text:
The Real Truth About Working with Recruiters
February 10, 2010 at 6:45 pm 99 comments
[This article was updated in June 2018]
When I first started my career as a recruiter, I worked and trained with a few "old-school" recruiters who had learned the staffing business in the days before internet searches, online job boards or social media … when recruiters were called "Head Hunters" and kept rotating card files called Rolodexes filled with prized contacts next to their wired, land-line desk phones. Their livelihood depended on who they knew – how many "A" candidates they had relationships with and developed trust with. The implication of the term Head Hunter was that they only went after top talent – usually people who worked for their client's competitors – and actually recruited them away from one company to come work for another! Some of the best of today's recruiters still operate that way, only seeking out top talent through networking and personal contacts. Many of those old Head Hunters even imagined themselves to be the business world's equivalent of a Jerry McGuire … like sports or entertainment agents who exclusively represent top talent, shop them around and negotiate the best deals for their candidates. ("Show me the money!!!") Needless to say, in today's ultra-challenging, internet-centric job market, most recruiters have learned to adapt to new ways of doing business.
At the other end of the spectrum from the Head Hunters are the younger, much less experienced recruiters who never learned how to creatively "source" (i.e. identify) and then actually recruit (i.e. sell an opportunity to) so-called "passive" (i.e. employed, non-job-seeking) candidates. They only look at résumés from people who respond to their online job postings – active job-seekers, otherwise known as the "low hanging fruit." Since most companies know how to do the same thing by posting their own ads and collecting those same résumés, recruiters who operate that way are finding fewer and fewer companies willing to pay them a fee for that type of recruiting.
Most modern recruiters fall somewhere in between those two models. As with any profession, there are good recruiters and bad recruiters. Yes, there are recruiters out there who lie, cheat, deceive, bait & switch, promise things they cannot deliver, and will pretty much do or say anything to get a placement and get paid — similar to the stereotype of Used Car Salesmen. I've met some of those people, and their sleaze factor can be quite astounding! Unfortunately, similar to the image problem that lawyers have, those bad recruiters tend to give the entire profession a negative reputation. How can you tell the difference between good and bad recruiters? Just like with any other business relationship, time will reveal the traits of a person worth working with: honesty, integrity, sincerely, responsiveness, timely follow-through, etc. Good recruiters treat everyone with respect, and care about the people they work with. They try to do the right thing, and look out for everyone's best interest – their own, their client's and their candidate's.
There are a lot of myths and misconceptions out there about how recruiters work, and how job-seekers can best utilize them as a resource. There is also a lot of confusion among job-seekers about exactly what recruiters do, how they get paid, who they work for, how to approach them, what questions to ask, etc. As a veteran of the staffing industry, I'd like to set the record straight, bust some common myths, and give some advice on how to best utilize recruiters as a resource.
[Click on the image above to expand and see it full-sized.]
The Different Types of Recruiters
Recruiters come in many different flavors. There are Retained Recruiters who typically only work on very specialized high-end C-level positions, and get paid a flat fee for simply producing a certain number of highly qualified candidates – whether or not they get hired. There are "Temporary Staffing" or "Staff Augmentation" Recruiters who work primarily on limited duration contract assignments for their clients and get paid based on their candidates' hourly billings on an ongoing basis. There are Corporate or Internal Recruiters who work directly for the companies who have the open jobs, and are usually salaried employees of those companies. And then there are 3rd Party Agency Recruiters. For the rest of this article, I'll focus only on 3rd-Party Agency Recruiters – the ones who work on permanent jobs, usually on a contingency basis. These recruiters work for independent agencies who contract their services to various companies who need help filling open jobs with very specific and often hard-to-find requirements. They search for candidates that match those requirements, and try to present only the top few most qualified candidates to their clients. They are paid on a commission basis if and only if their candidates are hired and after their client company pays their agency's fee. Those fees are usually a percentage of their candidate's first year base salary (typically 20-25% – sometimes more, sometimes less.) So naturally it's in their own best interest, as well as their candidate's, to help negotiate the highest possible salary from their client during the offer stage. The more the candidate makes, the more the recruiter makes!
Recruiters Are Sales People
I've always maintained that recruiting is actually a consultative sales position. In fact, it's one of the purest forms of sales that you can imagine. It involves selling a complete intangible – something that you can't touch or feel, but rather a concept. In the case of 3rd-party (agency) recruiting, each deal is actually a series of multiple intangible sales events. First the recruiter has to sell the concept of using the agency's search services to a potential client company (an employer with open jobs.) Once they get a signed Fee Agreement with that client company, then the recruiter has to actually go out and find — and then sell that company's job opportunity to — a person who fits the employer's specific requirements (a qualified candidate.) If the recruiter is successful in "selling" both of those intangibles, the next goal is to get the two parties in a room together (the interview) and hope they like each other. Essentially, it's then up to the candidate to "sell themselves" to the hiring authority during that interview. At the same time, that hiring authority must "sell their company" to the candidate so that an offer will be accepted. If that results in the candidate getting hired (a placement), and then the client company actually pays their agreed-upon fee to the agency – then and only then does the recruiter get paid! When you consider how many things can go wrong with such a complicated series of intangible sales events, it's easy to see how difficult a recruiter's job can be!
MYTH: Recruiters Find Jobs for People
Wrong! Recruiters find People for Jobs! If you think about it, that's a very different concept. While a good recruiter will certainly try to do right by their candidates, it's important to remember that they ultimately work for and get paid by their client companies. Recruiters do not get paid by candidates, nor are they job counselors. Sure, they "counsel" the candidates that they choose to work with, help them refine their résumés, and prep & coach them on interview techniques. However, they are paid by client companies to find candidates to fill very specific positions with very specific (usually hard to find) requirements. Randomly contacting a recruiter with your unsolicited résumé, and saying "can you help me find a job" is NOT a good tactic … and most recruiters will not respond. I get at least two or three of those a week from people I cannot possibly help. On the other hand, answering a recruiter's job posting with your résumé and a message that says "I match every requirement you've listed …" is a GOOD idea. Calling to follow-up is even better. The name of the game is matching your skills and experience to a specific job they are already working on. That's what they get paid for! That's why most recruiters don't return calls or emails from candidates that don't match all the requirements of their current job searches. For them, time is money, and they only make money on matches!
Is it Better to Apply Directly to a Company, or Go Through a Recruiter?
The answer depends on who you know at the company. If you've already networked your way to a decision-maker, and have a personal relationship there … go direct! If, on the other hand, you don't know anyone there and you talk with a recruiter who has a personal relationship with a hiring manager … then the advantage goes to the recruiter! The company's desire to avoid paying the recruiter's fee might sometimes be a factor … but a personal relationship trumps that every time. Most good recruiters develop and nurture relationships with their clients over a long period of time. Those relationships are invaluable … they have the trust and attention of the decision-makers who are the hardest to reach. They can get you in front of the right people. That is one of the main advantages of using a good recruiter!
Industry-Specific Recruiters
Most Recruiters specialize in a specific industry, and only look for specific types of candidates. Some are more focused than others. For example, a recruiter may be a general IT Recruiter, looking for any and all technical positions. Others may be focused on a smaller subset of IT – for example, only .NET programmers, or only JAVA developers, or only Web Designers, or only users of a particular type of software, etc. Others may focus on totally different industries. I've heard of Recruiting Firms that concentrate exclusively on very narrow industry specialties: HVAC Engineers, Paper and Pulp Industry Professionals, Hospitality Industry Executives, Copyright Lawyers, Chief Financial Officers, Radiology Technicians … the list is literally endless. Needless to say, an industry-specific recruiter does not want to waste their time talking to candidates who do not fit their niche. Job-Seekers who want to find a recruiter to work with should figure out which agencies and/or recruiters specialize in their specific industry niche, and focus on getting on their radar.
How Do Recruiters Find Candidates that Match Their Job Requirements?
