i am heading to get an offer with a management consultancy that i applied to through a recruitment consultant.my issue is that the recruitment consultant is negotiating the salary with the company and not me. although he has discussed this with me, i am not happy about the fact he thinks he knows whats acceptible and whats not. in short, he is encouraging me to accept the first offer (and it seems like he has told the company i will).is it in good spirit to bypass the recruitment consultant (rc) and speak to HR myself? i dont want to screw the process up, but the rc is really winding me up!

Going direct to HR is a bad move. If they dont up your offer you will reject? If so, just tell the recruiter the figure that you are after, and if they dont come up with that, reject it.

this is your career, your livelihood, your life. lay it on the line. set expectations and outline the minimum you'll accept. walk away if you don't get it.

These recruitment consultants are simple salesmen. It is not in their interest to push too hard on price once the sale is landed. Why risk their commission for an extra 5 % ?? I doubt your consultant would even ask HRThis is your career, and you need to take ownership of the salary negotiations.

Disagree with Me a little - You have to get both sides to agree to get your commission, so I would be amazed if the recruiter didnt even mention it to HR.Out of intrest - what is the role/salary offered?

ALERT ALERT - Headhunter sharking for business - "Out of intrest - what is the role/salary offered? "

MikeNormal rules apply - only conduct salary negotiations with the single individual who has the power to say yea or nay. Neither your RC nor HR have this power.No-on in HR cares whether you're recruited or not and has nothing to gain / lose either way.- On top of this: it's not relevant to a new employer (or RC!) what you earn now, only what the job is worth.- Any co. is looking to give you the smallest possible salary to get you and keep you motivated for as long as possible and at least until the inertia sets in. It's up to you to demonstrate where that bar lies - Buy "Perfect Job Interview" by Max Eggert and read the (for me) life changing section on salary negotiation at the back. All the rules and how to play the game.Seems to me you have 2 broad choices:1. Tell the RC you have had enough of talking to the oily rag and will only talk to the mechanic from now on; or2. Diplomatically say to the RC that s/he has done a wonderful job getting you to this stage and warming up the company and you feel it's now important to talk to the co directly to get a real fee l for what it will be like working there, including areeing your own salary now, as you'll be doing something similar every year at pay-rise time. If the RC reckons they can get you a better deal than you can get yourself, call their bluff and propose a competition - they do their best to get you a high offer, then you tell the co it's not enough and see if they increase it.Good luck!

Panter - good advisePS - I'm not sharking for business at all - I have more vacancies than candidates at the moment. I was politely trying to work out if it was a market rate offer or not.

9 years' experience, 93k. i am trying to push for 100k but rc is say that company wont have any of it!

he actually said this company doesn't negotiate offers. bear in mind i haven't got an offer yet as going through final set of interviews. i dont want to make a fuss about this now - so may approach hr when when tell me the result sometime next week.but the rc is VERY possessive over his client and continually insists that i dont raise the subject of numbers to anyone but him.i just get the feeling that his salary negotiations are not in my best interest. and yes, even at 93k i would take the offer if it was made - unfortuantely the RC knows this and therefore doesn't have much incentive to ask for an increase.

Are you looking for particular skills or industry experience currently?

MikeNo matter how possessive your RC is over the client in question, it's always a 3 way relationship - as a matter of course for more senior roles I always discuss with a candidate whom, and how, potential salary negotiations will be handled, and state the option that I do it, they do it, or they do it and I whisper in their ear. As you don't have the offer (yet) let this RC be as possessive as he likes - once an offer is made you have every right to go direct to the hiring manager and negotiate over the RCs head if he won't collaborate with you - it's YOUR offer after all. When will RCs realise we - HH, RCS whatever - are not gatekeepers, we are supposed to be advocates for our clients and candidates, shephards on occasions, confidants and facilitators? There is too much of this gatekeeper attitude in the business.

