Who is responsible for 'difficult hiring managers?'

The term 'a difficult hiring manager' has surfaced a few too many times this past week and it got me thinking.  Just who is responsible when a client becomes 'difficult'?  Is this a cause or an affect?  A symptom or the illness?

Within the context of hiring, a difficult hiring manager generally falls under one of four types:

Overly Demanding - They want 10 years of PHP, six years of the latest open-source tools and (well you get the picture.)

Overly Busy - No matter what you try, this hiring manager doesn't have 30 minutes to screen your candidate, much less put together the five team members to conduct the on-site interview.

I know it when I see it - Nothing like a moving target to get your recruiting juices flowing.

I'll let you now who I want to make an offer to -  A manager like this might have a giant contact list of people that they have worked with in the past, or they might have a headhunter (in their pocket - or possibly the other way around.)

The hiring issues around each of these are different, sometimes difficult to maneuver around/through, and might even leave you and your company open to litigation.  Sound fun yet?

So, back to the original question... Just who is responsible here?  What can or should be done?  Is it a symptom or the illness.

The "who" is generally NOT the recruiter.  Human Resources and the line management are really the responsible parties here.  HR is responsible for organizational (EG Personnel) development, training, etc., and a potential manager that exhibits these behaviors really needs to have a development (TRAINING) program signed and and a part of their review cycle before they take the reigns.  Line management should also be 'in the know' to recognize who are the real leaders, the real managers, the ones that are not only 'technically savvy' but maybe more importantly are the ones that really understand people, project and time management.  So, a difficult hiring manager is a symptom of an underlying issue.  It might be a lack of Staffing taking responsibility, control or having respect from the client group.  Or it might be a systemic issue of promoting without developing, promoting the wrong person, etc.

Lets assume that you're the new Talent Manager and low and behold... you've got a few difficult managers.  What next?

Answer: Write your engagement agreement down, get it signed by the hiring Manager & all members of the hiring team(s), the approvers (next level up in the chain of command)... and live by it.  Deliver, quantify.  Request feedback - quantify, measure the pipeline- quantify and report it to the hiring manager and team.  Basically, run your function like a professional service, be the Staffing Consultant that you can be, and deliver above the agreed upon Quality of Service (QOS) document.

QOS components: (Completed & agreed upon)

1. Job description (removes, both overly demanding & I know it when I see it clients)
2. Response, req review & interview commitments (removes the overly busy client)
3. Role & responsibilities  (or "Staffing is the Recruiter - there will be no pocket candidates") Any candidate that can show that they were treated differently than every other candidate in the hiring process has a very good shot at wining a discrimination case.
4. Budgeted compensation (hey it is a place to start)
5. Approvals by everyone

I'll be adding more, but I'd like to keep the talent acquisition process nimble and not a process drone.