Speaker 1: 0:00

Welcome to Retrained Search, the podcast where we lift the lid on what it's really like to work retained, discuss the stories we've gathered along the way and give you all a peek behind the scenes of our amazing community and how they're getting ahead. Ok, welcome everybody to today's episode of the Retained Search show. I'm so excited to have two guys. I'm very much looking forward to talking to Hish Mazouz and Chris Moylan and for the first time, I'm going to step out of the host seat and I'm going to let a very experienced host look after you today. Welcome, heesh, it's so nice to have you here.

Speaker 2: 0:46

Now I really appreciate the opportunity, love the idea when I saw it, so appreciate the opportunity to get involved and I'm really looking forward to this. I think it's a really important, interesting conversation around contingent versus retained. So I guess my goal here, if I'm honest, is just to try and um help both of you like really talk about this model that you're both passionate about and really see both perspectives and maybe chuck a couple of curveball questions at both of you maybe, and obviously, hopefully have some fun, but try and act as the sort of middle person here that can see both perspectives, because I've met plenty of recruiters that have been successful, retained, plenty of recruiters that have been successful, contingent let's talk about it ultimately is the goal.

Speaker 2: 1:35

So I guess you sort of helped come up with a bit of a structure as to how we're going to do this right, so we'll do a bit of an intro, but then we've got you. You've called it rounds, as if it's like some sort of boxing match, so so I guess the the audience will have to decide on the scorecard, if we get to that, unless someone gets knocked out, uh, in one of the rounds.

Speaker 2: 1:55

But we've got round one client fit and talking about when is is certain model right for the client and think about from that perspectives. We'll talk about it from a financial perspective, the risk, what's more sustainable, different stuff around that, the client and candidate experience. And then we're going to sort of flip the script and I'm going to hear uh, lou talk about contingent, which I don't think I ever have, and talk about if she was to start working on a contingent basis, how would she go about it? And then likewise for chrisson retained, uh, and then we'll sort of wrap up there. But along the way I might I might chuck some curveball questions at both of you.

Speaker 2: 2:32

So let's just start with a bit of an intro. Really, I guess, lou, I'll come. I'll come to you first, I guess. Introduce yourself your model. Obviously people here will probably know, uh, who you are. But I guess also we've added in there like what, what types of roles and markets or clients do you see in your clients that they will work with where you really feel like the retain model suits best and works best? And then talk to us a bit about why are you so passionate about this? I mean, this is your whole business, everybody's. You know all these years I've known you it's all about this mission of getting more people to work, retain.

Speaker 1: 3:01

So let's start there and then, chris, I'll come to you okay, yeah, so well, I'm lou archer, um, I guess most people listening to this might have seen me hanging around linkedin, because I have a habit of doing that quite a lot, and various other, uh, different places youtube and podcast as well. As you know, um, the model that I learnt about I don't know 10 years ago now is a retained model. Previously I had worked contingently for 13 years, so I had plenty of experience of that. But I'd say my model now is firmly the retained search model, which, basically, is where some financial commitment from the client enables the recruiter or us to put in place a rigorous and robust process and commit to making sure that we can reach a result, and not just any result, but the best result available to us all in the market at this time and in terms of the clients and the market that it excels with.

Speaker 1: 4:06

I find that it excels best where the contingent model doesn't perform particularly well. So that's often where, um it's a really niche or tricky or sought after skill set, or it's a series of multiple hires where one or two is easier, but when we get into three, four, five, six, it starts to get much harder. Or where it's confidential or senior or critical all those sorts of situations, the clients. It's a mixture, some big, some small, doesn't really matter on location or industry. It's more associated with the specific situation and I chose it for me because I got to the point where I knew I could deliver a great service, but I didn't always have the environment in which to be able to do that, ie the client working with other agencies or being at risk of them pulling the job, which meant I couldn't work as thoroughly and as rigorously as I wanted to because I was working at risk. So I chose the retain model because it enables me to deliver the service and perform to my maximum capabilities.

Speaker 2: 5:20

Love it, chris. Over to you, mate. Introduce yourself. What's your world and you've worked in a few different markets, I know. But yeah, tell us a bit about your markets If you've typically always done contingent, and why that's been the way that you've worked with a lot of companies. Just tell us a bit about that and then we'll get into it.

Speaker 3: 5:38

I'm co-founder and director of TechLink Partners, which is my business currently, which is a technology staffing company operating throughout Europe and the USA. I've been in the staffing and recruiting sector now for 13 years, starting out in tech. I've also done engineering and construction. I had a business prior to this, one which I exited and largely always been contingent throughout my career. So for me, retained is we've done a few, but it's the opposite side of the fence, right.

Speaker 2: 6:21

Who hasn't done a few retainers that's always the answer okay, so why?

Speaker 2: 6:28

why don't we? It may sound like really basic, right, but I do actually think if we have this conversation, let's just all make sure we're on the same page. So, like chris, when you say contingent, like just define that. For us this may sound basic, but let's just all make sure, like anyone listening, we all agree, because some people say they do certain things and it may be a bit different. So like when you say you've always worked contingent, tell us what you mean by that. Like how does that define it?

Speaker 3: 6:53

yeah. So typically we don't take money up front from the client before we start conducting a search. So you know, when I've worked in environments previously I've seen other people do retained. I guess part of that will be that I started out as a contract biller. I've been a contract biller for a large part of my career, mainly bolted perm in when I become a business owner. I never really dual desk when I was just when I wasn't a business owner, sort of value in perm when I launched the business, um, and for me when I've seen retained done um, you know, I imagine, look, they will enlighten us. But typically it's like 33 up from 33 on a short list and I've never fully understood those numbers, to be honest, because then I'm like where's your one percent? Go right, but and then? And then the rest when, when it's done. So I've typically worked where we'll take on a project or a job brief and we we get paid when the job's done when the job's done okay.

Speaker 2: 7:52

So that's typically how you've done it right. And then I know it really varied. But for the most part does that also mean that you're up against other agencies or no?

Speaker 3: 8:03

yeah. So we're big on new business, um, so if we create a job or create an opportunity or a need within a customer, obviously we'll always pitch for exclusive. But if we're late to the party ie we've heard a company has the requirement, they have a project, they had to build in a new service or practice and we want to get in what I find is, you know, in some cases we'll be late to the party, but out we're selling on our network and then our plan is to then go and outperform the people, um, and get a foot in the door, and then that's how we've opened up and, uh, won all of our clients. If I'm being honest, all of the clients in my career. I've won that pretty much that way.

