<div dir="ltr">Wasn't Fadi recruited via an agency? ;)<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><font color="#999999"><br></font></div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">Jeremie Godreche</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">Chief Operating Officer</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">Freenom</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">Keizersgracht 213</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">1016DT Amsterdam</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">
The Netherlands</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#999999">+31 6 46 13 66 85</font></div></div>
<br></div></div>
<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Emmanuel Otchere <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:emmanuel@otchere.com" target="_blank">emmanuel@otchere.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">In my experience it depends on level of knowledge/intimacy the recruiter has of with the organization. It's the reason In-house managed recruitment seem to be better off. Many of the sprung up recruiters of today build a portfolio of candidates but they fail to know these candidates intimately, and as a result fail to match right candidates or "sell" the required role needs to organizations. That said, there are some fantastic recruitment companies that have built extensive knowledge about their candidates and as a result provide rapid turn around when you need that right candidate to hit the ground running at the right time with the right guarantees of performance. In-house functions may not have this leverage.<br>
At the end of it all, it's a matter of looking at the role, level, ease of availability, technicalities of the organization and most importantly the"security" expected around performance guarantee.<br>
Reputable recruiters offer certain levels of guarantee with their recruitment packages which in-house may not have. At the same time if such a recruitment company is not very well intouch / intimate with the organization then it's purely a "luck" on the back of easing the search. In such circumstances you're better of with in-house going through the motions of recruiting.<br>
<br>
>From iOS 7.1<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Mark Tinka <<a href="mailto:mark.tinka@seacom.mu">mark.tinka@seacom.mu</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Thursday, November 20, 2014 09:44:57 AM Bill Woodcock<br>
> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Speaking from my own experience on the ARIN board when we<br>
>> had a similar transition to make, I’d say that<br>
>> “recruitment professionals” are an unmitigated disaster.<br>
>> They’ll find you a set of generic and mediocre<br>
>> candidates, none particularly prepared for the task.<br>
>> After two false starts using “recruitment professionals”<br>
>> we gave up on them and hired someone we knew was capable<br>
>> of handling the job, and who wouldn’t flake out. And<br>
>> that’s worked out really well for us.<br>
><br>
> I'd tend to agree, in this case.<br>
><br>
> We know the community, and that's an advantage worth<br>
> exploiting.<br>
><br>
> Mark.<br>
</div></div><span class="im HOEnZb">> _______________________________________________<br>
> members-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:members-discuss@afrinic.net">members-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/members-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/members-discuss</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
</span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">members-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:members-discuss@afrinic.net">members-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/members-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/members-discuss</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>