SEX, now that I have your attention...

It’s a rare occasion that’s befallen blog week. I have not one but three potential blog topics to choose from. I think it’s the increased activity which has led to more conversation which has in turn lead to the voicing of more opinions. There was the loyalist blog topic, inspired by TAA’s imminent departure from his and my boyhood club. Alternatively, I could've stretched out the walking green flag; a consultant with a record of their billings. However, I’ve decided to write on the hottest of the three potatoes: what role does ‘looks’ have in recruitment? I’ve been in talks with an agency that is currently looking to increase headcount. I’ve met the owner multiple times, and I’ve found them to be friendly, motivated, articulate, and not lecherous in the slightest. Which is important for context. The only thing that’s a slight issue, they have a habit of hiring attractive consultants. I’m not going to attempt to expose the readerships latent sexism in a similar way that Doctor ‘riddle’ does or like at the end of The Prodigy’s, Smack My Bitch Up music video. The recruitment owner is a man.

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this accusation levelled at a recruitment firm. Interestingly, it’s never one I’ve been a part of. I remember being down in Welly, and a client had remarked that another agency had a similar hiring strategy to that of an airline in the 70s. What made me think on the subject, I have a client meeting on this Friday, the day after the Meet-Up I know, but my days of gracing Doolan’s dance floor to the early hours are well and truly behind me. This agency also has a consultant team comprised entirely of females whom, if you weren’t a happily married man, could objectively say are handsome. Think I’ve covered myself well there. This other agency will not have the same insinuations made about them as the owner is female. This perhaps alludes to the issue that because there is the potential for foul play, it’s viewed as devious. It’s like the Zimmer frame with tennis balls on the legs. Cute when the ol fella from Up is using it, but sinister as all hell when Weinstein is trudging to court with it.

We would only know for sure if there was a female-owned agency that exclusively hired good-looking fellas. This femme Fagan would then presumably be dragged over the coals and be well deserving of their madame moniker. Is the concern purely from a protection perspective? Or are we worried that in a competitive industry, someone is getting a leg up or potentially over? Those with their mind in the gutter presume that a client, be it male or female, is somehow persuaded or coerced into a business relationship by the siren call of beauty. I think this not only speaks poorly of the level of intelligence and resolve of the client base but of the integrity and ability of the recruiter. I feel the insinuation that life is on easy mode because you adhere to some paradigm of beauty is a fallacy.  A fresh set of veneers or lip fillers doesn’t make you recession-proof. If you aren’t doing a good job by your client, it doesn’t matter how fluttery your lashes are. We’re in a results-driven industry, and if you’re not delivering results, you’ll end up delivering takeaways.  

Perhaps the unease comes from the notion that these consultants are being exploited. That their good looks were the only reason they were employed. While I don’t have any clients who are raving misogynists, I have fewer that are idiots. You’re not retaining someone just because they brighten the place up. If they aren’t billing money, you could be Sydney Chalamet, you’re getting the boot. Like you, I tend not to work with arseholes. If I had uncovered anything more than just observations on attractiveness, I’d be running a mile. The fact is this potential client is a family man who’s been married for 20+ years. In this small market of ours, if you were to do anything truly nefarious, it would be known by all, and you’d never live it down. I appreciate that we are in a sales industry and famously sex sells, but it doesn’t consult. If a recruiter bears a striking resemblance to a medieval jailor, you don’t heap added praise on them for doing their job. So, why is there the dismissal of skill and ability if they’re considered good-looking? In my opinion, looks can certainly open doors, but they don’t close deals.