Headhunters used to be the source for smart, talented employees who were open to new opportunities. They had a database – or a rolodex – of people at their fingertips and they could quickly present clients with a short list of qualified potential workers.

But how relevant are headhunters in the digital age, when a human resources specialist can search using specific keywords on LinkedIn – the biggest job search engine in the world – and connect to hundreds of potential employees with a click of the mouse? Job seekers can leverage their contacts or apply directly to a hiring manager. All of this can be done without paying a headhunter a dime, so why contract one?

Here’s a test: search for “environmental engineer” in Canada on LinkedIn and you get more than 2,000 names – there’s the key problem. That’s a lot of LinkedIn résumés to read and that’s where headhunters say they can provide added value to a company looking to narrow the numbers down to a handful of candidates.

Veronica Pastor, a partner with Toronto-based W.P. Osborne Executive Search Inc., says headhunters can find and assess candidates to find the perfect person for a particular job. This saves companies a lot of time, she adds, making it worth their while to pay for a headhunter’s services.

“We identify the talent pool for that specific [job] requirement,” Ms. Pastor explains. “We want to find people who don’t contact us. LinkedIn is one tool and there is a small per cent of talented people there because not everyone is on it.”

Allan Jones of Calgary-based Clear Road IT has been a headhunter for 16 years and he helps find and place information technology candidates. Working as a headhunter is not for the faint of heart, he says.

“You only eat what you kill,” he adds, explaining that companies don’t pay when headhunters fail to bring the right candidate to the table.

Delivering someone who gets the job is only the beginning of a headhunter’s compensation, which can range from 10 per cent to 30 per cent of the position’s first-year salary. Most headhunters are paid in thirds: a third once they’ve compiled a short list of candidates, a third when a candidate is interviewed and the final third when the position is filled with the headhunter’s candidate.

While anyone can be a headhunter, good ones differentiate themselves by staying in constant contact with both the company and the candidates, Mr. Jones says. A company may need time to consider its options but candidates can interpret silence as disinterest.

For workers who are contacted, headhunters can help them prepare for interviews and they can provide details about a company’s culture, the salary and the job position. Some will also review résumés and conduct personality tests to ensure the candidate is the right fit for the role and the company.

Another reason companies use headhunters is because LinkedIn and other job sites can’t offer access to “passive candidates” – those who are not currently looking for work or don’t have a profile online.

That’s why Sachi Kittur, vice-president of human resources at Mercatus Technologies Inc., a Toronto-based company that provides shopping technology to retailers, has used headhunters for 15 years. The value of headhunters for Ms. Kittur is the relationship she has with them and the relationship they have with their candidates.

“To make the relationship work, you have to invest some time in researching the best firms to partner with and give them access to your company, executives and hiring practices so that they can understand your culture,” she says. “Once they have [done that] they have a better chance of succeeding in helping you scout out talent.”

But sometimes a headhunter can be a hindrance. Patti Bond, 44, has been looking for work as a legal assistant for the last nine months after IBM eliminated her position. She is looking at job boards and company websites as well as contacting headhunters attached to relevant positions. It’s been a frustrating experience for Ms. Bond, who met three headhunters who contacted her after she submitted her résumé to various job boards.

“I walked out of there feeling good about myself and my résumé,” she says. “Then I’d hear from them for the first couple of weeks, then nothing.”

She’s had better luck securing interviews by applying directly to certain companies. A headhunter accidentally revealed a client’s name and Ms. Bond sent her résumé directly to the HR department – and then was interviewed by the company.

Whether headhunters are truly the gateway to a job is still up for debate. “Headhunters are often expert in the particular field that they recruit for – which can be useful. I’ve heard of more than one case of an employee actually applying for a job – and having that application be ignored – only to later be recruited for the very role by a headhunter,” the editor-in-chief of Workopolis, Peter Harris, said in an e-mail.

However, if you really want to get the role, Mr. Harris suggests trying to get your résumé on the desk of the person you’ll be working for. He says they are the ones who will know best how to evaluate and appreciate your skills.

