Blog

The Five: Things to Know about LinkedIn Lite

When it comes to technology, people want it all. And then they realize that maybe they want it not so much. Remember how Facebook introduced Facebook Lite a few years back and then went on to introduce Facebook Messenger Lite? They realized that if they want to gain the most users, they had to accept that some people have crappy old phones. So they created a lighter version of the app that could work on 2G and 3G networks.The LinkedIn Mobile app takes up a whopping 27 MB on the Android phone. And now, starting in India, they have launched Linkedin Lite.

Here are some interesting facts.

1.) LinkedIn Lite app is less than 1 MB in size.

2.) The new app can load pages in five seconds “even on a 2G network.”

It will also help those of us with spotty networks and limited storage.

3.) It will reduce data usage by 80 percent.

4.) India has emerged as a top market for LinkedIn in the Asia Pacific, contributing 42 million users. It actually launched there in September.

5.) LinkedIn reportedly plans to launch in 60 countries with limited mobile coverage in the coming weeks and months.

The lite version still allows you to see your normal news feed, personal profile, networks, messaging, and notifications. Just not the other stuff that takes up too much data.Unfortunately, there are no Premium features available with LinkedIn Lite, including:

  • Background image
  • Premium Insights in the job details page
  • Search filters
  • Sending InMail messages
  • LinkedIn Learning

 

“Besides providing a fast, data-light solution for professionals in slow network areas, we hope the LinkedIn Lite app will democratize access to economic opportunity. Regardless of their device or location, we hope to level the playing field for all LinkedIn members so they can get closer to their dream jobs, grow their networks and become more successful,” said Akshay Kothari, LinkedIn’s country manager for India. It should be interesting to see how many users flock to the “Lite side” of apps.

LinkedinLite
Akshay Kothari, Head of LinkedIn India

The Liquid Workforce: It’s Not Science Fiction, It’s Our New Normal

Today, some 38 percent of workers say they feel more comfortable working as an agile employee (aka independent) than a permanent employee.

Why? Here are the Top 3 reasons:

  1. Flexibility of Hours;
  2. More Control over my Career;” and,
  3. I can pursue my passion” (in that order).

By 2019 it’s estimated that up to 50 percent of the workforce will be “agile,” according to the Randstad 2025 Workplace Report.

How did we get here? We are in the digital age, with multi-functional devices connecting us, brick and mortar giving way to a remote workforce and co-working spaces. Millennials don’t need a pat on the head, they want intelligent feedback, inspiration, leadership, and to make a difference.

Maybe we should do a better job of understanding them as they will be 50 percent of our workforce in a couple years. And they redefine loyalty — they won’t stay if they are not engaged, and maybe that trumps the 20 year veteran who really stopped trying somewhere along the 12 year mark but didn’t tell you.

The Workforce model is changing to a “fully liquid enterprise”

Per Deloitte’s 2017 Global Human Capital Trends, we are moving away from a full time workforce and skill requirements to multiple workforces and technologies defining delivery. The old style hierarchal leadership is on its way out, along with big mahogany desks and side bar of scotch.

Yes, Don Draper has left the building.

Today, we are moving to a flexible organizational structure; now it’s about co-creating rather than managing. With artificial intelligence and data at workers’ fingertips, more decisions will happen on the front line, where work occurs. Per Accenture’s Technology Vision 2016 report, there will be a “fully liquid enterprise “operating with no full-time employees outside of the C-suite.

What exactly is the Liquid Workforce?

The data that the BLS (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics) has for these “non-traditional” workers is about a decade old and much has changed since then.

The “Liquid Workforce” is made up of traditional employees and a wide variety of non-employee workers including temporary workers, independent contractors/consultants/ freelancers, volunteers, outsourced resources, and even non-human options such as robots, drones and cognitive computing applications.

This workforce allows companies to optimize competitive performance, to react to fluctuating markets and demand as well as balance labor costs and workforce agility. It’s finding the right combination of internal employees, freelancers and technology for each new project.

This “fluidity” allows companies to win by focusing on workplace innovation and viewing their people as a strategic differentiator. The lines are being blurred between permanent, contingent, IC, cloud and crowd sourcing. Leading companies are using collaboration tools and cloud-based workflows that empower anytime, anywhere working.

What is the right combination of internal employees, freelancers and technology for each new challenge? More importantly, what is your strategy to source and retain top talent for your fluid workforce?

