Full Desk Recruiters vs. Split Sales and Recruiting

Like any business, there are different ways to run a recruiting firm. Besides perm vs. contract, 'space', and contingency/retained, there's another differentiator.

Some firms are comprised of 'full desk' or 'full-cycle' recruiters, and some split sales and recruiting. There may be other terms used which can mean the same thing, or a hybrid, like 'team approach', or different titles, Directors, Account Managers, Sr. Recruiters, Jr. Recruiter, etc.

A true full desk recruiter finds his/her own clients, recruits the candidates, and handles the entire process. A split sales and recruiting approach means one person deals with the client and another does the recruiting. Some have researchers, assistants, junior recruiters or whatever.

Most of my contacts tell me they prefer full-desk recruiters. They want to be talking to the person that knows the client, the position, the culture, not someone with a watered down, passed along job spec, or be getting screened by a junior person. Recruiting firms who adopt this approach are, in my mind, sacrificing quality of process in an attempt to scale revenues.

It is difficult to bring someone new in and have them do full-cycle recruiting. Firms that do may tend to have more turnover than others, because it is a real sink or swim approach. Believe me, I started that way, and I swam, but most sank.

The team approach in recruiting is a way to bring junior people on and learn pieces of the business slowly. But how do you think a CIO is going to like getting pre-screened for a CIO slot by 26 year old with 12 months experience as a recruiter? Do you think they'll be thrilled spilling their life story to someone like that, and then again (maybe) to the Account Manager, and then to the client? Probably not.

There's a place for junior people, doing research, handling lower salaried search assignments, etc.