Imagine for a moment that you are a photographer. A very successful, highly qualified photographer with a fantastic reputation for brilliant work. A new client approaches you to shoot their wedding day – it’s incredibly important to them, they’re paying you a lot of money and they want the very best service. That is, after all, why they came to you as they know you deliver.

When you turn up on the wedding day you find three other photographers have been booked for the same shoot.

You’re then told that although your client really values your expertise, they wanted to cast the net to see if they could get something different. You are still expected to provide your full service and present your final, fully edited and curated images.

However, you’ll only be paid if the client decides that they prefer your work over the others.

Could you imagine if this example was applied to other professions? Lawyers, accountants, drilling contractors.

It simply wouldn’t happen.

You could change this example to fit any industry. Apart from recruitment.

Why is that?

The answer we’re often given is speed. Many employers believe that by using as many agencies as possible they will receive a better pool of candidates and that the competition it creates between the agencies will work in their favour.

More often than not, the opposite happens.

It becomes a race to speak to the best candidates, a race to get CV’s out, a race to get each job filled. Your phone rings constantly and emails are out of control with consultants chasing feedback. It’s not a fun process for anyone.

That’s where exclusivity comes in.

To many employers it may sound overly restrictive and not fitting with their existing model of multi agent recruitment. But if we always do the same thing, how can we expect different results?

As the famous saying goes…

“the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result”

Is it time to try something different?