Speaker 2: 8:45

So it might, so it might start that way, but then can end up working where, like, you're the sole supplier, but there's no. Yeah yeah correct. All right, and then lou should we, because again, people can do this in different ways, right? Chris has just said that they're a very typical way. I've heard it be described in a different way, but for the most part retained how you define them. That for everyone.

Speaker 1: 9:06

When you yeah, and you're right, it can be different. And I suppose, and the payment model, um, most people see retained, uh, or when you ask people what retained is, they immediately say it's money up front, um, but actually it's not. It's the process of delivery which carries a different payment structure. So it's actually a different way of delivering against a requirement and it needs some financial commitment from the client to enable that that process to be put in place. But in a nutshell, there is a difference in payment model and the main difference is that a portion of the fee is paid on commencement of the assignment and that might be that there's then another portion paid on agreement of shortlist and then another on completion or after 90 days if some people will charge again after, you know, successful completion of the probation period. So the payment model can be flexible, but the fundamental of the payment model is there's some financial commitment at the start of on commencement of the project.

Speaker 1: 10:08

Yes, um, but for me, that's not the main difference between retained and contingent.

Speaker 2: 10:12

The main difference is the process that you apply to execute the project yeah, but a lot of people would say, like what chris said, right in terms of how do I describe it?

Speaker 2: 10:22

okay, almost everyone yeah yeah, right, so let's just get into a couple of bits here then. So firstly, what I'd be interested, lou, I'll come to you first like what would just be interesting to hear firstly would be because you've now you've got the perspective of one doing it yourself, but now you've coached a lot of people, right, so you've also got that lens. So let's just start firstly with where do you feel like the retained model? Being honest, where does it not work well?

Speaker 1: 10:48

yeah, it doesn't work well in quite a few situations and in particular, it work. It doesn't work well where the contingent model works really well. You know your low level, um, easy to fill, um high volume, plent talent available. You can stick an advert on field, a response, fire a few CDs over client picks, one happy days. The retained model doesn't work well there, because why should they change the model that's working really well? So not that it would work very well, but there's no need for it, it's not necessary. So I don't believe it's necessary in all situations Equally.

Speaker 1: 11:30

Where there's a fixed idea of what they're looking for, with no willingness or desire to flex any parameters, and what the client's looking for doesn't exist, parameters and what the client's looking for doesn't exist Like we can't manufacture people or pull rabbits out of hats that just don't exist. So where there's an agreement to want to seek the best result that's available, then the retained model works equally. Where there isn't a desire to seek the best result available, where there's a simple I want something that doesn't exist, then it doesn't work particularly well in that situation either okay.

Speaker 2: 12:07

And then, chris, same question to you like where from your journey, mate, and how? Yeah, you know you can draw it from wherever, but where have you found, from your perspective, the contingent model continue? Where work? Where has that not worked well in your experience?

Speaker 3: 12:22

I think it well, because it would be exact same. So if we're doing real higher level stuff, right, and we're up against, you know, let's say we're fishing in waters where it's traditionally executive search, you know, maybe it's like we're in tech, right, so maybe it's a global cio position, huge salary, and know you've heard of this and you're knocking on the door but somebody's already retained, so let's see how they get on. You know there's that. But then also, on the flip side of what Lou said, is my old business was an engineering and construction business. It was high volume.

Speaker 3: 13:03

The contract stuff was no interview, you just send people to projects. And construction business. It was high volume, the contract stuff was no interview, you just send people to projects and they work. And then even the perm stuff you just didn't really get a lot of in that construction market because they, you know, they want the best possible result for the cheapest possible price and they only want to pay when they've got a candidate. Um, so I guess, to answer the question, I would say you know the challenges with contingent can be real high level stuff. And then, um, yeah, just if we're going up against what you would call executive search, you know, real, real sort of higher level or real niche permanent stuff, I don't really see it's a challenging contract because people aren't typically retaining people on contract, unless I'm, unless I'm missing a trick?

Speaker 1: 13:51

I don't think so.

Speaker 2: 13:52

No, I haven't and I'm on this as well, by the way I was just going to say yeah, just to add, because Chris has mentioned it a few times and I think that will help all of us. So a lot of the people that you coach, lou, is it a real mixed bag in terms of their work contract perm, like do you know what I mean? Because I feel like that's going to be slightly I don't know.

Speaker 1: 14:11

You tell me like then, are we getting into difference? I don't know exactly. Yeah, so I mean my next contract. So I started in temps, in secretarial temps actually, and then moved into like engineering contracts. So all the work I did in in the US with Exxon Mobil in particular, was all contractors. Um, I moved into perm like you, chris, kind of later on in my career. I did a bit of it earlier and then moved back into it. So I'm familiar with the differences and was quite resistant, I think, to move away from contract because I like the pace of it. Um, but I haven't seen retained outside of statement of works or master service agreements or enterprise frame agreements, um, you know, on one-off pieces of work. I haven't seen retained done on a contract basis. I haven't done it. I don't have expertise in that area, I don't know anyone that does is much more common for direct hire or permanent work. The retained model unless you're, yeah, providing staff contractors to a, to a business on a project okay.

Speaker 2: 15:17

So like just on this then, like just just curious to get your take on this lou, is your typical advice then that you encourage people to reject working contingent outright, like if they're committed to working on a retain basis with their clients? Can I say in the same breath, yes, mr or mrs client, we also have this other service, called whatever, and you pay on success or we can work together on um this in this retain way. This is what involves, like is is that the advice here for the clients?

Speaker 1: 15:50

kind. Of kind of, but in a slightly different way, kind of okay.

Speaker 1: 15:54

So, in the same way that my experience is that the contingent model works quite well in some situations, but in other situations it falls over. That's the way I tend to explain it to clients. So I will explain to them that we work in different ways depending on the circumstances, right? So where it's low level, easy to fail, where the contingent model is working well, we're quite happy working on that basis. However, in lots of situations, for whatever reason, it doesn't work particularly well, and it might be that it's niche or it's challenging location, or it's a bit more senior or for whatever reason, the contingent model's fallen over. Then instead, we apply a more rigorous methodology, and that's where some financial commitment from you enables me to put apply a more rigorous methodology, and that's where some financial commitment from you enables me to put in a more robust, robust process and commit to producing a result. So, yes, I always give them the explanation that there are different ways of working depending on the circumstances okay, because I'll be honest, I do.

