One of my HHs wants to send my resume to a company, but I have another interview there, even though it's another group. So I told him. He then asked me which group. I told him it's another group, but it is not good for me to release the name of the group. He then said a lot of things/considerations, trying to persuade me to tell him. I finally told him. Am I wrong here? I really cannot resist his persuasions.

Most likely HH1 will send his candidates to compete against you for that position.When HH2 finds out you leak the position to HH1, he will persuade you to tell him what interviews HH1 has arranged for you.Finally, when HH1 and HH2 find out that you leak the secrets to other companies easily, they may be less willing to arrange more interviews for you.

QuoteOriginally posted by: jimmycarterMost likely HH1 will send his candidates to compete against you for that position.When HH2 finds out you leak the position to HH1, he will persuade you to tell him what interviews HH1 has arranged for you.Finally, when HH1 and HH2 find out that you leak the secrets to other companies easily, they may be less willing to arrange more interviews for you.Oh, that's too bad. But HH1 is really not a nice person. I insisted not to tell him, but he just kept talking me into it. Finally, I had to give up. OK, next time, I will definitely shut my mouth and say nothing.

JimmyCarter is right to be supicious. The HH that sent you in won't be awfully impressed since >50% of the value of a HH is who they know, and more importantly how few others know them.The only thing the second HH can do with the name is send other people to compete with you.Our guide has specific sections on "how to spot bad headhunters" and "Names", since this is a very common FAQ.It's very easy for us to say "just say no", but the balance of power and knowledge of the situation doesn't make that easyA good line to use when a HH puts pressure on you is to say "I wouldn't tell the other HH about the contacts you've given me in confidence , so I can't really give you the names he gave me in confidence."We've been in similar situations, and if it's another division, then I can't see that we'd need to know the name of the other manager, though of course we would like to know, because we're pimps.Also there's a messy legal thing, that the first HH may well "own" you for the next 6 months.Our policy is that if we put you into (say) fixed income, and later another HH finds a job in equity derivs, then we will not through our legal toys out of our pram.This happens a bit with newbies, because for your first job you aren't pigeonholed as skilled in one precise area.The market for people is fragmented and strangely primitive. We may be preferred suppliers for a bank, yet a given manager may not ever tell us about vacancies, and some managers only tell us aboutcertain jobs even though their firm has several other "Tier one" suppliers of people. Technology has not made this better. Most of the larger firms are moving towards the sort of IT system you'd think thay've had for a decade.Jobs go up for all apparoved suppliers to see, and HHs submit people. Should save a lot of arguments about who sent in this person first, and of course improve liquidity.Fat chance. The system basically records that this job is being run by a certain HH. One large bank thought "ooh, we can farm this database. Wait 6 months until we don't have to pay the pimps, and we can contact them directly".Sadly they'd outsourced their IT, and their system was such a shambles all they did is annoy people. As an amusing aspect of this, I still get strange random emails from this bank telling me that I'd been consideredfor a given job, but found wanting. I applied there about 5 years ago, so you can imagine the poor sod who has to go through all these CVs again and again.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCJimmyCarter is right to be supicious. The HH that sent you in won't be awfully impressed since >50% of the value of a HH is who they know, and more importantly how few others know them.The only thing the second HH can do with the name is send other people to compete with you.Our guide has specific sections on "how to spot bad headhunters" and "Names", since this is a very common FAQ.It's very easy for us to say "just say no", but the balance of power and knowledge of the situation doesn't make that easyA good line to use when a HH puts pressure on you is to say "I wouldn't tell the other HH about the contacts you've given me in confidence , so I can't really give you the names he gave me in confidence."We've been in similar situations, and if it's another division, then I can't see that we'd need to know the name of the other manager, though of course we would like to know, because we're pimps.Also there's a messy legal thing, that the first HH may well "own" you for the next 6 months.Our policy is that if we put you into (say) fixed income, and later another HH finds a job in equity derivs, then we will not through our legal toys out of our pram.This happens a bit with newbies, because for your first job you aren't pigeonholed as skilled in one precise area.The market for people is fragmented and strangely primitive. We may be preferred suppliers for a bank, yet a given manager may not ever tell us about vacancies, and some managers only tell us aboutcertain jobs even though their firm has several other "Tier one" suppliers of people. Technology has not made this better. Most of the larger firms are moving towards the sort of IT system you'd think thay've had for a decade.Jobs go up for all apparoved suppliers to see, and HHs submit people. Should save a lot of arguments about who sent in this person first, and of course improve liquidity.Fat chance. The system basically records that this job is being run by a certain HH. One large bank thought "ooh, we can farm this database. Wait 6 months until we don't have to pay the pimps, and we can contact them directly".Sadly they'd outsourced their IT, and their system was such a shambles all they did is annoy people. As an amusing aspect of this, I still get strange random emails from this bank telling me that I'd been consideredfor a given job, but found wanting. I applied there about 5 years ago, so you can imagine the poor sod who has to go through all these CVs again and again.Thanks very much for the detailed explanation. I will definitely re-read your "Paul Dominic Guide 1.5" carefully. Thanks a lot!

