Last year I made a post on LinkedIn about the risk of disclosing the name of your client to all and sundry when screening, and I got attacked for it by a number of recruiters.
A recruiter I coached last week had a “loose exclusive” with a new client. He worked the role hard, talked openly about the company, messaged many candidates on LinkedIn and sold the opportunity verbally to multiple candidates.
Later, the client called him saying that he had filled the role with a direct applicant.
“How did you end up filling the role?” asked the recruiter.
The client said, “I really appreciate your work and I’ll definitely use you again. Indirectly you helped, because it was a candidate you had messaged about the opportunity. He told me you didn’t interview him, which is what I expect from my recruiter. There’s nothing in your terms that says I have to pay you a fee for this one. I hope you understand.”
Ouch.
When I posted previously that I rarely disclose the client’s name at the early screening stage on contingent work, I got attacked for it. Some people said that not naming the client makes recruiters “part of the problem” and undermines trust with candidates.
Here’s what I believe:
There are absolutely times when I will give the client’s name to candidates.
That happens when, in advance, the client and I have agreed that I’m recruiting “in the open” and that if any candidate I introduce, directly or indirectly, approaches them via another route, my fee is still payable because the introduction originated from my work.
Candidates deserve clarity about where their CV is being represented – which is why, once a candidate is moving forward, the client name and “right to represent” can be agreed in writing.
In contract recruitment this is even more obvious. Some contract recruiters still live off leads for business development: candidates casually mention where they’ve been approached, and suddenly multiple agencies are ringing the same client trying to fill your role. If you spray the client’s name around without protection, you are feeding that machine.
Yes, you could argue that if you have a solid relationship with your client, they will push them away but what about new clients? And what about fickle clients who just want the job filled and don’t really care?
The message is not “never disclose the client name”.
The message is:
Disclose the name when it is strategically right and contractually protected.
On retained work, recruiting in the open is sensibe (as long as it isn’t a confidential role and your client is fully in agreement).
On contingent or contract work, be very careful about handing your opportunity – and your client’s name – to the entire market with no protection for your fee.
Transparency is good.
Smart, protected transparency – backed by agreed terms – is better.
Particularly in tough markets where some employers, competitors and candidates have vested interests that don’t always match yours.