Speaker 2: 16:58

When I speak to people that have worked retained for a good amount of time, I do often hear them say that it's like you can't in the same, in the same breath. You can't offer retained and contingent. It sort of decredits well, okay, kind of.

Speaker 1: 17:12

But it's not an offer. And this is where, like the nuance is, I'm not offering retained, I'm prescribing it. So in the same way that if the contingent model is working well for them, I'll say carry on doing that For me. I, on this type of position, would want to operate on a retained basis, but if the contingent model is working well, you should carry on doing it. It's then my choice whether I want to work on it on a contingent basis or not, but I wouldn't.

Speaker 1: 17:44

But in the same breath, I would say but what you've said to me is that you're frustrated that you're not getting the quality and the quantity or the candidate, and that's why we're having this conversation in the first place. So it doesn't make sense for me to put the same model in place. So in these situations, we always apply retain methodology and therefore we're able to deliver a different outcome. Do you see what I mean? So it isn't that I'm offering, it is that I'm explaining. It doesn't make sense for them to go down that route, because they've already told me that they're not getting what they want using that model.

Speaker 3: 18:17

Yeah, yeah, no, no, that makes sense. To be honest, I was. I was going to ask a similar thing like do you, would you encourage? I mean, as someone who's been a contract biller, sort of through and through, and then done perm as a business owner, I've got other people to do perm, just sort of playing devil's advocate, like if you're on the sales floor and you've got somebody doing perm.

Speaker 3: 18:37

It's interesting. So would you tell person if they come to you and say, right, I've got a client here, their tech or their life sciences or their financial or real senior role, they're happy to work with us, they're happy to agree fees or whatever, and they've pitched a retainer and they're not interested? Would you be encouraging that person to not work with that client and then equally appreciate? It's like a double barrel question. But are you happy to take on a retainer with a client that's already gone out to market and had two or three agencies going through the market, speaking to lots of candidates? Because then you've also got the challenge that you get with some organizations where you're now going to be retained, going out to market and what essentially? Introducing candidates that have already been contacted or are in process, you know. So are you telling them one to turn that down? And then, secondly, how are you overcoming that, that challenge?

Speaker 1: 19:33

yeah, okay, that's a really good question. So the third one would if they've rejected the retainer, would I then go and work on it with contingent or would I encourage someone to? It depends on what the diagnosis has yielded first. So if the client has been using a contingent model in the past for this sort of position and it's working really well, and I'm then trying to push them down a retained route and they reject it, then I'd say I'd probably tell them to just carry on doing what they're doing and leave it alone and go and find a client that is having a problem, to be honest, because it sounds like they're getting what they need from the current model anyway all their current suppliers. Why do they? Doesn't make sense for us to add more into the mix and muddy the waters and risk duplication and a messy process and so on.

Speaker 1: 20:26

But if the diagnosis is yielded that actually they're not getting the candidates that they want, or they're not getting them when they want them, or it's not a particularly enjoyable process, then I would say it doesn't make sense for them to carry on using the same model. So if they've done that diagnosis and found out that the contingent model isn't yielding results and explained why this is a sensible route to go down and the client has still said no, I don't want to do it. Then I just want to know, like why that's fine, that's not a problem, but what is it that is stopping you? Because sometimes it's just because they've got a perception of retained, where I don't know you're just going to take some money up front and then leave me high and dry. Or we've done it before and someone did that, for example, in which case I want to try and overcome some of those worries. Um, and if all of those things have been done and it's logical, it makes sense for them to do it.

Speaker 1: 21:18

The contingent model isn't working. I've overcome their worries on price and running away with their money and all that kind of stuff and they still say no. Then again I'm thinking they've got a problem. It's not being solved by the contingent model. I've given them a straightforward solution which is low risk. I've de-risked it for them and they're still saying no. Why not like? Why don't they want to commit? Normally, I find if a client doesn't want to pay a retainer in that situation, it's because they've got something else going on, like they've got like a candidate in the wings or they've got some, and sometimes it's then that they go. Well, actually we've got somebody at second interview and we just wanted someone to benchmark against, and I would have found out then finally that actually it would have been a waste of my time sending cvs in because they've probably got their front runner already. So I'm glad that they've said no.

Speaker 3: 22:03

So sometimes, I know is actually a win yeah, because you, I guess your, your team are then sort of saving, saving their time. So I think it's just a mindset shift, isn't it what I find?

Speaker 1: 22:12

like a qualifier. It's like you take them through that and then it makes you make you realize how serious they are and how much they do need you or not. And if they're just kind of like, well, I'll just have some extra CVs, in which case it's up to me, would I say to the guy do you want to send some CVs? Yeah, if you've got somebody handy, yeah, but don't spend too much time on it.

Speaker 3: 22:30

Yeah, that was going to be my next question, like if you've got somebody and like, retained your thing, you only do retained. And then it turns out let's say they've got a niche and they know they've got a great network in their niche and they've got somebody clients not interested in retained, but you've got somebody who hasn't been contacted. You know they'll do the job.

Speaker 1: 22:46

Are you still encouraging your team yeah, definitely In this case send that person.

Speaker 1: 22:49

Yeah, definitely, because what I find is those two activities the retained model and the spec model, which and the spec model, which is the BD model which works so beautifully in contingent also works really well for generating retained work. So you carry out a retainer that generates candidates that you now know are looking but aren't suitable for the project that you're currently working on. Right, because, for whatever reason, they're then the perfect candidates to spec into that sort of opportunity which we call like, often like an opportunistic hire. We're not actually spending time working on it, but we're, you know, hoping that there's a fit. We're just going to drop that in and see if that's a fit.

Speaker 1: 23:25

That would be a great moment to make an opportunistic hire, which sometimes then turns into the client going yeah, that's a good candidate and we do need some help on this, but our current suppliers aren't yielding a result, in which case we can then pitch retained. So the two things go hand in hand. What we don't do, or I wouldn't suggest my team do, is spend time actively working on positions where we don't have a financial commitment from a client. So we're either working with financial commitment or we're speculatively introducing people without investing a huge amount of time and energy.

Speaker 3: 24:03

Just on on that, yeah, just on the on the business development. So let's say you do spec somebody in and the client says, great, we're interested in this person, yeah. And you say, retain us, retain search. And he says, but you've already probably wouldn't do that.

