One Year In: A Q&A With Dan Tudor, JMC's In-House Recruitment Consultant

Dan Tudor joined JMC Legal as our in-house recruitment consultant, and head of the in-house desk, a little over a year ago. In that time, he's grown the team, delivered one of the most significant placements in the firm's history, and helped firm JMC's presence in a number of new sectors. We sat down with Dan to talk about what's changed since he started, what he's learned, and what he's working towards next.

You've just hit one year at JMC. What does the role look like day to day now compared with when you started?

The biggest change has been how busy we've got with inbound demand. When I started, we had fewer active client mandates and we had to be especially proactive. Over time, the investment JMC put into content marketing, SEO and building a brand for the in-house arm started to pay off.

The challenge has flipped over the last six months: it's no longer a lack of work, it's keeping up with delivery, it's a great problem to have. That's part of why we expanded our in-house team and have been joined by Dan. Even though he's only been here a week, he's already doubled our delivery capacity.

Looking back, what's the biggest way your approach to recruitment has changed over the past twelve months?

Recruitment has been changing throughout the fifteen years I've been doing this job — it never stops. One thing I'm critical of in this industry is that a lot of recruitment companies settle on a process early on and then repeat it indefinitely. I don't think that's adaptable enough. Market conditions change, and so do client requirements.

Take legal, for example: three years ago nobody was asking about AI tools. Now it's one of the first things clients want to know — whether candidates are familiar with using them. If what clients need keeps changing, our service has to change with it. I don't work the way I did ten years ago, and I don't believe there's a single formula for good recruitment.

"A recruiter needs to understand businesses far more than they understand job descriptions, CVs or keywords."

What I focus on, and what I'm building the team around, is that a recruiter needs to understand businesses far more than they understand job descriptions, CVs or keywords. 

We train people to understand how a business actually works: what it does, who it sells to and why, how it builds its products, what challenges it faces, what the competition looks like, and its growth and pricing strategy. That applies to any type of recruitment, but in law specifically, understanding the business tells you what agreements a company needs to sign, what regulations and licences it needs to meet, how complex its supply chain is, what commercial agreements it needs, how sponsorship works, and what export regulations apply if it operates across different jurisdictions.

Everyone we bring into the in-house team at JMC needs to learn how to recruit, and they'll pick up the legal knowledge on the job. But the third piece, the one I focus on heavily, is teaching them what a business actually does. It's important to me that if I asked a member of my team if they knew how a company goes from an idea in someone's bedroom to being sold for a billion pounds, that after a few months of being with us, they could tell me.

You've run some interesting and varied processes this year. Is there a placement or company that stood out?

I'd give two answers here. The first stands out simply because I found it interesting: working with the Formula E team. The work itself wasn't particularly different or challenging, but I have a personal interest in motorsport, so it was good to speak with the client, the team principal, and catch up on how race weekends had gone. They finished P2 in one race, and we got to talk through it. That's a bit different from the usual conversation.

"It's about making sure a country meets its democratic obligations — the kind of impact you'd normally only see referenced on the news."

In terms of the work itself, though, the placement that stands out is the Head of Legal Services for the Scottish Parliament. It's a senior, high-profile hire, and the impact goes well beyond a typical profit-and-loss line. It's about making sure a country meets its democratic obligations — that the constitution is upheld, and that the kind of mistakes or misconduct that damage public trust in democracy don't happen. That's the sort of impact you'd normally only see referenced on the news, and being part of getting that role right mattered.

What's the hardest part of the job that people outside recruitment tend to underestimate?

A lot of people see recruitment as untrustworthy, or as an industry that doesn't operate with integrity. It would be wrong to say that doesn't exist at all — I've seen it myself, and unfortunately it's a real part of the industry. But that's true of most industries; we don't assume everyone in banking is dishonest, even though the sector nearly brought down the economy in 2008.

What people often miss is that when a candidate doesn't hear back quickly, it's rarely because the recruiter doesn't care, it's usually volume. If three hundred people apply to one job advert over a weekend, personally following up with every one of them could take an entire week. The economics just don't allow a fully personal response for everyone who'd like one.

That's probably the hardest part of the job, wanting to give that level of service, but having to pick and choose where you can, because there are only so many hours in the day.

What's one piece of advice you'd give someone working with a recruiter for the first time?

On the candidate side, my advice is to ask questions about the client beyond the basics — the job itself, where you'd be working, the compensation package. A recruiter who knows what they're doing, and can add real value to your search, should know the business they're representing in much more depth. Ask what the company does, who its main clients and markets are, what sectors it sells into, how its departments work together, and where you'd sit within it. The more you ask about how the business actually operates, the clearer it becomes whether that recruiter actually knows the client, or is just working from a job spec they'll send to the next candidate too.

On the client side, it's the same principle in reverse. A good recruiter should be asking you these questions from the start. If a recruiter is happy to take a job description, have a five-minute call on terms, and then start sending candidates over, they don't know your business — they might send you the right people, but they're doing it blind.

"Someone who accepts an offer without knowing anything about you is usually doing it because they're desperate, not because they're convinced."

I often tell clients this catches them off guard, and sometimes they're reluctant to share that much detail. But the strongest candidates, the ones with options, because they're usually already in good roles, only accept an offer once they've bought into the vision of what you're building, and they can only do that if they properly understand the company. Someone who accepts an offer without knowing anything about you is usually doing it because they're desperate, not because they're convinced.

What's the one goal you're setting yourself for year two?

A few things, but the main one is growing the team to a minimum of four full-time employees, likely closer to five or six by the end of next year. That growth needs to happen alongside securing enough client demand, so a team of five or six is kept as busy as our team of two is right now, it all needs to scale together.

If you're looking to work with a consultant who takes the time to understand what exactly it is you're looking for in your next role or in house legal hire, get in touch with Daniel to find out how he can help.