Knyle style recruiting | Hacker News Reader

Knyle style recruiting

warpspire.com

45 pointsbroccolini11 comments

Recruiters don't have a magic wand that tells them when new job postings have posted - they get the same information in much the same way as you do (at least the ones I've interacted with). They basically trawl job boards looking for new jobs, then take that one post and throw it up on 10 other sites with slightly reworded text so you can't do a simple Google search to find the original post.

4 months ago when I was job hunting, I came across 6 separate postings from 6 different companies, all advertising for the exact same position. It was incredibly aggravating, because this practice of reposting as many jobs as possible has clogged legitimate job boards to the point that a clear majority of job postings are from "recruiters". There's so much crap you have to wade through to get to any real postings, and that's how they operate. These companies basically impede your job search to the point that you are almost forced to go with them - unless you have patience, a strong dislike for recruiting agencies/agents, and maybe a network of professional acquaintances you can announce your availability to.

Thankfully I have the first two (not the network :( ), and have so far steered clear of recruiters when I find my jobs.

I don't want this to become a pages-long rant, so I'll make the rest short.

I do not know of job boards like Monster have methods to report spam from recruiters. Not only email spam (that I can easily deal with), but phone spam, especially when it's an Indian (it's ALWAYS Indian) recruiter calling me for an AWESOME 3-month opportunity in New Jersey (I'm in Texas).

Most American recruiters I've dealt with have the unfortunate tendency to overstate the salary range their hiring-mark is open to. One of the very few interviews I've had thanks to a recruiter went downhill quickly after I was told the salary range they were going for. This after 3 interviews that I thought had gone splendidly. I was more than a little pissed, and so was the hiring manager after I called him and explained to him exactly what had happened.

Long story short: I no longer entertain any recruiters whatsoever (unless it's an internal company recruiter, of course).

Some recruiters I've talked to do actually have a magic wand that tells them when a new job posting has arrived. It's called a personal relationship with the hiring manager at the company. IE: The hiring manager informs the recruiter when they're looking for new talent. (we need 3 mid level QA, or we're going to be looking for new developers next quarter) Rare, but it does exist.

If you're looking to hire a designer, you can also check out my project, Folyo:

http://folyo.me

It's cheaper than most job boards, and much more effective (and I'll refund you if you can't find someone). Plus I personally vetted all the designers on the site.

Just went through your website. I really think it's a great idea! Personally-vetted designers, even the idea of it, sounds like it would clear out a ton of fluff. You're like an Apple App Store of designers :)

Now I wish there were something similar for web developers.

I'm a firm believer in the personal network. Finding qualified co-workers through friendship networks has been productive for me and anecdotes I hear usually say this is a good approach.

Asking about family when interviewing a candidate is inappropriate and illegal. Don't.

Please do engage candidates about their current job, dream job, give that open-ended "what have you been working on lately that is really interesting to you" question that lets you find about what really drives them forward.

<edit>

we all should remember to skim the eeoc guidelines occasionally:

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/index.cfm

AFAICT, most recruiters are essentially independent matchmakers. That is, they aren't working for the employer and they aren't working for the employee: they're trying to reach out in both directions and bring people together.

The incentive is to cut in on a share of the new employee's income. OK, book agents and talent agents do that too. The difference is that those agents have a contract with the employee. It is in their interests to take on exactly as much work as they can handle, and to do a good job on each transaction. They're looking for repeat business in both directions -- getting jobs for their clients, and addressing the needs of employers.

Recruiters, on the other hand, don't have a contractual relationship with the talent. They have no incentive to do a good job for any given prospective employee, and little or no hope of repeat business.

Meanwhile, the same network technologies that let you tell everyone what you had for lunch today and let you look up the difference between "deciduas" and "deciduous" in half a second will let you put your resume up and tell all your friends that you're looking for a new job.

Facebook and Google+ don't have employment features yet, but it's more or less certain that they'll be after LinkedIn's lunch in the next year or so.

I'm having trouble understanding the disconnect between the complaints about recruiters expressed here and my own motivation as a recruiter.

I wrote a longer response here: http://blog.teamgrep.com/2011/11/08/response-to-knyle-style-...

I think it boils down to: what are you trying to achieve as a recruiter? For me, it's about stepping outside my boundaries as a single engineer and my curiosity about the greater startup community.

Perhaps these organizations aren't doing their due diligence when selecting a recruiter?

A few days ago I heard from a recruiter who had scraped all the emails from the contributors list for a popular open source project.

They sent a mass email; it contained two typos.

Tip: this is a great way to make tons of people not like you, or the company you purport to represent.

I was shocked when a recruiter email came into my inbox all excited about my passion as demonstrated by a hobby project I had sitting in my Github account. It was so unique that I not only forwarded their message to my network, but also replied with a thank you.

The firm was Captain Recruiter. I don't know if that was a quirk of the particular recruiter who contacted me, or a company policy, but it was very cool.

It’s vitally important that you sit down face to face and grab a beer with every potential hire. Or sit down for dinner. Smoke a joint. I don’t care what it is — you need to sit down in a relaxed environment and figure out what kind of person they are.

I have an old Mormon friend who would be put off by this phrasing. Good guy, very competent. Positively useless around beer.

As for the "hire someone you want to be around all day" angle, that's why I'm putting personal interests back on my resume. I'm tired of pretending I'm a soulless automaton, only to gingerly feel out the place when I get there for the interview. From now on, there's a list of interests, and a note reading, "if you wonder why this list is here, or if your first reaction is not, 'I want to meet this guy!' please move on to other candidates." Maybe it will come off as arrogant, but I just can't take the games anymore, and I want to work with people that I actually like.

thanks for the article as I knew about Forrst but not Dribbble.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com