MikeNo matter how possessive your RC is over the client in question, it's always a 3 way relationship - as a matter of course for more senior roles I always discuss with a candidate whom, and how, potential salary negotiations will be handled, and state the option that I do it, they do it, or they do it and I whisper in their ear. As you don't have the offer (yet) let this RC be as possessive as he likes - once an offer is made you have every right to go direct to the hiring manager and negotiate over the RCs head if he won't collaborate with you - it's YOUR offer after all. When will RCs realise we - HH, RCS whatever - are not gatekeepers, we are supposed to be advocates for our clients and candidates, shephards on occasions, confidants and facilitators? There is too much of this gatekeeper attitude in the business.

ok, can someone tell me what would be the reasons for my RC not too bothered about negotiating a higher salary? surely they'd get a better cut wouldn't they? or is it that they might annoy the HR org of the company due to the hassle of negotiations and therefore be less likely to be used again?

Mike - I'm not to familiar with the business, but in my mind it's much like expecting an Estate Agent to get the best price for your property. They just want the house to be sold asap. The extra 1.5% on another £20K for example is only worth a few hundred quid to them. Why risk it losing it all with the house being sold through another agent who is selling it for a few £K less?Same with your situation, I imagine: The agent is more likely to be concerned about getting a deal to complete than negotiating you an extra couple of £K salary. Sure he'll get a little more commission on the extra £10K if he's able to negotiate it - but why risk losing the deal altogether by asking for too much, just for the sake of a tiny bit more commission?

There could be any number or reasons, but I would hazard one of the following (i.e. varying degrees of generosity to this RC):1. Unstable relationship with the client dictating that the client does not rate the advice of the RC.2. Inexperienced RC without the confidence of having led salary negotiations.3. The RC is simply a cowboy and looking for a quick buck.4. The RC knows the client very well and knows that pushing back on salary is likely to alienate the client possibly jeopardising the offer.5. The RC knows a case can be made but wants to wait until an offer is made so he has a position of strength to negotiate on your behalf.6. All of the above.7. None of the above.

A word of warning - today I had a candidate in a very similar situation (55k offer, she wanted 60k) she verbally rejected the offer and hoped that they would come back with the 5k - I told her that they dont negotiate and she should accept, she begged to differ - End result - client withdrew the offer.It may be the case that the RC actually knows what he is doing in your case - so beware!

Greyskull - see point 4.

I am a head-hunter, recruiter, used car sales man or whatever you want to call me. Bottom line is this. Some recruiters are experienced, know their onions, have good relationships with their clients and know exactly what they are doing - take advice from these. Some clients/hiring companies want to deal only with the recruiter and not have these conversations with you - personally I find it odd when this happens. What kind of working relationship are you going to have if the hiring company will not even talk directly to you? You sound like an experienced guy. I am sure you can make an assessment on the recruiter and the level of relationship he/she has with the client and consequently the value added. If the recruiter is just processing through an HR channel and is not discussing with key decision makers in the organisation or has no influence over them, you should cut him/her out. It is likely that the HR at the hiring company do not want to be undermined by the line manager and that the recruiter does not want to be undermined by you. They want to show that they can "get the job done on their own"A good recruiter will know that you will be a friend for life if he/she manages to get you want you want. The other week a candidate said to me that he would accept the first offer but would be a bit more comfortable with something a bit higher. I went to the client and managed to get him a small increase (a touch under 5k per year - small gesture, I guess). My rationale is that client will have someone who is significantly more motivated and will therefore do a better job, the candidate will value my input and help me out in the future and yes I will earn a tiny bit more in commission. IN reality this is the least of my concerns. The extra 1+ k on the fee does not make a whole lot of difference to my personal earnings but it is worth trying to make it right for the sake of all concerned. My advice to all of you is this:1. get to know your recruiter. Insist on meeting the individual and make a judgment as to what value they bring. Even someone who just monitors the application adds some value and saves you time but is not a lot of use in the negotiation2. Question the recruiter thoroughly. What level of interface does the recruiter have. Who is he/she talking to/when did the person last visit the client. Again if the answer is "some monkey in HR and never" it is not the end of the world but this person cannot negotiate your salary for you. 3. Remember that an ultra pally recruiter is not always best. "I was best man at the VP's wedding" often means that the recruiter will fight the client's corner and not yours. 4. Always make sure that you take the business cards of the people who interview you. It is amazing how often a quick call to the Director/partner etc can solve all of your problems. Often an inexperienced recruiter is quite scared of the partner or most senior person from the hiring company. It is a tough job and upsetting your key client is not a good move. To you this is just a guy you may or may not work with. Negotiations should be carried out by those who can look the key decision maker in the eye and talk as an equal. If your recruiter cannot do this, you are better off without him at this point.Personally, I try to coach my clients to present the offer (in the right way of course) to the candidates. I think that it sounds a lot better if a partner picks up the phone to offer a job a an engagement manager (obviously not possible at junior levels due to the volume) and that the candidate should always have done enough due diligence to know his/her own market worth.It sounds to me based on what you are saying that the recruiter is a little out of his depth here but this is just an instinctive view based on what you are saying.it seems that the recruiter is trying to pre-close you prior to final interview. This is a technique taught by some recruitment firms (along with "candidate control" - sounds like your guy is taking this too seriously). Ultimately, the only important thing is that you get to the final interview, secure an offer and put yourself in a position where you have a decision to make. You are not poles apart on the numbers - I am sure that this is a gap that can be bridged if they really want you and you are a little bit flexible/really want to join them.What I know for absolute certain is that if you go into the final interview worrying about salary, you will screw up the interview or end up dwelling on it for too long thus distracting the interviewers from what else you have to say. Have a short answer to the salary subject. "I want you to make an honest assessment of my skills and make me an appropriate offer". If pressed, tell them you are looking to be the right side of 6 figures and move onto another subject. My read on this is that some HR administrator is pressurising an inexperienced recruiter on a subject that should not even be on the table yet. It is utterly pointless pre-closing this precisely. All you can do is give an approximation of your expectations. You hope for around 100k but if someone else comes in with 120, your expectations miraculously move in line with that. If other people offer you 80, the 93 k does not seem so bad. ..... ultimately the recruiter will not care as long as he gets paid. Just be nice, tell him what he wants to hear and strut your stuff in that interview!! Good Luck.

