Last week, I had a conversation about creative staffing agencies with two different freelancers. Both wanted to drum up more work, and I suggested that, among other ideas, they call a few agencies (and drop my name so I could get the referral bonus!)."Have you had any luck with those? Because I haven't," they told me.
"Honestly, no," I admitted. "But I keep hearing about them, so I thought maybe they worked for other freelancers, and I just wasn't working the system correctly."
Turns out they'd had a similarly disappointing experience. Here's why I think creative staffing agencies aren't so hot.
Low pay. My rate is low compared to a lot of the freelancers I know, but it's pretty high by staffing agency standards, because the agency takes a big cut of every hour you work. I have worked as a subcontractor with more specialized advertising and copywriting firms, and they actually value the work I do, because they do similar projects themselves. They get that good writing is a craft, not a commodity.
Why earn $xx/hour at some staffing agency gig when I could cut out the middleman and earn almost twice as much on my own? Sure, there are certain benefits to having a staffing agency behind you (it's likely you'll get paid on time and in some cases, you might quality for health insurance), but really, you're just making money for the agency when you could be making more of it for yourself.
Experience over a quality portfolio. I've seen gigs posted on staffing agency websites that mirror my skill set. Then when I call to ask if they'll forward my portfolio to the client, my contact tells me, "they're not really looking for a junior copywriter." Well, actually, I'm not a junior copywriter. But when they pull up my file and see my graduation year, they automatically assume I need lots of hand-holding.
Most of my clients hire me based on my portfolio, not my resume, because they know that the quality of my work matters more than the number of years I've spent working. Some of the recruiters I've met at supposedly creative staffing firms don't even know how to evaulate creative professionals, so they categorize people based on how long they've been working. (This conundrum reminds me of Brazen Careerist's focus on ideas rather than resumes.)
Lots of on-site gigs. Last year, I met with recruiters at almost every creative staffing agency in the city. All of them said, "we do both on-site and work-from-home placements." Yet it seems like every time I get a call with a potential project, it requires schlepping out to the North Shore or Western Massachusetts five days a week. That's just not my style. Part of the reason I freelance is so that I don't have to get up super-early and commute to an office. I can spend that time getting more work done, working out, whatever I want. I'd hesitate to give that up.
Some creative staffing agencies also place accountants, IT professionals, and other types that typically work in an office, so they buy into the notion of facetime. I don't. If I spent 40 hours a week working on-site, then I would have very little time to market myself and line up work for after the gig ended. Trust me, that is a terrible situation for a freelancer! We have to be masters of multi-tasking and you just can't do that if you're working on-site because you have to focus on one client's needs.
Your turn! Tell us about your experiences working with creative staffing firms. Have you had similar issues? Or the opposite?
PS If you're reading this and you happen to be a recruiter for an agency that places freelance copywriters, I'd love to hear why I'm wrong. Match me with a great gig, and I'll post an update singing your praises. Seriously, folks, bring it on. I'm ready!
Flickr photo courtesy of Marc Sebastian
18 comments:
I have also had similar experiences with these staffing agencies, mostly because they are corporate. The recruiters are not creative types. The clients they represent are also corporate and run by strict HR standards (resume keywords should match up to the job requirements, for instance).
I'm signed up with three different creative staffing agencies, but I rely on them so rarely that I sometimes forget I'm in their database.
There's one agency in particular that contacts me every so often, with both on- and off-site work (though I've stressed that I'd prefer off-site work). Recently, they contacted me with a sweet-sounding off-site gig, and allowed me to pitch my own rate. I ended up getting the gig, and am about to start work on it this week. Success!
I think it's nice to be connected with staffing agencies, just as a means of covering all your bases. If they send you a well-paying gig, great! It's work you didn't have to drum up yourself! The ones that are less than ideal? Feel free to turn them down. I do! Just remember: You shouldn't be relying on staffing agencies. They're just an extra tool in your freelancing belt.
I'm signed with one, and decided against the other two. The one I'm signed with is friendly, but doesn't know what to do with me, because I don't fit into a typical cubicle-type slot.
I told them no worries, keep me on file if anything odd comes in, because I'll probably be the right choice!
I also noticed they tend to want more long-term commitments -- as in regular 9-5 hours 5 days/week for more than 3 months at a time, which doesn't really interest me.
I own and service staffing companies so i winced when i saw the comment about 'taking their cut' as if this were unethical and unique to staffing.
Don't agents, creative agencies, and for that matter all employers take their cut? As a premium for their risk?
It's called capitalism. Man exploits man [whereas socialism is the opposite].
Ok, the rest of your post was great, and the reasons you give for creative staffing agencies sucking more than your average agency are right on.
Some day though you too might find yourself with more work than you can handle. Start hiring and you'll see you get more than an extra hand - you get their unsuperviseable, deadline-disrespecting, aching back as well.
@Gregg: Your point is well taken, but I've yet to find a creative staffing agencies that pays freelance copywriters a decent rate. Plenty of marketing agencies pay me a respectable hourly rate and still make money themselves, but staffing agencies do not seem to have much flexibility in terms of paying writers what they're worth.
Also, regarding your comment about "someday you'll have more work than you handle," that day has already arrived. Rather than subcontracting to others, I usually just give them a referral so that I don't have to manage that project when I'd rather be focusing on my own writing. And I still get something out of it because I'm building a rapport with that writer and they may be in a position to reciprocate in the future.
I worked with Aquent on what turned out to be a three-year on-site gig. I started with them when I was just getting started freelancing.
