Recruitment agencies: pilot proposal
Use this pilot proposal exercise to design a small engagement that resolves a real uncertainty and has a clear stop or proceed decision. You are discussing a specialist recruitment assignment with a hiring manager with a hard-to-fill role. The point of the practice is to make a useful decision together, including recognising when the offer is not a fit.
Agree a bounded trial with evidence requirements and a review date, without implying expansion is automatic.
The situation
In this fictional brief, interviewers assess different criteria and suitable candidates disengage. The buyer wants a shared scorecard and a timely, clearly owned hiring process. Your offer is a specialist recruitment assignment, but you must first establish whether its scope addresses the actual need.
A relevant delivery constraint is that compensation and interview availability need approval before outreach. Treat that as a fact in the exercise; do not remove it to make the sale easier.
| Your counterpart | a hiring manager with a hard-to-fill role |
|---|---|
| Offer under discussion | a specialist recruitment assignment |
| Evidence available | an anonymised candidate brief mapped to the agreed role criteria |
| Terms to clarify | Clarify exclusivity, fee triggers, replacement terms and candidate consent. |
How to approach pilot proposal
A useful question for this stage: “What evidence would make you decide not to expand?” Ask it when the conversation creates a reason for it, rather than reciting every question in order.
- Define a narrow scope, a baseline, an owner and success criteria. Include a stop condition and the decision after the pilot.
- Ground the discussion in the buyer’s work. Ask: “Which capability must the person demonstrate in the first three months?” Listen for a concrete example before making a claim.
- Use evidence relevant to the decision: an anonymised candidate brief mapped to the agreed role criteria. Explain what it demonstrates and what remains unverified.
- Agree a bounded trial with evidence requirements and a review date, without implying expansion is automatic.
An industry-specific concern
Buyer: “Another recruiter charges a lower percentage.”
Possible response: “Let us compare the search scope, screening evidence and replacement terms before comparing fees alone.”
Why this response helps: it acknowledges the concern, brings the discussion back to a verifiable requirement and leaves room for a different decision. Adapt the wording to what the buyer actually said.
Run the practice
- Prepare for two minutes. One person takes the seller role and one plays a hiring manager with a hard-to-fill role. Read the offer and constraint separately from your preferred answer.
- Have a five-minute conversation focused on design a small engagement that resolves a real uncertainty and has a clear stop or proceed decision. The buyer should answer consistently with the brief and ask for evidence when a claim is vague.
- Add this challenge: The buyer wants an open-ended free trial. Explain the work involved and propose a finite evaluation with clear responsibilities.
- Pause for feedback. Quote one useful question and one missed opportunity. Repeat the difficult exchange using a different response.
- Finish by writing the actual agreement. A sensible option, when it fits, is to calibrate the role using an agreed scorecard and sample candidate profiles. A clear decision to pause is also a useful outcome.
What to avoid
| Common mistake | Calling a discounted full project a pilot without a learning objective. |
|---|---|
| A stronger direction | Let us test the uncertain part first and agree what the result will and will not tell us. |
| Scope and claim boundary | Do not guarantee a hire or invent candidate availability. |
| What to measure in real work | time between candidate submission and a useful hiring decision. Establish a baseline and definition before interpreting a change. |
An example conversation
Which question would a small trial need to answer before you considered a wider engagement?
Our concern is that interviewers assess different criteria and suitable candidates disengage. Also, compensation and interview availability need approval before outreach.
Which capability must the person demonstrate in the first three months?
Another recruiter charges a lower percentage.
Let us compare the search scope, screening evidence and replacement terms before comparing fees alone.
What evidence would make you decide not to expand?
Your working sheet.
Make the exercise your own. Notes are saved in this browser when storage is available. Download a copy to keep; avoid confidential information on a shared device.
Example: interviewers assess different criteria and suitable candidates disengage; compensation and interview availability need approval before outreach.
Example: What evidence would make you decide not to expand? Industry question: Which capability must the person demonstrate in the first three months?
Example: an anonymised candidate brief mapped to the agreed role criteria. Do not guarantee a hire or invent candidate availability.
Example: Propose a clear next step, such as: calibrate the role using an agreed scorecard and sample candidate profiles. Confirm the owner and date.
Review your work
This is a reflection checklist, not an automated assessment.
Questions
Who is this recruitment agencies exercise for?+
Can I use the example as a script?+
How should I assess the result?+
Fictional training scenario. The dialogue illustrates response choices; it is not a customer testimonial or a record of a real sale.
Explore more sales resourcesTake the conversation further.
Read a practical guide to structuring your sales practice, or explore the current London sales masterclass.
Plan your sales practiceExplore Jordan Belfort in London