Becoming uber cool so top talent will work (and stay) for you

You need to understand what motivates outside candidates to want to work for you, and then once they are in, how to get them to stay?

For starters, you need to hear them, and understand the Voice of your Customer (VOC). Often used in Lean and Six Sigma initiatives, this is about asking candidates and employees what your organization could do better.

Is the information you are providing to candidates enticing enough to earn a response from them? Are you responding to their needs in a timely fashion regards updates on their status and next steps in the process? What makes them want to stay once they are hired? These are just a couple of questions you could ask via brief surveys or polls to provide a better candidate experience.

Once you get top talent, how do you get their friends?

Here’s how: establish Brand Ambassadors.

A Brand Ambassador typically promotes a memorable experience related to your organization’s brand. In the case of candidate experience, you could include previous candidates, new hires, and tenured employees in your interview process to not only evaluate the candidate but also sell the opportunity through a lens that resonates with them.

This goes deeper than free yoga and dry cleaning, because candidates hear it from your employees, the people building your company. Companies such as Yelp, Hollister, and Sonic automotive have successfully implemented Brand Ambassador programs for internal initiatives and external marketing efforts to leverage real life social networks of their customers and employees to better gain market share.

We are entering a new era that some say is the biggest since the Industrial Revolution. The way we work, and the reason we work, is changing — and technology is a primary enabler.

The way we lead and grow a company is also changing, but what hasn’t changed are people, because they are and always have been the lifeblood of your company.

Keep that at the forefront and you will be successful.

Should We Fire Recruiters for the Wrong KPIs?

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are parameters by which organizations monitor the success or development of every staff member.

All companies have them and most people have their personal KPIs connected with their annual or semi-annual or annual, too. Managers and recruiters use KPIs for measuring performance, and as a time and task management tool to track productivity.

Every company has different KPIs and managers evaluate their teams based on these indicators. And, if you are a recruiter and you never heard about KPIs, then you are in luck!

An organization is only as good as the people who work in it. Therefore, KPIs should be developed and managed by someone who understands their merits and shortcomings and can strike a balance between them.

Typical Recruitment KPIs

Probably, the well-known and very easy to track KPIs are:

  • Number of submitted resumes;
  • Time to fill;
  • Number of placements; and
  • For agency recruiters, their KPIs are client calls/client meetings and the percentage of their commission, etc.

There are many other KPIs you can track. Below are some examples of the more important ones.

Application Completion Rates

If you need to fill out a four-page long registration, you’ll likely start feeling a little frustrated by page three, right? And what about your candidates?

This KPI indicator should be tracked by every company. Your long registration process could be the reason you’re not seeing enough candidates, and maybe because of that, good candidates are dropping out and leaving during the application process.

If you are not able to answer how many candidates are not finishing your registration and why they are leaving, you should start tracking it. If you track it, you can find any problem that your candidate could have with the registration form or with something as simple as a glitch on your career portal.

Whatever the case, keeping track of the application completion rate helps to investigate the drop-offs in your job application process. This could also include a variety of other reasons, such as inefficient optimization for mobile devices and too many input fields. Looking into these reasons might then allow you to change to an ATS or the development of a better web portal that makes for a smoother candidates/user experience.

From my personal experience, it’s important to see where you are losing candidates during the application process. If you identify these problems, and then you fix them, not only will you see more candidates in the pipeline, but you are also going to improve candidate experience.

Interview-to-Offer Conversion Rate

It is important to monitor the interview-to-offer ratio and offer-to-acceptance rate, because if you have been conducting interviews but not extending offers to candidates, then you need to look into why this is happening.

This could be an interesting indicator that could reveal that maybe your company is no longer attractive for candidates.

Maybe the new manager doing the interviewing is the person that is discouraging candidates because he is acting arrogant. Or, perhaps there is a difference between your expectation and that of the candidates. It could also be because there is a difference in culture, you are not competitive on the market (benefits or salary), or your competitors were hiring while you were waiting to get back to them.

Sources of Talent

It is important to know which sources offers up not only the most candidates but also the best candidates.

Knowing the right source is important because you can learn which one is helping you hire your top-performing employees and which is just costing you money. This will further help your hiring managers and leaders know where they should expend their resources in the future.

Every year you renew your contract with the job board that you’ve been using for years, and which their rep still claims is the “No. 1 job board in the country.” But, did you try to run a report on how many candidates you are getting from them?