Speaker 1: 24:19

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm just trying to understand that.

Speaker 3: 24:20

I guess you're just going to do a contingent deal there not necessarily.

Speaker 1: 24:25

Maybe if it's simple as that, if they go, yeah, I want to hire them, great happy days, I'll take the fee tomorrow. But always I'll ask the question, because my experience with specs and I've done a lot of it is that quite often they don't hire the person that you spec in and what it actually does is just open up a need. That isn't quite right. Or they'll meet that person, go, oh, they're nice, but they're good, but they're not quite right for this. So or they meet that person and then go actually they're quite good, but I think we want to see some more to benchmark against.

Speaker 1: 24:53

And then it's like yeah like, I've just sent you the the unicorn, and you told me you want some more, and so what I would normally do in that situation is, before I let them meet that candidate, is find out, like, what are we trying to achieve here? Because if you meet this candidate and then you haven't seen anybody else, you might then want others to compare them to, and then we might lose this person more than likely, and then we're back to square one again. So do you want me to bring other people to the table for comparison? In which case, yes, I need some financial commitment to be able to do that, but that will be deducted from any fee that you pay and will be committed to working with you to reach a result either way. And in the meantime, meet this guy. If you want to hire him, happy days. Just the remainder will be charged, but if you don't want to hire him, you've then got a shortlist to default to.

Speaker 1: 25:39

Okay, that makes sense, so you can either turn it into a retainer or go ahead. Yeah, go ahead and interview him. If it works out, great. And if it doesn't, no worries. And if you want to then launch a project after that, no problem.

Speaker 2: 25:54

So just to round this out then, so just curiously, like from the advice that you give, because I've interviewed a lot of people that end up winning some of their best customers, this one and it's also just coming back to what chris are so putting. I know this is nuanced and we're sort of role playing here and given scenarios, but I guess these are scenarios that maybe people run into. So putting aside for a second that you get in front of a client and they haven't exhausted this job with loads of different agencies, all these types of things, that isn't the case. It's it's a target account. You get in front of them and they've had really bad experiences in the past. We've retained or they've never worked that way, but you've pitched that and they've gone. You know what Chris like? We never were that way. We don't feel really comfortable. We really like who, we buy into you and we want to work together.

Speaker 2: 26:39

But actually on this vacancy or vacancies, we want to work on a contingent model and chris has got a decision to make there. Where he's got to decide is he going to work with them or not, or is he going to stick to like no, I need some financial commitment. If, if that's the premise, and maybe you might have had a conversation that, okay, well, normally I do work retained, but on this occasion you're a company that you know I really want to work with. I believe I can really do a good job here. Um, on the next position or positions, this is sort of the way that I want us to work. Like, are you advising against that? Because that, yeah, do you know? I mean so, like not in. So would you say, you know what if you pitched it and they've gone? No, we want to work contingent. What's the advice there is it go and do that, deliver, and then you've got an even better chance to upsell or no it's like there's a few different routes.

Speaker 1: 27:29

You can go down the first route. I would say it depends what their worry is, what their barrier is like. It depends what comes out of the why not you know. So I want to know what. What's the worry here? Sometimes it's like you know, we've done it before. Like you say, we've been burned. It's not been a good experience, in which case I'd say I understand that completely. That does happen quite a lot, sadly. So for that reason, I want to work on this basis.

Speaker 1: 27:50

I don't normally do it, but I'll work on a reimbursable basis so for the first two weeks so that if, if the first two weeks we're not getting the results that you want to see and you don't believe we're going to reach a result, I'll stop the search and I'll reimburse the retainer. I don't normally do that, but for this project I will.

Speaker 2: 28:10

Right.

Speaker 1: 28:11

So that makes it a bit easier for them. Does that make you feel more comfortable? This is how we'll set it up. We'll start, we'll have a review after the first week. If you're happy, we'll continue. We'll have a review after the second week. If, after the second week, you don't want to continue, we'll stop and we'll reimburse the retainer. That's quite a nice way to move the first project over the line, where we can then get the opportunity to demonstrate the difference in process, the difference in result, the difference in outcome and that's the way I've converted lots of clients okay, so full refund for the first two weeks only for the first two weeks, though okay

Speaker 1: 28:49

and normally what happens is after the first week, when you're doing the first week steering call, where you're showing your process. You're showing the candidates you've identified, who you've approached, what they've said, who's interested, who's not, why they're not interested. You're showing the candidates you've identified, who you've approached, what they've said, who's interested, who's not, why they're not interested. You're sharing the data you've collected on comp details. You've done the briefing session around functional behavioral competencies. You've set the parameters for the search. You've set the timeline. You can see when they're going to. They can see when you're going to shortlist it. That's within reaching distance. In a couple of weeks time they go I. I say do you want me to continue or not? And they say, yeah, I want you to continue. Great, it's now non-reimbursable from now on. Okay, cool, we're committed to working with you.

Speaker 2: 29:27

It sounds like the advice is then you basically tell people like you should still get financial commitment.

Speaker 1: 29:32

Then well, you could do those things. They say no to that. You know they might go. No, I don't want to do that, you know. In which case I'd say look, I really want, I really want to work with you. Um, I don't want this to be a barrier, but at the same time, at the moment I'm working totally at risk. So if at any point you stop, you say stop, I might have done two, three, four, five weeks of work and yet you go. I'll see you later, don't really need you anymore.

Speaker 1: 29:59

And I'm high and dry, like and actually, if this is an existing or incumbent client I can reference maybe that happened, it happened before, like that's happened to me several times. I don't, I can't commercially put myself in that position or keep putting myself in that position. So maybe on this occasion what we can do is look to waive the retainer in this instance but charge a cancellation fee if you cancel the project, just to give me some level of protection with the. This is a difficult assignment. It's a critical role you've already experienced. The contingent model isn't yielding the results that you're looking for. It's going to take me a lot of time and energy and effort to reach a result here, so I'm going to need some kind of protection to to make sure that we do reach that result and that's whatever.