There are several ways that recruiters might find matching candidates: using sophisticated Boolean key-word searches, they first mine their electronic resources: they look in their own data base of collected résumés; they post their jobs (usually without identifying the client company) on the popular job boards, on Social Media sites, and on their own agency's website and then screen applicants for matches; they search résumé banks that they pay to subscribe to, like CareerBuilder, Monster, Dice, etc.; they make extensive use of searches on all the Social Media sites like LinkedIn (which has now become the Number 1 search tool recruiters), Facebook, Twitter, etc., and send messages to people they find that potentially match the requirements they are looking for. Finally, they do a LOT of old fashioned cold calling to people within their industry niche, asking everyone if they know of anyone else that fits their job requirements, and asking everyone they talk with for referrals. It's a laborious time-consuming process where one person leads to another, to another, to another and so on. All along the way they collect résumés from potential candidates who may or may not fit the immediate job they are working on, but seem worth keeping on file for future searches in their specialty area.
What is the Best Way for a Job-Seeker to Use Recruiters as a Resource?
Try to identify an agency, or a specific recruiter who specializes in your industry niche, and put yourself "on file" there. Send them your résumé to get into their searchable electronic data base so that when a new job comes up, they'll "find" you later during a future search. You should also regularly check that niche agency's job posting on their own website, and look for jobs that match your background. If you do spot a matching job, contact the agency and ask which recruiter in their office is working on that search … and try to reach that specific person to alert them of your own matching qualifications. Needless to say, you should also keep your online profiles (LinkedIn, Monster, CareerBuilder, Dice, etc.) up to date and filled with as many "keywords" in your niche as possible. You want to make yourself "find-able" when a recruiter does a search for someone with your skills and experience.
What Questions Should You Ask of a Recruiter Who Calls You About a Job?
► What company are they recruiting for? (If you've already applied directly to that same company or been called by another recruiter for the same position, they would probably not be able to represent you there.) Find out everything the recruiter knows about that company. If they cannot tell you the name of the company, ask why. (If it's truly a "confidential" search, OK … but more often than not it's a trust issue, and failure to identify the client could be a red flag for a job-seeker.)
► What are the job requirements? Ask them to send you a job description. Help the recruiter see how you fit those requirements, if you do. Be honest about any requirements that you really don't have.
► What is the salary range defined for the position? You should be honest and up front about your own salary history and the salary range you would accept going forward. If your salary history and expectations do not match the job's defined range (or seem unrealistic) most recruiters will not consider it a match worth pursuing. Like it or not, it's a primary factor recruiters use to decide who they'll represent to their clients. [Read "Answering the Dreaded Salary Question" for more info on how to deal with this issue when working with recruiters.]
► What is the history of this position? (New or replacement … and if the latter, what happened to the person who left?)
► Who is the hiring manager, and how well does the recruiter know that person? What is their management style? What is the company culture like? Can you get any inside intelligence?
► How many other candidates is this recruiter representing to this job? Are there other agencies that are also sending candidates, or is this an "exclusive?"
► What is the client's hiring timetable? What steps are there – how many phone interviews and in-person interviews will there be, and with whom? When do they want someone to start? How long has this position been open? How high is their degree of "urgency" to full it?
► What is the next step? Will the recruiter definitely be sending your information to the client – and if so, when? How soon should you expect to hear back from the recruiter?
Good recruiters should be able to answer almost all of these questions and more. If they can't answer those basic questions … then they probably don't know their clients very well, and I would question whether or not you want them to represent you. Good recruiters will also be able to help you tweak your résumé to better fit the job specs, prep and coach you on how to successfully interview using their insider knowledge of the company and the decision-makers, and they will help you negotiate the best salary if and when an offer comes. Good recruiters will also follow through with things they say they will do, and will be good about keeping you informed with updates and progress reports. Expect good communication … and beware of anyone who suddenly stops returning your calls or emails — that's a telltale sign of unprofessionalism that is certainly not limited to recruiters!
Also, always verify that the recruiter will never submit your résumé to any companies or jobs without your knowledge and approval. Believe it or not, that happens quite frequently. I've recruited many candidates over the years who swore they never even heard of my client company, only to find out later that the company had already received that person's résumé from another recruiter! Not only did that make me look stupid, but more importantly it ruined that candidate's chances of getting the job – most companies will automatically eliminate any candidate who is submitted from multiple sources. They don't want to get into the middle of a turf war.
What NOT To Do When Working With Recruiters …
► Never ever agree to pay any money to a recruiting agency for their services, or agree to any future financial obligations – e.g. re-paying their fees if you leave a job before their guarantee period is up. Recruiters who ask for money from candidates are not to be trusted. Run away quickly, and don't look back!
► Never do an "end-run" around a recruiter and apply directly to a job they told you about. That is extremely unethical, and almost never ends well. If, on the other hand, the recruiter does not submit you to their client company for whatever reason – then you have every right to go ahead and apply directly to that company on your own.
► Do not sign any documents that promise "exclusive representation" by a recruiter (except specifically for the one position/company they are working with you on.) You have every right to work with multiple recruiters (as long as they are not working on the same job with the same company) and to continue applying directly to other companies. You should, however, inform your recruiter of other opportunities you are working on – especially if you are actually interviewing elsewhere, and may be getting close to an offer at another company.
► Never lie to a recruiter about your qualifications, your experiences, your education, your salary history, or anything else! Be honest about everything, and expect the same in return.
► Finally, do not put all of your job hopes into working with any recruiter, no matter how good they are. The real truth about working with recruiters is that while they can be a great resource … the vast majority of job-seekers today will NOT find their next job through a recruiter. Job-Seekers should concentrate on their own networking activities designed to get them in front of decision-makers in their target companies. [Read "How to Network: A Step-by-Step Guide for Job-Searching" for more detailed information on how to do exactly that!]
Entry filed under: Advice for Job Seekers. Tags: consultative sales, job-seekers, networking, Recruiters, unemployment.
99 Comments Add your own
I find the content amusing and very insightful while at the same time intriguing. Most are already aware that recruiters help prospective candidates "brand" ourselves to maximize our leverage so as to land an interview which can potentially lead to a job offer. It has become very crucial to work "hand-in-hand" with these professionals to tap onto their network & credibility in the market place so as to extend & expand the reach candidates can gain with potential employers.
I read lots on recruiters and seen them on sites. I myself, wouldn't use one. I don't know of anybody who's gotten employed thru one yet.
They are pretty much a joke, just looking to make a quick buck and pawn you off to the first person who will take you.
Thank you for reiterating and supporting what we tell our clients and candidates every day!
Thanks Michael!
Hi Mike,
Have you ever thought about writing a book? These blogs are so thorough, thought provoking and informative.
Thanks fo much!
This is a great post–comprehensive and lots of good points that are important for candidates to know.
If the search is with a retained recruiter, even if the candidate goes to a contact in the company, almost always the retained recruiter will be asked to work with that candidate. That way every candidate knows they have been through the same process. In 14 years of retained search, it never bothers me if a candidate uses other means to come to the attention of the company. Especially if it's an employee referral–always a good thing.
If the external recruiter is a contingency recruiter, the company probably will not pass on any resumes that come to them directly. So that candidate has an advantage because they do not have a commission attached to their candidacy. Not nice to use the contingency recruiter to find out about the job and then go around them, however.
I think this is a great blog for job seekers and one worth spending some time on.
Hi Mike,
You so right on all counts! Your work gives a clear picture to all who are seeking new opportunities and an understanding of the search world. Today, everyone is responsible for their own search. Recruiters do work for the client and many times candidates don't understand that and want special attention. I always extend myself as they could become clients of mine some day and the point is to establish a good business relationship. Many times though, candidates try to push too hard or could ask inappropriate questions to score points. They are trying to "get in' and stay close. It is important to always be professional and never compromise your integrity. Our searches were always confidential.
Thanks for the good read.
Nice article Mike!
Your readers might find this article I wrote a while back about how to effectively work with recruiters, remembering the cardinal rule of recruiters – They work for the hiring manager, not the candidate… and a recruiter's job isn't to call you back.
See how you can make these rules work for you (rather than against you) at: http://recareered.blogspot.com/2008/02/inside-track-on-recruiters-top-10-tips.html
Thank you for taking the time to write your blog. I enjoy reading it and have learned quite a bit from it! I look forward to each new post! Keep the good tips coming!
This guy is so pragmatic, I can laugh through the pain of reading his stuff. Most of it is trueeeeeee and truer.
As always, very insightful. I appreciate your candor, and your very topical discussions.
