Using a recruiter in this market, are you crazy!

I talk with a lot of people any given week about recruitment and admittedly in today's market more and more people think that the role of the recruiter is dying or dead. Many clients have the perception that the need for professional recruiters is low due to high unemployment. The reality is you need a great recruiter in any market.


Here's why. Let's say for example that unemployment is at 10% (currently Hong Kong is about 4% officially but probably likely to e 6% in the near future). That means that there are still 90% of people in the market who are employed. Now let's assume further that of those 90% about 20% are really active. These are the people who are on the jobboards everyday desperately trying to find an opportunity better than their current job. Let's further assume that another 20% of people out there are 'passive' job seekers. These are people who on occassion are looking but they are not desperate to leave their company, they are interested in new opportunities but they don't much if any of their day looking at jobs but occassionaly glance at the Classifieds. So this means that there would still be 40% of the people in the market that are not either Unemployed, Active or Passive who are NOT ACTIVE. Just imagine that's 4 out of every 10 people in the workforce who aren't even thinking about trying to find a new job. (Refer picture above)


My comment to the company who says, I'll just post this on Monster.com or JobsDB.com is always the same. Mr/s Client go ahead, post it online if you want to see the best of the unemployed or underqualified because their is a 40% chance that the candidate you want is not going to even know you were looking! I hear you say well touching 60% of the market is pretty good odds... hmm, doesn't sound too compelling to me.


A recruiter is your best option in any market. There job is to find you the best person for the job, not the best available person or unemployed person but pure and simple the best person. Now it is unrealistic to expect a recruiter to be able to reach all 100% of the market however even if they are able to reach out to 20% of the NOT ACTIVE market you will have increased your odds of getting the best talent. In a market where times are more challenging don't you want the best people. Typically the best people at their jobs aren't looking or even considering leaving their company. They are happy in their job and their employer looks after them because they are very good at what they do. A talented recruiter will know how to reach out to this segment of the market and position your company with the right people, they will sell your business and the opportunity, thats what they do. Added to that in today's market asking people to leave a secure position to join a new company is exceptionally challenging. People don't want to be the last one on and first one off, you will need a professional to help manage this process.


So Mr/s client next time you think about just asking HR to put an advert online just remember that there is a >40% chance that golden candidate you are looking to hire doesn't even know your hiring. Improve your odds engage a professional, the results of the right hire far out weigh the costs of using a professional.

Dumbing down your resume?

I was watching an interesting news clip on CNNMoney.com about how as unemployment is on the rise a lot of people are having to apply for jobs for which they are "overqualified" and as a result they need to "dumb" down their resume to give themselves a chance at getting interviewed.

Whilst I can understand the logic to an extent I think there are two perspectives to consider here. 1) is from the unemployed candidate and 2) the Employers.

Let's start with the Employer First;

What are the concerns Employers have with hiring "over qualified" people?

My experience has taught me that the majority of employers whilst they love the idea of what is often referred to as an employee DNA upgrade they often don't take advantage of the market for several reasons.

a) Will this person really want to do the job, or just do it for now because the employment market is bad? If you step into the shoes of the Employer this really isn't an unreasonable perspective. Everyone wants to hire people who will enjoy their job and take pride in it, not just do it because their is nothing better to do. My advice to an employer in this situation is to make the job bigger if you can, leverage off the persons skills to improve the role and what it can deliver. However I do agree that in a lot of cases it sounds good and should be logical to hire the best you can but it can come with problems in managing people's expectations on job satisfaction. In this situation the Employer really needs to spend time assessing the personality and attitude of the candidate. Focus on candidates who have a history of taking pride in the task or job, usually this profile is fixated on doing what ever they do well irrespective of the task.

b) I can't pay them what their old job paid and as soon as the market improves they will go somewhere that pays them better? You need to be realistic and you can't blame people for wanting to earn more money but you might be surprised to find out just how loyal people can be. The vast majority of the human race feels obliged to people who help them when they need help. Its not uncommon to see employees say "the company gave me an opportunity when it was tough and I owe them". This is works to a point. If you have a highly over qualified employee and they can find better work and better pay then people will leave. However use this market to use these higher qualified staff to download their experience to your other employees. Give your less qualified employees a chance to learn and grow by being surrounded by better qualified people. Upgrade your DNA through IP/experience transfer from the more experienced person, think of it as a cheap training opportunity for your staff.