Speaker 1: 30:42

When I'd put maybe a cancellation clause in and if after all that, they just say, no, I don't want to do it, I'd probably say worst case, you know, if you still didn't want to let go of this client, like I'd start to wonder why, like why, if they, if that won't even suit them, does that mean they actually really want to get out so they can cancel the project? In which case I don't know whether I want to work on it because that looks high risk to me and I've got other stuff that I'd rather spend my time on. But worst case, okay, we'll work on it for two weeks or three weeks tops. You know, we know look at all the stats on contingent that the the chances of filling it go down, don't they? The longer it goes on, it's like goes down to like five percent or something after three weeks. If you haven't found the candidate within three or four weeks, it goes down to next to nothing. So apply that, so we'll work on it for this amount of time. Contingent if we don't, if we don't reach the result in that it's either we then switch to retainer or we don't. You know we stop, and that would limit my, my, my commercial risk, basically, of spending time on something that doesn't result in a fee.

Speaker 1: 31:47

Are you enjoying this so far? Don't miss a single episode. Hit the subscribe button right now so you can be part of the conversation that's shaping the future of recruitment. So we dive really deep into the strategies, the stories and the truth about retained search. So if you want to hear more about it or you know someone else that needs to hear this, then share it with them. Right, let's get back to the good stuff so I think this brings let's, let's.

Speaker 2: 32:21

I want to move this on to the other like topics, but let's sort of run this out, because I think I was looking at the comments and stuff when you posted and I think this sort of ties in quite nicely where a lot of people were just saying, like there's no debate to be had, it's what's right for the client or what's right for the customer, and this has come up quite a lot because that's where my mind, just when, when he was explaining that where, when I've so, for example, I interviewed someone recently, really successful biller, always worked contingent and I started to had like retained training and just thought, basically why would I do that? Like I'm, it's working fine, like I don't need to do that, I don't get it. But the biggest blocker was they were viewing it from the lens of like them versus what's in it for the customer. Right, like, what does that actually mean? So this is what I want to sort of round out on, because, chris, I'll come to you on this because when I speak to really good contingent recruiters who have been successful, I think they do a really good job, I think they'd do a really good job and they do like a really good levels of service and probably do some of the things.

Speaker 2: 33:25

Maybe all of the things I don't know when it comes to a process and how recruiters work when they're on a retained basis. I don't know. But, chris, why don't you tell us about, like, if you were to work on a contingent basis with a client it was a really solid role in your niche. Like how would you position that? What's like the process that you would do? Because I feel like that can look really great for continuing recruiters and that can look really shit as well. Like some people do a really shit job where they just send cvs or whatever, but I feel like really good continuing recruiters that are committed to this have done a good job. They run a good process. What so? What does that look like for you when we think about the process?

Speaker 3: 34:02

I think it's in a similar way that people said you know, it's horses for courses on retained versus contingent. It's the same on contingent. So it kind of depends, uh, where we are. Who. Who are we dealing with, like, where are we at in the process? So if it's a client that we've wanted to work with for ages and we've been calling them for a while, we we spoke to them a number of times they've got partners. It's like what Lou said if there's no need to change anything, then they won't, but when the need arises, we do have a process in that we typically want to first look at what's the outcome that we're delivering, like why has this been a problem? Why has it been open for so long? Why haven't your existing vendors been able to to deliver this project for you, or this, uh, this role? What's lacking, like what's?

Speaker 3: 34:52

the diagnostic, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, exactly what's lacking. And then after that we're always going to ask for a period of exclusivity. Now, um, if we get it, great. Um, you know, like I said, I'm predominantly a contract biller myself, right? So if you look at a team build, if somebody asks us to deliver a specific project in tech and we've got to build a team of four or five people, I'm not going to let you know that there are there are similarities. I'm not going to let another agency or vendor put one or two people into my team build. Um, if I don't have to because we're going to be carrying an element of risk, you know, typically they'll want to say you know, if the project isn't delivered successfully, then there might be, you know, we might be penalized in some way, even though it's time and material. So we'll always pitch for exclusivity. If it's a customer, typically we want this from them. We need to understand what outcomes are, looking to deliver the full details. You know, no stone left unturned.

Speaker 3: 35:51

We want a pre-booked call to introduce the profiles. Talk through them. We want interview slots. You must have them. You know who are the decision makers. Are you the decision maker? If not, can? Can the decision maker come on the on the call and a pre-booked feedback call. That's the ideal scenario. Does it happen all the time? No, and sometimes you go. Well, we want to work with that client, so let's see how we get on, and I think that that, in our world at least, on contract, is kind of the equivalent to, or as close as you can get to to, sort of getting paid up front, because if they won't give you that, then you're like right yeah, yeah so how much does that differ to typical retain process?

Speaker 2: 36:36

lou, I know it's nuanced here, but we're gonna have have to be holistic.

Speaker 1: 36:41

And I speak to a lot of people like you say, you've got really good, robust contingent model going on and for quite a few people coming into the training there isn't a massive amount they need to change. Some people there is, but some people there isn't, and actually they're delivering what is essentially a retained process but they just don't have any commitment from the client, which is dangerous, of course, risky. So typically a retained process starts with a briefing session. Yes, of course it starts. The diagnostic of what they're looking for, the actual scope of the search. So the functional behavioral competencies. What do they need someone to do, what culture fit? Are we looking for the geographical parameters, the target companies, any off limits, the scope from a target company's perspective, scope from a target company's perspective. Then to agree the process of the search, the timeline, the stakeholders involved, and then to set out then the research framework. So we then systematically identify every single candidate across that geographical location or target companies that look to meet that criteria, then approach them by every means possible and have that systematic, no stone left unturned. You know, however, many approaches normally seven to ten and then they're out a final and then bring all those candidates through a competency based assessment against the core functional behavioral competencies, and then that creates a long list of candidates which we then collectively collaboratively shortlist, and then that shortlist is moved through to interview and then the client then can make the decision from all the talent that's available To them, the best of the talent that's available in the market at this time.

Speaker 1: 38:36

The problem with the contingent model is, or why that isn't always possible. To do that on a contingent basis is because you can't share the workings, because the client is not under contract to retain you for the position, so could take those um that information and share it elsewhere, um the we can't hold candidates back in a contingent process because somebody else might spec a cv in. So as soon as we're aware of a candidate, that's right, we've got to send them over. We can't. We can't wait until we've got the rest of the candidates ready to move to interview. So we can't move them all to interview at the same time and so we can't apply the same. It's similar but we can't apply the same process as we would be able to on a retained basis okay, and then what?