Ms. Kittur doesn’t see an end to headhunters in this digital age but as Ms. Bond continues to look for work, she remains disenchanted. “Headhunters are valuable for networking on LinkedIn,” Ms. Bond says. “But I have never gotten a job using a headhunter.”

TIPS AND TRICKS

Allan Jones of Clear Road IT suggests candidates ask headhunters these questions:

• Who is the client who will receive my résumé?
• How well do you know the company?
• Do you have a detailed job description?
• What are the client’s candidate requirements?
• Are there other headhunters submitting candidates, or do you have an exclusive arrangement with them?
• What is the salary or hourly rate being offered?
• How fast should I expect to receive feedback about my résumé?

For companies using a headhunter:

Sachi Kittur, vice-president of human resources at Mercatus Technologies Inc. says the headhunting industry has changed in the last 15 years, when it was more standardized.

• Check out who the headhunter is. “There is no umbrella organization. Anyone can be a recruiter,” Ms. Kittur says.
• Ask the headhunter to provide examples of people they have placed. “Let me talk to the CEO and HR,” she says. “I need to see a long-term track record.”

Special to The Globe and Mail

Transcript

Chapter 1: Introduction — 0:00

Sitting here with Alan Z. of ZEL Human Capital, we’re looking at the landscape of recruitment and the convergence of government, politics in the United States, and business — an obvious conversation to have in light of the current president, Donald Trump. Let’s look back on the past couple of months. Could you have predicted this a year ago?

Alan responds that about a year ago, he predicted that America wanted to elect a populist president. Given Trump was the only populist option, he believed Trump could win in spite of himself. While few could have fully predicted the outcome, he wasn’t surprised by what happened. There are lessons to be learned from this moment.

Chapter 2: Could You Have Predicted This — 1:00

We stated early on that business, government, and politics have converged. Is it sustainable? Can you run a country the same way you run a company?

Alan explains that Trump’s election doesn’t necessarily mean America wants or needs a CEO‑style president. Similarly, Hillary Clinton’s loss doesn’t mean America wasn’t ready for a woman president. We must separate individuals from movements. Trump won, but that doesn’t define the entire political climate.

If America truly wanted a businessman president, Alan argues they could have chosen someone with a stronger business track record. Trump has declared bankruptcy more times than most CEOs in the last 20 years. So we must be careful not to conflate personality with capability.

Chapter 3: What Are the Dangers — 2:37

What are the dangers of having a man who is flawed in business apply business principles to government?

Alan begins with the core issue: running the United States is not running a business. A CEO can make unilateral decisions. A president cannot. The U.S. government is essentially three separate entities — the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court — that must work together but are not led by one individual.

Trump has tremendous authority, but Congress and the Supreme Court are not obligated to follow him the way employees follow a CEO. This creates friction. Trump’s business instincts don’t translate cleanly into governance.

Chapter 4: The Positive — 3:49

People were looking for change. The populist vote in both the U.S. and the U.K. speaks volumes about public sentiment. What are the positives of having someone with a business‑driven ideology running government?

Alan notes that Trump is not an ideologue. His political views have shifted throughout his life. He has run as a Democrat, an Independent, and finally a Republican. His ideology about running government, however, is extremely business‑oriented.

Trump has expressed surprise at how difficult governing is — famously saying, “Who knew health care was so complicated?” In business, he doesn’t have to “herd cats.” In government, he does. When he proposed replacing Obamacare, both fiscal conservatives and Democrats opposed him for different reasons. He didn’t anticipate that level of resistance.

Still, Alan sees potential pragmatism. Trump’s appointment of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State is an example. Tillerson, a businessman, brings negotiation skills that differ from traditional political figures. This could create opportunities in foreign policy.

Chapter 5: Lessons from Trump — 7:29

What lessons can corporate America take from Trump’s election?

Alan explains that Trump is a manifestation of celebrity culture. For decades, we’ve seen “rock star CEOs” and “rock star politicians.” Trump is a master brand builder, and building a powerful brand is an effective way to get elected.

But governing is different. You can be a terrific brand builder, but without sound legislative skills, you won’t be effective. Alan compares JFK — a great brand builder — with Lyndon Johnson, who actually passed the Civil Rights Act. Johnson had the legislative skill to execute Kennedy’s vision.