Reports for the last three years could reveal that the number of candidates you get from them are dropping while their prices are growing. You should check how many people you’ve hired from them in the previous three years. When you do, maybe you will be surprised when you see the data.

Cost per Hire

This is one of the metrics that recruiters consistently rank as one of the most helpful in their planning.

Cost per hire helps show the relationship between recruitment efforts and the actual hiring of employees for an organization, and it can be easily understood by people who do not have a background in recruitment. Company leaders especially like this KPI as it ensures that recruitment efforts are feasible for the business while also taking into account the industry, size, and location of the establishment in question.

Mathematically, this KPI is expressed as: Cost per Hire = (External costs + Internal costs / Total Number of Hires)

Quality of Hire

As the manager, your responsibility is to balance the quality of candidates recruited with the costs incurred in the recruitment process.

In the assessment of a candidate’s quality — the quality of hire — parameters such as productivity (the length of time it took the recruit to get to an optimum performance level compared to the average time of their peers or predecessors), tenure (the length of time someone stays in the organization), scale (was there growth professionally and promotion internally?), and impact (contribution to the development of the organization) should be looked into.

Typical KPI Problems

Sometimes, the KPIs for the recruitment team are set up by managers who’ve never worked in recruitment or who don’t have much experience with it. Because of that, KPIs will not always reflect the current situation of the local market, and they can often go a long period of time before being updated.

The second problem is that the KPIs are sometimes set up without any previous analysis or plan.

KPIs don’t measure the true recruiting process, but only one small part of it (like only tracking the time it takes to fill a position or the number of hires). I hope that one day we will replace KPIs with Realistic Performance Indicators (RPIs), because the new indicators should be focusing on real performance and consider more things that reflect the current situation in the job market, the seniority of the role, and other typical indicators.

A KPI Riddle

I like riddles, and I have one for you.

You are the team leader of four recruiters. Your boss told you that the company is going through a crisis and you need to let one person go. The decision is up to you, so which person you will chose?

The first recruiter hired 12 candidates per year, the second hired 24, the third hired 28, and the last recruiter hired 36 candidates during the year.

Maybe if you see it in this format your decision will be easier.

  • First recruiter – 12 hires per year;
  • Second recruiter – 24 hires per year;
  • Third recruiter – 28 hires per year;
  • Fourth recruiter – 36 hires per year.

Which recruiter would you fire if you had to? Which recruiter do you believe is not performing at the same level as the others? (The answer to the riddle is at the end of this article)

Maybe this riddle was too easy for you and you decided to fire the first one, but hold on and let’s try one more.

You have a team of three recruiters:

  • First recruiter – 30 hires per year;
  • Second recruiter – 30 hires per year;
  • Third recruiter – 45 hires per year.

Who would you pick to leave your team if you needed to choose one of them? Are you going to let go the first or the second one? Or what about the third one? Are they safe just because of the larger number of hires?

I know that’s not easy to answer this without some data, and if you answer based on very limited data, you could let a good recruiter go and keep the bad one. And yet lots of companies make this decision based only on the number of filled roles or the time it took them to fill a role as their only KPIs.

But remember: Making decisions without data is the same thing as making decisions based on wrong or irrelevant data.

Based on the things you know about the recruiters from the first riddle, your answer was likely to fire recruiter No. 1. But what if you start tracking other KPI data and not just time to fill and number of hires? If you start evaluating based on more KPIs like those I mentioned above, you will get a much different view of your team.

Answering the riddle

You chose to fire recruiter No. 1 from the first riddle, right? And what if I told you that you just fired the best recruiter on your team who was able to attract more talent than the others?

If you are only tracking the number of hires, you are only seeing that the first recruiter hired 12 candidates per year. But consider some additional parameters before you make that decision, like those I mentioned above. What if you also start to consider the number of referrals?  If you do that, you can find out that these 12 candidates recommended 40 other new employees as referrals, and the other three recruiters hired them.

Without the right data or right performance indicators in place, you would never find out about this and potentially fire your best recruiter. This recruiter helped you hire 12 people, and these people helped you hire 40 more, or a total of 52 people out of 100 hired during the year.

So, 52 percent of all your hires were affected by recruiter No. 1 alone.

The same method could be applicable to the second riddle. Again, don’t focus only on typical KPIs, and always try to think outside the box. For the right decision, you will always need as much data as possible.

