Recruitment’s digital experience platform

This article is part of SourceFlow’s “Should recruitment marketers be incentivised?” series, where recruitment leaders and marketers share different perspectives on incentives, commission structures and commercial performance in recruitment marketing. You are not a recruiter. So why are you asking for the trip, the commission and the number without any of the risk? Recruitment marketers want bonuses. And the recruitment business owners hiring them are starting to think that is simply how it works. That is understandable when many agency leaders built their own careers on commission and learned to equate money with motivation. On the billing desk, that logic makes sense. Commission exists because recruiters operate under constant commercial pressure. The upside is tied directly to performance and the consequences of missing target are real. Marketing is a different role entirely, and that model does not automatically travel. Wanting the upside is not the same as deserving it I find the assumption quietly offensive. The idea that a marketer needs a financial top-up to do their best work implies their default setting is somewhere below that. That without the incentive, you are getting a lesser version. That professionalism itself has a price. And to be clear, marketers are driving this narrative as much as anyone. They sit close enough to the billing desk to see the commissions, the incentive trips and the visible rewards of a good quarter. Naturally, they want the same. That is human nature. But wanting something and deserving it on the same terms are two very different things. Recruitment marketing does not carry the same risk as recruitment Let’s be honest about context. Marketing in recruitment does not carry the same existential risk that a billing consultant operates under every single day. A consultant who wants the commission, the incentive trip and to protect their seat at the table is operating under genuine pressure. Miss the target for long enough and the conversation changes quickly. That risk is priced into the model and it is a reasonable trade. Marketing does not work that way. The role comes with stability the billing desk simply does not have. No monthly number deciding whether you still have a job by Friday. That security has value whether it gets discussed openly or not. Incentive structures can damage long-term thinking I have also seen what happens when businesses bolt bonus structures onto marketing roles. The marketer starts chasing the short-term metric that triggers the payout and quietly stops investing in the things that actually build the business over time, such as, brand, content, long-term pipeline, and market positioning. The things that do not necessarily show up in this quarter’s numbers but matter enormously twelve months from now. Recruitment marketing is a different role and it requires a different mindset. Borrowing incentive structures from the billing floor can actively damage that. So, should recruitment marketers be incentivised? My view is no. At least not in the same way recruiters are. If you want the bonus, the incentive trip and the commission structure, then it is fair to ask whether you are also prepared to carry the number and accept the consequences that come with missing it. Almost universally, the answer is no. And that tells you everything. Profit share is the exception Profit share is different; that is a genuine alignment of interests. If a business performs well, it is fair and right to share that success with the people who helped build it. But commission, trips and bonus structures without the corresponding jeopardy is something else entirely. That is wanting the upside of recruiter life without any of the risk attached to it. If that is what you want, become a recruiter. Results are the job, not the exception From where we sit as a recruitment marketing consultancy, none of this is abstract. We are brought in at a rate cheaper than a full-time hire and the arrangement is straightforward: Deliver results or lose the contract. There is no bonus for doing what we were engaged to do. Results are the standard, not the exception, and there is a certain professional pride in treating them that way. The marketers who consistently build pipelines, protect brand and generate commercial impact should be doing it because that is what the role demands. Not because a quarterly incentive scheme temporarily raised the stakes. Do that well, do it consistently, and then you have every right to demand to be paid properly for it. If the incentive is the only thing driving the work, that is a different problem entirely. About the contributor Robert Woodford is Founding Director of The Marketing Junction , a recruitment marketing consultancy supporting agencies with strategy, lead generation and commercial growth. He has spent more than a decade advising recruitment businesses on marketing strategy and performance. Other perspectives in this series: Wayne Brophy: Should recruitment marketing be incentivised? My view after 20+ years in recruitment Amity Watts: Why recruitment marketers should be commercially incentivised Will Astbury: As recruitment marketer, bonus schemes have been responsible for my success The views expressed in this article are those of the individual contributor and do not necessarily reflect the views of SourceFlow Want more insight on recruitment marketing incentives? Download the Recruitment Marketing Playbook from SourceFlow for more perspectives from recruitment leaders and marketers on commercial performance, incentives and growth in recruitment.