Trump has yet to demonstrate legislative ability. In business, strategic alliances require negotiation skills. Trump’s business record shows strong branding but mediocre deal‑making and poor financial outcomes, including numerous bankruptcies. This distinction matters.

Chapter 6: Corporate America and Government — 10:50

Is corporate savviness more useful for getting elected than for governing?

Alan agrees. They are almost two different hats. The political climate has changed dramatically since the Clinton years. Extremes have emerged on both sides — Tea Party conservatives, Bernie Sanders progressives, and Trump himself, who is not an ideologue.

Navigating this polarized environment is difficult. Reagan or Clinton might struggle today. Trump has not yet shown the ability to unify or legislate effectively.

Chapter 7: Predictions — 12:29

What’s your prediction moving forward?

Alan notes that while people talk about four‑year terms, the real window is about 20 months before midterms. Every day in politics feels like a week; every week feels like a year. Trump has dug himself into a hole. Can he come back? Possibly.

His poll numbers are historically low, and he lost the popular vote by a large margin. Many voters may realize they elected a great brander with “a lot of sizzle and no steak.” If health care worsens or immigration policies fail, voters may turn quickly — consumers are fickle.

Economically, things look good, but Alan credits Obama for that; it’s too early for Trump to claim credit. The key issues will be health care and immigration. If Trump fails on both, he may descend quickly and be remembered as a minor president — a footnote like Millard Fillmore or Zachary Taylor.

Alan concludes that it will be interesting to revisit this conversation in six months.

Transcript

0:00 Today we’re going to talk about the changing landscape of technology and social media, and how both have impacted not just recruitment but human capital in general. Careers have changed dramatically, and the influence of social platforms is anything but insignificant. There are a few points worth exploring, especially around how social media affects the way people interact throughout the hiring process, and even during onboarding once they’re hired. Social media can be both a positive and negative force in these contexts.

0:54 To begin, the old “rolodex” still exists — but it’s been digitized. Younger generations may not even know what a physical rolodex was, but it used to be a box of contact cards. Today, everyone carries a digital version in their pocket. Beyond that, social media allows you to reach anyone, anywhere, 24/7. This accessibility has changed dramatically over the last decade.

1:32 Historically, academics talked about Marshall McLuhan’s concept of intimate proximity — the idea that television brought distant people into your living room. When Kennedy and Nixon debated in 1960, politicians suddenly appeared right in front of you. Entertainment and information were now part of your home. But with social media, something even more dramatic happened. I call it intimate accessibility. Not only are people proximate — they’re reachable. You can interact with them instantly.

2:52 This real‑time, always‑on dynamic has changed how we live and work. It has increased productivity, but also created burnout. Before the digital revolution, if someone wanted to reach you, they left a message and you had time to think before responding. Now, that buffer is gone. The constant need to respond immediately leads to reactive, sometimes poorly thought‑out communication. Social media amplifies this, and in extreme cases we see public figures posting unfiltered thoughts without any moderation — which can be dangerous in business as well.

4:48 Another major shift is how social media has changed perspectives in the workplace — not just for candidates and hiring managers, but for employers and employees after hiring. In recruitment, something significant happened: finding people became easy. Years ago, recruiters added value by locating elusive talent. Today, everyone is visible. Even if someone barely participates in social media, 80–90% of professionals have at least a basic LinkedIn profile. Facebook adds another dimension entirely.

6:37 The challenge now isn’t finding people — it’s filtering through the noise. There is so much information available that hiring managers and recruiters must sift through countless profiles before even seeing a résumé. People present what I call their digital avatars — curated versions of themselves. This isn’t necessarily bad, but it requires skepticism. As Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.” We must analyze what people post, especially in technical roles where someone may list skills without truly having proficiency. Context matters, and careful scrutiny is essential.

9:02 This applies to everyone: job seekers, hiring managers, and professionals promoting themselves. Don’t over‑inflate your brand, and ensure accuracy. For those hiring, dig deeper into profiles to determine what’s real.