These two riddles are only examples, but in the end, just tracking the number of hires and not seeing the bigger picture could not only cost you a good recruiter, but it could also affect your hiring activities and overall number of hires.

Final thoughts

Recruiting is an important part of any business, because without people, there is no business. It’s vital that leaders pay close attention to its performance, especially if you don’t want to start losing good employees and be stuck with the low performers that were just lucky to get hired.

Even though there are many tools out there that could help you with reporting, such as a modern ATS, technology alone will not be enough to analyze and offer solutions.

If you want a to build a great team and have a good recruitment strategy, you must look at the goals you are striving to achieve and ensure that every member of the team understands the thinking behind the metrics, whether that is how they’re being measured, or how these metrics fit into the organization’s long-term growth plan.

Remember: Focusing only on one KPI, and evaluating the performance of your team members based on that one KPI could cost you a great recruiter.

The 4 Worst Questions You Can Ask in a Job Interview

Hiring staff isn’t just a one-way activity – it’s a contract between two parties. So when interviewing candidates, it’s as much about advertising your organization as it is for the candidate to advertise themselves.

Job candidates love modern, quirky companies that think outside the box, so asking dated, age-old questions can misinterpret your employer brand instantly.

For example, here are five (5) interview questions to avoid, and what asking them of job candidates really says about you:

1 – Sell me this pen

This one is a classic among sales hiring managers. It’s age-old, was previously used to identify the sales strategy of a candidate, and most candidates will always have an answer for it.

It’s famous. What may seem like an intriguing question actually says that you may, as an interviewer, lack the initiative to create your own questions and ideas, or to tailor an interview to the chosen candidate. It could be seen as a bit of a “box-ticker.”

How else can you identify such strategies? Here’s how: Ask the candidate about their hobbies and interests, something they have some strong knowledge in. For example, let’s say that the interviewee has a keen interest in cars. A good question to ask would be;

“If you had literally just developed the perfect line of car parts, what problems would you look to address, and how would you sell this to the market?”

Product knowledge is a huge part of selling. Sometimes candidates simply won’t know the problems an industry is facing and why your product addresses those issues.

By creating a scenario in which the candidate holds this knowledge, you’re setting it up so that you’ll clearly be able to see how they would follow through on the sales process. Not only that, you’re engaging the candidate and showing interest in what they enjoy or believe in outside work. This puts your employer brand in a fantastic light from the word go.

2 – Why should we hire you?

Again, this is a classic question that leaves job seekers trembling in their chairs. It also inserts a hint of arrogance into an already outdated question.

An employment contract binds two parties, so if you’re happy to ask this question, be prepared if the candidate turns it around and asks, “Why should I work for you?

If this question would make you feel uncomfortable, the feeling is probably reciprocated by the candidate. People work their best when they’re feeling relaxed and focused, and asking something like this could really change the atmosphere during the interview. Chances are that you’ve already made your decision based on their available skills and compatibility for the role, but a question like this could cause you to lose a top candidate.

Here’s a different question you could use to work around this issue. Although there’s no real substitute, something like this could work well:

“We’re hiring and you’re looking for a job. What would stop you from accepting a job with us, should you be offered one?”

This is much more positive in a couple of ways. It allows you to give power to the job seeker, with a real hint of positivity, and it also allows you to gather insights into what sort of barriers there may be in hiring the candidate. These barriers could include the expected salary, working hours, and employee benefits. Knowing this sooner than later will save you time when it comes to the actual offer and subsequent onboarding process.

This question should be used if you’re happy with the interviewee and their skillset/compatibility for the role. Then again, if you feel that this question is too promising for the prospective candidate — that is, you are concerned it might make them feel they already have the job — chances are you have already wrapped up the interview and can skip it altogether.

3 – What’s your greatest weakness?

This is another unusual question, and rarely will you get an honest answer. “Well Steve, in all honesty, I’m never on time, I savagely underperform without fail, and I struggle thinking outside the box. When do I start?

What you’re most likely to get is something like, “My biggest weakness is loyalty to my employer,” or “My biggest weakness is working too hard.

Answers like those will be used to dodge a question that simply has no good answer. A genuine weakness within one job may translate to a profitable trait in another because every company has a different work culture and a different way of utilizing employees.

A way to proactively identify any weaknesses is to collect a few references. You could ask a previous employer what the candidate struggled with and what they excelled in. This will give you real insight into their skills — if the references are detailed. A substitute question to ask would be:

“What sort of training or help would you need from us to be most comfortable?”

