RE: deliberating over all job offers versus accepting the first o ne

I think that there are a few different issues here. First, you should be
clear if the "recruiter" you are speaking about is an internal recruiter
(i.e., part of the corporation you'd be interviewing with) or and external
head-hunter. Since you refer to the company as a "client," I'll assume the
latter. If that's the case, the answer is very simple. Money! The outside
recruiter makes his/her income mostly from commissions on closed
requisitions. In other words, if you don't take the job, they get nothing
for their efforts. The goal for this recruiter is to fill the position any
way possible. That sounds callous but it's the truth. If they don't fill the
jobs, they don't eat.

Their desire to "close the deal" up front really isn't bad though and it's
not underhanded. Recruiters learn through experience that people can take up
a lot of their time "tire kicking" as they look at various jobs with half
interest. Think of this as nothing more than a typical sales cycle. The
"salesperson", in this case the recruiter, needs to make sure that the
person they are working with at a client corporation has the authority and
is ready, willing, and able to make an offer of employment for the right
person. The "right" person is defined by a carefully crafted job
description. Additionally, the recruiter will work closely with potential
candidates and works hard to make sure that they are truly willing to accept
an offer for a job should it be presented. A more junior recruiter gets
stung over and over as they learn that candidates often say that they will
take a good job if it meets all of their needs, but when it comes time to
signing on the dotted line, they back out. Why? Fear of leaving their
current job. Using the recruiter to get an offer so they can push for more
money from their current employer (i.e., counter-offer) or even push for a
better offer through another recruiter. They learn to do your best to get a
verbal agreement that the person is ready to make the move before they spend
time setting the candidate up with interviews.

I agree with you though that asking if you'll take a specific job before
meeting the team, etc. is pushing it. You can't make an educated decision
until you have more facts. There is nothing wrong with saying that you'll
accept a job should it meet all of your needs (which the recruiter should
know about). It's not uncommon to put a 48-hour limit though once a job is
offered. That is very reasonable. Most companies are interviewing you and
many others. Once they give you an offer, they have to put the others on a
short "hold." You can't ask them to wait much more than 48 hours in this
market or they'll lose the other candidates. They have jobs to fill so they
can't lose everyone in the process.

Accepting and offer and then continuing to interview is really just a case
of bad faith. Really, I can't respect that. The company who made you the
offer shuts down the recruiting process, let's other potentially candidates
go, sets up a desk, buys equipment, etc. all on your word. If you back out
after accepting the offer, you really leave the employer in a bad situation.
You won't get another job with that company and it may even get around to
other companies that you did that. It's not supposed to happen, but people
talk. Reputation is everything in a technology field so don't do this. Also,
if you really can't take a job, but the employer loves you, be honest since
you may want to go back to them at a later date. Trust me, if they liked you
enough to extend an offer once, they'll consider you at a later date.

Todd Cranston-Cuebas
[email protected]
310-360-2436

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terrence Brannon [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 4:16 PM
> To: L-Perl-Jobs-Discuss
> Subject: deliberating over all job offers versus accepting 
> the first one
> 
> Acceptable interval between getting a job offer and deciding on it
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> The time delay between getting an offer and accepting it can 
> send signals to the employer who made the offer. I think it 
> looks best to the recruiter and the company if you accept 
> immediately - it communicates that you have no reservations 
> about the job being a perfect fit for you and you are eager 
> to start... but I could be wrong. What is an acceptable 
> amount of time to delay a response to a job offer? Some 
> people accept the job, then claim they have to work 2 more 
> weeks and then keep interviewing and then withdraw their 
> acceptance. I think this is dishonest.
> 
> So I think the essential question is once you have one decent 
> offer (in terms of work requirements and pay), how much 
> longer should you interview and continue to accept offers?
> 
> A possible sticking point is if you get two great offers from 
> companies A and B and accept company A, a lot of times 
> company B will never talk to you again, which means it may 
> have been wise to only submit resumes in sequence and do one 
> interview and if it seems OK, then go with it for the time being.
> 
> 
> Taking an offer as soon as it is made
> ---------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure all of you have been in a situation where a 
> recruiter has reviewed your resume but prior to submitting to 
> the employers asks "if they make an offer, will you accept?"  
> and tries to get you to say yes to this question. Some people 
> will say yes and then just ditch the recruiter if they find a 
> more desireable job. I personally would like to be upfront 
> and say: "well, actually I am interviewing the employer as 
> much as he is interviewing me. Just because he makes an 
> offer, I cannot promise that I will accept."
> 
> After I say this, they usually say something about how 
> important this client is, or how the last person they 
> submitted opted not to take it and try to make you feel like 
> it is up to you to save the Eastern seaboard from falling 
> into the ocean. How do you handle situations like this?
> 
> Conclusion
> ----------------
> I don't understand what recruiters are saying to employers. 
> Why is it such a heartbreak when a recruiter submits a 
> resume, the employer gets excited and makes an offer, but 
> then the candidate refuses the offer because he felt it was 
> not a good fit? Why do recruiters try to paint a picture that 
> a candidate is bound to want to take an offer when all he 
> knows about the employers is some general info in a job spec 
> and perhaps a trip through the company website? It doesn't 
> seem fair to obligate a candidate to accepting a position 
> before he has deliberated on the interview and perhaps a few 
> more. I think it would be unreasonable to spend a month after 
> an offer deliberating. I think 7 days is the absolute most 
> time one should wait before accepting an offer and I think 
> that immediate acceptance or any acceptance without sleeping 
> on it at least one night is nothing but a mistake.
>