10:46 Social media has also changed how we interact socially. We communicate quickly, often without considering tone or the “energy” of our message. One of my professors once said: “Your sentence is a gun, and every word is a bullet.” Every word matters. Younger generations especially need to think before they click “send.” Grammatical errors matter less today than the substance of your thought, but thoughtful communication still matters.

13:12 The rise of digital communication has weakened interpersonal communication. Before email and social media, you often spoke to someone directly. That personal connection has faded. Just because you’re behind a screen doesn’t mean tone and intention are less important. We need to be mindful of how we present ourselves, even visually.

14:12 In summary, technology and social media have moved us three steps forward and one step back. But if we consciously work to improve how we interact, we can be far more effective. With millions of people at your digital fingertips, both younger and older generations must adapt thoughtfully. The digital revolution — especially social media — has fundamentally changed how we relate to one another. If we stay conscious of these changes, we’ll navigate this evolving world more effectively.

Sometimes being too experienced can work against you. Here’s what you can do to prevent that from happening.

When it comes to job searching, we often hear how difficult it can be for recent graduates, who are somehow expected to have years of experience straight out of school, to even be considered for an entry-level position. What happens when the situation is reversed, and your years of experience begin to work against you? How can job seekers set themselves up for success when recruiters keep telling them they are overqualified for positions they’re interested in?

Hiring managers might challenge you by saying you’ll be bored and leave for a better-suited position, or your compensation expectations won’t be met.

In these situations, your context will influence your course of action. Let’s examine what you can do when you’re considered to be overqualified.

SITUATION NO. 1: YOU’VE RELOCATED OR HAVE BEEN LAID OFF
How to respond: Highlight the win-win situation

Here, you must explain your motivation for applying to a position that you might seem “overqualified” for on paper. Highlight “how the organization can benefit from your experience, and how taking this position can advance your own skill set,” says Alan Zelnicker, executive recruiter. If the job scope is more narrow and the compensation is less than your old position, you must emphasize what you can contribute in terms of added value and what you can get from the role.

How to respond: Make an important mind shift

Going into any interview, you should always project confidence and take on the mind-set that recruiters are getting a great deal from you, rather than going in feeling like you’re overqualified for the job. You have to drive the power seat and never feel like you’re getting the short end of the stick. Instead, adopt the mind-set that any company would be lucky to have you! Without seeming arrogant, remind recruiters that the learning curve involved with your onboarding will be cut in half, leaving you more time to learn the organization, and giving you a competitive edge.

How to respond: Re-evaluate compensation

Managing expectations around compensation is a separate conversation. You need to be realistic and accept that sometimes you’ll need to take a step back. Whenever possible, make a direct touch point with the hiring manager over the phone to talk about compensation. This way, you can form a personal connection, and you can articulate all that you have to offer. As mentioned before, what is the win-win negotiation for you that makes taking a pay cut worthwhile?

SITUATION NO. 2: YOU’RE SWITCHING CAREERS/INDUSTRIES
How to respond: Highlight your new career path

It is not uncommon for people to switch industries or careers. In fact, millennials report switching jobs four times in their first 10 years out of school. When working with recruiters, highlight any new credentials you’ve earned to demonstrate your commitment toward this new path you’re taking. Emphasize your desire to learn and retrain to create a new path forward for yourself.

How to respond: emphasize the rudimentary

Though you may have 20 years of experience in one field, you must demonstrate to recruiters that you’re ready to check your ego at the door and learn about a whole new world. That being said, relevant and rudimentary skills can always be transferable and should be considered as your added value.

How to respond: know your worth

When discussing salary, make sure to mention that you’ve done your research, you’re aware of the industry standards, and are comfortable with what these types of roles typically offer.

“Fall seven times, stand up eight.”–Japanese proverb

What not to do: The worst thing you could do is tell a recruiter you’ll take anything just to get a job. Though this often may be the truth, people want to see that you possess the right enthusiasm and fit for the role. You must always sell your skills and highlight how you are the perfect candidate for the job.

