You think you sell creative?

I think you sell the creative abilities of talented people!

There's been much talk of the past year being a tough year.
I think it's been a tough decade.
What we're feeling now has been a long time in coming.
The agencies that are feeling less of a pinch are those agencies that have consistently made the financial investment required to scout great talent.

Talent is the make or break conversation.  

Agencies working with less people, are still expected to provide the same level of creativity and thinking they were a year ago.  Less people per creative project - means less time.  As we all know, great creative takes time.  

A print production person I worked with used to scream through the creative department when we were on a deadline with not enough time, "What do you think we're doing here?  Making donuts?!!??!!"  She was right, we aren't making donuts.  This isn't an assembly line.  We're creating creativity.

As time-consuming as the process of creativity, is the process (yes, sorry, process) required to recruit great people.  It is a full-time job. I know.  Because it is my more-than-full-time job.  In order to do it effectively, it requires more time than a Creative Director who is doing his or her job as a Creative Director well, currently has at their disposal.  

First let me explain the two types of recruiters.

Because many of you are still unclear.  Even those of you who have done both.  Or worked with both.

Contingency Recruitment, is exactly what it sounds like.  
The recruiter gets paid contingent on finding the candidate.  
Before you do.  
Or another recruiter does.  

Retained Recruitment is when you pay a retainer at the initiation of the project. Along with that retainer, you make a commitment that you are prepared to see this process through.  Together.  As partners.  I like that.

Contingency recruiters know what they're in for.  And who they're up against.  They're up against you.  Even though they're supposedly working for you.  They have to beat you to the candidate.  So that they can get paid.

How does that impact the quality of the candidates you meet?

That rush, means that there is no time to get to know you, where you are in the marketplace, how you'd like your creative department to be regarded within the next two years, and how this hire will help you get there.  

It's a race to the finish.  

So hang up that phone contingency recruiter, and start firing resumes at the Creative Directors inbox.  Because after all, should it come to that, you know that only the resume with the earliest time stamp on the email will get paid.  

The image of a pack of hounds being released in rapid pursuit of the fox comes to mind.  Barking and baying and lots of noise, but no one really knows what they're running for, except that every other dog is running, and hurry!  Bark!  Bark!  Bark!

But what happens, is that those hounds (or resumes) end up in your inbox.  And now you have to sort through them.  I would bet, that because there wasn't really a lot of time spent getting to know what you want, that most of them are not close to what you're looking for.  

How are you liking this so far?  

You have a creative department to run, and sorting through all these resumes is taking you away from doing that.  I thought using a recruiter was supposed to save you time - make the process of finding someone - easier, not harder.

See how that might impact your ability to choose the best talent?

Contingency recruiters don't work for you.  

They also don't work for the talent.

They work for themselves.

Do you blame them?  

Here's how what you've basically said to them translates to a similar request in your world:

"Hey agency, work on some ideas.  We'll get our in-house studio to work on some ideas as well.  If we like yours, we'll pay for it,  but if we don't, you get nothing."

That's what it sounds like when it's coming from your clients.
Same deal.

Honestly.  If you actually said 'Yes' to this proposal (this is not a new business presentation, a regular client) would you put your best thinkers on it?  

Would you be as committed to that project as the project from the loyal client?

Of course you wouldn't.

Neither do they.

So if they're not getting any traction, or you're being "impossible" (impossible = selective), or you can't decide, or you want to change directions (which both your and my clients do) contingency recruiters give up.  Moving towards the nearest, or in this case, the fastest dollar. They, like you, have to eat.

If you pay a retainer to a recruiter, they can't give up.  No more than you can give up if there's a relationship on the line.

Just like the creative process, sometimes a path you thought might work isn't working.

A retained recruiter will keep going.  They go to the market again.  They go at it in a different way.  Together, you strategize on what's not happening, what could happen, what another approach might be.  

In the process of doing a search, a good recruiter might consider and/or contact over 300 people for a position.  Those people talk.  Those people look out for each other.  They pass along leads.  In the process of passing along leads someone might forget to mention that a recruiter is involved, and that person will contact you directly.  

