Viewing All Posts In The ‘Industry Commentary’ Category

It’s a Hard Job

How do you view the profession of Recruiting?  Grab a mirror and get your “Stewart Smalley” on because we’re about to search your soul as a Recruiter.

In my travels to companies as Director of AllianceQ, I often hear this objection when we present our solution;

How is your system going to help me find my double PhD, Biomechanical Nuclear Physicist? (or fill in any other absolute needle in a haystack profile for your industry)

My answer is always the same;

How do you find them today?

Answer: research lists, cold calls, lots of networking and hard core headhunting

Then THAT is how you are going to find them in the future.

It seems that many Corporate Recruiters are searching for easier ways to source difficult profiles and that search will always be in vain.  You see, Recruiting is a HARD JOB, or at least it should be.

Before the internet, the only way we found anyone was through a very tough and arduous process of cold calling, phone book research and faxing job descriptions.  Then the internet and eRecruitment was born and I think many recruiters have come to rely on the “ease” of internet recruiting to their ultimate demise.

If I ran the world (which I won’t because frankly I’d rather be sailing) Recruiters would be as revered in an organization as the top sales people are.  Why not, their job is just as tough and they contribute as significantly to the bottom line right?  Well, in “Phil-land” they would.  Here’s how.

I’d create a pyramid picture of the roles my department fills every year.  The broad base at the bottom are those repetitive, high turnover roles.  For every industry these are different but they are there in EVERY industry.  Then I’d move up to the next level where we are looking to fill the roles regularly but less frequently and then up to difficult and frequent then to impossible and frequent and then to impossible and infrequent and so on.  You get my drift.

Now anyone with a “Recruiter” title would never touch the bottom few job families in my world.  Instead, I’d find a way to automate that process (yes, it can be done) and allow my Recruiting Assistants to process these people.  I’d then take my now freed up Recruiters (who are dying to get on the phone and pull that needle out of that HUGE haystack) and make them heroes in the company by doing what Executives believe only Korn Ferry and Heidrick and Struggles can do.

I may not have slashed my headcount spend because what I’d save in not paying a bunch of low level Recruiters, I’d redistribute to my now Rock Star Recruiters in the way of retention bonuses, organizational impact bonuses etc. and I’d have a team made up of the best in the country because I’d be paying them like headhunters.

Many of you believe this can’t be done.  I’m not sure why.  Perhaps it is because you came into the industry after it was made easy by the internet, perhaps you believe that “recruiting” is a noun and not a verb.  Either way, these are times of change and I hope you’ll find the courage to re-create Recruiting, not just as a verb but as a very hard job occupied by really great salespeople who love the fight and can sell your company to your biggest competitor.

Recruiting will hopefully be a hard job again one day soon.

The “New” Monster?

Monster.com unveiled its new and improved site claiming;

Monster’s new job search is easier than ever! To apply for the job is 65% faster than before!

I know Monster has a crush of cubicles staffed with Product Managers who no doubt spent hundreds of man (or woman) hours talking to job seekers to develop their “new and improved” hyper-speed application process but Monster, did you also spend that time on the Recruiter side?  You know, that side that pays your fees and determines your future?  It seems that the New Monster is simply speeding up a problem created by the Old Monster.

After spending 15 years at a recruiting desk and having been a Monster, Careerbuilder et al user since their inception I can unequivocally tell you that allowing candidates to apply for the wrong jobs 65% faster is NOT what your paying customers want!  Monster added questionnaires, pre-screening tools etc to try to mitigate this issue but the facts are that a majority of candidates apply for a job they are not qualified to do.  This creates the millions of excess applications for jobs every year to Corporate America.

Proof that Monster didn’t do the due diligence on the Recruiter side is evident in this sales pitch to employers from their new site;

For employers, a faster, easier search process for seekers means more candidates than ever will make time to apply to your Job Posting.

I don’t know of 1 Recruiter who is looking for MORE candidates to apply to their postings.  As a matter of fact I would estimate that over 90% of Monster’s employers are looking for ways to streamline that number, not increase it.  By increasing the number of people who can now, faster than ever, apply for your jobs Monster is exacerbating the job posting issue for employers, not solving it.  The steps in the process are:

Job seekers search for postings that match what they want to do.  Maybe what they have actually done but certainly what they want to do even if they aren’t qualified. (no one applies for jobs they don’t want to do right?  Just see all the postings on Monster stating. “stay home, make millions” – the process appeals to the WANTS of a job seeker, not the qualifications of one)

Job seeker hits “apply now” button on Monster job posting which traditionally takes them to the employers career site where they actually apply for the job in the employers ATS.