I agree with Michael. Recruiters do what is needed to get the person an interview. Most candidates don't know how to write a resume or use the right "Buzz Words" to stir interest. Most don't even know about "spell check" so it is our job to make sure all resume look good and hit the mark (without spelling mistakes). If I sent out the resume I received, I probably wouldn't get as many interviews as I do. What I see that recruiters don't do enough (which I train all recruiters to do) is once an interview is set-that's when we really earn our keep by preparing them 100% for the interview-not just the address-who to speak with and a slap on the back-good luck! We should be experts on how to interview and how you handle yourself during that interview and the follow-up. The Interview is one of four steps in looking and getting a job. Resume, Interview, Prep and follow-up (close) are those 4.
Hi Mike – great stuff, thanks for sharing.
I am in a situation where I responded to a recruiter's posting & was told that I was not a good fit for an interview. A month later I responded to a posting on a Right Management job alert & I have a face-to-face later today. I have found out that the hiring manager will be meeting with the recruiter's candidates beforehand – which according to the recruiter, I was not a good fit. Now, I had no way of knowing that this way all about the same job because the recruiter did not disclose what company he was representing.
Interesting …
I do agree, as I ask recruiters all the time to review my resume before submitting and if they want me to make changes to it, I will, or if they want to make the changes, go ahead just send me a copy of it prior to the interview so I'm not suprised by something entirely different then what I wrote.
I like Michael's way of using 3rd party recruiters. I used to take it personally when they didn't call you back or you called and they didn't take your call….but since I was laid off from Accountemps I have been working with temporary and 3rd party recruiters I do hear from them if there is a close match and since in my career I have done so many things I may have actually done something that gets me in the running that wasn't on my original resume, had they not called and asked me if I had done this or that, as I had 95% of the other requirements.
Well said. It's as though I read your blog before a I spoke this morning at a business group networking meeting. Reading your post when I got back to my desk reassured me that not only is this information topical, it will help promote equal business status and a better partnership among good staffing specialists and their clients which I believe are both employers and those seeking employment.
Well written and spot on! Wish I had known this when I first started working with recruiters, head-hunters, etc.
I read your blog post..good information. The bottom line is that developing a relationship with a recruiter is like anything else in your career. Some are good, some are bad. It's a question of the work and follow up you put into the relationship. If they are bad, move on…if good, work with them and keep in touch after they place you. That's key!
Michael- you always tell like it is… Thanks
Good overview and insights, Thanks for sharing! I am in the job Market for the first time in 20 years and the new rules of the electronic age of job seeking have created a whole new game. The challenge from my perspective is to find and partner with good recruiters who have the reputation and contacts in my field (Building materials/construction) and who also have enough of these contacts to cover a meaningful portion of the job market
Thank you!!! Excellent resources and as someone who has entered this unemployed arena, I certainly appreciate the insight on how to understand and leverage relationships with recruiters.
Mike Rivard
Sales Leader Now Available
These are all great tips. Of course recruiters are working for those hiring! I guess I have been fortunate that the recruiters that I am working with do call me back or e-mail me. I have gotten some great feedback from my recruiters. Do I have a job…..no. But, at least the responsiveness of my contacts gives me hope.
This is a great article that answers many of my questions about working with recruiters. Straightforward, well-stated and very helpful. Thank you for sharing this information. In the current climate of unemployment, I am sure that many will benefit.
Great article. I think that many job seekers don't understand the full role of a recruiter. How they are compensated, what is their niche, and how are they being compensated for their search, are very important things to understand when reaching out to a recruiter. My favorite take-away from this article is to include within the cover letter that "I match every requirement that was listed…" How many times have I written the same basic cover letter with only changing the company and contact?? Too many times!! Great article and I will definitely follow your blogs moving forward.
Very objective information on the pros and cons of working with recruiters.
Good tips to keep in mind in dealing with all types of recruiters.
2007: Optimism has been replaced by Hope.
2008: Hope has been replaced by reality.
2009: Reality has been replaced by frustration.
2010: Frustration has been replaced by anger.
We all need to be careful with whom and with the way we express ourselves
I find Michael to be right on! His comments are always presented in a positive format. His information is very supportive and encouraging for those seeking employment and self empowerment! Thanks Michael for caring about us!
Great article, Michael! I had a follow-up question. If a recruiter represents you and the employer decides they aren't interested, at that point, is it acceptable to contact the company directly? I had a situation where the recruiter told me my salary demands were to high. I relented and let the recruiter know I was willing to accept a lower salary, but she indicated that she was not going to inform the employer even though I was willing to be flexible on salary. What would be the best way to handle this situation?
You comment about not submitting an job application to the company that a recruiter brings to you. I am in a field that is narrow with only a few employer prospects in my professional and geographic community. After learning that my employer is closing its doors, I submitted resumes and created profiles with most of these companies. Within the past 6 months, I have applied for a job similar to the one the recruiter is looking to fill. I am a perfect candidate and meet all the criteria for the position the recruiter has and I have not applied for this specific job directly. The recruiter stopped all communication with me after submitting my profile and learning that I had applied for a similar job with the same company. If I go around the recruiter, and apply directly to the company I tarnish my relationship with the recruiter and it is unlikely that my application will receive the same attention. I feel screwed. I am willing to do whatever to get in front of the hiring manager. I would consider paying a finder fee to the recruiter.Is this wrong in this case? Are there alternatives?
Glad I found this site-good stuff Michael.
To those high caliber recruiting professionals reading the blog, forgive me for saying so but the reputation and sentiment of others I talk to seems that recruiters in today's market leave much to be desired. I'm not sure how he does it but recently one of my colleagues told me he is refusing to work with them-seems to me that often times you have little choice-I have to assume he is passing up opportunities?
Michael, my question…is there such a thing as a blacklist that a job seeker could be placed on in the recruiting world?
I found a job on my own before my staffing firm was able to. When they called me about a position they were working on, I informed them I found something. They asked me what company I will be working for? Why do recruiters ask this personal piece of information? What do they do with it? I've had two different recruiters ask me this.
I accomplish a lot of Interim CXO work for early-stage companies, plus I've done management consulting for over 20 years. Most of my contacts come from investors or VCs. Recruiters haven't entered my picture for those 20 years. When they do call, it's generally for a lower level position, totally appropriate for a 30-something. I'm not 30 anymore:)
Luckily Michael, I actually have a staff of 5 people working from home. It's been a trying time over the last few years, but I work in 10 different verticals globally, so the impact is minimized. I'm just over 60, so my 'headhunter call' days were over 10 years ago. The new 65 is 50, as a recruiter told me recently. That's a fact, unless you control your own destiny. I started doing that 20 years ago. Today, it would be a real challenge, and recruiters would not play a role in it.
In fact, the last position I got was from Korn-Ferry (they still around) in 1987! Seems like yesterday…but the pay was good, and they moved me to Los Angeles from Houston….for free, and bought the house. Now…that's a 'head hunter'! Stay well.
This is very pertinent information with regards to working with recruiters. I think that job seekers and employers alike can benefit from this.
While using recruiters can be a great tool, I do suggest that most job seekers find other recruiting avenues as well.
The agencies suck.could care less about anyone. A lot of things need to change-we all have a right to have jobs.,not be labelled as a number,discriminated cause of our age,attitudes need to change-for the better.,batter pay so we can all live better.,no matter what type of job it is.
I have actually had lots of success with agencies, and I recommend them to my friends and family when they are job searching. I'm working for an agency now on a temp-to-perm assignment and yesterday my "agent" actually contacted me and offered me an opportunity to work for him! This agency is one of the larger ones. They are international. It seems like an interesting opportunity too, but I've never done sales. I'm an accountant, so I would work in the accounting and finance division. Can you offer any advice on what to expect when working in this field? I have two opportunites to chose from at the moment and need to make a decision over the weekend. The recruiting firm would be a career change and the accounting position would push me forward on my current path. Any info you have is greatly appreciated.
Appreciating the time and energy you put into your site and in depth information you present. It's awesome to come across a blog every once in a while that isn't
the same outdated rehashed material. Wonderful read! I've saved your site and I'm adding your RSS feeds to my Google account.