If you're working with a contingency recruiter, you now have a decision to make.  Do you tell the recruiter, or do you 'forget' to tell the recruiter and save the fee.  

Times are tough.  Be a hero. Save the fee.

Too bad, because if that recruiter was a retained recruiter, they might have information on this person that might help you with your decision.  Either for, or against.

Hiring is hard, but hiring mistakes are much harder.  Not only on you, but on your department, your company, your clients.  Any hiring mistake prevented is money well spent.

The other side of this equation is what happens during a contingency recruitment search.  If a contingency recruiter poo-poos your candidate and you know they only get paid if their recommended candidate gets hired - do you ever 1000% know that they are motivated by your agenda, and not theirs?

Negotiation.  Doesn't it just make you wince? 

Not I.  I love it.

When you involve your retained recruiter in the process, they do references for you, and the best part of all, they negotiate for YOU.  Because YOU are who is paying the recruiter.  

Makes me wonder.  If the recruiter who is doing your negotiation for you, wasn't able to negotiate a respectable fee for themselves, how great a job do you think they'll be able to do for you?

Do they really believe in the value of what they're selling enough to ask for a commitment?  I believe in what I do and the value I provide.  So I'm not afraid to ask.  

Another request I've heard in the past is that agencies don't want to pay a recruiter if that name was in your database.    

A name in a database is worthless.  

Open the phone book, pick a name, any name.  Worthless.  It's only a name. What has value, is knowing which names in that database are most suited to the position you have available.    What has value, is knowing how those people will meld with your culture. That takes time.  That takes process.  That takes discipline.  That takes meticulous record keeping.  That takes constant daily updates.  That takes talking to hundreds of people and taking notes.  

Retained recruiters don't sell you people.  

Retained recruiters don't sell names.  They sell a process.  That process is one of doing a thorough inventory of the market, and knowing you've left no stone unturned.  That process gives you the assurance that you are hiring the best person you can hire for the money you have to spend.  

They sell you their expertise, their time, their discipline, their meticulous record keeping, and their constant daily updates.  

And still, whether retained or contingency, they still don't know everyone.  They never will.  But I guarantee you, they know more people and have met more people that anyone in your agency ever has.

Which brings us to my next point.  

Why are the people in your agency interviewing people instead of working on creative?  

Are they trained to interview?  Do they know how to tell the company story?  Do they know what points they should highlight?  Do they know your latest greatest hits?  Can they take someone through your reel, and do a mini public relations campaign for your agency?  Do they know how to evaluate talent?  Do they know what the hiring criteria are for anyone in your company?  

Interviewing skills are as learned a skill as creativity.

Just like in the business of creativity, where practise makes perfect, to be an effective talent scout, you need to focus on doing it better all the time.

Some networks now pay a "Success" fee.  I call it that too.  However, our definitions are somewhat different.  Agencies that work with contingency recruiters consider it a "Success" if the recruiter finds the person first.  I consider it a "Success" when I have helped a Creative Director, or a President with one of the most difficult aspects of his job and we have successfully hired someone spectacular together.  

Doesn't this sort of relationship sound like the kind of client relationship that causes you to do your best work too?  Best work, and love, and passion and partnership results in great creative.  It also results in great creative hires.    A relationship where the goals of the year are discussed.  So you can start thinking about it.  Not a frantic call on a Friday afternoon where the best you could do in a weekend will have to do.

Talent is the way through this.  

David Ogilvy already knew this circa 1959.  
He said, "The agency with the best people wins."

The agency with the best people wins more new business. Because they're in that boardroom with you.  
The agency with the best people wins more awards. If you don't have the talent to do the award winning work, how can you win awards?
The agency with the best people wins culturally. A great culture creates the previous two - it's been proven too many times to argue.  
The agency with the best people wins financially.  
I think you get the picture.

In 2009 and for as long as I can imagine, the agencies that figures out the new agency model, or how to monitize social media, or how to gain back the respect of their clients will not be the agencies that win, and continue to win.

It will be the agencies that remember what David Ogilvy said, "The agency with the best people wins"
And set up effective processes and productive partnerships to make it happen.

Before their competition does.