does 'branding' matter in recruitment services?

Branding in 'recruitment service delivery' is one area found wanting in theory to my little knowledge. 

This is all the more from a vendor/agency perspective.... 

Here am not speaking of employer branding... this is about how much branding matters if you are a vendor trying to partner organisations in their executive search or permanent recruitment plans.... 

Does branding matter really? I would prefer to safely assume that more than branding, it is the sheer delivery capability of the consultants that matter. Nothing else.

Look at the many top-notch recruitment agencies or search firms, who stand tall by their sheer chronological presence coupled with delivery in at the CXO level hiring. With this capability, what is the value of the brands they have assiduously built? What is the value of brand ABC or like that, a brand Ranstad or a brand Manpower..... 

I would opine that given the structure of the recruitment industry in the country 'branding' would be more of a supplementary attribute second only to delivery and legacy relationships.... MNC's in this space have that edge compared to the smaller players to position their pan Indian footprint and ability to deliver for recruitment needs across every nook and corner of the country... but those would be the typical entry and middle level positions in large numbers which strong local players may not be able to do, not by virtue of competence or the lack of it, but by only lack of footprint..... 

And even in the temporary staffing space nationally, it is the local players who have the ability to customize services and work through the maze of local labor laws, who are beginning to make inroads, eating numbers away from national players.... So to conclude, a 'brand' in recruitment would only serve for better positioning.... beyond that it will be only delivery and relationships, with absolute and predictable consistency that would make recruitment companies win... I know there is going to be a huge debate on this subject... which will make all of us learn more about 'branding in recruitment'.....

So how much do you believe that 'branding' your services works in agency hiring?

A world sans job descriptions?

In recruitment, particularly when you are at the agency end, this is the most common question - and although its in the organisation/clients interest to provide us with one, that's what does not happen.

The easiest and most common refrain is... well, you are a recruiter and ought to know what we need! This can  be at best - laziness or incompetence in aligning with the internal hiring managers to understand what makes a good fit - which candidate will be good; and at worst laziness and passing the buck, with the carrot of agency revenues.

What happens as a result is endless calls to candidates, almost as a rote - sans any clarity on the role and the fit, and wasted agency time.

For the company, the consequences are even bad - the candidate market perceives the company to be one where there are no clear processes - well, if you can not have a proper jd for a role, what sort of other processes can one expect to have...

Even assuming that in the absence of the job detail, candidates are shortlisted - a blind putt shot, what else, - the consequent management time invested in evaluating the person without any understanding of the role need    - is sheer waste, and indeed a crime on time management.

Hiring practices are undergoing a tectonic shift - with the world out there speaking of role outcome descriptions and quantifiable revenue/customer impact results expected from the job.

And in this, imagine a world without job descriptions, even those that are antique pieces!?

Where do u set the bar for the team?

How do you perceive the fact that many a times, there is a tendency of leadership to set and have a pretty low expectation for the team?

In any given business environment, 'setting the right standards' is so important, not only for the organization, but also for the team and the individuals in it; at stake is not just the organizational performance, but also, the career of every single member of the team!

While a few leaders come down heavily on not so good performance, and even get tough from the execution point of view, surprisingly enough, there are also leaders who thrive on sub-optimal performance, just by shifting the blame of the handful of external factors - a bad client, a slow market, a perceived disrespect to the brand et al... In essence, it is either being blind to the whole world out there, or being naive to think that what you think is right, is what everyone thinks! You just stand on a high illusory platform, and be akin to a frog in the well... and to top it all, you are immune to what happens in similar companies, with similar people, with almost just a similar external environment..!!

Owing to being driven by the internal environment (?), you just stay in the comfort zone and live by sub-optimal standards....

The biggest loser, in my opinion is the team and its members... your own colleagues, who trust your wisdom to grow them, and their career..!

By your own deeds of not knowing where to set the bar, you make them feel nice with a performance that is just good, from the internal perspective. Little do they realize that what they think is good, is just not good to the outside world, which is where their careers will prosper and have to take wings....

Good is the enemy of the Great, and a 'myopic good' is the greatest evil for bright careers... it is the duty of every single leader to stay clear of any sort of myopic good - even if it means a temporary setback, a failure to get to stated goals, or even a setback in position... 

careers : market your sorrows - at your own peril.....!!

have you tried marketing your sorrows, more so, when you scout for a change in job?

what is meant by marketing sorrows - its to put personal issues and problems, however be genuine they, in the forefront of any professional discussion that leads to finding another job.

it might suit in a sense to get into a role, by speaking about how some decisions were taken with personal considerations in mind, and they will be well justified too.

the prospective employer will be considerate enough to factor that into his hiring decision, and it may suit both ends at that point in time...

however, the personal disclosures, made in all earnesty, will be well exploited later at every possible work moment, leading to the professional stature or perception of competencies being colored....  which will be forever detrimental in the professional eco-system for the individual.

so, never put on the table your personal issues, only position and bargain on the basis of your professional credentials and track record.