The salary should have been negotiated prior to submission, if that is done then this kind of thing rarely happens. If it has not then as someone said before, weigh everything up, consider the minimum figure you will accept and stick to it. But be prepared to lose the offer if you are going back to the client for more spondoolees

ok, thanks for the input guys - very very helpful.right, I should at that my RC is very good friends with the HR guys (and no one else in the firm). my RC has repeatedly warned me that bringing up salary negotiations prior to an offer with the company could jeopradise my chances. my gut feel is that the RC is being very possessive and is trying to rein control on the situation.i am a bit tied down as the final interview has not taken place. suffice to say that once the offer is made then i will be in a much better position to negotiate. the question i have (and potential problem) is that HR will tell the RC an offer has been made - how do i then get back to HR to negotiate the offer? bear in mind that the RC has very likely told the HR person that i will settle for the base offer...so for me to then go back to HR would make me look silly, which i don't want to be known for if i join the company.i guess my fault was that i let the RC get away with controlling the situation too much.note, that i do value the RC finding me the opportunity as i never would have got it otherwise.

Interesting thread.Mike - there is a consistent discussion about "negotiating" with HR. I, personally, do not believe that this is possible.In every organisation I have worked in, HR have the power to make an offer a business manager has authorised. If the potential recruit asks for something different, HR goes back to the business manager and, before you know it, you have entered the double-glazing method of negotiation.So, if one wants to have a real negotiation - i.e. go back and forth re. pay, holidays and benefits, one must talk to a business manager with the authority to make a decision.If one is happy to be given a single offer and accept the business manager's first "offer", then HR or your RC is fine.MD - thanks - a useful list and analysis.P