I was skeptical when I saw the title of this article, but Michael is spot-on in his assessment and advice for working with a recruiter. Understanding how the recruiting industry works, and what recruiters can and cannot do for you as a job seeker is key to a successful recruiting experience. Nice job Michael.
Michael, I recently had an encounter with a recruiter for the first time and the experience left me feeling a little bit foggy in general. I submitted for a position for which I have experience and I thoroughly enjoyed the previous job. I am currently employed, but I find myself wishing for a job like my previous one! (I had to relocate with family which is the only reason I left this job). Anyways, I was contacted and complimented for my resume and my communication skills, beyond that an interview was scheduled. The recruiter had been hired by the company, and I was expecting a direct hire situation, but didn't mind the 3rd party aspect. The recruiter said they would call me before the interview and also "try" to meet me there. Unfortunately both things did not happen – also, okay with me. The initial interview was with the hiring manager, it was successful and I was immediately asked for a second interview. Upon my second interview, I met the recruiter… I thought the meeting was for all intense and purposes a good one, with only minor areas that I could have approached better. All and all, I found the recruiter has continued their search for candidates without ever following up with me. I took the hint that I was not selected… Anyways, the whole thing was a little bizarre, is this a typical experience?
Also, I wanted to compliment your ability and willingness to reply to the comments. I find all of this both insightful, and interesting!
Hi Mike, you wrote: "If, on the other hand, the recruiter does not submit you to their client company for whatever reason – then you have every right to go ahead and apply directly to that company on your own."
BUT– couldn't there be a downside to doing this? Or do I have nothing to lose? In my case it was a national search that's been open for six months, and the job is still not filled. I was turned down by the recruiter after he interviewed me. It was all very professional and amicable; I just didn't make the cut. Couldn't that be bad for my reputation if the recruiter found out I applied to the company on my own?
Thanks for the information. Good stuff, but I disagree with you on being open with salary information…sort of. Most of the time, I've been able to find my way around that question, especially if that request is made during an initial phone conversation with a recruiter.
That always seem to be the case; a recruiter wants to know what a potential candidate is currently making to establish a fit. I get that, but to insist on that information initially to me isn't a reasonable expectation. Let me explain.
I was contacted this week by a recruiter that had a position available that sounded like an ideal fit – products and customers with which I was familiar, and have experience (I'm in sales). The third or forth question out of the recruiters mouth regarded W2 amounts over the last 2 years. Huh? Is this recruiter looking for a good fit, or just trying to get a read on what people in my industry and area make in a year? To me, fit should be the most important criterion that a recruiter looks for, and while salary range is part of that equation, compensation can be negotiated. Qualifications to do the job, not so much.
I made the mistake once by providing salary history to an employer at an interview and that's the offer I received. I negotiated up a little, but it turns out that I started out too low in the first place and sold myself short. I don't want to repeat that mistake again, and I have to wonder why a company would hire a sales guy who would weaken his negotiating position by providing a number without first understanding what the employer might expect to pay, or at least a range.
So back to this week's recruiter. He would not budge on the salary question and indicated he could not represent me unless he had that information. I offered that if he could provide expected range of compensation I could reply one way or the other if that range was agreeable. No dice. We decided that we could not work together and politely ended the conversation.
My question to you Michael is this… If a prospective candidate has concerns about sharing salary history, what's wrong with asking for an employers expected range in order to allow the candidate a chance to indicate interest?
I think the only exception I take with what you've said is this " Never do an "end-run" around a recruiter and apply directly to a job they told you about. That is extremely unethical, and almost never ends well. If, on the other hand, the recruiter does not submit you to their client company for whatever reason – then you have every right to go ahead and apply directly to that company on your own."
Candidates should never do an end run around a recruiter if rejected. Most recruiters take the time to ensure that a candidate has been properly screened, is authorized to work and has the clients confidence. Most contracts penalize employers who allow candidates to make end runs. And, almost all of my clients reject candidates who don't come through the agency.
I'm not sure why you suggested never do it and then go ahead if you're rejected by the recruiter. Did you mean to say something different?
Great article though.
Thank you
Why do you need to know salary? I do not get this at take issue with it in your post. If I was a contractor I would not tell you what my last rate was because its between me and last client.
I recently had two employers contacting me directly after a few months when my recruiter told me he has sent out my CV to these two companies. Both companies told me that they have not got any feedback from the recruiter and that's why they had to contact me directly. Seriously, what is wrong with these people?
Hi, a company whose offer I have declined earlier came back to me and this time they would like to commission a project to my current company. I remember the recruiter once reminded me when I declined the offer that they should have a commission. Is this true? But I am not working for this company as employee this time, but as vendor.
Fantastic Article! I agree with pretty much every point! More and more we hear about "bad recruiters". In this area, rather than "a few bad apples" it seems that there's almost more "bad recruiters" than good ones. Candidates now are requesting not to send their resume out without their consent upfront. Goes to show how many people are getting "burned now a days". It's sad really.. Although there have been times that I've assisted candidates with their resumes. Mostly persons that have been in the same job for 15-20 years and have a poor resume based on the fact that they haven't had to write one in so long and have no idea how to start I will help them only if there's a position that needs people "now" and that person would a fantastic fit for the position and organization. In this case I will direct them to a few links to help them compile their resume and give them a few ideas. Aside from that we sometimes recommend formatting changes but don't usually recommend other changes that would make them look better for "the job". Also, a poor resume is a refection on the person. They either have poor computer skills, poor language, grammar, communication, or don't care about their job search. Whatever the reason, we don't feel it is fair to make the person look better than they really are. If the resume reflected perfect spelling and they got into the job and had poor spelling, grammar, etc. it just doesn't add up. We try and present a person how they really are: the good & the bad. Just the same we present our clients the same way. No one is perfect, it's just like a relationship: You have enough in common, can work together, have a similar vision for the future, but you can put up with each others downfalls because they are not a game changer for you.
Brilliant ! How many mistakes one can do… This article and others from this page give me knowledge how to aovid them. Thanks!
Marcin Product Manager from Poland.
Hi, how long do I need to wait to submit my resume to a company that a recruiter has already represented me?
Sorry to be harsh, but I encourage anyone who is thinking about working with a recruitment firm to look into "lead-stripping".
Basically, the reason they ask you who you are working with (e.g. being considered for employment), is so that they can contact that company and offer them what essentially amounts to your competition (probably with a candidate that the firm has on file) and make money with their own placement, thereby reducing/eliminating your chances to be employed there. In an economy that is low on jobs and high on job-seekers (buyers market), it's a way for them to get more positions, even if it leaves you high and dry. They may not have had a position for you at all, and the sole reason for them contacting you is to get that information.
I don't know if all recruitment companies do this, but I would never work with one.
This happens more frequently than most people would like to admit. Recruitment is sales, and it's also account lead generation (prospecting). Corporate recruiters that work for companies hold a higher standard. Staffing agency (contract) recruiters have no ethics to speak of. Their goal is to convert you to money – sell you, sell your friends (on the same job description, while talking to you), sell a new account relationship with a new hiring manager, acquire new job postings (some of which you may divulge to them), and so on.
In 20 years of contracting and consulting services, I've seen it all first-hand as a candidate. There are some folks out there who develop reputations for niche market segments (like ecommerce), and they definitely have a reputation to uphold AS INDIVIDUALS. That does not mean they won't allow you to get screwed. If it is the difference between retaining their Buyer/Client and you, you lose 99.9% of the time.
There's nothing noble about the recruitment business until you get to really high-level sales at the Dir, SVP and CxO levels where reputation is what gets you conversations with both sides and Recruiters are dealing directly with hiring managers (and not going through an account director or middle man).
A recruiter emai me Thursday at 9:00 for a job and said that they jus review my resume and the job a good fit so if iam still interested apply at the bottom but ian see it too 3:00.and it said it needed too be filled immediately and i sent it back at 3:00 than get a email saying tnank u for applying something bout another candidate do anybody know what happen
Most recruiters..
-have very limited sales experience.
-don't know their clients very well.
-are simply playing 'the numbers game'
-can't explain why the job they are recruiting for is compelling (outside of company brand name or prestige value).
-have no idea what you really do or how you do it (nor care).
