I think there’s a difference between using a headhunter on your current job hunt when you’re not working and keeping in touch with job hunters while in your current job.

Headhunters can be very valuable at bringing you new opportunities that you might not otherwise be aware of, and this can be part of the continuous job hunt Penelope is always writing about.

In this instance you are interesting to the headhunter as someone in her database who has a specific skill set that the headhunter may be trying to fill at some point in the future, but you won’t be calling every week to find out about the latest job openings she is trying to fill.

While I think your characterizations are generally correct, there are exceptions. Recruiters tend to be looking for superstars and in general, cannot do much for individuals looking to make a career change; however, not all recruiters are simply peddling their listings.

In my organization, for example, we only work with candidates we think we can place; but we do not limit ourselves to making introductions to firms that have a stated hiring need. We actively market our candidates to create more opportunities for them. If I have a strong candidate who has good credentials and a skill set which is in demand, I do not wait passively until a client articulates a need. I talk to the clients about the candidate to see if they are thinking about making a hire.

Agents work for whomever is writing their checks. Job seekers can hire agents too. And headhunters most certainly do work with career changers.

Headhunters are transactional in how they conduct business. They are paid by their customers (companies not individuals) to find the right candidate. No candidate = no paycheck for that job.

Most of the recruiters I’ve encountered love you while they’re trying to sell you to the customer. Once the customer decides you’re not it, then you get dropped like the proverbial hot potato. While it is unfortunate that such is the case, it is the nature of the businss, and nothing personal. Once the job seeker realizes this fact, then using recruiters in a job search becomes another tool in the process.

I agree. They can be as nice as it gets if they need you. But the moment they are no longer interested, you’re out of the picture. It’s better if you do things on your own. You’ll be more ready to face the criticism.

Yes recruiters work for who signs the cheque (the client, hirer) and does “get dropped like the proverbial hot potato” but only because if we talked to every candidate that we DON’T have anything (jobwise) to talk to them about we would never have time to speak to anyone else.

It would be nice if it was easy to get the attention of recruiters. With the increasing number of people who are unemployed, it would mean a great deal to have a job. However, it will only make people more dependent on recruiters and will not decrease self confidence.

Understand that a recruiter sees candidates as marks - they are looking for an easy placement into a position, so they can get their commission quickly.

If you want the attention of a recruiter, make their job easy. Have a reputation for being great at interviewing. Have an impressive resume. Have a reputation in your field (awards, public speaking, attendance at events).

In other words, set yourself apart. Which, amazingly, is great advice anyway.

Like Penelope says, you want to make yourself available to recruiters. One way to easily do so is to not only do a linkedin profile, but put your email address in your name when you do so. If you do that, and you have a reasonable size network in the system, you have at least set the table. If there is any market for your skills, you WILL be contacted.

If not, at least you are in linkedin building a network. which in this economy, is the key to the really good jobs - not to mention the only real job security available unless you are in a big union.

And a slight correction, there are NOT an increasing number of unemployed, as Irene claims. The unemployment rate is currently at its lowest level since 2000 - 4.5%.

Penelope, I can’t wait to meet you in October. It’ll be huge fun. Commenter Aaron, “marks’ is an ugly word. If I saw people as marks I would not have 2 people I have placed 3 times,3 people I have placed twice,1 guy placed at the same company twice ,both times for a fee, a million dollar client who became a candidate, a candidate who took a counter-offer hiring a dozen people from me and many placed candidates hiring people from me later. My two oldest relationships in recruiting are the second guy I ever placed and another guy I’ll never place.
Since this is all about ‘ideals’ Let’s stipulate that the best recruiters and headhunters only talk to the best people. The bottom 80% or recruiters/headhunters will certainly fall for tricks like ‘making yourself open and available on places like LinkedIn’ but looking like a top performer is not the same as being one. It is nothing more or less than humane to minimize one’s time with those we can’t help so we can maximize it with those we can…regardless of who’s paying whom. I need to get back to the phones but before I do I am going to go see if I can find a blog somewhere lamenting the fact that hairdressers don’t pay more attention to bald people because they’re too busy working with hairy people.
P.S. Erik, if I see the phrase ‘using a headhunter’ once more, I’ll stick my finger down your throat. :-)

I am using a “Head Hunter” now, she called me because of my resume on Hcareers. Am I only using her? No, I am still seeking the right position for myself.

Head Hunters, sometimes know positions before they appear in print. It will be interesting to me, who gets me a new job first, me or my head hunter. I think you need to be proactive, use all the tools you have to get ahead in this world.