it depends a lot on the type of company. I have experienced both sides of this. If this is a big "machine" like BT, Accenture, Microsoft etc, you will doutbless find that a very impersonal approach to hiring occurs. The recruiter may even have had to sign a contract agreeing very specific lines of communication. It is a terrible way to work as a recruiter. A decent bit of money in it but you basically have to call up some very senior people to pitch jobs to them without the level of information you would usually want in this situation - when in this situation, I used to rely on very detailed candidate feedback to build up a picture of what the client wanted. What usually happens is that the more experienced consultants move on to other work and the juniors do most of the calling - result.... 23 year old kids are calling up high tier Directors.... In your case, the recruiter, to be fair, has correctly identified the opportunity for you and you for the opportunity. Ultimately the recruiter just wants to fee. He may not like you going behind his back but if that is what it takes to close the deal he would prefer it if you did. Line influence is key here. When in a similar situation a few years ago (before I decided not to get involved in this type of work), I had a high tier candidate in an interview for an excellent job. Because the client was a very valuable client to our company, I had to stick to the rules of engagement imposed on my by the contract. Basically I did not have the right to talk to the poeple I needed to talk to to give the candidate the advice he needed and I had become extremely frustrated by having some quite brilliant people rejected by some 25 year old inernal recruiter. The way I arranged it was tell the client that the candidate was unavailable every time they proposed an initial HR interview. Eventually, they came back with a first interview with the Director running the business unit who had obviously became frustrated by the fact that he had been sitting on a brilliant CV for some time. This was the moment we were waiting for. I sent the candidate in. He charmed the interviewer, got his business card and opened up a direct line of communication with the real decision maker. The HR interview then became second interview and a total formality ( I think they talked about the cricket mostly) which took place a couple of days later.... How many internal recruiters are going to reject someone who is approved by someone at the very top of the organisation. By this time the Director had agreed with the candidate what package was appropriate and HR did as they were told. Due to heavy restrictions on the lines of communications, I had to take a ridiculously convoluted approach to getting my guy hired. Your recruiter has to "tow the party line" because HR can get really nasty if they think you are going against their wishes. To the recruiter, this can mean causing your company to lose a very large account. You can actually help your recruiter by having the conversations he is not allowed to have.

What a fascinating thread! The core conclusion surely has to be that the employer is the recruitment consultant's ultimate client - doesn't it? They have far more to lose by antagonising the employer than they do by irritating the candidate. Hence they will always be more inclined to push through an offer at a rate that the employer is happy with than to push for those last few thousands for the candidate.Reminds me of a fascinating study published in the last couple of years - in the Economist if memory serves me right. It showed that estate agents always secure a higher price when selling their own houses than when selling a client's house. As an earlier contributor remarked, the impact on commission of securing a few extra thousand is negligible for the agent. But when it's their own money at stake then it's clearly worth the extra round of negotiating.Same must be true of recruiters - they'd get far more upside in their businesses by maximising the number of placements achieved in the year than by maximising the salaries achieved on each of those placements. Hence that is what they are bound to focus on. Not a slur on recruitment agents, just the reality of the commercial arrangements in place.Lesson must surely be to work with recruitment agents to gain access to opportunities that you might not have access to direct - but once you've reached offer stage you have to stand up and be counted yourself...

As a matter of interest, I would like to know how much influence an RC can have on a candidate getting the job? Could i annoy my RC enough by bypassing him that he could jeopradise me getting the job?In my case, the RC is very connected with HR - to the point he is their choice RC and brings in most of the people. I swear my RC speaks as though he works for the company!

I would pretty much agree with this assessment. It can vary. Recently, working on very favourable terms of business and negiating a very high salary for someone, the differentials in the package (note package - every add-on was chargeable) were enough to make quite a bit of difference to my personal earnings. In the majority of cases tis is far from the case. Ultimately recruiters are paid by the hiring company not by the candidate. Yes we need candidates to make placements but there is always another candidate. There is not always another client round the corner as these relationships can take months and years to build up. I am more than comfortable to negotiate salaries for my candidates or to act as a guide/sounding board while they do it themselves. Experienced candidates generally have a views as to how they want it to work. I find that candidates use me to ask the cheeky question they would not dare ask themselves

MikeEven if you sufficiently annoy your RC by circumventing him in the process I fail to see why he would try to sabotage an offer as he will be paid by the client is you are placed there regardless - the terms cover the introduction and usually guarantee some period of 'ownership' of this introduction. So where is the benefit in both alienating someone you may well need again in the future, and in losing an ally in the negotiation? Ultimately the RC not only wants you to be offered and accept that offer, he also wants you to remain with the company to ensure he is not called in on the rebate period if you leave, so it is in his interests that you are happy, motivated and contented with the offer in the first place. My advice - stop thinking about this until you have an offer and then discuss it with your RC; you never know, the client may surprise you and offer you what you want in the first place!