-don't have any direct contact with hiring managers
In the IT industry…
-overwhelmed by H1B recruiters, most of who can't speak English well enough to carry a conversation.
-Recruiters focus on tactical contract fulfillment that has nothing to do with a candidate's growth or career objectives. (they are Keyword matchers and Spam mailers)
-don't have the full-lifecycle experience to understand how to maintain an ongoing relationship with a candidate, even if no offer.
-don't realize they are selling a highly priced commodity/asset (not a huge ticket sale, but certainly a big one).
-lack and understanding of the industry, history or dynamics.
-don't understand their markets very well.
-work for a few key accounts, which limits their target audiences (because everyone else is trying to sell those jobs at the same time)
-some Recruiters source their leads via job boards, and don't actually have the right to represent anything.
-it's rare that Recruiters have any insights into the hiring manager, organization or process. Those are almost exclusively the domain of the account manager.
Add to the 'Never Do This' list….
-never divulge who you are working with on other job opportunities.
-never divulge the other companies that your are interviewing with.
-never provide references in advance (this is a ploy to find new candidates a.k.a 'Sourcing New Talent or Account Leads')
-while it's a good idea to call back and talk after interviews, keep it high level (use 'i' statements). Your job is to evaluate the job and move on.
-never give Recruiters all of the details that you didn't get 9in terms of the 'real' job, working conditions, etc. You're only doing their jobs for them. Just don't do it.
-Never engage with recruiters or staffing agencies who are not local to your market (location). This never works out well. Period.
-Never agree to take a contract with a staffing company that doesn't have a local office within reasonable distance to where you work.
-never allow recruiters to change or re-format your resume.
Add to the 'Always Do' list…
-if you're applying for a positon, make sure it's not something that someone else has already talked with you about.
-always qualify the lead.
-why is this a compelling opportunity.
-what about this opportunity jumped out at the recruiter as a good fit. -why is pursing this worth your time.
-what is the process that they are stewarding.
-a JD is not an actual role – it's a composite. What's the real job like?
-what is the culture of the organization. (especially if you've heard things)
-If they are asking you to submit a resume and Right to Represent through a client extranet portal (like TAPFIN), what assurances do you have that it's not another Black Hole?
-what advantage does this agency or recruiter offer that you can't get with any other firm?
The answer to all of theses is simple.
The #1 (and only) reason you engage with a Recruiter is because they have a direct line with the hiring manager and can leverage their professional relationship to get you an interview.
Anything else is just churn n' burn Sales rubbish.
I have no interest in
Didn't read the whole thing, because I have somewhat of a different problem. Maybe you can help me out.
There is a company, American Income Life, who continues to call me about a job opportunity. I've told them many times that I'm not interested, it's not the position for me. I've asked them several times (via the phone and email) to stop calling me, that it's become more like I'm being harassed by them. Even told them to take me out of their database. The calls continue. One just came in today, in fact.
I just went online to the "Do Not Call" site to see if it would be possible to somehow stop them from calling me, but it's not, because it pertains to a job opportunity.
The thing is, I've NEVER applied for any position at this company. They must have gotten my resume` when I had it public. I changed it to 'private' quite sometime ago.
So, is there a way to stop them from calling me ever again??
One of the worst things about posting your resume on sites for all to see is a majority of the out of the blue calls you receive will be from insurance companies and financial services companies. Many times they're one in the same as plenty of those companies incorporate both. The reason is quite simple. The sales turnover in those companies in very high. Plus, those jobs tend to be full commission and you have to pay for the licenses out of your own pocket as well. There's no risk for those companies to cast a wide net and also hire many people.
I worked for a period of times as a recruiter for positions mainly in the world of accounting. There's some suggestions I'd like to make for those who are looking for recruiter help with your job search.
1) Networking these days is the name of the game yet many people don't think to do that when it comes to finding or choosing a recruiter. How many friends, family members or other people you know have started new jobs recently? It pays to speak to them and find out what they did in their job search. Did they use a recruiter that helped them or more importantly was key to them landing their job?
2) When you do find a recruiter there's nothing wrong with finding out their experience as well. Do you really want to work with somebody in the job one week or with somebody who has experience? I know they need to start somewhere and need to gain experience but this is your job search. Also, what types of jobs do they specialize in?
3) Increase your exposure if possible. If it's an agency recruiter see if they have other offices and ask if they work collaboratively. Even if it's just one office ask if they share your resume with their colleagues so that you can be considered a candidate for their open positions. Yes, depending on their pay structure a recruiter will want to match their job with their candidate. That being said a successful recruiter will want to be working with several clients and candidates. In my mind it was better to get the candidate placed and then move onto the next job.
I guess some third party recruiters can go from an exciting promising interview and promising to touch base on a certain day to not responding to email or returning calls Is that common recruiter behavior?
You've certainly given a very good insight to recruiters, in a rather professional and witty manner. I've personally had both positive and negative experience with recruiters, being that everybody is different in their abilities and expertise.
I read an article recently which essentially explained the sad truths and unfortunate changes of recruitment, and your post seems to remind me of it:
It's important to always do your research before choosing a recruiter, seriously. Some companies are brilliant, but some… are simply awful.
Thanks for a marvellous posting! I genuinely enjoyed reading
it, you are a great author. I will be sure to
bookmark your blog and may come back in the future.
I want to encourage continue your great job, have a
nice day!
Leave a Reply to m12 Cancel reply
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


text:
I don't have an Iphone. But I might have to get one. There is a new Iphone app that finds wing restaurants. And a website.
Why didn't I invent that? (Ed: Because you are a techno-moron.)
Just awesome.
There are a lot of great reasons to get an iPhone (I'm addicted to mine) but I'm not sure an app for finding wings is one of those reasons… 😉
Ok, that website sucks. I understand it may not have good info on Bangor, where I currently reside. But Phoenix/Tempe/Scottsdale has a ton of wing places, most notably the Native New Yorker (I lived around the corner from a Native in Tempe, and it was like being in heaven) and the Vine (the original is right across the street from ASU). Neither of thos eplaces show up on Kluckr. Instead you get Applebees, Wing Street (Pizza Hut), and BW3. That's not very helpful.
I agree that it is a great idea. And one that, if they ever get the good wing places up, I may wind up using from time to time.
Hi Bucky, Sfhayes and Cate,
Thanks for the feedback on Kluckr and you are right…the list isnt there yet. . We are only 3 weeks old. We are really looking to people that love wings to tell us where the great places are and in the meanwhile we are going city by city and adding places. Sorry we havent gotten to yours yet.
If you can help us that would be great so the next time someone looks in Tempe they will be satisfied with the list. In the meanwhile if you want to send me personally the list you can reach me at email@example.com.
Your comments are really appreciated so please right me if you have more ideas to make it better
Mark Gilmor
Big Ol' Kluckr
PS we scraped applebees from the list but evidently there are a few stragglers from the original 3000 locations.
Last summer my 12 year-old nephew visited me for a week. Our goal was to find the best chicken wings in Milwaukee. We ate at different places for both lunch and dinner everyday. We also took a camcorder and posted a video on YouTube. You can find it if your search for "Milwaukee Chicken Wings."
Check out Arizona now I think it is much better. But if you know of more places please add them. Also my uncle lived in Bangor and if you could add some places there to make the Content better that would be great.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Labour government has announced significant changes at the Ministry of Defence (MoD), whose effect will be to put more resources into the Afghan war while nonetheless cutting spending overall - largely by reductions to parts of the RAF not engaged in the fighting. However, there is also a major reshuffle of helicopters among the RAF and Navy, which will see many aircraft change services.
The headlining move comes with the announcement, widely anticipated, that the British fleet of US-made Chinook heavy-lift helicopters is to increase from 48 to 70 aircraft, with initial deliveries of ten new choppers arriving by 2013. The Chinook is the only helicopter in widespread Western service with enough spare lift to operate with any freedom in Afghanistan's heat and high altitudes, and the new copters will be extremely welcome among British forces there.
It is also expected that another Boeing C-17 heavy transport plane will be ordered to join the existing UK fleet of 5, which are regarded as crucial to sustaining the "air bridge" logistic link between Blighty and its troops in Afghanistan.
