The Big Idea in Executive Search

Donny Deutsch, Host of the CNBC television show "The Big Idea" features successful entrepreneurs who've launched products, companies, and at times, even whole industries inspired by the realization "there must be a better way!"  Where are the big ideas in executive search?

In the recruiting industry, we essentially have two flavors of search firms: Retained and Contingency.   The two models are distinguished primarily by how they prefer to be paid.  And while the end product is essentially the same (a placement), the process is very different.  Retained tends to be fairly consultative and labor-intensive. The candidates are scrutinzed to a higher degree quite simply because more is at stake. Contingency is highly transactional and is typically aimed at the staffing level.  They have to make a rapid placement or else they move on.

Research firms have primarily taken a back seat to search firms, whether retained or contingency. Retained search firms, in their effort to stave off competition, frequently marginalize research and framed it as a low-level, if not secretarial, back-office function . . .  this even though research is the very thing that identifies and develops candidates.  Ironically, it is viewed as tactical -- simple name generation -- when, done properly, the very opposite is true.  Search that does not leverage hard-core investigative research (human capital intelligence) is tactical. In other words, most retained search is tactical. 

Denigration of search research, from where I sit, is mired in the good old boys' network that attempts to keep clients snookered into believing that they make better placements simply because they say so.

The reality, my friends, is that one makes better placements if one is smarter as in  "he who has the best information wins".  And the only way to make yourself smarter in search is to power every engagement with an investigative process that analyzes the date you gather to transform it into actionable intelligence (translation: to find short cuts to the best candidates).  This form of research is not a simple list of names. Search without it is like searching with your eyes closed. 

At the end of the day, search should not be defined by how you bill for the service (retained versus contingency), but by how you deliver the candidates.  If your search process isn't informed by actionable intelligence, than it is search dumbed-down.   

Comments

[Jo]

The interesting thing about search from an HR point of view is that firms have to do it at all. By definition, you are dealing with a firm that has no idea how to secure its talent. It is relying entirely on their competitors to have trained people for them - or chance which is worse.

Conversely, why would a talented person want to be found by such a firm? If they are so talented, they know where their industry is developing and where the opportunities are and have networked in already!

That is not to say there isn't a good business niche here. An additional untapped opportunity may be an outsourced form of talent management on the external labour market side. Telling people how the market is unfolding and helping them to network in advance of needing someone.

[Jeremy Langhans]

my Comments are below in CAPS

Denigration of search research, from where I sit, is mired in the good old boys' network that attempts to keep clients snookered into believing that they make better placements simply because they say so.
ON-POINT KRISTA! EXECUTIVE TALENT SOURCING (AKA SEARCH RESEARCH) IS EVOLVING AND THE "YOUNG LIONS" *(COUGH ME, ETC) ARE GIVING THE GOOD OLE BOYS SOMETHING TO WORRY ABOUT.

The reality, my friends, is that one makes better placements if one is smarter as in "he who has the best information wins". And the only way to make yourself smarter in search is to power every engagement with expert human capital intelligence. This form of research is not a simple list of names. Rather,it leverages market intelligence and competitive intelligence to deliver candidates faster-better. Search without it is like searching with your eyes closed.
YUP AGAIN. I POSTED AN ARTICLE BY DAVID CARPE ON CI THAT IS CRITICAL HERE WHEN DISCUSSING HUMAN SOURCES (SEE: http://executivesourcer.blogspot.com/2008/02/understanding-human-sources-by-david.html

PS. WHAT KIND OF SYSTEM (CRM MAYBE) WOULD YOU RECOMMEND PUTTING ALL THAT CRITICAL INFO IN?

Thanks,
Jeremy Langhans

[Bill Fitzgerald]

I wonder if Donny would be interested in a refreshing new approach?

All search firms charge their client company when they place someone in a job. It's been like that for 30 years. It's all based on the belief that it's hard to find people and takes lots of time.

With all of the tools available to recruiters, it's a lot easier than the industry would like to let on. To charge firms based on the effort it took to find people 20 or 30 years ago is outdated.

Check out www.fitzdrakesearch.com. Our approach to how we bill is very different. And we deliver the same top quality talent that any retained or contingent search firm delivers.

We are currently working on a product that will turn the search world on it's head. Very soon the days when search firms will be able to charge large placement fees for recruiting top talent will be gone!