1 other point Mike: you said 'In my case, the RC is very connected with HR - to the point he is their choice RC and brings in most of the people. I swear my RC speaks as though he works for the company!'.As you would expect; would you have dealt with this RC with any confidence had it been otherwise?

Mars - wrt your last point, the RC will always use lines like 'thats typically them', 'thats how they operate', 'you can expect that' - to anything! he makes a lot of stuff up on the fly and tries to project way too much confidence in 'knowing' the company. the reality is he doesnt know and will change his story with the wind to make it seem that way.i am less bothered about that - just want the best offer.anyway, i'll wait post-offer to bring this up again.

Are you all mad? There isn't even an offer yet! It sounds to me like the recruitment consultant is doing a good job managing a candidate’s expectation and being honest for once, a trait we are always accused of not being. I am a RC so take my view as you will. I’m not going to justify why I do what I do but will assure you I'm not thick or an ex car or phone salesman before we start down that old and tired route. Anyway back to the issue, you seem extremely presumptuous to discuss an offer when you haven't even finished the interview round. If you’re as good as you seem to think you are why don’t you think they offer you £100K instead of £93K? Secondly, do you understand how we get paid? If yes why would you think for a minute that we wouldn’t try and get you a higher offer? If your recruitment consultant is saying that there is no way its possible maybe they know something you don’t and you aren’t as good as you think you are. Or else, perhaps they know their client well and understand how salary bandings work. Companies like the Big 4 and Accenture have strict bandings at each level that they can’t change no matter how much I/we might like them too. Either way don’t go direct to HR. Tell you recruitment consultant that you won’t take the job unless you get the £100K and they will do all they can to get you it to avoid loosing the fee that they have worked for. No matter what you think this is what we do EVERY DAY and therefore are much better at it than you. Unless you are taking big revenues with you and going in at partner level it is extremely important to make a company feel that it’s not just about the money.

RC - you make a good point, but the scenario in which you will do everything you can to secure the £100k for the candidate is when you risk losing the placement if you don't manage to secure that for them. By contrast, if you think the candidate is going to accept the £93k offer then there's minimal upside to you in chasing the extra £7k salary - so it's not something you're likely to invest a lot of effort in securing unless the whole placement is at risk. You're better off spending your time finding a £93k candidate for your next assignment.If you're on 25% commission of the package the successful candidate secures, your firm gets £23,250 for placing the £93k candidate. The extra £7k salary brings your firm only an additional £1,750 of commission - and unless you own the recruitment firm then you'll only get a small fraction of this as additional placement bonus. So surely the fact still remains that the candidate has a lot more to lose financially than you do by not successfully negotiating this £7k rise.Or have I missed something?

yes, you are right prospective candidate but this all depends on how well you know the client and candidate. We are paid to make the deal happen. If we are leaning on you to be more flexible we should be doing the same to the client in the hope that both sides give a little and we all get the result we want. The recruiter is right. This is not even an offer. Frankly, the candidate should get himself to the interview and make sure he gets an offer. He is going to feel like a right w@nker if he gets rejected after all this. I am looking forward to the next post "I got rejected and it is all my recruitment consultant's fault"....

Quite frankly the way this guy / gal is behaving in assuming that his Rec Consultant is a twat is probably indicative of his personality. You would be surprised at the negative feedback I get from excellent senior candidates who simply think they are above the interviewer in front of them. It's all about playing the game until you get the offer! They have all the power until they decide they want you and then you have it as they will want to make sure they get you. P.S. Prospective candidate you seem to be assuming here that we only work and listen to the client. We are the broker in between but you make it seem like we jump when the client shouts and that Mike is simply going to go with where we say he should???????? Surely a he is sooooooooo good he will have more than one opportunity on the go ……

good lord...i hope i never come across the RC's in the last 2 posts. you should take the time to explain yourself rather than having a go at people. I never put my RC down, just a bit bemused at his actions.does being an RC stress you out that much? sorry to be a handful

