Hi Danny,

When should a decision to present a candidate turn on second-hand information?

I was arranging a candidate interview for my favorite client. Knowing that the candidate is as strong-willed as the woman he would be working alongside, I suggested that my client get her input before his sit-down with the candidate. The word came back that “he’s arrogant and a sexual harassment case waiting to happen.” Alrighty then. I give the candidate a plausible excuse for not going forward and I back away.

Today I get a call from an employer whose position is a great match for this candidate. “Arrogant” is a) in the eye of the beholder, and b) not such a bad thing for this particular employer. “Sexual harassment case waiting to happen” is something else. I have met the candidate briefly, and never in any situation that would let me judge this fairly. It’s second-hand, though from someone I know and respect (and placed in her current...

Hi Danny: 

Just last week we had 2 accepted offers go south. And we have had offers not accepted. One took a counter offer after accepting and the other wanted a loan and to moonlight and the client was considering the loan but not the moonlighting. Any way to save? (It is too late now, but curious what we can do to avoid these challenges?) 

AccordingToDanny replies: 

As disheartening as it is to lose deals like this, try to remember what it was like when it was less candidate centric, when unemployment was 3 times as high as it is now, and clients had no interest in paying your fees. This market is hard, in its way, but it is a playground in the big picture. You’ll have more turndowns because candidates, according to a Marist Poll, overwhelmingly (84%) say they have no fear of losing their job and even less fear of getting another one. The chips on their shoulders are real and they are not going away soon. 

Without you giving me the details of the...

Hi Danny,

Danny, I have been a "follower" of yours for many years(I think I have some of your older training materials on papyrus). You are one of the few trainers/owners that have been in the thick of things over the last 15-20 years (maybe longer?) and have seen the impact of new technology on our industry such as the internet, email and job boards such as Monster. I was wondering, as you face a class of new recruiters now vs. facing a class of new recruiters 15-20 years ago, is there anything really fundamentally different that you would say to them about our industry or teach them differently? If so, please share that with me. If not, maybe things really have not changed that much and the "basics" are always the same. I would be interested in your comments not only from the perspective of how a recruiter spends his day now vs. then but also from the perspective of how a hiring manager might view our services now vs. then and from the perspective of how a candidate looking for a...

Hi Danny,

As you know we place technology sales guys just like you. Most of our clients want the exact same things. Someone that has sold the same or similar products to the same or similar customers with good stability and #'s to back them up.

So here's the question...How do we get our clients (VP's of Sales or RVP's that are Baby Boomers or Gen X types) who are hung up on stability to consider talking to these Millennials (since most want to hire young, hungry types) or candidates that have had what they consider too many jobs? The youngsters just don’t care about changes and a lot of good people were damaged from 2008 - 2012 by the down last recession which touched a lot of good people and was worse than most. I realize that a lot of these bouncers are damaged goods in our world but some of them are fee worthy. Many times if we can just get them in the hunt they can get the job. Can you help with some lingo to help us get the better ones considered when we submit them or...