A Recruitment Consultant's perspective

scooby088

How many of us send in CV's and the actual job we are applying for isn't there and is only a means of collecting CV'S to be used for a later date, and when we do get to registration and interview we are then told this is a completely different job.

smyla_2

A lot of valid criticism on the use of keyword searches to filter candidates - I agree it's a very imperfect way to identify the right candidates. Please note that I said I would only do this in the few cases where we get hundreds of applications - actually twice in the last year, so it's very much the exception. Even, in these cases, I read the first hundred or so CV's individually (you don't realise, initially, how may responses you're going to get!!).....

Marie88_2

SueC wrote: »

While I completely agree that CVs need to contain details relevant to the role etc, I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more with the view that it's unrealistic to expect recruiters to read the CVs.

That is their job.

So they're a bit busy right now because there are a lot of people hunting work (although in fairness I would imagine that is completely balanced out by the reduced number of vacancies in the current climate), but that doesn't change the fact that finding the best candidate for the role is their job.

By all means use a computer as a tool to help you do your job, but expecting your computer to do it for you is where it gets unrealistic as far as I'm concerned.

It is pure laziness from the recruitment agencies, and it is the jobseeker who is expected to make up for the recruiters laziness. If you show some initiative, and show you have your own way of describing things with varied vocabulary, you are punished because these may not be picked up on the keyword search, and the recruiter can't even spare time to read a CV. So a person who puts no effort in, and just copies all the words from the job advert verbatim, will be selected :T

You bring up a very good point relating to the number of vacancies and number of applicants. I guess as you said, it really shows up the recruitment agencies, when it is their job to find the right candidate, and they don't even put much effort into it. It is such a shame recruitment agencies exist, as the majority of agents don't seem like desirable people themselves, and I find their tactics and whole purpose quite vile. A lot of them offer such poor service and have questionable ethics.

Jerryjerryjerry

I don't trust agencies. A couple of months ago, I was contacted by an agency and they secured me an interview. I must have done well as I was invited back for a 2nd. After that? Nothing. No phone calls, no emails. I had wasted my time, my petrol, my effort!

I waited 3 weeks and then sent a sarcastic email along the lines of... I take it I didn't get the job then?

I dont understand why agencies (not all), but most, don't want to do the job they are paid for! They seem to want the commission for making a couple of phone calls, but they don't seem to want the hassle of reading through CVs properly.

I've lost count of the number of times I've applied for a job through an agency, only to be told that that job is no longer available once i'm through the door, being registered!! Yet that job had only been posted that day!

I've also lost count of the amount of times they ring me, tell me about a job, and then tell me they will forward my CV and I don't hear from them again until the next phantom job comes along.. and the whole thing starts again.

Agencies are a ROYAL waste of time, Mostly.

Jerryjerryjerry

One other thing I dislike about agencies, is their noseyness. I know they are desperate for leads, but come on. Stop pressurising us to tell you where exactly where we are currently working and which agency we got the role through... when its none of your business. Especially since, when they describe a job to you and put your Cv forward, they are reluctant to tell you which company the job is for!!!

Jerryjerryjerry

scooby088 wrote: »

How many of us send in CV's and the actual job we are applying for isn't there and is only a means of collecting CV'S to be used for a later date, and when we do get to registration and interview we are then told this is a completely different job.

Oh... I've lost count!!!!!!!!!!!

Marie88_2

Jerryjerryjerry wrote: »

I don't trust agencies. A couple of months ago, I was contacted by an agency and they secured me an interview. I must have done well as I was invited back for a 2nd. After that? Nothing. No phone calls, no emails. I had wasted my time, my petrol, my effort!

I waited 3 weeks and then sent a sarcastic email along the lines of... I take it I didn't get the job then?

I dont understand why agencies (not all), but most, don't want to do the job they are paid for! They seem to want the commission for making a couple of phone calls, but they don't seem to want the hassle of reading through CVs properly.

I've lost count of the number of times I've applied for a job through an agency, only to be told that that job is no longer available once i'm through the door, being registered!! Yet that job had only been posted that day!

I've also lost count of the amount of times they ring me, tell me about a job, and then tell me they will forward my CV and I don't hear from them again until the next phantom job comes along.. and the whole thing starts again.

Agencies are a ROYAL waste of time, Mostly.

So to sum it up, from most people's experiences as well as my own, when dealing with recruitment agencies they fail on the following three factors. Firstly, poor customer service when discussing a job or sending a CV on to the employment, where you never hear back from them. Secondly, people apply and get interviews, and then hear nothing back from them. Thirdly, they can't even read CVs. So really, I wonder why they must be so busy, if they can't even do these basic elements of the job and provide an effective service in any of those three areas. Maybe the people doing these recruitment jobs aren't skilled people, and shouldn't be doing a job in recruiting as they don't have the ability. Maybe they are too lazy, or maybe they just have poor ethics and morals. I guess all three may apply for most of them.

teffers

Agencies exist to do one thing: Generate income by introducing a new layer of profit obtained from reducing the money the person actually doing the work gets paid.

Recruiters are little more than sales people, the people working for them are their product.

My point of view is derived from 10 years of having to work for them.

SueC_2

Oh dear OP... are you regretting starting this thread...?

wimblewomble_2

CV parsing software is a real joke!
You have to be reasonably lateral and search for "university" if you're looking for graduate or degree.

As has been said, software cant really apply context to a word search.
Coming from a technical background, I despair at the results I get sometimes.

The applicants are getting the brunt of it.
As there may only be 1 job, and any more than 2 applicants, there will be more disappointed people than happy ones. And since we're interested in the ones that make the grade, the rest get left behind. Sorry.

Recruiters have a balancing act when writing up the advert. You dont want to be so specific that some good people decide not to apply. But sometimes, the adverts are so vague and generic, the influx of replies creates the very problems this thread describes.
Recruiters would rather have a looser advert than too specific.

I am amazed at the post which said that if you're not in the first 50 you dont get a look in. Thats just randomness gone mad.

Sadly, I have experienced a couple of companies that have been a bit unprofessional. They seem to want to take someone on, but then change their minds, or are indecisive. I would love to !!!!! about them to the candidate, but that might put the candidate off! So we have to tread a fine, diplomatic line.
(I've only been in this game for a few months)

There are some really good recruiters out there. Really.