Without meaning to come across as an unethical guy, I would suggest you just lie. If the other group is credit, then say MBS/ABS or something else. You could even make up a group entirely, say the daffy duck trading group. Similarly be creative when HH1 or 2 asks you who is the head of that group. Your answer should always be "I think he calls himself Smith".

Just say no. If he won't work with you after that he's not worth your time.From my former contingency days - The one circumstance I think its justifiable for the HHer to ask (but still not necessarily for you to answer) is when you are well into a process already with the HHer and are alos iving elsewhere, and he is actually doing a good job for his client by asking you. After all, in the same way its no good coming second for a job from a candidate point of view, no bank values coming second for a candidates signature. If I get that information from a good candidate who also has processes with two rival banks of my client, then it allows my client to strategically gear their end game interview process to (hopefully) highlight their own strengths over those houses, or how much better it is to be in credit than FX etc. or (more often) point out the weaknesses of the other house/s. May sound a bit aggressive etc but its a 'war for talent'.Of course, as a candidate, you could say you benefit from no one knowing, in that it makes all parties present themselves on absolute not comparative terms. But as its the client who pays, I think its in the HHers rights to ask so they manage you better for their client. Anyhow, in the current market if he has time to chase new jobs you probably aren't working with the right ones.

Just say no. If he won't work with you after that he's not worth your time.From my former contingency days - The one circumstance I think its justifiable for the HHer to ask (but still not necessarily for you to answer) is when you are well into a process already with the HHer and are alos iving elsewhere, and he is actually doing a good job for his client by asking you. After all, in the same way its no good coming second for a job from a candidate point of view, no bank values coming second for a candidates signature. If I get that information from a good candidate who also has processes with two rival banks of my client, then it allows my client to strategically gear their end game interview process to (hopefully) highlight their own strengths over those houses, or how much better it is to be in credit than FX etc. or (more often) point out the weaknesses of the other house/s. May sound a bit aggressive etc but its a 'war for talent'.Of course, as a candidate, you could say you benefit from no one knowing, in that it makes all parties present themselves on absolute not comparative terms. But as its the client who pays, I think its in the HHers rights to ask so they manage you better for their client. Anyhow, in the current market if he has time to chase new jobs you probably aren't working with the right ones.

QuoteOriginally posted by: needaclueWithout meaning to come across as an unethical guy, I would suggest you just lie. If the other group is credit, then say MBS/ABS or something else. You could even make up a group entirely, say the daffy duck trading group. Similarly be creative when HH1 or 2 asks you who is the head of that group. Your answer should always be "I think he calls himself Smith".I thought to making up a lie, such as if I am interviewing with equity group, I will say fixed income instead. But as you said, that's not quite ethical, and God does not like us to tell lies. So I choose to either tell them the truth or not tell them. But if it is not ethical for them to ask this question in the first place, maybe I can tell a lie now? In this way, I may persuade myself.

Heh. Think about the lies you hear from companies, interviewers, headhunters et al. You are working with the damned anyway, so don't worry about divine intervention. It's a bit unhealthy to be the only ethical guy in a head-banging dance competition which is approximately what the hiring process is like.QuoteOriginally posted by: HinstingsQuoteOriginally posted by: needaclueWithout meaning to come across as an unethical guy, I would suggest you just lie. If the other group is credit, then say MBS/ABS or something else. You could even make up a group entirely, say the daffy duck trading group. Similarly be creative when HH1 or 2 asks you who is the head of that group. Your answer should always be "I think he calls himself Smith".I thought to making up a lie, such as if I am interviewing with equity group, I will say fixed income instead. But as you said, that's not quite ethical, and God does not like us to tell lies. So I choose to either tell them the truth or not tell them. But if it is not ethical for them to ask this question in the first place, maybe I can tell a lie now? In this way, I may persuade myself.

Yeah, you are right.QuoteOriginally posted by: needaclueHeh. Think about the lies you hear from companies, interviewers, headhunters et al. You are working with the damned anyway, so don't worry about divine intervention. It's a bit unhealthy to be the only ethical guy in a head-banging dance competition which is approximately what the hiring process is like.QuoteOriginally posted by: HinstingsQuoteOriginally posted by: needaclueWithout meaning to come across as an unethical guy, I would suggest you just lie. If the other group is credit, then say MBS/ABS or something else. You could even make up a group entirely, say the daffy duck trading group. Similarly be creative when HH1 or 2 asks you who is the head of that group. Your answer should always be "I think he calls himself Smith".I thought to making up a lie, such as if I am interviewing with equity group, I will say fixed income instead. But as you said, that's not quite ethical, and God does not like us to tell lies. So I choose to either tell them the truth or not tell them. But if it is not ethical for them to ask this question in the first place, maybe I can tell a lie now? In this way, I may persuade myself.