Speaker 2: 39:22

and then what's? Because I think this is the thing that sometimes when I speak to people like, besides, we all know what's in it for the recruiters. Right, working that way, what's in it for that client like what? What's in it for them if, if I work with chris and he gets me the end result that I want the team that he gets them in the seat yeah you get me the same end outcome but I've had to part with cash to start that process like what's actually in it for the client um.

Speaker 1: 39:51

So it's confidence in knowing that they've reached the best result that's available to them okay like on a contingent basis.

Speaker 1: 39:59

It's very difficult to know that because you haven't. You haven't seen the workings, you don't know who's been identified, who's been assessed, you don't know what they've been assessed against. That isn't normally a rigorous assessment process. I haven't seen candidates against each other often because I'm interviewing them as they're being sent through. So it's a bit like the analogy that, um, I found most helpful was like I go to book a holiday with a travel agent and she understands what I'm looking for beach, kids club, all the rest of it.

Speaker 1: 40:26

I go away. She then sends me a hotel after a few days and another one after a few days, and I'm having to make a decision on something when I don't know what else is available. So a client on a contingent basis is making a hire, not knowing whether there could have been something else, or and if they're okay with that, I say that's fine, and if it's okay that they might not reach a result, then that's okay too. Contingent model would be okay, but if what they want is to know without a shadow of a doubt that they're reaching the best result in a fixed time frame that is available to them in the market at this time, then there's no other way to do it that's interesting that because I do feel like some good contingent recruiters will probably deliver some of that possibly yes, if that's what you're saying.

Speaker 1: 41:10

Yeah, it's the client knowing in knowing in detail.

Speaker 1: 41:14

Without shadow of a doubt, they've got the best person available but that one thing I would say yeah, and sometimes that is the case. The one thing I would say yeah, and sometimes that is the case. The one thing I would say about a contingent model is it's very difficult to allow the client to make there's going to be any more, or then they'll see a second candidate and then a third and still not know is there anything else? Sometimes they will, and sometimes we we get people in the program that go yeah, I'm doing all of those things already, in which case, at the moment, you're doing it totally at risk but that's then what's in it for then the recruiters at risk, right, the client's not.

Speaker 2: 42:04

That's the thing.

Speaker 1: 42:05

Well and this is where it comes into converting clients is different depending on the service that you're delivering. So in that situation, what's in it for the client is this person continuing to deliver? Because what we tend to find in that situation is it's not commercially viable for the recruiter because they're putting all that time and effort in and quite often they're working really hard on stuff and it's not resulting in a fee if it's not. If they are the recruiter, this is getting what they want when they want it, and it's an enjoyable process. Stick with a contingent model, absolutely, carry on doing it. But what we find is they're putting all of that process in, they're delivering an excellent service and the client's going yeah, I really appreciate your time and thought on that, I really.

Speaker 1: 42:45

But actually we've decided to change our mind. We're going to do this and so their fill rates are only 50, where they should be 95 100. And if they had financial commitment they would be 95 100. But it's the clients, in the client's benefit, to do it, because that recruiter will then continue to provide a service, because it's commercially viable. So I'd say to that client look, are you happy with the service I'm delivering? They say, yes, it's brilliant, keep doing it. I say I would like to, but I've got a problem. I'm at risk here and commercially it's not sustainable for me, because the last six months has been three projects I've worked on that you've canned and I'm high and dry, and that doesn't make commercial sense. So I'm not changing the pricing model, I'm not changing anything at all, but I do need some kind of security in order to be able to carry on delivering the service that I. You've become accustomed to see what I mean yeah, that that makes sense.

Speaker 3: 43:38

You know, when you mentioned about, you know you're using a holiday example, right, so you get everything at once. I guess what it comes down to is the client, at the point that you are fully retained, is relying on your network, in the same way that I guess a great contingent recruiter is selling on their network, right? So you know. You say they've seen everybody. That's possible at once.

Speaker 3: 44:03

What do you do in a scenario whereby we've had it right, where somebody's been retained and maybe they haven't delivered, and then we've sent in a contingent profile that hasn't been introduced, and then they say, right, well, well, we are retained. You know, we didn't want that, they didn't want us to send up. We've sent it. Maybe it's anonymized and it's a, it's a graved, a candidate and they want to engage that candidate. What are you doing in in in that scenario, I guess? Do you then say, if they say, look, sorry, we're retained with you, we didn't ask for this profile, are you going to say, right, we'll stop the search, we'll keep what we've charged you at this point, and then you you take the other candidate, or have you got something in your terms that says that, even if another agency sends something in and they go outside. It has to be by yourself or how you, how you navigate in that question.

Speaker 1: 44:54

Let's see if it's unusual. If it's proper retain process been put in place and someone's doing an exhausting, an exhaustive piece of work on it, then there won't be grade a candidates that get missed that doesn't happen, it's your, your bank, your banking on your, on your people, then yeah, your your room.

Speaker 1: 45:15

Well, no, it's not, yeah, people, but also process. Like this is a systematic identification of all of the target identification of all of the target companies, of all of the target individuals. A systematic approach, and, yes, you need good people to deliver that, but you also need rigorous process to make sure they don't miss anything, and that's a collaborative effort with the client, by the way, so it's not that we go out and do it and then we go alright, here's your shortlist, it's every week, it's shared with them. Right. Here are the target companies. These are all the individuals have've identified. These are the ones who've outreach. This is the next phase of targets that we're now going to be identifying, so they see all the stones being unturned, and they're normally the ones saying, oh, have you tried this and have you tried that, and make sure you think about this company. So it's a collaboration. This isn't just a you know, us and them type thing, so candidates don't tend to get missed in the same way that they wouldn't in a, you know, in an executive search process.

Speaker 1: 46:07

It does sometimes happen, though, which is why it's important that we don't just want a third of the fee. We want the whole lot for the first third right, there's no profit in that. So we have to make sure we reach a result when we're working on a retained basis. So we have to cover every single, but we also need to protect the fact that we've committed to making that happen. So if someone else specs a cv in, they can't just go, oh stop, now I'm going to take this candidate, or oh, we've, our internal team have found someone, we're going to go down that route now in the terms this is our mandate to complete, and if they choose to hire the position by any other way, then a cancellation fee, termination fee, whatever you want to call it, is payable, which would be equivalent to wherever we are in the search.

