I've been recruiting for a little over 8+ years now. Fall Offs (Candidates that recruiters place into their client's job where the candidate quits within 8 weeks of start date) is something recruiter's dread as it effects their overall compensation.
My question is the following? Is it the recruiter's fault that the recruiter did not find the perfect fit candidate for the client (which resulted in a fall off) OR is there a problem with the client's organization.
When placing in manufacturing, I find that clients have high turn-over in their organizations (3 different plant managers in 1.5 years). The client have asked different recruiters to source the market to find the best candidate for their company. The recruiter can present candidates, coach and mentor the candidates through their screening process but at the end when the client makes the offer and the candidate accepts - the recruiter's work is done...
Recruiters have no control over what happens when the candidate is working at a client's organization. It is now up to the client to retain that employee. Unfortunately, what happens is that when a fall off occurs, blame gets put on the recruiter for producing a below par or non-performing candidate. Is it really the recruiter's fault?
I always say, "When you point the finger at the recruiter, there's a always 3 fingers pointing back at you (the corporation)." Maybe the CEO of the corporation should seriously look at their own organization to see their own deficiencies and ask themselves 'Why do we have a high turn-over rate / revolving door at our organization BEFORE they start pointing the finger at the recruiter"
Just my thoughts... Opinions are welcomed....