These short-term improvements will be paid for not by any budget increase, but by reducing the active forces of Tornado bombers and Harrier close-support jets, and early retirement for much of the existing fleet of antique Nimrod MR2 maritime patrol aircraft. These moves will allow closure or mothballing of some of the RAF's 45+ UK stations, with associated further job losses and savings.
Tri-service helicopter plans also appear now to be set in concrete if not stone, with an official announcement that in future the UK will operate Chinook, Merlin, Future-Lynx/"Wildcat" and Apache types only. The current, aged Sea King will depart by 2016 and the Puma fleet - even now being expensively upgraded - will go in 2022.
This could have meant a black day for the Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm. The famous "Jungly"* naval air squadrons of the Commando Helicopter Force, operating from ships or bases ashore in support of the Royal Marine Commandos, fly Sea Kings. So do the fleet's critically-important airborne radar units.
However, MoD spokesmen informed the Reg today that the plan is for the entire Merlin HC3 troop-carrier fleet to be moved out of the RAF and into the Navy, with the Merlins being sent back to the factory over the next few years and "marinised" for shipboard operations. Some of them will also be equipped with airborne-surveillance radar to replace the existing Sea King Mk7s; the rest will be taken over by the Commando Helicopter Force.
Meanwhile, the RAF airmen who are now operating Merlins will change over to operate the new Chinooks.
The influx of new machines will mean that previously-discussed plans for closing at least one British helicopter base will not now take place. Search-and-rescue units around the UK - currently a mix of RAF, Navy and Coastguard - will get new contractor-run aircraft under a PFI deal already announced. ®
*So-called from their early combat operations in the Borneo rainforest.


text:
A Look Into Our Tagging Process
Posted on September 26, 2012 | 0 comments
Today, we're giving you a more in-depth look at our inside tagging process. Demonstrating for us is our Warehouse Manager, and mustache connoisseur, Harry Fuzzybottom. Hopefully, he won't get his fur all over the place like usual. Enjoy!


text:
Acrylic has many distinguishing quality features. In addition, the large selection of high-quality acrylic baths from Villeroy & Boch offers durable quality with optimum comfort and unique design variety.
Villeroy & Boch only uses panels from cast sanitary acrylic (PMMA). The solid-colour and pore-free material is extremely shockproof and largely resistant to damage from falling objects. If the worst comes to the worst, the 3-4 mm thick material can simply be repaired without leaving any residue.


text:
I'm collecting advanced exercises in geometry. Ideally, each exercise should be solved by one trick and this trick should be useful elsewhere (say it gives an essential idea in some theory).
If you have a problem like this please post it here.
I'm collecting such problems for many years. The current collection is here.
At the moment, I have just few problems in topology and in geometric group theory and just one in algebraic geometry.
Thank you all for nice problems --- I gave bounty to one, but would give it to 4 problems if I could :). Some of them are in the collection by now --- please post more...


text:
Most of us try to get more fiber in our diet — but we'll never get as much as some of our long-ago ancestors. Australopithecus sediba lived in Africa around two million years ago, and it looks like their diet was different from any other ancient hominin's.
While most other species were happily munching on grass and sedges, A. sediba's tastes ran more towards the foresty end of the spectrum. Through laser analysis of carbon in the fossils' teeth, wear analysis, and examining preserved food fragments still in their mouths, researchers believe the hominin's diet was far more tree-linked than any other.
These analyses point to A. sediba eating trees, shrubs, bushes, bark, and wood. This is similar to modern chimpanzees, but stands in contrast to most other hominins. It adds another wrinkle to the question of where A. sediba stands in our evolutionary tree, as well as figuring out how we came to develop our current, much less wooden, diet.
Image: The skull of MH1, a juvenile male Australopithecus sediba, by Lee Berger


text:
Gordon Gee, Ohio State's "Best Recruiter" Of Uncompensated Student-Athletes, Expensed $64,000 Over Five Years On Bow Ties: "The university spends tens of thousands of dollars alone branding Gee around his signature bow ties. Since 2007, Ohio State has spent more than $64,000 on bow ties, bow tie cookies and O-H and bow tie pins for Gee and others to distribute, the newspaper found." Read »
Steve Spurrier Wants A Columnist Fired And Will Probably Get His Way: "It gets weirder; Bailey starts talking about free speech and Soviet Russia. A tipster who seems fairly well wired to the situation tells us, 'No word on what the paper is going to do, but indications are Spurrier is going to get his way.'" Read »
Michael Morse Ran The Bases Backwards, Swung With No Bat, And Re-Ran The Bases Forwards Tonight: But: the back wall at Busch stadium is actually out of play, and after some standing around, the umpires establish that fact. Second but: Morse must go back to the batter's box and go through the motions of hitting a grand slam-with a swing and without a bat, in Morse's interpretation-for the runs to count, because baseball makes you touch every base, even when it's obvious what would have happened." Read »
How To Make Chili: A Guide For People Who Aren't Anti-Bean Zealots Or Elitist Scum: "All it asks of us is that we round up some chili peppers, some protein, and some liquid, and we give them time to get to know each other. Beyond that, we've got free rein to customize to our delight. Chili-the cultural institution, not the specific recipe, but sometimes that, too-is a grand monument to heterogeneity. Let's celebrate it for that, and quit with the fighting." Read »
The Redskins Lose Two Players To Pre-Game Collision: "The sense of haplessness in such a bizarre pre-game incident is made all the more Bad News Bears-y since it all took place, according to the CSN reporter, right in front of that weird pirate ship in Raymond James Stadium. And Rex Grossman's continued presence on an NFL roster, of course." Read »
Rory McIlroy Needed A Police Escort To Make His Tee Time At The Ryder Cup Today Because Of The East Coast Bias: "Rory McIlroy had an 11:25 a.m. local time (important) tee time this morning. Rory was a little bit late getting to the Ryder Cup because he has no idea what time it is. According to NBC/Golf Channel, Rory was telling time by the television and since they kept giving his tee time as 12:25 p.m. because they "always do things with eastern time zones in mind," he thought his tee time was at 12:25 p.m." Read »
"Desmond Howard Talked About "Beaver Juice" This Morning On College GameDay: Please do not discuss beaver juice. Anywhere. Desmond Howard elected to do exactly that this morning, and here's what happens. (Also, remix!)" Read »
Hugo Chavez's Opposition In Venezuela Lampoons Him As An Egomaniacal Pitcher: "As it is Venezuela we're talking about, baseball is the metaphor. Chavez is an overmatched pitcher getting shelled by the Monstars-like problems facing Venezuela: Inflation, Blackouts, Insecurity (i.e. violent crime), Scarcities, Holes in the Roads, Unemployment." Read »
Ed Hochuli's Crew Got The Full CBS Starting Lineup Treatment, Complete With Stating Where They Attended School: "How excited was CBS for the return of union officials? Ed Hochuli's crew did the full Super Bowl-style intros before tonight's Jacksonville-Cincinnati game; the officials even said where they went to school. It was cute, but a little weird; after all, we're already back to booing these guys." Read »


text:
Lucy Play Dress - Coral
$ 48.00
This adorable play dress is amazing is so many ways! This will honestly be your "go to" dress for your little beauties! Made of stretchy, super soft knit and elastic. Snaps crotch for diaper changes or easy potty breaks. This dress is super stretchy with elastic straps so you are able to get extended use as your little girls grow!
Made in the USA
Turnaround time: 1-2 weeks


text:
How can Express Overstock save me money?
If you have questions, we have answers... Check out our FAQ page!
Visit our FAQ Page...
Closeout A/C Equipment & Systems!
Closeout & Overstock A/C equipment & systems at low prices!
Shop Now!
Learn more about financing options for your A/C System in our Financing Resource Center!
View more details...
Ductless Systems
Find a stylish ductless system that offers comfort and energy savings for your home!
Shop Now!
Find the UV light system for your home!
Eliminate mold, mildew, odors and other allergens present in the air you breathe!
View our Indoor Air Quality products...


text:
|Off-Topic Everything else.
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Standards by any name have their uses vermaden, from Linux or not.
Unix has been around since before the cows came home, there is a lot of stuff a foot since there is no single omni-present implementation available (for a really long time). Any note worthy limitations on file names have been gone for ages but we still call it /usr instead of /user, because everyone assumes it is named /usr, even though it's a stupid way to save one letter (now're days).
