I always wondered how finding a job as a programmer was always so employer-centered. Sourcers find resumes and dump them on recruiters who dump the programmers on employers; yet no one is looking out for the programmer's needs. It seems so one-sided.
Athletes have agents. Movie, stage and screen people have agents. Musicians often have agents. Even house buyers can use a buyers agent if the local real estate people haven't put them out of business (real estate agents act like they are helping you, but they really are representing the seller).
There are millions of web sites that post jobs (some of them real, some of them not) and you can search all over the internet. If you find something interesting however you are on your own dealing with a recruiter (who acts like a friend but is really only interested in dumping you on the nearest employer) or HR person or whoever.
Sure, it doesn't cost the prospective employee anything but that's the rub, you don't get anything for the nothing you are paying. The employer pays everything and gets all the cards. If we were willing to pay 10% or whatever agents usually get, then they would be more motivated to find you something you wanted and get the best deal.
Sure agents can seem as unseemly as, well, recruiters; but if you maintain a relationship with them over time it is in their best monetary interest to find you long paying work that you are happy with, and also to understand your needs and abilities and make a good sale on your behalf.
In the long run an agent makes the most money if they can make their customers happy and employed long term; and thus will take the time to network and find the best opportunities. Rather than the employee having to hunt all over the country , trying to interpret stupid job ads, fight off nasty recruiters and sourcers, fill out myriads of forms and web sites (what is it with job sites that require 20 pages of forms just to look at a job), a programmer's agent would market your talents and find the best job for you.
I want someone on my side, the percentage I have to pay means I get real service, assuming the agent has a clue and a real network. In the end, the whole idea is to get the right person for the right job at the right price.
A nice dream but the industry seems to be set on having the employers pay for fishing and hope a good programmer falls in the net.
Michael Chermside 08/24/2009 07:20
Well, there are a couple of problems. Agents tend to exist in areas like sports, entertainment, or writing where the individuals being marketed are completely and utterly NOT interchangeable. Now, I'm not saying programmers are interchangeable (maybe the other guys are, but I'm not), however many employers DO think that they are more-or-less interchangeable. I doubt that any studio executive has ever told a department manager "you can have 3 new FTE in this year's budget" -- they are more likely to say "yeah, for this one I think I can authorize Brad Pitt... can you get him?". That tendency makes it much harder for agents to do their marketing... and it also makes employers more likely to view the marketing as a hassle than a benefit (and if it's a hassle for the employers then they won't play ball).
joe 08/24/2009 21:39
Deals involving agents are usually complicated, with relatively few choices for who's being signed, for large sums, relatively short-term (so the agent is getting a cut over and over), and the agent's client usually can't create and deliver a movie, play, sporting event, music tour, etc all by themselves as a one-person firm.
When employers hire programmers, the deal is usually simple salary with a few standard benefits, there are typically many potential applicants, the salary isn't astronomical, the employment is assumed to last indefinitely (and often does), and the programmer can realtively easily go off to create and deliver a complete software product totally on their own as a one-person firm.
Agents prefer the non-programmer scenario. That's why programmers don't have (nor really need) agents.
Harlan 08/25/2009 18:56
I've noticed at least two types of programmers in my short time in the field. There are the ones that people here seem to think of. Interchangeable, seeking relatively long term/stable gigs, etc.
Then there are the sought after, rock star, programmers who get inquiries about availability because of people stumbling across their blog posts, familiarity in the open source community, etc. This latter type could use an 'agent' figure who pimps them out for a cut. These people are highly specialized, competent, and efficient in their area of expertise.
They could go into a gig and knock out a specific itch that a client has in a few days, a week, a month, whatever the term. They can train staff, write documentation and vision documents, architect a system, or whatever the client needs; and be on their way to the next gig.
The case against an agent might be that these people tend to not have trouble finding the kinds of gigs they want, to begin with. They have leverage and bargaining power because the clients seek them out specifically.
Mike 09/01/2009 06:37
It would be fun having someone in your corner yelling "Show me the Money!" for you. :)