|
By Phil Williams
pwilliam@franklin.uga.edu
Some time in the heady economy of the early 1970s, the stodgy old employment agency faded into history. In its place came corporate headhunters--agents working not for job candidates but for companies desperate to lure high-quality workers.
In one of the first research studies of its kind, UGA sociologists have now found that headhunters may be more vulnerable than previously thought to the ties that bind them to the corporate world.
“For the most part, these are small-business people dealing with much larger and more powerful clients,” says William Finlay. “It turns out that the relationship between them is really an uneasy one. Beneath the surface, headhunters aren’t the aggressive, always-confident people they seem.”
The study, authored by Finlay and UGA sociology colleague James Coverdill, was published in the journal Work and Occupations.
Although some may object to the term “headhunters,” with its overtones of aggression, Finlay discovered that the term is common and is used without offense by those in the field. In fact, most headhunter firms are “mom-and-pop” operations, and many are solo operations located in home offices.
Headhunters find candidates for jobs. They are paid by their clients--employers--when the candidates they generate accept job offers. Competition among headhunters can be fierce, and large businesses often use several headhunting firms simultaneously on the same search.
There has been, however, almost no published research on headhunters other than what the authors call “a few kiss-and-tell accounts by insiders,” one dated study, and “occasional passing references” to their work. To get a fresh approach, the authors spent four years interviewing headhunters in a large southern city--in order to encourage participants to speak openly, the researchers agreed not to identify the city. The team completed 34 one-to-three-hour interviews with headhunters representing 31 firms; those interviewed included 24 white males, eight white females and two black males.
“We also completed some 300 hours of field work, spending about 150 hours at five different headhunting firms, observing and talking to the headhunters,” says Finlay. “Much of this involved listening to the headhunters’ side of telephone conversations, which they would explain or interpret for us once the call had ended.” Finally, they conducted a mail survey of the roughly 500 “contingency” headhunting firms in the metropolitan area around the city.
The data provide, for the first time, a clear picture of headhunters and how they work. Considering that 13-15 percent of all firms nationally use such private employment agencies, according to one recent study, a great deal is at stake, says Finlay.
Some headhunters only deal with top-ladder candidates--CEOs or university presidents, for example. Most specialize in some way. While establishing relationships with companies is the lifeblood of headhunters, many remain wary of their contacts.
“The cozier you get with them, the more likelihood they’re going to take advantage, in my opinion,” said one headhunter the team interviewed. “If you make multiple placements with them, they’ll want discounts. . . . They have less respect for you, in my opinion, if you get cozy and comfy.”
Headhunters in the survey were well aware that, when it comes to hiring, corporations don’t care who brings the potential employees as long as they’re good. Headhunters know that, for any job search, a company may be using three, five or even 10 headhunting agencies to locate candidates. The competition is thus fierce.
“What it really boils down to is the old saying that people don’t hire paper,” says Finlay. “Somebody can look great on paper, but when they come in for an interview, the chemistry just isn’t there. So a headhunter has to know what kind of candidate will work with the person doing the hiring.”
In other words, a successful headhunter isn’t going to send a forceful, aggressive candidate if the person doing the hiring is a quiet person who collects stamps and enjoy barbershop-quartet singing. In short: match the candidate with the person who’s doing the hiring.
Another problem facing headhunters is that there are no qualifications for entering the field. A group called the National Association of Personnel Services offers a course through which headhunters can receive ranking as certified personnel consultants. Although many headhunters don’t have that certification, it may help in some ways, says Finlay.
Numerous headhunter horror stories surfaced in the course of the research. The worst involved candidates who simply did not show up for interviews. “There are other people who haven’t even told their wives they’re interviewing for a job in Seattle, and the wife puts a stop to that,” says Finlay, laughing.
Headhunters aren’t just victims, however. One supposedly iron-clad rule is that if you’re trying to bring job candidates to a certain company, you don’t look for candidates for outside jobs from within that company. Some headhunters, however, shrug this off. “My own personal opinion is that if a candidate [from a company with which the headhunter is working] approaches us,” explained one headhunter, “I have an obligation to the candidates in the industry to have them pursue their career goals. It’s a two-way street, you know.”
Thus there’s a deep well of suspicion and even distrust between headhunters and corporate America.
“I do know you can’t trust them,” said one headhunter. “Absolute statement: there’s no loyalty, and I just assume there’s no loyalty and no trust. If there is, I lucked out.” |