Recruiter sifts through the first 20-25 applications until a viable pool of candidates is found (5-7) and then begins the interview process.

Recruiter rarely if ever reviews any applications that come in after interview process has started (#26 +) THUS creating the black hole of recruitment.

I know of Recruiters who get between 100-250 applications for every job they post (multiply times 30 open positions and you can see why “More” is not “better”)

If Monster was listening to the people who pay their bills (hefty bills with the Super Bowl ads to come this year) they would be focused on making it slower and more thoughtful to apply for a job not 65% faster and easier. 

New year, same Monster.

Paying it Forward

It is good to see that in this tough economy, people have not lost their ability to sympathize with those who are conducting a job search.  Great post by Kelly Dingee on Fistful of Talent on this subject.

That said, I am amazed at how many recruiting departments are OK with continuing to let candidates sit in the “black hole” of recruitment.  This “black hole” is created by not communicating with candidates outside of the original “we got your application” email that is sent by the ATS.  I estimate that anywhere from 50% – 85% of the candidates that apply each year to Corporate America hear NOTHING after this acknowledgment! 

Now back to “paying it forward”.  Recruiters don’t want to deliver the “no thank you” message for fear that they will be inundated with calls from candidates asking “why not?”.  These are long held beliefs that seem to be driving business process decisions even though it is unfounded.  I know of several F100 companies who communicate with ALL candidates after the initial aknowledgement and close the loop with 100% of the applicants – WITHOUT this imaginary call volume.  They simply give the candidate information that they are longing to have AND are offering them help in continuing their job search.

Pay it forward is as simple as choosing to communicate with your candidates and giving them information about their application.  Really, it is very simple.

Problem or Opportunity?

In an article from Monday by Dr. Sullivan titled;

Managing Recruiting During an Economic Downturn: The Top 10 Action Steps to Take

he also mentions “10 Recruiting Problems You Might Face During Tough Economic Times”.  Problem #4 is of high interest to me.

An increased volume of traffic. Normally, all great recruiters focus on the employed candidate (the so-called passive candidates). However, layoffs and high unemployment may mean that some high-quality people are now available among the ranks of the unemployed. Unfortunately, if you actively recruit during tough times, the volume of mediocre but enthusiastic unemployed people who will apply for your jobs will also increase dramatically.

So I’m a glass half full guy and see this as an opportunity and not a problem.  Increased flow of applicants during times of higher unemployment is one of the greatest opportunities a company has to cement its employment brand as positive.  How you treat the “mediocre but enthusiastic” (really judgemental and subjective and NOT my words) applicant today dictates your success when the unemployment rate dives and we are back fighting for talent.

Here’s the logic.  When you have 5 openings in marketing (as opposed to 55 during high growth boom days) it is very easy to classify really good candidates as “mediocre and enthusiastic” because it’s a sellers market and you and your hiring manager can be as picky as possible for these few hires.  But when the market comes back and it is once again a buyer’s market (we all know it will happen) how you treated these candidates will come back to bite you.  Remember, we are still in the age of Facebook, myspace, the vault etc. so if you fail to make a positive impression on the hoardes of people who need you today, you will find yourself wanting when you need them.  And you will.

Here’s the action plan (so simple it’s crazy that it isn’t being done by most companies):

1. Disposition everyone.  No, not only in the ATS to cover your EEO butt but actually communicate with everyone who has applied to your company through the automated email process available in everyone’s ATS.  Most companies don’t understand that not communicating with someone who has applied is NEVER an acceptable business rule.
2. Talk to anyone who meets minimum qualifications.  Really, you don’t have time?  5 openings in Marketing?  What are you doing if you aren’t talking to candidates?  Find the candidates who meet your needs today or who MAY meet your needs in future growth times and treat them like diamonds, not dirt.
3. Give people reasons.  Again, most ATS vendors allow you to add a reason; doesn’t meet minimum qualifications, wrong location, salary too high etc.. but recruiting departments turn off this functionality because they don’t want to “upset” a candidate (meaning they don’t want to have to defend their decision in the event a rejected candidate calls)
4. Don’t trust me, trust your candidates.  Again, you have time (I know you do) so hold an impromptu candidate focus group and find out what your candidates (selected and not selected) want from you.  You’ll find they simply want communication and not to fall into the black hole that corporate recruiting departments create to protect themselves.