This article is part of SourceFlow’s “Should recruitment marketers be incentivised?” series, where recruitment leaders and marketers share different perspectives on incentives, commission structures and commercial performance in recruitment marketing. Recruitment is a ruthlessly commercial sector. Money is the language, revenue is the metric, targets are the heartbeat. And yet, for years, the people responsible for building the brand, filling the pipeline and supporting business development have been operating without a stake in the game. I think this needs to change. Two very different motivations: who joins recruitment and why Consultants are, at their core, commercially wired. Nobody stumbles into recruitment because they fancy a career in altruism. They get in because they’re good with people, they understand people and business, and they are financially motivated. That combination makes them very well suited to the job. Sales and money go hand in hand, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Marketers are different. They come in through creativity, curiosity, problem-solving, words, design and data. Historically, marketing has been underpaid across most sectors, with a quiet expectation that you do it for the love of the craft. There’s a lingering “arty” stigma attached to creative roles that has suppressed salaries for decades. Put those two worlds together in the same business and you can see exactly where the siloed departments have come from. Marketing used to be a bolt-on. It isn’t anymore. For a long time, recruitment businesses treated marketing as a nice-to-have. Make the brand look presentable. Update the social channels. Take the team photos. Write a few blogs. It was lovely until it lasted, but things have changed. The challenges recruitment businesses have faced over the last several years: tightening markets, harder business development, more noise and more competition, have fundamentally changed what marketing needs to do. Sales does the one-to-one. Marketing does the one-to-many. Both should be pointing in the same direction. Marketing is still seen as a cost centre Here’s the mindset shift too many recruitment businesses still haven’t made: marketing is not a cost centre, it is a revenue driver. Treating it as the former is an outdated way of running a business, and it shows. When marketing is positioned as overhead rather than investment, it gets under-resourced, under-briefed and undervalued. Goals become vague. Strategy gets disconnected from the commercial plan. And the marketer, however talented, is set up to underperform because nobody has clearly defined what winning looks like for them. The marketing function, regardless of its size or make-up, should have specific goals and genuine alignment with the business strategy. Not a version of the strategy that gets shared six months late. The actual strategy, from the start. So, should recruitment marketers be commercially incentivised? Absolutely. Marketing is no longer a support function. It is a revenue function. So why aren’t we treating them that way? Recruitment businesses already incentivise the people responsible for converting opportunities into revenue. It makes no sense to exclude the people responsible for building the brand, generating demand, supporting business development and creating those opportunities in the first place. A properly executed salary guide generates conversations, introductions and placements. That drives revenue. An event supported by the marketing team, with the right attendee list and customer experience, gives consultants room to do what they do best. That drives revenue. A well-built SEO strategy brings more relevant traffic to the website, more CV uploads and more placement opportunities. That drives revenue. A database management and automation strategy can reactivate dormant clients and resurface relationships that would otherwise have been lost. That drives revenue. Done well, and with the right support and investment, your marketer could be as commercially valuable as your top-billing consultant. Key principles to remember 1. Marketing is no longer a bolt-on Marketing can no longer sit at the side of the business looking decorative. It needs to perform, contribute to revenue and work alongside sales towards the same commercial outcomes. 2. Recruitment marketing should be commercially incentivised If you want the best from people, you incentivise them. That’s not controversial. The strongest incentive models connect marketing reward to measurable business outcomes: placements, lead generation, revenue influence, and commercial objectives. 3. Fixed-sum models often work best The gold standard is tying marketing reward directly to placement value, but marketers should not absorb the volatility of inconsistent consultant performance. That’s why fixed-sum models can work well: 250 per website placement 3% of placement value Quarterly commercial objectives tied to clear KPIs Simple enough to administer. Meaningful enough to motivate. 4. It’s not all about cash The businesses that really get this are the ones bringing marketers into the wider commercial culture: Quarterly trips Lunch clubs Team incentives Shared commercial recognition That changes the dynamic and gets the marketing department thinking differently. 