Speaker 3: 46:52

So outstanding fees remain payable that makes sense, because I had another question where we're going to say if you, if you guys have taken something on, then let's say at the time it's in your niche, you're happy with the salary, you know it's up your street and you're like right, we're going to deliver this. And for some reason, maybe it's not a delivery issue on your side. Let's say you are delivering what you believe to be match fit top tier professionals for this job and they're just not hiring them, they're interviewing them and they say no, no, no. At what point do you say well, we've, we've done all we can and do you, do you encourage, to charge the full fee for that?

Speaker 1: 47:30

well, firstly, we wouldn't be feeding candidates through and putting them in a position where they're having to make a decision without knowing what else is available. It's a bit like that travel agent, right? If you instead, if she instead then go away, come back in two weeks and I'll sit you down. I'll show you all the hotels that match your criteria and you can choose one. If I don't want to, if I decide not to go on holiday, fine, no problem, I don't have to go on holiday, but I've asked her to do a job and she's done it, so, yeah, so we put them in a position where they can make that decision.

Speaker 1: 47:59

our job isn't to force them to make a hire. If they don't want to hire from what's available, then that's okay. We can only bring them what the best of the market has and make sure our process is rigorous. So if at the end of that we get to, we've collaboratively shortlisted from the long list and they've decided right, we're going to interview these three people. They interview them and they go. We don't like any of them, we say okay, no problem, that's your choice. This is the best that are available to you in the market at this time. If you don't want to hire any of them, then that's okay. Do you want some support in deciding what to do instead? Do you want to look at a contractor to coach somebody internally into this position? Do you want to look at an interim solution? Do you want to look at an interim solution? Do you want to look at a contracted outsourced firm? I can help you in touch with people.

Speaker 3: 48:49

How else can we help you solve this challenge? We can't manufacture people, so I guess it. It ultimately comes down to relationships and trust. Right, they're trusting that you, because because we can all say listen, I'm the first one to say if it's in our niche, we'll deliver on it. Right? Have we been beat before? Yeah, I don't like to say that on a live recording, but have we been beat in our niche before? Yeah, and it probably stings a little bit. So I guess that there's trust in the client, there's trust in you and your're trusting you and you're trusting your people, that no one's, no one's being missed, then, I guess, it's process, it's well, it's process and capability, isn't it?

Speaker 1: 49:29

if we've demonstrated a track record of being able to do this for their peers and competitors, and we've got a demonstrable track record of that so that it can be tested, you know, referenced and we've got a process that's rigorous, that is going to collaboratively identify all of these targets, approach all of these candidates, and they can test our process of um, of assessment and rigor of approaches and bringing, making sure that we've identified all of these candidates within the parameters of the search and that we can assess them appropriately.

Speaker 1: 50:03

Well, what more could we possibly do? That's, that's all we can humanly do. We can't, humanly, we're not capable of doing any more than that. But if we our job isn't to produce magic, you know, make magic or produce rabbits out of hats or manufacture people we can only be the best placed person to take a thorough brief, to understand that brief, to line it up with what does exist in the market, to systematically identify all those options, to approach them all and to bring all the people, all the options, to the table that's humanly possible for them to decide yeah, you can't do any more than that that makes sense.

Speaker 3: 50:40

And my last question was if somebody's listening right and let's say they've been contingent perm, right because obviously, like I said, we're we're not an out and out perm business. But let's somebody's listening, they're an out and out perm business and they've got a portfolio of clients so predominantly contingent and they're like right, love that I'm going to sign up, do my training, but retain from here on, what are you, what are you encouraging them to do with their existing client portfolio? Would you encourage them to to then go and try and convert them to retain? I mean, I guess that's the end goal. But, um, do you see what I mean? Because there'll be different people on a different journey. Some people will be starting out like, right, we'll just do retained. Other people have been retained and we'll learn stuff. But other people might be like, right, I'm a contingent perm business, love that want to go retained. Like would you be encouraged in them to go and convince their existing client portfolio to now go fully retained?

Speaker 1: 51:37

it, it, it caught it. You know case by case scenario. So where I what my my rule of thumb for that is if it's working, you know, as he says, like if there's a guy working contingently, he's loving it, it's working for him, he's working for his clients, I can carry on doing it, I don't. You shouldn't try and fix something that isn't broken. If it's not working for you or it's not working for your clients, then there's a solution to be had. So that's what I would say if we've got a current client that's working well, we're happy with it. Leave it as it is, don't, don't, don't mess with it. Like it's making money, everyone's happy. If either we're having a hard time trying to deliver against it or they're not getting the results they want and they keep banging on the door going we need more CVs then there's a problem to solve and in which case, quite often, the retained model will solve it. So those situations we start looking out for with our incumbent clients and there's the opportunity to start converting them.

Speaker 2: 52:36

From what you've seen, though, because I've had a lot of the conversations with Chris Ars, it's a really good question. I'll be honest a lot of the conversations that I've had, I bet you'll have a better lens on this. Lou probably is a lot of recruiters I've spoken to have had more success converting, net, new relationships, work and retain versus existing. That's typically what people said to me, but you may have a different lens on that.

Speaker 1: 52:57

So we probably get I don't know a win a day, maybe a couple of wins a day, you know, in the community and it's a real mix. I'd probably say 50-50. Yeah, some are saying just converted my biggest existing client and some are like, oh my God, I never knew I could win a retained with a new client who never even known me before. You know, there's just different challenges to overcome with incumbent suppliers that have got a perception of how you should work with them and new ones that don't know you.

Speaker 2: 53:28

Yeah, fair yeah, have we got time for just a couple of quick fire ones, or no? Is that all right?

Speaker 1: 53:34

Yeah, go on Quick fire. A couple of quick fire ones, yeah.

Speaker 2: 53:38

Okay, lou, I'll come to you on this. Okay, let's say you well, yeah, both of you, but I'll start with you, lou. So let's say you both lost your top three clients tomorrow, big spenders. Which model helps you to get back faster?

Speaker 1: 53:55

Chris, do you want to go first?

Speaker 3: 54:01

For me, for us it would probably be contingent because most of our revenue comes from contract.

Speaker 1: 54:08

But if we were sold, if we were a sold perm business, then I would say retained right, because this is cash cash is king yeah, I'd go retained every time, not just because, um, it enables me to focus on the stuff which is revenue generating and I'm not spending time on stuff that doesn't generate a fee, but it also enables me to do what is most important in any market for business development, which is solve problems, and so that's what I'm always looking to do. The retained model solves problems that the contingent model doesn't, and that's what I like doing, because that elevates my relationship with clients.