Your resume: If you’re having trouble getting through the door and you think your resume might be the culprit, there are some workarounds to try:

1.) If your resume demonstrates work dating back more than 10 years, consider consolidating your experience and only keeping what is still relevant today
2.) If you have multiple designations and education, consider only keeping what is relevant to the job you’re applying for and removing anything that is redundant
Consider reformatting your resume in a way that tells a new story
3.) If you can demonstrate how a role will help you develop, and show how you can be an asset, then don’t let a recruiter persuade you that you’re overqualified! Remember, you need to maintain your confidence throughout the process and let your resiliency guide you as you continue your search.

Striking the balance between nurturing and building a career at your current company while still being open to new opportunities can be stressful. When we’re invested in our team and work, our judgment can become clouded, and we don’t always know when it’s time to stay or go. Let’s discuss the different contexts and possible courses of action to take when offered a promotion if you’re planning on leaving the organization.

SCENARIO 1: YOU’RE LOOKING TO SWITCH INDUSTRIES OR CAREERS

If you’re looking to switch careers or industries, then seeking a new role outside of your organization might be necessary. You can’t jeopardize your current role by letting your employer know you’re prospecting a job elsewhere, but you also should not be seeking out promotions from within.

Should a promotion come your way: It could look suspicious to turn it down. Of course, there are some instances where saying no to a promotion is reasonable. For example, you might not feel ready for the responsibility, or the promotion might be a job that you don’t see yourself enjoying in the long term. If you’re able to articulate your reasons for declining in terms that make sense, then great, you’re in the clear! However, if declining this promotion could raise suspicion, your best option might be to accept, and give your current employer your best effort while you continue to look for something else.

If you’re one foot out the door: Don’t go out of your way to seek out a salary increase or promotion just to satisfy your ego. However, should a promotion land on your doorstep, you’re entitled to reap the benefits of your work.

You don’t actually know how long an interview process might take with another organization. If you’re still learning, then accepting the promotion and continuing to give it your all while searching on the side could be a great personal move. It might take you weeks, months, or close to a year to find the perfect opportunity worth leaving for. Until you have ink to paper, you should still be giving your employer your undivided attention and best effort, says Alan Zelnicker, Founder of Zel Human Capital.

SCENARIO 2: YOU’VE BEEN DOING THE JOB FOR MONTHS, OR MAYBE YEARS, AND YOU’RE FINALLY GETTING THE RECOGNITION AND TITLE CHANGE
Given the fast-paced nature of the corporate world, we often find ourselves picking up the tasks of the people below or above us, and managing responsibilities well beyond our job description. This can be a positive, as it allows you to stretch beyond your current position and develop new skills and qualifications. However, doing the work of multiple people without the proper recognition for an extended period of time can be discouraging and make you feel like you’re being taken advantage of. Here, you should definitely push for a promotion and demand the appropriate compensation.

Oftentimes, organizations will prolong the process of giving you that title and recognition. If, after months of underpaid work, you finally get the promotion, but have begun to explore new opportunities outside of your company, go ahead and take it. You’ve been doing the job already, and deserve to be properly compensated for your exceptional work.

THE COUNTEROFFER

If you’re a top performer on your team, there’s a good chance your employer will come back with a counteroffer. It’s important to consider what initially drove you to apply for a new job before accepting more money from your current company. If it was simply a matter of money, and this counteroffer solves for that, staying with your organization could be a solid option. Perhaps the counteroffer will come with a promotion, a significant step up, and a brand-new career worth exploring. Here, accepting a counteroffer might be of value as well, says Zelnicker. However, if you’re unhappy as a result of an organization’s culture, leadership team, industry, or any other factor that won’t change with a higher salary, you likely won’t last more than six months before deciding to relaunch your search, says Marina Byezhanova, cofounder of Pronexia Inc. Before making a decision either way, be honest with yourself about why you’re feeling unfulfilled in your current job.

While it might be uncomfortable to resign after accepting a promotion or raise, as long as you hand in the required notice and provide solid work until the end, there is no need to feel guilty. What’s best for your leader’s business might not always align with what’s best for your future, and any reasonable boss will come to understand your decision to leave for a new opportunity. Remember to be respectful and avoid burning any bridges, as you never know whose door you might be knocking on in the future.

This article originally appeared on Glassdoor and is reprinted with permission.