Why is recruitment viewed in a bad light?

Recruitment doesn't always have a good image. While the profession was once seen as connecting and advisory, frustration and cynicism are frequently heard nowadays. Recruiters are said to be too pushy, too commercial, or primarily focused on themselves. But where does this negative image actually come from? And is it really as black and white as is often portrayed?

A striking example of this recently emerged during a trade fair. One of Voltys’ employees got into a conversation with a visitor about the challenges in the labor market. When the conversation turned to staff shortages and the pressure this places on recruitment, a remark followed that stuck: “Yes, but I don’t feel sorry for you guys.” No joke, no wink, but a sincere response. The undertone was clear: recruiters are not seen as part of the problem, but as its cause.

That attitude does not come out of nowhere. Many professionals have negative experiences with recruitment. They think of impersonal messages, positions that do not match, empty promises, or processes where they never hear from them again after an interview. To them, 'the recruiter' has become not an individual, but an anonymous symbol of everything that goes wrong in applying for jobs and recruiting. That sentiment is subsequently extended to the entire field.

At the same time, the circumstances under which recruiters work are often forgotten. The pressure to fill vacancies quickly is high, the market is tight, and client expectations vary. Recruiters constantly navigate between the interests of candidates and organizations, never being able to please everyone. Yet, it is precisely the visible touchpoints—the message, the phone call, the rejection—on which judgment is formed.

Adding to this is the fact that successes in recruitment often remain invisible. A good match that functions well for years rarely earns applause. But one bad experience sticks. This creates a distorted picture in which the profession is primarily associated with noise, irritation, and mistrust. That makes it difficult to conduct a substantive conversation, as was evident at that trade fair.

However, the cause does not lie solely with recruiters themselves. In recent years, recruitment has increasingly become a volume-driven discipline. Speed, targets, and reach have become more important than relationships and depth. This affects how the profession is perceived, by both candidates and clients. And as long as recruitment is judged primarily on numbers rather than quality, it will be difficult to change that perception.

The conclusion, therefore, is that recruitment is not only viewed negatively but also faces a trust issue. This cannot be solved with even more messages or even stricter processes, but with genuine attention, transparency, and realistic expectations. After all, behind every recruiter is simply someone trying to bring people and organizations together, even if they do not always receive appreciation for it.