Now from the perspective of the Candidate or Unemployed:

a) Dumbing down your CV: Now dumbing down your resume might actually help in some respects and your audience definitely has to be taken into account. If you have an audience with the CEO then that's not a good idea. If it is going through an HR/Recruiter then you might need to tailor your CV for the situation. Now don't lie, just frame your CV for your audience. Let me give you an example; Let's say you are applying for a job as an HR Manager and you have previously been an HR Director. You have to forward your CV to HR for review. Now be fair, if you were the HR Director would you been keen to bring on a 'peer' or maybe even someone more qualified than you? What happens if the CEO finds out that the person applying is better at the HR Director job than the current Director? You have a very common issue which is most time people struggle to recommend people who are equal to them or more qualified for a job below them. Its human nature and just something we need to accept. As a candidate you need to ask your recruiter to clarify whom there relationship is with? Ideally your CV needs to go to the person above the person who will be your direct manager to have a shot if you are applying to a role where you are over qualified.

b) Highlight how you can transfer knowledge and experience: Your over qualified and you need to help the potential employer understand why it will not be a risk for them to hire you. By highlighting your ability to share your knowledge and experience, train up younger or less experienced staff will go a long way to easing concerns employers have about you jumping ship at the first chance.

c) Show some loyalty; OK so someone gives you a job. Sure they don't expect you to stay forever but at least do the decent thing and stay for a committed period. Maybe when you take the job do it as a fixed to term contract so you have an nice way out. The employer knows your going to go when the markets better (unless they make it worth your while to stay) but remember in their mind they are taking a risk by hiring you, don't make them regret it. Unfortunately in Asia I've found this to be a huge issue so please all you over qualified employees looking for work show some integrity and if you have to leave earlier than expected because a better opportunity came along give plenty of notice and be mature about your exit.

Unemployment Wave Theory

I've been developing this theory for some time and I'm calling it unemployment wave theory. Whilst I'm sure it there are significant cracks in the logic, I'm confident there is some basis to what I'm saying based on my experience. Hard data however is yet to be gathered to back up my opinion. I'll get to that later.

Picture for a moment the waves coming into shore, one after the other. Now image that the first wave is unemployment going from 4% to 6%. Contray to common belief by many in the market this would mean that there is a sudden flux of exceptional candidates in the market. True there are good people coming onto the market; there always are, however lets be brutally honest, 90% of those being let go when the market goes from 3-4% to 6% are not the mission critical employees, they are the ones you want to have when your business is booming (3-4% is arguably the margin of error in unemployment and would almost certainly mean full employment and as of the writing of this blog unemployment in HK is about 4%). Now this is not meant to be offensive to anyone who has just lost their job because there are people currently who are vitims of bad circumstances and bad luck, investment bankers being a prime example.

Employers need to understand that whilst there is a in flow of more candidates onto the market this does not mean that they represent the exceptional talent they maybe seeking. Sure there will be good ones but most employers want the "superstars" however the reality is that the superstars aren't on the market, they never are unemployed, thats why they are superstars!

When you hit the first wave, you have good people but not superstars coming onto the market. This doesn't mean there is not a lot of great talent out there but in a time when companies only want to hire the best due to the economic downturn hiring managers need to understand that just because unemployment is on the rise doesn't mean its going to be easier to hire a superstar.

Second wave is when we go from 6-8%; Now things are going to change a bit in this wave as this is when you start to see companies having to let go of some of their best talent. Typically smaller businesses are the biggest hit in this wave as they don't have the financial power of the large MNC's and as a result the people that drive these businesses are forced back onto the employment market. This is the point at which you can say as an employer that there should be a lot of good talent on the market and you'll be right but once again employers understand superstars aren't on the market in vast numbers, good talent is now in the market.

Third wave is when unemployment goes above 8%. If my memory serves me correctly during SARS in 2003 unemployment went to about 8.6%. Now this is truly an employers market, this is where you really have a chance to look at a much broader and more qualified group of candidates. There will be a lot of exceptional talent on the market and arguably a great time for companies to look at upgrading their own DNA for higher calibre candidates. However once again SUPERSTARS aren't actively looking and probably still aren't part of this group.

So I hear you asking "when are the superstars coming onto the market?". Well the bad news for you the employer is; they're not! Sure there will be a few that will come onto the market due to factors beyond their control. e.g. Company closes operations, changes business model but thats going to be only a few. This is why I never fear my industry will go out of business (the recruitment/search industry) is because I know the best people are never really looking, they don't need too. They are so good at what they do they are getting approached and they are doing well where they are so they are not insecure nor are they actively looking. They are the play makers the people that are the life blood of their respective companies. Their current employers treat them well, pay them well, reward them openly and keep them happy. So for all employers out there looking for SUPERSTARS I hate to break the misconception but the reality is if you want a superstar you're going to have to hunt them out.

If your looking for good talent in vast numbers then you'll need to wait for >8% unemployment but I would argue that unemployment going to >8% is not something your company wants either. So bottom line is that you can't kid yourself into thinking that superstars are easy to hire in this market. In my experience all these cycles do is adjust people's expectations on compensation, benefits and entitlements.