In my model, the employer pays, your details go nowhere without your approval, and you keep control of your own job search throughout. A recruiter is one channel among several, and you can run others alongside it. The fee is tied to a placement, which tells you where the incentive sits.
Those three cover the questions candidates put to me first, and the second one is where the questions get sharpest. Here is how the process runs and what you are entitled to expect at each point.
Who pays, and what does that mean for you?
In my model, the employer pays, the candidate does not, and my fee is tied to a placement.
Fee structures and guarantee terms vary between agencies and between arrangements, so ask any recruiter you deal with how theirs works rather than assuming.
The fee gives a recruiter no claim over your career decision. If a role is wrong for you, the right answer is that it is wrong for you, and a recruiter who pushes past that is working for the wrong side of the arrangement.
Can a recruiter send your CV without asking?
I send your details to a client only when you have given me your say-so for that specific role, every time.
The reasoning matters as much as the rule. Sending a CV around without a yes breaks trust the moment it happens. Showing a client someone who has not agreed wastes everyone's time. My job is to help people find work without sending their details anywhere they have not approved.
That risk is real. A CV landing somewhere unexpected can get back to a current employer, and the person who pays for that is you.
So my rule is straightforward. Before anything goes anywhere, you should be told the company name, the role, who you would report to and the package, and you should say yes to that specific employer. If a recruiter will not name the company before submitting you, that is your answer.
What does the process actually look like?
Six stages in the way I run it, and you should know which one you are in at any time.
- First conversation. What you do now, what you want next, what you will not accept, and what you are worth. Bring your deal-breakers to this one.
- Role discussed. A specific role, with the company named, the reporting line, the area, the package and the honest problems with it.
- Your approval. You say yes to that employer, or you do not. Nothing moves without it.
- Submission. Your details go across with a written case for you against the brief.
- Interview process. Preparation before each stage, and feedback after each one.
- Offer or close-out. Either a package to consider, or a clear finish with a reason.
If you are sitting between stages 5 and 6 and you have heard nothing, ring and ask where it stands. Silence is one of the few things in a process you can act on yourself.
What should you expect from a good recruiter?
Someone who listens first, tells you how it is, and puts real options in front of you.
The order matters. A recruiter should listen and understand what you are actually after before they suggest anything. Then they should be straight with you, including when the answer is that your expectation does not match the market or that a role is not right for you. Then, where there is something genuine to show you, they should put it in front of you and tell you plainly what is live and what is not.
What you should expect concretely: preparation before interviews, feedback after them, and updates whether or not there is news. Those are my service standards and I would not claim they are universal, so it is fair to ask a recruiter what theirs are.
What can a recruiter not promise?
Three things: that a role will be fixed, that feedback will always come, and that something suitable is live today.
- That a role will be fixed if it turns out to be different from the brief. Nobody can promise that.
- Full feedback after every interview. Sometimes a client gives very little, and I would rather tell you that than invent something.
- A role that suits you right now. Sometimes there is nothing live that fits you, and I will say so plainly.
How many recruiters should you work with?
Few enough that you always know who has submitted you where.
My own rule of thumb is two or three you trust. Once you are past the number you can hold in your head, duplicate submissions to the same employer become a genuine problem: the company does not know who represents you, it can complicate the process, and it makes you look disorganised through no real fault of your own.
Keep a simple log. Company, role, which recruiter, what date you approved it. It takes very little time and it keeps the overlap from happening.
What if your recruiter goes quiet?
Ring and ask, because a quiet phone can mean no update or no suitable role.
Ring and ask for a straight answer. If you still get nothing back, decide whether to keep relying on that recruiter.
Should you go direct instead?
Sometimes, and I will be honest that this one is not clear-cut.
The case for a recruiter is influence. Someone who knows the business, can position you properly, can consult with the hiring manager and can push for a second look. That is worth having, and it is what I do. Whether to use a specialist or a generalist is a separate question with its own answer.
The case against is simpler. Once you have applied directly, a recruiter has very little room to get you a second run at it. A fee can sometimes sit between someone and a job they want. Use a genuine direct connection when you have one.
So the practical answer: if you want the market worked properly and someone in your corner through the process, use a recruiter. Just do not run both routes into the same company at the same time without telling everyone involved. If you are running your own search alongside, here is how to start one.
If you are weighing up a move, get a straight read on where you sit in this market. The employer's side of this relationship, and what they should be asking of a recruiter, is on the paired page.