Speaker 2: 54:48

So I just go around looking for problems and that would be my fastest route to market. And then, uh, lou, I'm going to come to you on this as well. The retain piece I'm just interested because a lot of these conversations how do you feel about people positioning retained as the cheaper option because they're getting more commitment? I hear this a lot. So, chris, we can work together. Contingent, it's gonna be 25, mate, but if we work retained, my friend, you've got to give me some, uh, financial commitment, but it's gonna be 20. Which one?

Speaker 1: 55:16

I don't feel good about it at all and I haven't had a good experience of it for two reasons. Firstly, it's very quickly unprofitable, um, if you start reducing below contingent fees because you do need to put rigor around it. Often these are positions that are quite difficult and the contingent model hasn't worked so we've got to put even more time into them. And that, especially if you haven't got proper processing, means they can go on and, on, and, on, and on, and on, and, and then you're hemorrhaging profit and you're in a whole world of problems, which is a whole other topic I could talk about all day on. But secondly, the perception of the value of it's not good either. If you sell something cheaper to someone, they then aren't even as invested in it, so the perception of their commitment to that process is lower. Process is lower.

Speaker 1: 56:00

So, you know, we went through a phase of selling, you know, teaching, coaching very, very, very low price, because we thought we'll go high volume and that, will, you know, be an interesting way of doing it. People just weren't even doing it. So, like what's happened here, this is like a very high value program but you're not doing it and it's just because, like, well, it's not high volume because I only paid this much for it. Do you know what I mean? But you're not doing it and it's just because that, well, it's not high value because I only paid this much for it do you know what I mean.

Speaker 1: 56:23

So it's partly that you've got. You've got to get the buy in from the other side and the perceived value as well as the actual ability to be able to commercially deliver it yeah, it's an interesting insight because I hear that a lot.

Speaker 2: 56:35

I'm sure you see that a lot in terms of how it's positioned.

Speaker 1: 56:39

People just people just see differently. If you make it cheaper, they see it differently, the commitment to it's different, the perception of it's different, and it's not commercially viable. So there's two reasons why. So don't ever make it cheaper.

Speaker 3: 56:52

Comes across a bit desperate sometimes as well, doesn't it? I think?

Speaker 1: 56:55

If you have the sell retained by making it cheaper, you're doing it wrong.

Speaker 2: 57:01

Yeah, fair, you've heard it from louis south. Okay, let's end. Let's end on this, then, chris, I'll come to you first. If someone is listening, they're trying to decide from what you've learned here today conversation, but if someone's listening, they're trying to decide which model, uh, to build in their business around, or like to really double down on like what, what's your best advice around this from your, from your perspective?

Speaker 3: 57:23

I think if you're an out and out perm recruiter or business, retained but open, approach it with an open mind, like I'm irish. So we'll never leave money on the table.

Speaker 2: 57:36

Okay, they're prepared to be flexible, but okay, fair, nice lou, what's your two pence on that? What's the question again here? If someone's listening, they're trying to really decide which model to build their business around, or double down on like what's your best advice, to sort of decide if you like the contingent model, if you like having the freedom to, you know, bet, basically, you know, bet, basically.

Speaker 1: 58:00

You know, put some effort into that and hope that something sticks. And you like the thrill of oh cool, I didn't expect that to come in, but it has. And you like that kind of. You know, some people like that hustle, they like that pace, they don't like being committed, they don't like being committed to rigor or process. Then the contingent model is probably more suitable for you. If you like committing and working in partnership with clients and making sure we're reaching the best result every single time, then the retain models would be my advice.

Speaker 2: 58:31

Nice. So to sort of round this out, then, I think what I've really enjoyed here and just to offer my two pence, I think from my conversation day to day in this industry, I think sometimes what can happen, Lou, you may disagree with this, but sometimes I feel like people can sort of look down their nose on, like, oh, how can you not work retained, like I only work retained and all these things Right. But I think what's really clear here is there isn't one size fits all. Lot of exceptional people out there that really care about this. Uh, the service they provide, doing a really good job for their clients, candidates that work on a contingent basis or work on a retained basis I think there is a lot of crossover, is sort of what.

Speaker 2: 59:10

What I believe, um, I think it does sort of boil down to at the end of the day, does the client that you're working with have the problem that have problems that you can actually generally fix, and is the contingent model working?

Speaker 2: 59:21

Is it not working? But ultimately, I don't think there's one size fits all. Right, and I think you've got to figure that out, but I definitely don't feel like it's like one is better than the other or like one looks down on the other and I feel like sometimes it's positioned in that way I think anyway from my conversations but I think, um, it really is out. There isn't one size that fits all, and I think you know hearing you uh lou speak and same you, chris, like what's clear is like you'll commit to understanding what the clients need, what the issues are, and then you can figure out what's the best way to work with them, what's the best service, and, at the end of the day, if you're committed to that, then you're going to go far in recruitment and if you care about that, so I think that's what really matters at the end of the day.

Speaker 1: 1:00:01

Thank you.

Speaker 3: 1:00:02

Yeah, 100%.

Speaker 1: 1:00:03

Thank you, Hesham. You've been listening to the Retained show, Hesham Azuz, Chris Moylan and me, Lou Archer. Thank you so much, guys. That was fantastic. See you soon, folks.

Speaker 1: 1:00:16

Well, that's another episode of Retrained Search, the podcast in the bag. Thanks for listening to our wild tales, LinkedIn controversies and our top tips on how to sell and deliver Retained Search. Get involved in our next episode. Send in your questions and share your experiences with us by emailing podcast at retrainedsearchcom. And don't be shy. Connect with us on LinkedIn and come and say hi, we don't bite, unless you're a Shrek firm, that is.

Speaker 1: 1:00:46

We want to say a special thank you to our retrained members for sharing what's working for them right now and innovating new ways to grow and evolve. It's an incredible community. If you're wondering what exactly we mean when we mention our communities, well, we have two separate programs. Our Search Foundations program is for recruiters who want to learn how to sell and deliver retained search solutions consistently, and we have our Search Mastery program. That's for business leaders or owners already at 50% retained or more and looking to scale and grow and structure their search firm. We cap memberships to these programs to protect the integrity of the community. If you want access, just talk to us. Okay, thanks for listening. We'll be back very soon with another episode of Retrained Search, the podcast.