Vetting a recruiter: signs they'll send volume, not fit

The difference between hiring someone who fits your team and hiring someone who's merely available can shape your business for years. A good recruiter spends time understanding your culture, your actual needs, and the nuances of the role. A mediocre one sends you a stack of CVs and calls it done. Learning to spot the difference before you've paid fees or wasted weeks interviewing is where your leverage lies.

The volume trap: when filling seats matters more than filling the right seat

Some recruiters operate on a simple math: send fifty candidates, hope three get interviews, and place one. Their incentive is throughput, not precision. You'll notice this pattern early if you're watching for it. After your briefing, they'll come back with candidates who meet maybe sixty percent of your requirements—wrong industry, missing a key skill, or clearly overqualified and using your role as a stepping stone. When you flag this, they respond with "well, they're close" or "they learn quickly." That's not helpfulness; that's efficiency at your expense.

The telltale sign is speed. A recruiter who sends a longlist within 48 hours of your briefing hasn't done much filtering. They've probably used keyword matching or, worse, pulled from their existing database without thinking. Ask them how long they typically spend screening before they present candidates. If the answer is vague or dismissive—"we move fast"—that's a warning. Quality screening takes time: checking references, verifying claimed experience, sometimes even doing a preliminary skills conversation.

Another red flag is lack of pushback. If you brief a recruiter badly (and sometimes you will), a good one should ask clarifying questions or gently challenge your assumptions. If they nod and vanish, they're not actually thinking about fit; they're just executing. They won't adapt if you realise mid-search that your priority has shifted, or if the market tells you something different about the role's difficulty.

How to force them to slow down and think

Before they start, lay out what you're actually looking for in plain language. Not just the job description—the real gaps, the culture clues, the deal-breakers. Then ask them to brief it back to you. If they can't articulate why someone would thrive in your environment, or they're focusing only on technical boxes, you've found a volume player.

Make them defend their first batch. When candidates land in your inbox, ask the recruiter: "Why this person specifically? What did you learn about them that made you think they'd work here?" A thoughtful answer sounds personal and informed. A generic one sounds like a batch process.

Set a quality bar explicitly. Tell them you'd rather see five genuinely vetted candidates than fifteen maybes. Most recruiters will agree in principle, but watch whether they actually do it. A candidate who passed their screening should be able to explain why they want the role, what they know about your company, and why they think they're suited—not just recite their job history.

When to walk away

If after your first batch you're interviewing people who clearly didn't read the brief, or who are missing stated requirements, the recruiter has stopped thinking. They're running a funnel, not a search. This matters because each wrong candidate interview wastes your time and sends the wrong message to your team about hiring standards.

Likewise, if they resist feedback or treat your concerns as nitpicking, they've already decided their approach is right. You need a partner who adapts.

Finding a recruiter who moves deliberately is harder than finding one who moves fast—but it's the only kind worth paying. When you're evaluating candidates on Strove, ask recruiters for examples of how they've rejected candidates who looked good on paper but didn't fit. Their answer will tell you everything.