This is a great way to identify their self-proclaimed weaknesses, but at the same time, make it clear that you’re happy to provide anything required in order for the employee to be comfortable within their role. Again, it’s a much more positive question that still gathers the information you require.

If the candidate replies with, “I wouldn’t mind shadowing some of your top performers and seeing the different techniques they use to close Sales contracts,” you know the candidate is keen to learn and perhaps has a weakness in the latter part of the sales process. If the candidate replies with, “I’d really like constant review of my work to address areas where I can improve” – you know that the candidate may require additional praise in order to keep their motivation high.

4 – Where do you see yourself in five years?

I struggle to think of anyone I know that hasn’t been asked this question. “In all honesty Steve, in five years I see myself with a new job, a new house, a wife and kids, a small Labrador, and a membership in the local chess club.”

Life and careers change so often now that the days in which an employee would only work for two or three companies within their entire career are long gone. Positions available for promotion today may not be available in five years, and positions not currently available now may develop in time.

A suitable substitute for this ancient interview question would be:

“What sort of timeline for promotions would you expect from us, and how could it be fulfilled?”

Again, this offers a line of positive discussion and allows the interviewee a chance to see that you understand what’s required of an employer to motivate staff, and provides the candidate the power to write their own terms.

It’s a great piece of enablement that further illuminates your employer brand.

Nobody Messing With My Click: A Recruitment Marketing Call To Action.

 

It’s estimated there are approximately 28,000 companies competing in the HR Technology space, and some mornings, opening my inbox feels a little like I’m being bombarded by every single one of them simultaneously.

You know the feeling – those mornings when you seem to be taking a page from Pandora, unleashing all the evils of the world simply by opening your inbox.

Every single one of these manifold messages want me to do something, and most of the time, this consists of doing a demo or setting up a time to speak to some sales guy (as if). The calls to action, mostly, are nothing but noise, and the din can be deafening. Recruiters, you know what I’m talking about.

Of course, then you go to a search engine or social network, and you’re served up display ads from the exact same vendors you were shirking touting the exact same call to action you ignored in the first place.

It’s been said that “the best minds of our generation are being wasted thinking of new and different ways to get people to click on links,” and there’s some truth to that. Thing is, we go into our inboxes and open our web browsers expecting to ignore many of the marketing messages that come our way.

The fact is most recruitment marketing messages are just not all that good.

It doesn’t have to be this way, by the way.

Can’t Tell Me Nothing: A Recruitment Marketing Call to Action.

The thing is, recruitment marketing e-mails don’t have to suck. But if you want your recruitment marketing call to action to get heard, you’ve got to stop thinking like a recruiter or a marketer (counterintuitive, I know) and step into the shoes of the intended recipients of your recruitment marketing activities: the top talent you’re looking to hire.

Chances are, they’re also suffering from a pretty severe case of inbox overload, too, and suffer the same constraints of too many messages and too little time that adversely impact the rest of us every time we open our inbox.

If you’re trying to reach them with a recruitment marketing message, it not only has to be clear and compelling, but it also to be as good (or better, TBH) as any consumer marketing campaign or collateral out there.

After all, they’re displayed side by side with content and collateral that have nothing to do with jobs (and, let’s face it, are often infinitely more interesting). This can seem like a pretty daunting challenge. But the fact is, the reason we’re so bombarded with e-mails all the time is because, well, sometimes they work as intended.

So, what’s so special about those exceedingly rare e-mails that successfully convert cold prospects into warm leads?

Take a moment and think about the messages and outreach that you look forward to opening when it arrives in your inbox, and the company or provider responsible for creating these anomalies of actually compelling content.

Why do you listen to them and how did you find them in the first place?

In most nearly every imaginable case, it’s because you they add value, and in doing so, have instilled at least the tiniest bit of trust in the fact that they know their stuff.

They are writing about topics you care about, always teaching you something new and demonstrate subject matter expertise time and time again. They’ve become a resource to you and have had the ability cut through the noise because of it.

Now, imagine how candidates, passive or active, must feel when looking for their next opportunity online. It looks very similar. They keep seeing the same crappy job descriptions or career related copy over and over.

Whether that’s the AdWords served up in the results of the 85% of job searches that start with a search engine, or an automated job alert feed of irrelevant results sent straight to their inbox, candidates won’t respond to any call to action if it’s not compelling enough to do so in the first place.