By contrast, different countries have different ways of writing the date. If people agree on writing 2008-05-14, at least you don't have to check for every bloody countries format (or worse every possible one!). It limits ambiguity that otherwise has to be dealt with.
Since people don't always conform to their countries normal date/time notation, programs that allow specifing the desire format are good, ones that don't know the format but let you tell it are better.
I for one write time/dates in ISO and NATO styles, because I need to communicate with people form different countries, and I ain't taking an off by one margin error for people being late :-P
When helping people, I generally believe in giving both options (cli/gui) where appropriate, such as on PC-BSD you can generally assume some thing about the GUI tools available, same on Ubuntu, etc. Under FreeBSD, Linux, or Unix Brand Foo, that is usually harder.
One reason I never learned much about GUI way of administrating my systems: why learn 20 different ways to dick with user and groups (different guis) when you can just use tools from the command line that pertain to most OSes.
I am a firm believer that ANY THING worth doing should be doable from both the command line and a graphical interface when doing so is within reason. I.e. controlling the network settings via either method is the right thing to do but using some thing like GIMP designed for real tty's would probably be overkill.
However... From a business point of view. I don't care if it has a GUI or not, if someone is getting paid, they should know what the hell they are doing !!!
Learning to use a Linux box at the command prompt is not hard for most people that can read English. Being competent enough to manage one that'll cost a company big buck$ every second it doesn't work right is a bit tricker I'm sure.
I'm not a professional user of Linux or BSD although I know more then just my way around. If I had to hire someone, fine by me if they prefer the GUI over the CLI and can still get the job done properly. But they better know what the frig they are paid to know !
Especially if they want a raise later ;-)
My Journal
Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
I work in a fairly big corporation on the AS/400 side. Our IT department has got a Win farm, linux cluster & unix here & there. Most of the Win & linux developers think of a server as the box beneath their monitor. And their concept of multi-user server workload is Alt-Tab.
Graphics have their place. And the place may well be on the client workstation. I just can't agree with a real server consuming processor resources for displaying graphics.
And I hate the mouse. It's such an impediment to accomplishing real work..
Long live green screen, or whatever color your tty is
Let me throw out some very rough (read: speculative) estimates to demonstrate the idea, without mentioning any specific forum names:
Average Linux forum
Average BSD forum
Why is this so? * Could it be that many BSD users start with Linux to learn a lot of concepts and then expand their horizons to the world of BSD? Could it be that the learning curve required to get a BSD installation up and working as a desktop system is more steep (thus weeding out lower-skilled, potential users)? Could it be that as a community aggressively markets and grows it will inevitably attract novices faster than it can breed experts?
* Note: I'm not stating that this definitively is so, but rather asking some questions based on my own perception of the situation.
Kill your t.v.
>Could it be that the learning curve required to get a BSD installation up and working as a desktop system is more steep
But otherwise, there are systems like DesktopBSD and PC-BSD.
>Could it be that many BSD users start with Linux to learn a lot of concepts and then expand their horizons to the world of BSD?
In my experience it's most of the time out of frustration.
>Could it be that as a community aggressively markets and grows it will inevitably attract novices faster than it can breed experts?
Well this is a problem for really small communities like this $BSD-community, but it's no problem at all for the huge Linux community. There you'll get lot of experts and novices at the same time. No marketing at all on the other hand is fatal too.
use UNIX or die :-)
Otherwise I think it depends on what kind of server you are running... if you are running a rack in a data centre with more than millions of hits everyday, sure, running a GUI you never seen is bad...
On the other hand, my home "server" sits on a 30" monitor and is constantly running a full blown desktop environment, because I want to use it to watch movies, write documents, and surf the web too... pretty much doing the job of a desktop, while serving my home network as a NAT firewall/router in the background, having 5~6 house mates surfing YouTube/FaceBook/whatever wirelessly... I mean, it does this all fine, since the work load isn't very high, and I can have a dedicated workspace with a few xterm opened showing top, pftop, squid, and status like that, it all works very well.
Other than those case, I have seen that on BSD mailing lists that people install X just so they an run a few xterms to show status or what not... it all depends on what you are actually serving I suppose.
She sells C shells by the seashore.
A wise physician I know, on a Linux forum made an interesting statement after watching a thread that degenerated.
He commented on the old popular rap song, "My Milkshake"
For those unfamiliar with it, you're not necessarily missing that much, but the lyrics are,
"My milkshake brings the boys to the yard
"And they're like, 'It's better than yours,'
"D**n right, it's better than yours,
"I'd teach you but I'd have to charge."
It struck me as frightenly appropriate.
Here's a question for those of you with your anti-Linux sigs.
Ok, Linux is not Unix. (Neither are the BSDs, officially, but we're all so elite we know that's wrong. I mean after all, FreeBSD is one of the systems in O'Reilly's Essential Unix Administration--oh, wait a sec, so is RedHat--well, we're Unix anyway--no, that's U-N-I-X, NOT
E-U-N-I-C-H-S, you fools.)
Anyway, Mac OS X is an official Unix. Now, you need to hire someone to run your mail server on FreeBSD, say postfix. Your two choices are the Linux admin who's been running postfix on an RH server (not using webadmin) and a Mac OS X expert, who's worked at the genius bar in
an Apple store and knows all about Mac OS X, an official Unix.
Which do you hire?
Sorry, folks, it's a hot day, I'm not in a good mood. However, as that role model for all of us, Michael Jackson sang, "I'm starting with the man in the mirror..."
>Which do you hire?
Are we talking about the UNIX trademark (aka Mac OS X) or the UNIX heritage? The latter is something about quality and reliability. So you should ask, why are you using $BSD? If you want to hire someone, well it's probably a Linux-guy, because it's a Linux-world. But if we are talking about academical coherences then it's $BSD and its qualities.
use UNIX or die :-)
The posts here have been waaaay too short... guys, PLEASE explain your opinions in greater detail
I think the OP's original example about GUI on a server is a relevant one- if you need a GUI on a server, then just use Windows or Ubuntu and turn your brain off. You won't need it.
Network Firefighter
To short? Remind me to drop this thread from my list >_>
While I personally feel a GUI on a server is dead weight, there are times when it makes sense to have one. A SOHO situation where the poor sap that actually knows how to power off a computer properly is in charge of the box but he/she doesn't eat, sleep, and eat servers for breakfast but still needs a decent file or print server for example.
One thing I like about FreeBSD, I can pop in the disk, go to custom install, grab the minimal needed file sets (i.e. base, kern, what ever I want), boot it, setup and turn it into what ever I want from there.
The desktop machine pressed into service as my file server runs OpenBSD, access is via SSH only.
My Journal
Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Last edited by TerryP; 28th May 2008 at 08:28 AM.
Well I'm happy to report that some users are seeing my point. I am trying to be diplomatic and logical about the whole thing, and thankfully another *BSD user has joined me on the forum who will back me up from time to time. It's always more credible coming from more than one person.
Still I am appalled at what has happened to the general Linux community. Sunnz asked if they just install the GUI on the server. The answer is yes, they do the server install with the server distibution and then apt-get someting called ubuntu-desktop. I haven't personally used it so I don't know what it loads but it looks like a full blown GUI. If this was a desktop distro I wouldn't have been so shocked but this is Ubuntu's server edition, and they even state on their web site that not loading a GUI is for security. Looks like the more popular it gets, the worse people will abuse it.
Get your Windependence today!
>Looks like the more popular it gets, the worse people will abuse it
Of course, but it's their will, you cannot avoid abuse while denying certain possibilities. If there is freedom, somebody will abuse it - but I don't think anybody would be lucky about denying freedom just to ensure the proper use of it ;-) The Linux community is a huge community, you will find even some nerds like in $BSD, you'll find anything - so there is no 'versus' there are just different people anywhere.
use UNIX or die :-)
Actually, in that list of sticky links posted the other day, there was one excellent entry in the myths section. The myth, *BSD is better than (insert other system)
This is user opinion only.
Some people will put a GUI on a server.
When you call someone foolish, you've gone a long way towards closing their mind.
