Top Echelon Network Policy 6

Top Echelon Network Policy 6

Issue: Client company ownership

Date: 01/15/91

Recruiters may have established varying degrees of "loyalty" with specific hiring authorities, but no one "owns" a client company. Also, making placements through Top Echelon Network is not meant to be a source of new client companies for the recruiters "owning" the candidates. Therefore, as a general rule, you should "STAY AWAY" from those clients you may have "learned about" while networking with Members.

Also, be aware that there will be times when you and one or more of your Trading Partners will be working with the same company, and possibly even the same hiring authority on the same job order. In those situations, reaching an agreement as to how the individual job order will be handled is the key. Demanding withdrawal of the other recruiter is not the answer.

Spirit of this Policy
Realizing there is an infinite number of possible scenarios that can arise regarding client companies, we felt that it would be best to share Top Echelon Network’s views regarding some of the more frequent situations. These views are merely intended to be "guidelines" to work by, and may or may not be the same as a decision made by the Network's Ethics Advisory Board if a particular issue is brought to a vote.

It is the firm belief of the Top Echelon Network Administration that there is no substitute for "open communication" between two Top Echelon Network Members that have a difference of opinion. If, however, a "meeting of the minds" cannot take place, the following is some direction as to how the Network feels about certain types of situations.

Scenario 1:Recruiter "A" is working with XYZ Company and places Recruiter "B’s" candidate at the firm. Recruiter "B" never worked with (or tried to work with) the firm prior to this placement. After the placement is completed, Recruiter "B" knows the identity of the company.

Our Feelings: Recruiter "B" should refrain from contacting clients that he/she learned about while working with another Network Member. The Top Echelon Network Administration will frown upon any recruiters who appears to be trying to build their client company base from their dealings with Top Echelon Network Members.

Scenario 2:Recruiter "A" is working with XYZ Company and places Recruiter "B’s" candidate at the firm. Recruiter "B" has done some work there in the past, but that was "x" months or years ago. After the placement is completed, Recruiter "B" knows the identity of the company.

Our Feelings: If Recruiter "B" has worked with (or tried to work with) the client within the last 12 months (and can prove it), then it is our feeling that after this split placement is completed the two recruiters should go about their business. Neither owns the client, nor does either owe the other anything. The one recruiter that continually provides the best ongoing service to the client will probably be able to establish the most client loyalty.

If the time period is longer than 12 months, then it is our feeling that recruiter "B" should make every effort to compensate Recruiter "A" for reminding him that the XYZ company is still a viable hiring authority. Chances are that Recruiter "B" would have eventually gone back to the client anyway, but recruiter "A" brought it to his attention sooner. A possible compromise might be for Recruiter "B" to offer to share his next two commissions from the XYZ company with Recruiter "A," if he (recruiter "B") wishes to continue working with the client.

Scenario 3: Recruiter "A" is working with XYZ Company and places Recruiter "B’s" candidate at the firm. Recruiter "B" has never worked with this company before, but his/her candidate is hired in a position as a "hiring authority." After the placement is completed, Recruiter "B" now knows the identity of the company and begins receiving phone calls from his ex-candidate for help in filling his job orders at this or another location, or wants help with candidates.

Our Feelings: It is not the corporate entity that calls you on the phone asking for help, it is the hiring authority. And again, as always, no one owns a client company, therefore, the TE Network will not try to dictate to any "hiring authority" which recruiters they may or may not work with. If the hiring authority believes that you are the "best recruiter," they will work with you.

It is also Top Echelon Network’s feelings that without the efforts of Recruiter "A," Recruiter "B" would not begin receiving these new phone calls for help. Therefore, we feel that Recruiter "B" should make every attempt to try to establish a "workable" situation where Recruiter "A" receives some additional compensation for their efforts, and doesn't feel as though their client relationship has been compromised. A possible solution might be for Recruiter "B" to offer to share his next two commissions from the XYZ company with Recruiter "A."

Summary: Don't do to Members what you wouldn't want to happen to you. Also be aware that different people have varying opinions about client company ownership. The best way to avoid a conflict is to stay away from a company that you know for sure is being actively worked by a Member. Wouldn't it be wiser to work with this Member to satisfy the client's needs, rather than competing against them?

Also let it be known that we are confident that the Top Echelon Network Ethics Committee would probably not support any recruiter that is hoping to "lock up" a particular market niche, whether it be industry specific or geographic, by telling every recruiter that they work with "who their clients are" as a warning to stay away. Keep your client lists to yourself except when needed on a case-by-case basis.