And the few that do click through – and go through the gauntlet of your draconian application process – probably never heard back from a recruiter, but likely still get served the same targeted ads and segmented e-mails that just pour salt on the wound of a crappy candidate experience.

Through The Wire: How To Add Value Through Recruitment Marketing.

No wonder a recent survey found 19% of job seekers said they’d rather wait at the DMV than apply to a job. After all, candidates face the same deluge of marketing messages in their inboxes every single day, and do what they’ve been trained to do as consumers – ignore all but the best and most relevant of results.

And chances are, your recruitment marketing messaging is falling on deaf ears, contributing to the noise instead of cutting through it.

The goal of all these recruiting efforts, presumably, is to build and accelerate a pipeline of qualified candidates and nurture them from passive leads to actual applicants to ultimately new hires.

But no matter how big your database might be, no matter how many followers or friends you’ve acquired on social media, no matter how many candidates have opted into employer related e-mails, if you’re not adding value to the candidate through their journey, it doesn’t matter what medium you are using because your message sucks.

If you want to get results from any of these marketing initiatives, you’ve got to reciprocate with more than a periodic e-mail that’s nothing more than a list of job titles or automated tweets sent directly from your ATS to your careers account. You need to provide a message that matters and adds value to the candidates you are trying to attract.

Taller, Better, Faster, Stronger: Recruitment Marketing Has Evolved. Have Your Processes?

I’ve got a news flash for you – the old school online recruiting that’s becoming omnipotent is creating a ton of candidate fatigue, resulting in diminishing returns and recruiting related ROI.

If the message you’re sending can’t make a candidate care enough to click, then you’re wasting everyone’s time – and likely burning a ton of brand-related good will in the process, particularly passive candidates, which surveys show is about 85% of today’s workforce.

No matter how active a job seeker’s level of interest might be, the bottom line is that there are some proven tactics to make sure that those candidates are being attracted, instead of repelled, by your online recruiting and employer branding initiatives.

These tested, targeted techniques guarantee when choosing what to click, the candidates you’d choose for jobs choose to click through – and apply – to yours. This isn’t a tough concept, but let’s review this again. Marketing works when content adds value – it fails when all you’ve got is another ask. You might as well be a Nigerian prince for the kind of results taking without giving is going to generate. That’s where recruitment marketing comes in.

Recruiters, meet recruitment marketing Y2K.

Put simply, “recruitment marketing” is creating compelling online content for the purposes of attracting qualified leads to a product or service. If you’ve ever filled out a form on the web, downloaded a white paper or registered for a webinar – you’ve experienced recruitment marketing in action.

Same goes for if you’ve applied for a job or subscribed to a talent network, community or simply a job alert list. Or read a blog post like this one, for that matter. If you’re reading this, well, you’ve got proof that marketing works.

Everything I Am: 3 Reasons Why Every Talent Pro Should Care About Recruitment Marketing.

If you invest in recruitment marketing instead of blindly serving up irrelevant and impersonal crappy career copy, you’ll soon see the recruiting ROI.

Here are 3 reasons marketing works for recruiting – and why every organization should at least be considering investing in this critical core competency to stay a step ahead of the competition – and top of mind with top talent, too.

1. The Consumer/Candidate Connection:

The fact is, the consumer and candidate experience are almost completely congruent, with a slightly differentiated call to action. That’s why treating candidates as consumers of career related content is so important, strategically speaking.

Making sure your message gets heard means standing out from the competition – and the noise – which means adding value instead of simply advertising open jobs. Top talent might not even know they’re looking for jobs yet, which is why it’s up to your content to convince them.

Never hard sell – there’s no bigger turn off than looking desperate, which is probably what how your recruitment marketing is coming across in a market where you need them worse than they need you.

2. Process Alignment:

Recruitment marketing’s process almost perfectly aligns with the hiring process pretty much every recruiting organization out there already has in place.

From sourcing to candidate development to extending an offer, recruitment marketing augments and extends your existing recruiting related processes and initiatives rather than replacing or replicating them. This means that recruitment marketing is easy to implement and tie into every stage of the hiring cycle – and continuously drive meaningful results by continuously delivering meaningful content specifically targeted to their stage in the process.

Of course, in recruiting, the process doesn’t stop with an accepted offer, and recruitment marketing extends to increased referrals, employee engagement, improved onboarding and ultimately, better retention (commonly called ‘renewals’ in the marketing world).