If I were able to get enough freelance work on my own then no, I wouldn't go through an agency. As you point out, they all advertise off-site work but that rarely happens. But during slow times it's definitely an option, and it allowed me to beef up my portfolio.
As for pay -- yes, my rate from the agency was about half my freelance rate. However, they do pay the employer portion of taxes/Social Security that I have to cover on my own out of my freelance rate. Aquent also offers decent health and dental, paid holidays, and a bonus that works out to about one paid week of vacation for every 9.5 months worked (if you work 40 hours a week). There's also overtime pay, which you don't get freelancing.
And because I was working 40 hours a week, I wasn't spending (unpaid) time marketing my freelance business. When you take all that into account, the agency rate comes out about equal to my freelance rate.
My health and dental cost me nothing if I worked 40 hours a week, and they are available as long as you work 20 hours a week.
I don't mean for this to sound like an ad for creative agencies or Aquent in particular. There are definite downsides, and it doesn't allow you the flexibility that you get with freelancing. I think it's a good option for filling a slow time, though.
Out of the blue, I was recently offered 40 hours a week of ongoing writing work by a staffing agency. But the rate was abysmal and my counter offer was ignored.
The agency rep also refused to specify a start and end date or guarantee the number of hours in the contract. This was my first experience with a staffing agency. Is this how they typically work?
I'm proud of my writing credits and was surprised that anyone would approach me with so little to offer.
Anyone else have this experience?
I read with interest many of the comments. I work with outside vendors constantly and have considered just working with staffing firms for creative work. After reading these posts, I think I'll stick with my usual working method of retainers or just try to find a freelancer. I really don't think creative staffing agencies are the way to go. They aren't providing the actual creative and therefore just taking their cut to find someone I could have found on my own and cut out the middle man.
Hey Susan...Your method of referring work out besides being generous can create great long-term business relationships. Since I read and enjoy your stuff like a new issue of the New Yorker, I'm not surprised to hear you're booked. Tx.
@Joyce: That sounds similar to what I've experienced myself and heard from other writers. But until recently I thought it was an anomaly, not the rule.
@Gregg: That's a huge compliment. Thanks!
I don't think it hurts to have your name in at creative staffing agencies. You never know what sorts of things employers are going to need -- especially in this economy. You can always say 'no thank you' to an offer. With that said, I think a good creative agency is hard to find. It's difficult to haggle a creative fee with people who have no idea what really goes into each project.
strikes me that there could be a niche agency business possibility here, more analogous to the relationship -- and knowledge of talent -- that independent music booking agents have with the their artists rather than the staffing agency model. hmm.
@Kerry: Now that you mention it, I think the Hired Guns in NYC has a more hands-on, creative approach to staffing. I'm on their email list, but since they are based in NYC, I haven't had a chance to work with them so far.
I've worked very well in the past with creative staffing firms. One in particular is great - they manage their business model well, and they value talent over fitting folks into a slot (this local office, anyway).
I've worked both onsite and offsite. The offsite jobs are great - pays decently and the work is often easy. Onsite is tougher because all else has to be put on hold. I was in a position once where I had to take immediate work, and it was there. But in general, I don't enjoy onsite.
The pay rate is lower, as you say, Susan. I was making $35/hour for an onsite proofing gig. The most I made was $65/hr. for editing. However, the taxes are taken care of. It's a treat to be on a W2 for a change! A side benefit - I've secured two ongoing clients as a result of my work with temp agencies. Both have waited until their contractual terms expired, then called me directly.
In general, even those jobs are drying up right now.
@Lori: I'm so glad you decided to weigh in, as I know you've used creative staffing firms in the past. It sounds like that local office really has its act together!
Interesting post. Back when I was starting out as a graphic designer, I took some temporary assignments through a staffing company just to keep working. However, most of the assignments were much more clerical/admin than advertised and it was rare that I was able to get an actual designing gig. When I got an assignment I didn't like, I told the agency. I did eventually get a temp good assignment and was hired full time. Since then, although I've changed jobs, I've never gone back to a staffing company. If I lost my job today, I think I'd stick with freelancing and go back to temping only out of desperation.
And as a creative professional working for a company that SERVES the staffing industry, I think it's fair to say that very few staffing agencies understand how to place creative professionals. I don't think it's because they don't value the work -- I think they simply don't know what's involved and they aren't current on acceptable rates. Also, I don't know many freelancers that try to use staffing firms. It's as if they are two different cultures that have a lot of misconceptions about each other. Firms like Aquent that actively look for creative candidates are a better fit than ones that don't. I think PSG in Boston also "gets it" where graphic designers are concerned (full disclosure; they are a client of my employer).
I agree that it's a good idea for freelancers to use staffing agencies as one of many tools to look for work. But if you have a bad experience with them, you should let them know. Staffing companies do want feedback from their candidates. Frank discussions about issues like on- and off-site work, pay rates, etc., should benefit bother parties.
Its funny I just saw this post because I just got contacted by a staffing agency yesterday to come in and meet with them. Based on the comments here I think I'll check it out. If it's not going to work, thats okay, but it sounds worth looking into. Thanks everyone!
I'm going through this right now. I signed up with a creative agency and had an interview with a company they set me up with. I think the pay they offered was okay, but there is a 40 min commute with traffic. Seems like after reading all the comments here, that there are definite pros and cons to taking work with a creative agency. Great tips to help me consider whether it's worth taking this full-time job or not. Thanks!
Post a Comment