You never put your RC down? To quote you:“the rc is really winding me up!”“he makes a lot of stuff up on the fly and tries to project way too much confidence in 'knowing' the company. the reality is he doesn’t know and will change his story with the wind to make it seem that way.” More pity the analysts that work for you. And yes being an RC is stressful, largely because you are dealing with people who question your ability to do your job on an offer that they haven’t even received.

yes - i question some of the things the RC ius doing, which are winding me up. i know that the RC is BS'ing on certain things. However - i still respect him and am still grateful for him finding me an opportunity. i've listened to everything he has said and obided by his terms. perhaps you dont realise this is a democracy and i am allowed to have my views AND respect someone - clearly something you are not capable of doing.do you view all your clients in such a dim light? do you always project your persona in such a dim light? we all have stressful jobs - we all deal with issues - its life! get over it my friend.

Now now children. Let’s not let this thread fall into a slanging match. There were some people further up who were very appreciative of the information contained herein.

Hillarious.I bet Mike doesn't even get an offer!

Mike, I have managed a lot of these scenarios. No-one can offer a real assessment here without knowing who the potential employer is. there is a different method for recruitment into different organisations. The same rules do not apply for all. If you are going into one with a very strict machinelike approach to hiring, your recruiter is doing what he has to do, unfortunately. Up to you to improve lines of communication with the hiring companyGood luck

All very good points. As an in-house recruiter I find it very frustrating when agencies don't represent their candidates completely. If you don't trust an agency you are better off going direct to the client. Bear in mind that salary is key area, some hiring managers don't necessary have the authority to negotiate this is done by HR AND the budget holder for that area.When I interview people I always clarify their salary expectation as I don't want to get into a bidding war. Generally speaking it doesn't look good from a candidate who tries to do this as it highlights remuneration over challenge of the role etc. I agree it's important but this is where agencies can ruin things for both the client and candidate... to be fair it's not all of them. That's why I'm selective on who I bring on my PSL.

You have to remember that in-house recruiters earn significantly less money than the recruiters who represent you as candidates. They are generally failed recruitment consultants with a big chip on their shoulders and a great desire to "get one over" on people who could even be ex colleagues. If your recruiter is only dealing through this channel, it is unlikely that he is going to be able to help you much other than from an admin perspective and you should speak to the in-house recruiter yourself. If he is able to get around straight to the actual leadership and use the in-house recruiter simply as a process person, he can help. In-house recruiters tend to drill down on your salary at 1st interview stage, taking no account of the fact that you are in several interview processes and your real worth should be dictated by the result of all of these processes. "Why is this person rejecting our offer of 95k when he said he would accept this in his first interview?" they ask..... "Probably because he has been offered 110k and 115k by 2 other companies since you had that conversation with him" the brave recruitment consultant replies... My favourite in-house recruiter interview story was the person who accused my candidate of "not having much of an IT background" when he was interviewing for a very senior Programme Director role with a major System Integrator. He politely pointed out that he had 2 patents, an Msc, 25 years of professional IT experience and had recently led a 1 billion pound national level programme (I had better not detail more specifically). He was rejected for being "arrogant" and not having the right "culture fit" for the organisation..... needless to say the programme he should have been running was left without the right leadership for several months with quite disastrous consequences....Play the game Mike. Humour recruiters, do the interview, get the job and have some impact from the inside once you get there. You can change nothing from the outside!

thanks ode.good points all over.Out of interest, how much do successful recruitment consultants earn - especially those hiring at the exec levels?

If you are an average biller £50 - 70K.If your any good at all £90K to the skys the limit.

gosh - thats a fair whack! maybe i should become an RC - might earn more!

joking apart Mike, one more high level job and a good load of connections and you could almost certainly do well + improve your earnings. The flip side is that it is very high risk. If you do not do well, you earn next to nothing and get fired! There is not a lot of attempts to work with you, understand your career goals etc. This is probably why recruiters have so little sympathy for management consultants. While we certainly understand the challenges, some of the complaints make us laugh as we work in a little more of a "gun to your head" type of environment. If we do not make sales, we get fired.