5. Incentivisation should create alignment, not friction The marketer wants the consultant to convert. The consultant wants the marketer to deliver the lead. Done well, commercial incentivisation creates alignment around the same strategy and the same commercial goals. That’s how high-performing recruitment businesses operate. 6. Clear objectives matter Incentives only work when expectations are clear. SMART objectives, measurable goals and commercial alignment should form the foundation of any reward structure. And if the business hits or exceeds its targets? Everyone should share in that. About the contributor Amity Watts is Client Services Director at Kitto , a recruitment marketing agency built on the belief that recruitment is a marketing job. With more than 20 years in marketing, including seven years building marketing functions inside recruitment businesses, she advises, mentors and advocates for marketing’s place at the commercial table. Other perspectives in this series: Wayne Brophy: Should recruitment marketing be incentivised? My view after 20+ years in recruitment Robert Woodford: Recruitment marketers SHOULDN’T be incentivised Will Astbury: As recruitment marketer, bonus schemes have been responsible for my success The views expressed in this article are those of the individual contributor and do not necessarily reflect the views of SourceFlow Want more insight on recruitment marketing incentives? Download the Recruitment Marketing Playbook from SourceFlow for more perspectives from recruitment leaders and marketers on what drives commercial growth in recruitment.

This article is part of SourceFlow’s “Should recruitment marketers be incentivised?” series, where recruitment leaders and marketers share different perspectives on incentives, commission structures and commercial performance in recruitment marketing. I absolutely believe recruitment marketing should be incentivised, but only when it’s tied to genuine commercial value. With more than 20 years’ experience in recruitment, I’ve seen first-hand how effective marketing can become a major revenue generator for a recruitment business. For me, recruitment marketing is not simply a support function or a brand-building exercise. It keeps the business front of mind, creates demand, attracts candidates, warms up clients and generates high-quality inbound leads. What I don’t agree with is rewarding vanity metrics. Likes, followers, impressions and engagement may have some value, but they should not form the foundation of a reward scheme. Otherwise, you risk encouraging noise instead of meaningful business activity. Instead, marketing incentives should be tied to quality lead generation, conversion and revenue influence. At Cast, some of the most successful incentive structures we introduced focused on marketing-generated inbound leads. These leads were tracked carefully and consistently converted into retained business at a higher rate than many consultant-generated leads. As a result, the marketing team was rewarded when their work created genuine commercial opportunities. The importance of attribution For marketing incentives to work, there needs to be a clear and trusted system for tracking where leads come from. In my business, marketing leads had to come through specific routes such as: Website forms A dedicated marketing inbox Tracked phone lines Everything was logged in the CRM, and the source of each opportunity was visible across the wider business. This avoided disputes over ownership and made marketing’s contribution far easier to measure. The risk of rewarding the wrong output One of the challenges with incentivising marketing is that teams can become too focused on the wrong outputs. I’ve seen businesses reward lead volume without enough focus on lead quality or commercial value. The strongest incentive schemes connect marketing activity to conversion, retained work and revenue. I also think recruitment businesses can change direction too quickly. Market positioning, brand building and demand creation are not quick fixes. They require consistency, patience and proper execution. Recruitment businesses also need to think beyond short-term billings I also believe recruitment businesses need to think beyond short-term billings. While short-term incentives can create energy and momentum, they should not come at the expense of long-term market positioning. Recruitment marketing often creates value before a deal exists by building trust, visibility and credibility in the market, especially in larger or scaling businesses where brand, content and market presence can materially improve future sales performance. So, should recruitment marketing be incentivised? I believe recruitment marketing should be incentivised when it can prove a meaningful contribution to commercial outcomes. It should be directly connected to quality lead generation, conversion and revenue influence. The strongest incentive schemes do not reward visibility for visibility’s sake. They reward marketing for creating the demand, trust and market attention that ultimately leads to revenue. Key principles to remember: 1. Treat recruitment marketing as a revenue generator Marketing should not sit on the sidelines as a support function. It can become one of the biggest contributors to growth. 