I disagree somewhat.  At least, in my experience:<p>Experience 1:  25 years old and applying for a $200k&#x2F;year job.  I didn&#x27;t get it :( but the recruiter had my back and significant sway with the employer.  He filled around 10 roles per year.  He was also buddy of the person I sat next to but this was unknown to me, I was cold-called for the role.  &quot;This is small-fry for me, I usually just fill $500k+ roles.&quot;<p>Experience 2:  Recently (10 years later) a recruiter asked me my expectation &quot;It&#x27;s in your interest to get me as much as possible&quot; was my response.  I _know_ there&#x27;s more to a job than financial package, but that was that question dealt with.  She called me after each interview within the hour, and gave me status updates every 2 days over a period of 4 weeks.  Happened to be in the same city on a trip, and had lunch together.  Nice lady.  Didn&#x27;t take the role in the end.  Still in contact, no bridges burned.<p>I also agree somewhat.<p>Experience 3:  I sit next to an HR Ops team that staff large tech companies.  A team of 20 people that download and forward CVs all day.  The level of technical questioning before forwarding a CV is &quot;How is your XXX language&quot; and that&#x27;s that.  Applicants are sorted and pigeon holed into buckets depending on existing role and package, and no more.  They have no bargaining power with a client (on either side) as they simply don&#x27;t understand anything related to the role.  Their KPI is how many roles filled, that&#x27;s all, and when the client gets unhappy they email the GM.<p>So, in my opinion, it&#x27;s mixed.  But some headhunters really are good.  Differentiate yourself, make yourself special, then the good headhunters will seek you out.