If they're inexperienced, give your reasons why you don't think it's best practice, and let it go. They can choose to listen to you or not. If you think they're foolish, well, you stated your opinion. If you come in saying, Only an idiot would put a GUI on a server, then, especially when you DON'T know what Ubuntu-desktop is, (nor do I--for all we know, it's a minimalistic GUI for certain possibly appropriate uses--probably not, but the important point here is that you're saying, "I don't know what it is, but it must be wrong."
It's possible, for example, that it's a home server for family files, that will double as a desktop and they need some sort of awkward hybrid. Just for example.
Judging from your posts here, however, I'm sure that you are giving intelligent, diplomatic arguments. Without looking at the thread, if I say, "You're doing it wrong," I'm doing exactly what I say not to do with the Ubuntu desktop thingie.
For one who has not lived even a single lifetime, you're a wise man.
As Count Dracula said to Van Helsing in the original Dracula from 1931
use UNIX or die :-)
By the way, I went and looked at that thread of Windependence's, figuring I'd add support if necessary. He's doing fine.
As I suspected (from Tim's posts here) he was polite and is making his points well.
It's not a flame war. Actually, even those disagreeing aren't disagreeing with vehemence.
Over here, I was not saying they were stupid or anything like that, just making an observation that from the last time I was on a Linux only board, I noticed a marked difference in the attitude, and it kinda reminded me of Windoze admins I know, and I was just a little shocked, that's all.
Get your Windependence today!
I was soooooo tempted to post something like nano???? What a wimp. Real men use ex. (Not that I do, but....)
However, fortunately, I'm at work and don't have time to play. It was a letdown though--I went to look at it early this morning thinking, "Dey better not mess wit' my maaain man Tim," (best Ali G voice for the preceding) and you had no need for help or support.
One thing I should say for those forums--in general, most disagreements are respectful of the other side's view. Considering the volume of those forums, it's impressive and their moderators deserve compliments. (As do ours here, of course.)
When you go to the furniture store, do you care how a dovetail joint is created, or do you just want a table? There are many fine woodworkers who could carve a dovetail in their sleep with hand tools, but most people just want the table and want to not to break.
How many people can work on their car? They don't care! They just want to push the gas pedal and have the car move. If the car breaks down, they don't care why, they just want it fixed - NOW!! They don't want the mechanic to explain the innards of the valve train or tell them how to fix it, they just want it fixed. Even those who might have some inkling that they can fix it themselves (hey, I'll save me some money) just want a quick tutorial on how to fix it and don't want to know the fundamentals of automotive engineering. And they will call with the most inane questions and just want a quick answer (and I have heard some whoopers as a mechanic and parts clerk).
So yes, I think the majority of those who use computers (machine-independent) just want the stupid contraption to work without knowing or caring how or why.
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
JMJ, that was an excellent analogy. We've all heard the car one so often that it rolls off us, but the table one is new to me, and an excellent illustration.
Most people use the computer as a means to an end while we who are into computers, and that can include some skilled MS admins, see the computer as the end in itself.
Ubuntu is offering itself as a solution to those who see the computer as means to an end. If they succeed, it will be good for all of us, simply for hardware support.
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|linux compat and linux-only drivers
|FreeBSD General
|22nd January 2009 05:42 PM
|What's the difference between these two memory modules?
|General Hardware
|25th November 2008 03:13 PM
|difference between jdk16 and diablo 1.6
|FreeBSD Ports and Packages
|16th October 2008 12:17 AM
|difference between rc.conf and loader.conf
|FreeBSD General
|3rd September 2008 05:54 AM
|Difference between chpass and pw
|FreeBSD General
|7th July 2008 11:12 PM


text:
I took my son to Photo Day. My brother in law took the pictures.
There was a big crowd in front of us already.
I saw many Puig jerseys today.
I wasn't sure if it was a good idea to bring my son or not. He's not one to be okay to just hang out and do nothing. He's very active and needs to be doing something at all times. He's amazing though.
I took the chance and brought him. I wasn't going to go without him. What's the point of me going to Photo Day alone? I'm too old for this.
Oh hey, it's that guy with the big glove.
The man that throws 103 mph, Jose Dominguez. By the way, you will see in all the pictures, my son can care less about all of this. He's not going to look at the camera. :)
Paco Rodriguez! (Again)
Andre being Andre.
Clayton Kershaw.
Nancy Bea Hefley.
Hanley Ramirez.
Adrian Gonzalez scared my son.
Sorry Adrian, my son was tired already. We left after this.
Good times. It was nice seeing many readers of my blog and thanks for all the nice words towards my son.
Click here if you want to see more pictures.
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Photo Day @ Dodger Stadium
2 comments:
- Unknown said...
Huge Dodger fan from CO. Love reading your blog and checking out your pictures. GO DODGERS!
- July 13, 2013 at 10:40 PM
- Roberto Baly said...
Thank you Michael! :)
- July 14, 2013 at 12:30 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Our Cookies Policy has changed.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on all our websites and mobile applications.
This includes cookies from third party social media websites if you visit a page which contains embedded content from social media. Such third party cookies may track your use of the websites.
We and our partners also use cookies to ensure we show you advertising that is relevant to you.
If you continue we will assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the websites.
A return to the Turkish Airlines EuroLeague and its confirmation as the team to beat in German basketball are enough achievements to consider this past one as a great season for FC Bayern Munich. After two and a half seasons in the 7DAYS EuroCup, Bayern played the new round-robin regular season for the first time and was competitive right away. Led by Derrick Williams, Vladimir Lucic and Petteri Koponen, Bayern reached the halfway mark with an 8-7 record. The German powerhouse kept its playoffs chances alive most of the way, but a late three-game losing streak ended its hopes to reach the next round. Even so, Bayern placed 11th with a 14-16 record, just one victory behind the final playoff contestant. Bayern lost against ALBA Berlin in the German Cup quarterfinals, but when those same teams met again in the German League finals, it was a completely different story. Bayern swept the best-of-five series to successfully defend its German League title. Bayern had not won back-to-back German League titles since 1955. Fully established as a EuroLeague team, this is just the start for Bayern, a world-class sporting powerhouse.
FC Bayern Munich is one of the best-known sports clubs in the world. Its basketball team's roots go back to 1946 and the club was powerful in those early years with national championships in 1954 and 1955 and a German Cup in 1968. The team even made its European debut in the early rounds of the 1968-69 Cup Winners' Cup, but slipped over the next few years and was relegated to the German second division in 1974. After that, Bayern all but disappeared and spent just three seasons in the top German League over the next three-and-a-half decades. In 2008, following the success of the club's junior team, Bayern purchased the license of the Dusseldorf Magics to return to the German second division. With national team stalwarts Steffen Hamann and Demond Greene signing up and head coach Dirk Bauermann leading the charge, Bayern dominated the second division and clinched its promotion to the German elite in 2011. Bayern received a wild card to play the 2011-12 EuroCup and reached the German League playoffs that season, too. Coach Svetislav Pesic stepped in before the start of the 2012-13 season as the guard tandem of Tyrese Rice and Yotam Halperin helped Bayern finish the regular season in fourth place and reach the German League semifinals. Everything clicked in the 2013-14 season, as Bayern made the most out of its EuroLeague debut by reaching the Top 16. It was first at the end of the German League regular season and took out MHP Riesen Ludwigsburg, EWE Baskets Oldenburg and ALBA Berlin to win its first domestic crown since 1955. Coach Pesic and German League MVP Malcolm Delaney were the club's most visible faces all season. Bayern was eliminated at the end of the EuroLeague regular season in each of the next two years, but moved on to finish first in its EuroCup Last 32 groups before losing against Valencia Basket in the eighthfinals in 2015 and falling against Galatasaray Odeabank Istanbul in 2016. Bayern returned to the German League finals in 2015, but Brose Bamberg triumphed there and did the same in the 2016 semifinals. The club also reached the German Cup final a year later, before capturing silverware in 2018 by taking the German title with a thrilling 3-2 finals series victory over ALBA. Bayern reached the EuroCup Semifinals that season, too. Bayern was one win away from the EuroLeague Playoffs last season and successfully defended its German crown. Bayern looks forward to a bright future after a defining season in which the team took an important step forward.