Is a recruitment consultant really a consultant? Do they display any of the competencies that would normally be associated with consulting? For some time the recruitment industry has suffered from a perceived lack of ethics and with just about every professional in the UK having had experienced recruitment consultants first hand, is there are case for making recruitment more consultative?
In a recent article by Mick James, quoting Steve Tappin (ex-CEO of Edengene, now Managing Partner – Heidrick & Struggles) he put forward the notion that the recruitment industry needs to be more entrepreneurial and more innovative. While this is true, it can also be said that he is assuming the basics of good consulting exist.
When viewing what they are actually providing to their clients, it can be seen that they are actually selling access to information. A management consultant sells their breadth of knowledge as applied to creating a solution to a client’s problem. Simile a recruitment consultant sells access to the information held in networks of contacts. They are both providing access to information, albeit for a different end result. The management consultant delivers a solution while a recruitment consultant delivers a person for a position.
As it would seem they are both selling information, do they need the same competencies? When considering the ‘consulting’ skill set, competencies like: solutions orientation, lateral thinking, resilient, stakeholder aware and change orientation, can be seen as key competencies for success. The question to ask then is: do consultants working in the recruitment industry display similar characteristics?
Most would argue that they don’t…! Similar service, different competencies! The fundamental difference can be seen in the way that these two different types of businesses charge their clients for their services.
If you look across the breadth of the recruitment industry there are numerous subdivisions. From: high street temp recruiters (Manpower, Adecco, etc) through specialist contingent recruiters (Michael Page, Computer People, etc) to senior executive search (Korn/Ferry, Heidrick & Struggles, Russell Reynolds, etc). Within this enormous spread there are not only different operating models, but also a very large spread of calibre of individuals (similar to the Consulting industry). Placing all of the industries recruitment consultants into one category would be like putting a McKinsey & Co consultant in the same category as a physical therapy consultant.
In breaking this down, it is important to recognise that like the consulting industry, the recruitment industry can be essentially broken into being either Search firms (sometimes called: ‘Head-hunters’) or Contingent agencies (with the bulk of the volume of recruiters being contingent recruiters). One fundamental difference between these two broad camps comes down to the methods of payment for their services. A contingent recruiter is exactly that – they are paid when the person they find is successful and starts in the new role. They charge their fee (usually a percentage of the starting salary) on the first day the person starts. In opposition to this, a Search consultant will charge a client based on the delivery of the work activity.
This typically means that for each vacant position there may be a number of different contingent recruiters from different firms working to find a candidate where-as, if a client engages a search firm they are the only person working to source a candidate for that particular role. When comparing the contingent agency model to the consulting industry it would be like a company approaching: McKinsey, Bain, Booz Allen and BCG and saying: “all of you work on a new strategy for us and we will pay for the one we choose.”
This ‘contingent’ approach to payment results in a number of issues regarding quality and the ability to of the recruitment consultant to actually ‘consult’ to the client. Contingent firms, due to the fact that they are competing with sometimes 5-10 other firms on time, cut short the process in the interest of making sure their candidates fill the available interview slots. They typically take a very short brief from the client, forward the first available, best-fit candidates and reduce the time in assessing the true capability of the candidates. In comparison, as the Search firm is engaged on an exclusive basis they have both the time and the inclination to be more thorough in managing the quality within recruitment process. Taking a detailed brief, truly understanding the client’s employee value proposition (EVP), sourcing the best possible candidates and thoroughly assessing their suitability.
This retained model allows time to be proactive and targeted in their approach to sourcing. As it is an accepted fact that top performers infrequently apply for roles via advertising, actively targeting individuals in competing firms is an effective method for attracting top-quartile performers.
Further, to this Search consultants tend to be more experienced individuals that have either come from senior industry roles (i.e. they specialise in sourcing people with a similar background) or from senior consulting roles. Where search consultants are hired for and trained in the consulting skill set, contingent recruiters are taught to sell, negotiate and to move a candidate through a process as quickly as possible.
The retained model allows the Search consultant to be more consultative in their approach. As they typically represent one client at a time they are truly able to apply the competencies required to ensure that the best possible candidate is found. Further, as they ensure the process is managed correctly, they ensure that the candidate is completely engaged and bought into the ‘one’ opportunity (as opposed to multiple opportunities when liaising with a contingent recruiter).
When looking at the recruitment industry as a whole, it can be said that they don’t display enough of the competencies required to be considered consultants. Despite this, true Search consultants display the same competencies as best practice Consultants (management, strategy and other) operating in other sectors.
__________________________________
Jonathan Krogdahl is the Managing Consultant heading up the Consulting Sector Team with Futurestep – a division of Korn/Ferry International. Prior to joining Korn/Ferry International he worked as a freelance consultant advising a number of blue chip clients in a variety of industries on recruitment, resourcing and resource management issues.
