Winning clients · Lesson 13 of 18 · 7 min
You have a ranked list and a named person on each row. Now the part that decides whether any of it produces a client — and the part that quietly collapses first when you get busy delivering.
Hiring managers receive a great deal of agency contact. Almost all of it opens with the agency rather than with them, offers to place anyone anywhere, and asks for thirty minutes. The bar is therefore not high, but it is specific: your message has to be visibly about their situation within the first line.
Five parts, and the last one is the hardest to obey.
A reason you are writing to them specifically
Not "I noticed your company is growing". The actual observation: the role that has been open eleven weeks, the four positions in one team, the site that just opened. If you cannot name a specific reason, you are sending a template and it will be read as one.
A single sentence about what you do
One. Narrow enough to be credible — the vertical, the roles, the market. A generalist claim to place anyone anywhere is the fastest way to be filed as noise, because it describes every agency that has ever emailed them.
Something that suggests you understand the problem
A sentence that only somebody who knows this hiring market would write. Why that role is hard right now, what candidates in it are actually asking for, what usually stalls those searches. This is the part that separates you, and it is the part most messages skip.
One small, specific ask
A short call, a couple of profiles, an answer to one question. Not a meeting to explore a partnership. The ask should cost less to accept than to decline, and it should be answerable in one line.
Nothing else
No attachments, no capability deck, no list of every sector you cover, no paragraph about your commitment to quality. Every additional sentence lowers the chance the message is read at all.
This is the single most consequential thing in this lesson. A first message is the opening of a sequence, not a test of the channel — most of the replies you will get arrive later, when the timing happens to align or the reader finally has a moment.
Which means an agency that sends fifty first messages, gets little back and concludes that cold outreach does not work has not tested cold outreach. It has tested sending something once.
First contact
The full message above. This is the one most people obsess over, and it is not where most of your replies will come from.
Second contact, a few days later
Shorter, and adding something rather than repeating. A relevant profile, a note about the market for that role, a piece of information they can use whether or not they reply. Never "just bumping this to the top of your inbox".
Third contact, the following week
Different angle. If the first two were about the open role, this one might be about a candidate you have, or a different problem the same manager has. Same person, different door.
Fourth contact, and the close
A short, genuinely final message that makes it easy to say no and easy to say later. "If this is not a priority, I will stop here — happy to check back in a quarter." This message gets more honest replies than the three before it combined.
Then stop, and diarise
Do not keep going. Put the date in, and come back when the situation may have changed — a new posting, a new round, a new quarter. Persistence past the close is how a prospect becomes a permanent no.
Check yourself
You send a first message to fifty hiring managers and get almost no replies. What is the most likely explanation?
Which of these is the better ask in a first message to a manager with a role open eleven weeks?
Leading with yourself
A first paragraph about your agency, your years of experience and your commitment to partnership. The reader is deciding in two seconds whether this is about them.
Fake personalisation
A merged company name inside an otherwise generic message, or a compliment about their "impressive growth". Hiring managers see dozens of these and it actively signals volume-sending.
Asking for thirty minutes
A meeting with a stranger to discuss a partnership is a large ask. A two-line answer to a specific question is a small one, and it starts the same relationship.
Sending once and calling the channel dead
Most replies come from the second, third and fourth message. An agency that sends once and concludes cold outreach does not work has tested nothing.
Volume without narrowing
Sending more of a message that says nothing specific does not improve results, it just spends the list faster — and, on email, damages the domain you will need later.
Outreach competes with delivery, and delivery always wins. A live search with a deadline is urgent; the messages that fill next quarter are not. This is why new agencies grow in bursts and then stall — the business development stops the moment the first placements land, and restarts when the pipeline is already empty.
There are two answers to that. Protect the time, honestly and in the calendar. Or automate the parts that are mechanical, which is what the next lesson is about — including where automation does not help.
Key takeaways
Open with the specific reason you are writing to them — the role that has been open for weeks, the several positions in one team — rather than with your agency. Add one sentence on what you do, narrow enough to be credible. Then one sentence that shows you understand why that particular search is hard, which is the part that distinguishes you. Finish with a small, specific ask that can be answered in a line. No attachments and no capability deck.
Three or four contacts spread over two to three weeks is a reasonable sequence, with each one adding something rather than repeating the last, and a genuinely final message that makes it easy to say no or to say later. Then stop and diarise a date to revisit. Most replies come from the follow-ups rather than the first message, which is why agencies that send once conclude that outreach does not work — and continuing indefinitely past the close turns a maybe into a permanent no.
Both, for different reasons. LinkedIn is better for being seen as a person and for roles where the manager is active there; email is better for detail, for attachments-free specifics, and for reaching people who ignore connection requests. The most reliable pattern is to use them together on the same prospect in a single sequence rather than treating them as separate campaigns. Whichever you use, the message has to earn the reply — channel choice does not rescue a generic message.
Usually because the message could have been sent to anybody. Managers receive a lot of agency contact, nearly all of it opening with the agency rather than with their situation, offering to place anyone anywhere, and asking for a meeting. A message that names their actual open role, says something only someone who knows that market would say, and asks a question answerable in one line is a different object entirely — and it is rare enough to stand out on its own.
As early in the vacancy as you can. A role in its first week or two is a manager who still believes they will fill it themselves; a role that has been reposted is a manager who has run out of patience. Both are contactable, but the second is the one likely to act now. What does not work is contacting long after the fact — by the time a search has been running for months, other agencies are already on it.
Finished this lesson?
Next: Automating the loop with StaffingLeads
Progress is saved in this browser only — no account, nothing sent anywhere.