Ask HN: Is it ever worth working with recruiters?

Your mileage may massively vary, but it was a very beneficial path for me. The recruiter I choose to work with (exclusively) understands my boundaries and how I like to be represented.

While numbers are only part of the equation, they were the primary reason I partnered with a recruiter: the percentage increases per-role he has secured me over the last 3 placements are: 52%, 28%, 33%.

The recruiter is happy because they get a nice cut every time I move. I'm happy because they're very motivated to secure a high salary which often attracts a better title. The companies I work with have been pleased with the work I produce. With each role and each step up in responsibilities, I grow a strong CV too. It's been a good choice for me so far.

None of these "promotions" would have happened without the recruiter. They're an enigmatic salesman for my skill set. I've got imposter syndrome and am not assertive at all in negotiations. The recruiter was the missing part of the equation.

What about the company you move from ?

Are those happy to ?

Why did you decide to move ?

> What about the company you move from ? Are those happy to ?

I have worked (until my current role) solely in SMBs, 10 employees at most, where I would be the technical lead or authority. I've always left on good terms and hired + trained an appropriate replacement. Because these SMBs were often startups, I'd build the proof of concept / prototype, get bored when the "problem" was solved, then pass it off to someone who could build the full product better than I could. I proved business models and ideas so they could secure funding - that's really fun.

> Why did you decide to move ?

New challenges, better pay, different area of work - it's good to be diverse.

Wonderful reply, thanks :-)

I found my job through a recruiter. The reason was that I was looking for small companies, which were hard to find on Google. I searched through all the known channels (linkedin, job posting boards, forums, stackoverflow) but I could only find some ads from big companies. I contacted a recruiter that seemed decent, and they had a much bigger list of companies, including fun small companies!

The important thing is that you pick the right recruiter. Ignore all the recruiters that send you irrelevant spam, pick a recruiter that really cares and who doesn't send you unsollicited spam.

They set me up with a handful of interviews, they played them out against each other (so I could get a higher wage), they managed the contact with all the companies, and I ended up with a much higher salary than I ever expected, at a fun company!

I place "No Recruiters" on my personal posting of my resume. This is because some less than scrupulous recruiting companies use bots and/or Google to find potential candidates. Remember: a recruiter gets paid when the position is filled, so they see cold calling and emailing people as advertising.

I have been placed in my jobs by recruiters nine out of the last ten positions (30 years). If you work with a recruiter it will become very apparent very quickly whether they understand your skill set and which positions match those skills. If you feel they aren't sending you on good interviews, dump them. There are many, many recruiting firms out there.

I feel this warrants a bit more explanation.

I like that you add "No recruiters" to your rèsumè, but do you then accept pitches from really high quality ones regardless (and use that line as a filter) or do you seek out well-known and well-regarded recruiting firms to place you?

And if you find good recruiters, where do you find them?

It's a big field. I'd recommend staying away from "outside" recruiters (those recruiting firms who have only an affiliate relationship with the company who is hiring). "Internal" or "embedded" recruiters, on the other hand, might be the way a company prefers to be contacted. They, in some cases, are the defacto HR department for the company.

Generally, as a rule of thumb: If a recruiter reaches out to you and masks the company's name, then they are likely an outsider who is trying to protect their potential commissions (and trying to force you to work with them instead of circumventing them). These guys (and gals) are pretty much worthless bottom feeders, and have nothing of value to offer you. In fact, they might do damage by blasting your resume to every company in silicon valley without your permission! Run away!! On the other hand, if a recruiter reaches out with the company name, and encourages you to interact with the founders directly or come to an event, etc then they might be legitimate. This latter group can open doors or fast-track you through the HR process and might give you an advantage over applying directly.

In general, I like to ask "what benefit do I receive by working with you instead of applying directly?" If they say something along the lines of "Well, I can get you a lunch with the CTO this week." then that recruiter might be worth dealing with. It's all about the value-proposition. If they don't offer you one, then don't waste your time.

I'll second this.

1. Company ("internal") recruiters tend to be much more adept at assessing technical ability and whether there is a mutually beneficial match for both the company and candidate.

2. They also tend to be extremely helpful and available. They serve as your advocate through the entire process, and will try to get you the highest salary they can[1], and will negotiate on your behalf.

3. They are motivated by incentives that align with yours, instead of e.g. the recruiters who spam you on LinkedIn, disguise their company and bottleneck the process.

Good recruiters fast track you where they can, are very frank and helpful about the company, continually make themselves available, explain everything in the process and are advocates for you.

It is wise to keep in contact with a recruiter if you get a no just because they can help you interview and get into a company a second time.

90+% of recruiters are stupendous bozos.

The good percentage are gold.

Most of my best jobs have come via a recruiter.

YMMV.

Speaking as a former recruiter, the great majority of headhunters don't understand your profession or your skill set. They are set up in "boiler room" type environments where they are motivated by commission. That being said, like it or not, these people sometimes have access to openings that aren't public and established relationships with HR. Additionally, you may consider, that their job is to find you a position. If you think about it, working to find a new position can be a tremendous task. Why not outsource all that work to a competent professional. I think all recruiters should be judged on a case by case basis regardless if it's a third party agency or an internal recruiter. In other words, don't stereotype and discount an industry based on a bad experience. There is a reason that recruiting is a multibillion dollar industry. Find a good recruiter and work closely with them to make sure they understand your interests, abilities, boundries etc. Think of them like an employee that you guide to understand your best interests and develop a mutually beneficial relationship. They may help you find your dream job.

> They are set up in "boiler room" type environments where they are motivated by commission.

I must say, my opinion promptly plummets when I can hear that they're clearly working from a call centre.

I have had some good experiences with recruiters, but I give time and preference to the ones that bring me the best opportunities while still considering my career objectives. If I don't like dealing with the recruiter on a personal level, then I don't give them priority.

I currently work with a recruiter who used to do programming. He understands what we do and provides some level of mentoring, however self-serving. I also found him to be incredibly understanding when I turned down several offers. Other recruiters in the past nearly ripped my head off for doing the same thing.

So, like anything else, when dealing with people you will get different results. I wouldn't close off a whole channel because of general anti-recruiter sentiment. Also, when an ad states "no recruiters", it could mean that they are not willing to pay the recruiter fees or that they want to have control over the candidates they see.

> should I give in and work with some recruiters?

What's your current job-search bandwidth like? How effective are you at self-promotion? Are you able to directly connect with senior hiring executives?

If you have the time and basic sales ability, you may not need a headhunters help. But networking with the right the people is always a smart play. See if you can identify the few 'good' recruiters who truly understand your space.

*Pro-tip-- these guys are inundated by needy job seekers. Flip the script, ask them what positions they're looking to fill? How can you help them? Do they need any candidate referrals?

I was in a similar situation a while ago, I hated it.

Anyway I am trying to fix part of the issue here: http://siscia.github.io/open-hire/

If you are interested feel free to write me :)

The current comments cover this well, if you need more, I strongly suggest http://www.asktheheadhunter.com/ and in general there's a lot of great stuff on his site, like the related "Death by Lethal Reputation" (http://www.asktheheadhunter.com/halethalrep.htm about a company).

I'd also take a cue from his general advice about finding a new job: only work with recruiters you've specifically selected. Likely only the top in your area, e.g. in the '90s there were only 2 worth dealing with for normal jobs in the D.C. area.