Over on Recruiting Bloggers, we find the usual excellence from Jim Stroud and his Recruiter’s Lounge (I know, because I’ve been there and the questions asked by Jim are right on target) in a thread entitled, “VIDEO – The Recruiter’s Lounge with Ami Givertz and Call Girl Vicky.” Very entertaining banter from both Jim and Ami.
Then comes the Call Girl Vicky part (no wonder prostitution is illegal in most states). Vicky and Jim role play a sourcing call into a company that’s the kind of stuff that comprises the fodder for those interminably long ERE threads that make you want to scream out loud and pray for God to “take me now.”
These are the threads that bring out the so-called ethical sourcers and recruiters from the most squalid recesses of our recruiting community. You can’t beat these people away from the Comment section. But in this case – Call Girl Vicky – are there any comments posted about the tactics used to obtain names? Not even one. Why is that?
Could it be that the usual suspects have gone on vacation?
Could it be that the usual suspects have suddenly realized that all is fair in love and recruiting?
Could it be that the usual suspects have forsaken their ethical oaths to whatever recruiting association they belong to?
Then why aren’t the usual suspects up in arms over Jim and Vicky’s role play of the same tactics used by many to identify names via the telephone?
Could it be they have a connection to the Recruiter’s Lounge and SourceCon?
I’m truly interested in hearing from the SourceCon Presenters about the Recruiter’s Lounge demo and why the “hang’em – they’re rusin’ ” comments aren’t flying in like in-laws to family reunion.
You see, this issue is important because of the consistency of the inconsistency about what is allowable when telephone names sourcing. In other words, so many are just plan inconsistent about ethics. It is these very people who believe they have been anointed by the Recruiting Gods (no, not Sullivan, Adler, Wheeler, Jay Gee, or Manaster…well, ok, maybe David) to impart upon the masses “the right way to source and recruit.” It’s ethics when they want it – and not when they don’t.
Ultimately, it is so transparent what is taking place amidst the online banter surrounding sourcing and recruiting. If you’re pushing an “ethical agenda” but your actions are inconsistent, what does this say about the ethical agenda? Let me help you with a few words: Charlatan, Fraud, Disingenuous.
To those scratching their heads, you may not be aware of the schism that is growing on the sourcing side of our profession. And it’s a damn sham too. You see it on ERE, in the Yahoo groups, and in the recruiting blogosphere. Some even want to create a sourcing accredidation via the NAPS model that would no doubt ban the “dumb blond” tactics used in the Recruiter’s Lounge demo. You know the saying – if you can’t beat them, accredite them. I’m sure it will work just like licensing people to drive cuts down on accidents.
What this is really all about is a few strident recruiters who publicly denigrate everything sourcers do down to and including the role itself in an attempt to devalue the undeniable impact sourcers have on recruiting. I wonder why that is?
Now go enjoy the Fourth of July and the freedom to source any way you please. “My country ’tis of thee…”