The true measure of your employment brand is how you treat the people you CAN’T hire, not how you treat the people you desperately need.

Doomsday Predictions

It’s mid October and I just read my first “here’s who will fail and who will succeed” prediction article by Joel Cheesman.  I expect we’ll see them from Wheeler, Sullivan etc. coming soon just like we always see the “HOT new companies” predictions each year.

How many are really right?  In my experience, not many.

Joel mentions the demise of Itzbig as being the indicator that many, not only companies (jobster) but classes of companies (eHarmonies), will fail in the current economy.  But two things bother me about his predictions;

1. In the loser list, he mentions that recruiting budgets are being slashed yet #1 on his winners list is LInkedin, the most expensive corporate recruiting solution (paid solution – it’s still free to use it the headhunter way) on the market.  I heard that they are getting over $200K a year from Microsoft for the pleasure of using their solution so if budgets are getting cut, how does this one win?
2. Joel mentions;

And when employers batten down the hatches of recruiting dollars, they stay with tried and true methods instead of straying outside of their comfort zones.

To me, this is criminal if true.  What’s tried and true is old and false.  Pulling your head into the shell, putting it into the sand and hoping that the economy comes back before the C-suite realizes that the recruiting department is still costing the company too much money is why Joel also quotes an industry leader as saying “Our industry is f***ed!

If Corporate Recruiting departments stop striving to be great in difficult times, if they completely reverse the momentum they’ve created in the last few years, if they stop reviewing new technologies and techniques that can help solve once and for all the problems that plague them – then I agree,

“Our industry is f***ed!”

Frustrated Job Seekers

Completing the concept that a fragmented internet recruiting world is ruining online recruiting, here is an article that touches on the job seeker frustration.  In it, Jennifer Hamm mentions some of the frustrations:

Continue reading

Wanted: Recruiters

I’ve just returned from OnRec in Chicago and am wondering;

Are there Recruiters out there?

It seems that advertising has taken over and today the Internet is being used to solicit candidates rather than find them.  (apologies to Shally and Dave) If you want to argue with me, then tell me why are job boards so prolific and why are they all run by ex-advertising guys?

When I started in recruiting in 1992, I had a desk, a yellow pages and a phone.  I know, it sounds like the old “hike up a hill in bare-feet” routine of the middle aged man but seriously, recruiting is about finding talent not waiting for it to come to you.  The Internet should have helped this but the ADMEN got ahold of it and today it is a fragmented mess of confusion for recruiters and job seekers.  Thanks Madison Ave!

Continue reading

The Politics of Recruiting

William Uranga NAILED IT today in his post on Fistful of Talent comparing the selection of Biden and Palin to similarities in the recruiting process.  Way to go William!

For me, the net takeaway is that hiring the RESUME is the safe, conservative and least effective way to hire anyone, VP of IT or VP of the United States.  (Imagine putting Sarah Palin’s resume in front of a typical hiring manager, “not enough industry experience, not enough years of expereience” blah, blah, blah)

If you want to shake up Washington DC or simply shake up the marketing department, hire the most talented, driven and potentially game changing individual you can find.  Use your insticts, your advisors and an eye to the future.  All it takes is courage, vision and leadership.  Any hiring managers out there fit this profile?

De-Fragment for Increased Efficiency

If this was posted on CNET or TECHCRUNCH, you might think it was about your computer.  But this is a recruiting blog and this comment is about the world of online recruiting.  In the years since the dot-com crash, the online recruiting world has become so fragmented it is now working against recruiting departments and job seekers.

Let me explain.  Continue reading

Dating and Recruiting

I just read a great article on the ERE by Amy Kimmes.

The only addition I have is that when you break up, do it gracefully.

Recruiting Application:
Take the time to treat the candidate who has interviewed with your company with the dignity and respect they showed you.
give them feedback
give them hope
give them a link to AllianceQ!