3. Work Smarter, Not Harder:

It’s becoming increasingly important for recruiters to adopt analytics, and inbound marketing’s emphasis on constant measurement and optimization can provide employers with meaningful metrics on the data that matters most in terms of candidate attraction and conversion.

From improving cost per hire and time to fill by improving incoming applicant flow and response rates to recruitment marketing initiatives that you’ve already got in place, inbound marketing turns the data you’re already generating into the insights required for actionable analytics. The cool thing is, not only does inbound marketing work, but it very explicitly has the numbers to back it up, too.

I know a lot of you out there are thinking this is just another BS buzzword or another trending topic that doesn’t translate to the trenches, and I feel you.

But you’ve got to trust me when I tell you that recruitment marketing matters – and it’s something that every recruiter needs to know if they want to stay top of mind in the minds of top talent.

 

To learn more about how to make nurture part of the recruiting nature at your company, click here to register for our upcoming webinar, Recruitment Marketing 2K17, presented by our friends Symphony Talent

Editor’s Note: This post was sponsored by Symphony Talent, and RecruitingDaily received compensation for publishing this post. Now that we’ve got that disclaimer out of the way, we’d like to reiterate that tomorrow’s webinar is going to be awesome (and worth your time). If you’re in sourcing or recruiting, this is one hour you definitely can’t afford to miss.

Added bonus: the presenter is Bill Boorman, and dude knows his stuff when it comes to recruitment marketing (and has a killer British accent to boot). Register now and get your recruitment marketing learn on tomorrow, June 20, at 2 PM ET. 

And we’re not just saying that because Symphony Talent paid us for this post to promote it. Promise.

If You Build It, They Will Come: The Zen of Employee Referral Programs

I think it’s safe to say that most organizations have at least a rough resemblance of a referral program, and if you don’t, it’s time to cross that bridge.

But how much energy and effort is actually put into your employee referral programs?

We (Talent Acquisition professionals) put an enormous amount of money, time, and effort into streamlining processes and developing creative ways to sell our company’s “brand” to future employees. Now, I’m not saying that isn’t important, but a majority of organizations get a large amount of their new hires each year from employees referring someone into their organization.

So why not spend more time coming up with creative ways for rewarding those employees that put their personal reputation on the line for the company they are employed by, and actually motivate them to do more to drive referrals?

Human behavior studies can be really interesting. All too often, what someone tells you versus what they would actually do are quite different.

Social Pressure CAN Help Drive Change

I used to work for a company called Opower. They were a publicly traded SaaS based software company for the utility industry. And I say “were” because they were eventually acquired by Oracle in 2016. Their co-founder, Alex Laskey, did a TED talk around a particular behavioral study that is intriguing.

This study was done in Southern California during a very hot summer roughly 15 years ago. Graduate students from a local university put four (4) different signs on the doorknobs in a particular neighborhood.

  • One quarter of the neighborhood occupants got a door hanger that said to turn off their air conditioning (AC) and to turn on their fans so they could save money.
  • Another quarter of occupants received a notice that said to help save the planet by turning on fans instead of their AC.
  • The third quarter received one that said they should be a good citizen and help control energy blackouts in the area by turning on fans and not their AC. You would think that these types of messages would have motivated some of the homeowners to turn off their AC? Nope. It had zero impact on decreased energy consumption.

But, there was a 4th door hanger. It said that when surveyed, 77 percent of their neighbors did in fact turn off their AC and turned on their fans, and, to please join them in doing so. You know what? It worked!

What does this tell us? It tells us that moral persuasion and financial incentives don’t do a whole heck of a lot to move us. But the social issue? That’s where change can actually happen. Whether it is social pressure or social recognition, that is where true change can be achieved.

How Most Referral Programs Work

So lets get back to our referral programs. Most organizations simply offer a referral program that pays you $X dollars for referring someone into the company who is hired and stays 90-180 days.

This message is usually skipped over in New Hire Orientation or it’s a quick bullet point on a PowerPoint that employees will never remember. Very rarely are referrals a large talking point or get into a discussion of the value they bring to the organization, or, the responsibility of an employee to bring in qualified talent that they are acquainted with.

Just like a majority of your current employees, compensation is not the No. 1 reason they are still with your company. I find that compensation is usually several notches down the list (reasonable comp) of why someone would want a job or stays at a job. This could be an entire article in and of itself, but let’s skip past that.

