Recruiter - a weak link with the employer

I have been working as a programmer for a long time and I would like to correct the view from the side of the recruiter described in the topic " Should I go for an interview with the recruiter? "

Suppose that on the one hand of the “barricades” we have an average normal employer who needs an IT specialist. It is necessary really, for business, “to work work”, and not to sit on cuts and kickbacks.

On the other hand, a normal specialist, whose goal is to find a job that meets his internal criteria (salary, interest, team, etc.). Do not go for an interview to show your coolness, do not get an offer to blackmail a boss at your current job - but get a job in a good company for a long time.

The mediator is a professional recruiter who has the goal of closing a vacancy in the company. Do not imitate violent activity, do not fill the “base”, do not conduct a lot of meaningless interviews - namely, close the vacancy with an adequate professional who most likely will not fly out (or not run away) from the probationary period.

So, let's go through the points of opinion of a professional recruiter from the topic " Should I go for an interview with a recruiter? "

1. According to the recruiter, the candidate believes "I do not want to be evaluated in appearance"

Your untruth.
As a candidate, I want to be evaluated in all necessary ways, including in appearance. I am for complete transparency in the relationship, and this relationship starts from the moment of the interview.
But I do not want HR to do this assessment.
The reasons are simple:
a) the recruiter evaluates the candidate, with whom you don’t have to work further.
b) the candidate is evaluated by a person who is far from his field of knowledge.
c) the candidate does not have the opportunity to conduct a cross-assessment of the employer.

So the opinion of many candidates will be more likely this: “I do not want to be evaluated by recruiters, I want to be evaluated by professionals with whom I will work.”

2. "Personal assessment"

If the candidate is an adequate professional, then your personal assessment will not do anything. It is impossible to understand whether this candidate will fit into the team without trying to bring this candidate together and the team itself, or at least the candidate and the bosses of the team.

The desire of companies to save time of expensive specialists is understandable. Time is money. Only this statement is true for the other side of the negotiation process - for the candidate. If you add 2 * (30-90) minutes to the round trip (for a large city) to 40-60 minutes of communication with the recruiter - the losses look very significant. The candidate receives nothing from the interview - the recruiter works as a one-way filter.

Conclusion: the only thing the recruiter can do is to conduct a primary screening inadequate, while, alas, the candidate is not given a similar opportunity.

3. “Testing technical knowledge”

That a recruiter is able to go to sql-ex.ru and take away the task of the training phase is good.
It is bad that the recruiter forces the candidate to write any problems on a piece of paper. It’s bad that, according to the conversation, the recruiter cannot even understand the approximate level of a specialist. It’s bad that the recruiter’s conclusions are based on the results of children's tasks.
There is no other way to reliably evaluate a candidate’s technical knowledge, except to conduct an interview with the participation of technical specialists.
Yes, it’s clear that techies’s time is expensive. But in another way. I will give an analogy as an argument: If you need to make a hole in a concrete wall - take a hammer drill, or at least a hammer drill. Do not pick the wall with a screwdriver or hammer on it - ruin either the tool or the wall.
I think that after a “technical” interview from a recruiter, the desire of a good specialist will settle in a company (which he had not even seen at this stage) to cool down somewhat.

Conclusion: If you want to test technical knowledge, look for how to minimize the cost of verification by professionals.

4. "Identification of the interests of the candidate"

If a person has already come to you for an interview, then he is already interested. And that means that he already asked a number of initial questions over the phone and almost certainly read about the company on the Internet. Since the recruiter does not work in the company where the candidate wants to get a job, because he did not see the project in the eye, he is not able to answer most of the candidate's questions about the project and the company. It is impossible to determine whether the project or the company will be of interest to the candidate. In fact, how can you identify this interest if it does not provide any additional information? And the candidate has already received general information.

Conclusion: playing the role of a damaged phone, it is impossible to give the candidate comprehensive information about the company, team, project, processes existing there, etc. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether the company will be of interest to the applicant.

5. “To go or not to go? That's the question! Question about +1 interview. ”

Yes, it’s exactly +1 interview that usually stops, because from the candidate’s point of view, you spend an average of 3-4 hours taking into account the road, and in return you get nothing. Of course, the dream employer may be hiding in the rear, while his recruiters are fighting at the front. And you need to use your chance! But a technical specialist will not fall for this bait. He understands that the probability of finding a good employer does not correlate with the presence or absence of an additional interview with a recruiter. Therefore, it makes sense for the candidate to try first like interviews with direct employers. And only then, if there is time, go to recruiters. That is, for the candidate, the presence of an extra link only pushes the company in the line of interviews. Of course, this is not about employment in the corporation of good or evil,

Conclusion: The question of whether or not to go is not worth the candidate. The candidate will simply postpone your vacancy “for later”. The applicant will come to you if he has already talked about all the direct vacancies that interest him. Or it won’t come if the queue doesn’t reach your vacancy.

6. "Why not immediately admit what the maximum amount they can give me?" “And why not immediately admit how much I get now and how much I want? »
These issues, both on the part of the applicant and the recruiter, can only speak of their infantility, and they hardly need to be discussed.

4. “Will a classy specialist who knows his worth agree to come to HR-y?”

Yes, of course, the fact that the “cool special” will not come to the recruiter is a myth.
But you must understand that he will only come to the recruiter last.
First, he will sort through all his contacts. Well, how does one of the former colleagues / bosses have a tasty vacancy?
Secondly, he will call those companies that interest him. And / Or, it will respond only to “direct” vacancies.
And only thirdly, he will come to the recruiter.

Advice, or suggestions to recruiters from applicants:

Give the applicants something so that they do not think that they have wasted time.
Become an insider for the job seeker in the company. Share with him information that he could not get from open sources (of course, I do not call for blurting out the secrets of the company)
Ask the employer for maximum details about the vacancy, project, team, processes. If the applicant asked you a question that you cannot answer, ask the employer a question, call the applicant back and give him the answer. Do not be indifferent.
Be as open and honest as possible, be humane, do not speak in phrased phrases.
Do not be afraid to tell the applicant the name and address of the company. If he wants, he himself will find them by your vacancy, but you will lose confidence.
Do not try to pretend to be techies and ask technical tasks - it looks pathetic. Look for another way to quickly / cheaply evaluate a specialist’s technical training.

And finally, do not confront the applicant. Even if the candidate considers you an enemy, it is in your power to make him an ally. After all, your goals - employment and closing a vacancy - coincide.