I got an interview through a headhunter for a job doing low-level embedded work ("C and assembly" stuff). Now there are some things I'm wondering about.
The headhunter gave me an application but also said the company might have its own application. Why two applications for one job?
The headhunter said to contact him after the interview. Why? I guess the headhunter does some preliminary pseudo-screening before the interview, but once I meet the company, why would I ever talk to him again?
Any other aspects of the headhunter interview process of which I'm not aware?
One will be the headhunters own form and it will register you as one of their clients so you can't get the job by circumventing them.
The headhunter realises that his usefulness has been exhausted once you have met the employers and exchanged contact details so they like to get involved to try to justify their huge fees. Usually the employer will be irritated by the go-betweening here as well and will try to talk to you direct without the agent.
Don't think they are on either your or the employer's side - they work for themselves
The headhunter's application is mostly for him to keep on file so he can try to place you when other openings come up.
Because he wants to know how it went and what they asked you (so he has some idea who else to send). If you're having doubts about the company or the position, he has try to convince you it's a good company and a good job.
Remember: the headhunter works for the company (not for you) and he only gets paid if you take the job.
Because he may be a useful resource in the future? You're under no obligation to meet with him after the interview, but if you act like a jerk he probably won't send your resume to any more companies (unless he doesn't have any others to send).
Just remember that he's working for the company not for you, and his income is 100% commission. He only eats if he can talk people into accepting job offers.
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Dehydrated EGGS are
at STREWN across ROULETTE
Right. Maybe I need another interview. I should have mentioned that in my use of the word "ever". I just wondered whether it was optional or necessary to the hiring process. I read optional. I like optional.
Weird. I figure they'd require their own form *before* scheduling interviews, but I guess that takes more time and is often not worth it since the chance of getting an interview seems low compared to the number of headhunter contacts.
Huh, well I don't want that. I hate it whenever any salesperson tries to convince me of anything. The only thing I want to help make a decision is as much raw, unbiased information as I can get.
A salesperson. Huh. I'm probably the worst person a salesperson could ever get. I'm pretty much immovable, like a rock. The only reason I take interest in a product is because some aspects of it stand out. I think a good product sells itself without requiring any convincing.
Which would be unethical for you do do since s/he did get you the interview.
The headhunter's company application may be more generic, namely to get your information for lining up other interviews in case this one does not lead to an offer. Of course the company hiring you always has their own paperwork system. That's why they have an HR department, to create all those forms for applicants and employees to fill out. Isn't HR wonderfull?
A good headhunter's usefulness does not end at the interview. Negotiating salary, setting up followup interviews, getting feedback on what went wrong in an interview are some of the other things they do.
Any employer "irritated by the go-betweening here" that tries to go directly to you is as unethical as some of those that gave headhunters a bad reputation.
Well this is true and should be self evident. But that said, good headhunters create a threeway win-win situation. Often they last in the industry a long time. Check references of the HH agency. Ask them for names of others they have placed. Ask the references if they would use that agency again. As Grant pointed out in another post, they don't get paid unless you take the job. And if they screw you or the company or both, in the long run, they will lose business.
Not all headhunters are jerks. Not all jobs show in the want ads (and some that do are filled before they are even printed.). Not all advice on usenet is useful. So think about it You'll learn.
That's a strong word. Actually, I think it'd be ethical as long as the right connections were kept intact, that all parties got the core of what they wanted (commission to headhunter, job to candidate, and candidate to employer). My only interest would be in circumventing the superfluous connections.
By the way, I asked my headhunter since then, and he already has a signed agreement with the company and his letterhead on my resume, so I think his commission should be intact.
Most of the engineering/technical headhunters who are in the business for more than a few months (it's a very high turnover field), have figured out that's the way engineering types are and won't try to bullshit you too badly. Still, he's going to want some feedback on what the company was really looking for (the headhunters often get the job listing from an HR person who's completely clueless).
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I just bought
at FLATBUSH from MICKEY
Resumes are what get people legitimate interviews. The only way headhunters get people interviews is by speaking the language of bullshit, which might be understood by a hiring manager who also understands the language of bullshit, but speaking in bullshit is not a legitimate activity and therefore is unethical itself, so circumventing it can only be ethical.
You don't think it might be that they understand people? And probably prefer people to abstractions. Headhunters can't possibly understand the particulars of all their clients. That's not their job. Their job is to connect job openings with the people to fill them, that depends on understanding people and the processes involved.
You might find a book titled "The Introvert Advantage" interesting. It may help you see how different people see the world and why. It's not that others are necessarily superficial or unethical. They do, however, have different viewpoints and capabilities.
By using the services of a headhunter you have agreed, even if reluctantly, that his services are necessary. Depriving the headhunter of his interest because you dislike the necessity of using him or you have gotten what you needed from him is at best questionable. Once he's received his due the two of you can part company amicably.
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Here's another way to explain why it's actually ethical. Headhunters are basically thieves who steal jobs from candidates and candidates from employers. Circumventing them is like identifying the original supplier of a set of stolen merchandise. Circumventing a criminal act can only be right.
On this point, I rethought my response. I think I would stick to my original instinct to never have a reason to talk to the headhunter again, and I wouldn't consider this being a jerk.
Speaking of which, the headhunter's entire job is to be a jerk. The headhunter is never useful. He/she is an obstacle, and I don't want to encourage such bad behavior. The only reason I ever talk to headhunters is because some companies are too cowardly to search for resumes or advertise their contact information directly.
What do you think? It is all about selling you. The headhunter knows the companies he deals with have different ways of selecting CVs and he's just trying to maximise you chances. Do you think that is wrong?
No, the manager knows he is going to get a large number of CVs. He cannot possibly read them all, there just isn't time, so he has to set some basic criteria that any idiot (=HR=headhunter) can apply to weed out the ones that obviously do not fit.
Exactly, it is about getting the interview nothing else - if you do not recognise already that working in industry involves dealing with idiots then you will not survive long.
HR serves a limited but useful purpose in recruitment. You cannot expect any more of them in that role.