very little up front risk. Unfortunately there are some search firms that give the titles I described at the outset of today's blog a lot of validity. But if you can find the right firm, the idea of true partnership should always be on your mind as well.
Would you agree? Anything to add about the definition of passive vs. active searches? As always, I would welcome your thoughts and feedback.
No comments:
Post a Comment