2. Do not reward vanity metrics Likes, followers and impressions should not be incentivised unless they connect to genuine business outcomes. 3. Incentivise quality, not volume The focus should be on high-quality inbound leads, retained opportunities and revenue influence not simply the number of leads generated. 4. Build a clear attribution process Tracked forms, dedicated inboxes, call tracking and CRM discipline are essential if marketing incentives are going to be trusted. 5. Balance short-term revenue with long-term market positioning Recruitment businesses often reward immediate billings, but marketing also plays a vital role in building future demand, trust and credibility. About the contributor Wayne Brophy is the founder and former owner of Cast UK, Cast USA and The Talent Team. With more than 20 years’ experience in recruitment, he has built and scaled specialist recruitment businesses across multiple markets. Other perspectives in this series: Amity Watts: Why recruitment marketers should be commercially incentivised Robert Woodford: Recruitment marketers SHOULDN’T be incentivised Will Astbury: As recruitment marketer, bonus schemes have been responsible for my success The views expressed in this article are those of the individual contributor and do not necessarily reflect the views of SourceFlow Want more insight on recruitment marketing incentives? Download the Recruitment Marketing Playbook from SourceFlow for more insights from recruitment leaders, founders and marketers on what drives commercial growth in recruitment.

Inside SourceFlow’s recruitment marketing event (and why you should be at the next one) Most recruitment marketing looks good until you try to run it inside an agency. Different teams, different priorities, and usually half the data missingthat’s where most strategies start to fall apart. Here’s a look back at our recent event, and a few highlights worth taking back to your team From The Source x Manchester: Lunch & Learn Our latest Manchester session brought together marketers, agency leaders, and ops teams in the Northern Quarter for an afternoon of speaker sessions and a leadership panel. The discussion was about how marketing is assessed inside real businesses: cost, contribution, and commercial impact. Between them, the speakers covered agency leadership, in-house marketing, and commercial strategy. The sessions stayed close to the questions teams are dealing with day to day. Here’s a topline view of what was covered: Ben Browning - Revenue Architect & Founder, Be Resonant Ben broke down how sales and marketing alignment plays out inside agencies, and what changes when both functions work towards the same outcomes. He challenged the idea of running them separately, pushing instead for a single operating model (Account Based Sales) built around shared pipeline and revenue goals. Jenny Wood - Global Head of Marketing, Salt Jenny brought the focus back to brand clarity. As more content becomes automated and reliant on AI LLMs, teams that aren’t clear on who they help and how, quickly blend in. She advocated for identifying the uniqueness and expertise within agencies’ company brands, and of the personal brands of their consultants. Kris Holland - Founder, Kitto Kris tied marketing back to commercial outcomes. Meetings, vacancies, and placements, not just activity. The point wasn’t perfect tracking, but consistent use of data to show what’s working and have better conversations with leadership. Panel discussion Wayne Brophy, Brian Johnson, Jeanette Barrowcliffe, and Victoria Short, shared how marketing is judged inside agencies, specifically, where strategies hold up and where they fall short. Here are just a few of the hottest takeaways from the day: Marketing only adds value when it connects to how the business makes money. Most gaps happen after the campaign. Follow-up, ownership, and data consistency Marketing and consultants need to work to the same goals, with shared targets and pipeline Leaders look for simple, visible progress over complex plans For a deeper dive, you can read the full recap here . Join us at From The Source X LDN in May Join us in London for the next event in the series, From The Source X LDN. On the day, we’ll cover: How marketing is being used to generate pipeline, not just activity What’s working across websites, content, and campaigns How teams are aligning marketing and consultants more effectively Where strategies fall short once they hit real-world pressure There’s also time built in to talk things through with others doing similar roles. Whether that’s comparing approaches, challenges, or what you’re trying to improve this year. We’re also working more closely with The Lonely Marketers , who are now officially supporting the series. If this is something you’re working through in your own team, the next session builds on exactly the same conversations. Learn more about the event here: From The Source X LDN recruitment marketing event May 2026