Why would we think that simply slapping a $2K bonus sticker on a referral is going to persuade our employees to refer someone? Yes, it will happen. During an employee’s first six months at a job they are more likely to refer someone while the honeymoon phase is still present.

But what about employees that have been there for years and the honeymoon period has long worn off? Now, all they think about is the project that is due Monday morning and they haven’t started it yet. How about engaging with them on a social level where they will take time out of their day to throw a few names your way?

Note: In asking for referrals from employees, do NOT just ask about people they know are looking for a job. I don’t know when my best friends are looking for a new job so it’s doubtful you would know if the person you worked with five years ago is looking either. Instead, ask them who they loved working with and who they would love to work with again? Or, ask who they know who would be qualified for the job? If they prefer their name to not be mentioned, that’s fine, but now you have someone you know is solid and can spend some time on reaching out to a “qualified” candidate.

But, let’s get back to social pressure. Let’s think about what would cause an employee to go out of their way to find people in their network to refer to their recruiters. A few extra bucks on a paycheck is something that no one will turn down. But those few extra bucks — what are they going to? Most likely home improvements, kids day care, student loans, etc. That money will most likely be spent on expenses that the employee will incur on a regular basis, or on a necessity.

Don’t get me wrong; it is great to get some extra money to help pay for those things, but that employee getting the referral bonus has probably already budgeted for those expenses anyway. Plus, after taxes and the 401(k) deduction, they are taking home a fraction of the original bonus number and they know that.

But this extra money in the pocket falls into the moral persuasion category — the same category that did not get any homeowners to turn off their AC. Sure, they told you that “it was awesome,” and probably even thought it would be cool to get some extra money, but in the end it doesn’t truly incentivize them to refer someone.

A Better Way to Do Referrals

So here’s an idea: How about offering a fully paid trip (airfare, hotel, entry fees) to a conference of their choice? Most likely, they would NOT use the referral bonus to purchase this trip, and after taxes, the referral bonus wouldn’t even cover it. It’s one of those “wants” but not “must haves”  — sort of like my Apple Watch.

But letting them attend a conference has a two-fold effect:

  1. They are excited to be able to attend a conference that they are super pumped about. Yes, conferences are a blast and it always feels great to meet up with old friends and talk “shop” about your skill set.
  2. Your organization now benefits by having an employee that may have just acquired new knowledge that they can spread throughout your organization. Also, think of the branding aspect. When that employee is attending a conference, they can’t wait to post all over Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc that they are at this amazing event. Go a step further in making sure they have a few company tee’s to wear and they will be increasing your brand as well. It’s a win-win for the employee  — and your organization.

Here’s another idea: Create a cool supply/demand effect with special swag. Look at the world around us. Humans want to posses something that others can’t have. If it’s rare, it’s worth a lot. It’s also worth a lot in terms of the social aspect, too.

Take a look at the craze around Michael Jordan (maybe only sneakerheads will relate.) If a pair of Jordan-branded shoes are one of kind or very rare, people will pay insane amounts of money to get their hands on them and then wear them so the world around them knows that they have something special.

So, create a special company logo to incorporate that you are a “referrer” and throw it on a North Face jacket that someone ONLY gets if they refer someone who is hired. That’s what it takes to get this magical piece of swag. Then people who have referred someone can walk down the halls, strutting their stuff and knowing that everyone else is admiring the fact that you have something that they don’t.

What this does is create a social frenzy, and your employees will dip into their network to try to refer someone and and get this super special swag. It’s also important that the organization publicizes this and makes it well known. You gotta create a buzz around it, because that increases the social aspect.

TA Can Do SO Much Better at This

So, back to why I wrote this article: Referrals are usually a key source of hire for companies, and no matter how lazy and ineffective the referral programs are, that will continue.

But we (Talent Acquisition) can do SO much better!

Employees have joined your company because they believe in your brand and excited about what you represent. Take that excitement to the next level and make your referral program the cool, new trend (but not like the fidget spinner trend). Think outside the box. There is always room for improvement.

PSPlease note that I was not an English major, so excuse any grammatical errors here because I am a recruiter.

Hire Power: What Google’s New Applicant Tracking System Means for HR Technology.

Google has announced the release of Google Hire, an applicant tracking system for G Suite customers – and its first step into the HR Technology market.

For a function long consigned to being something of a technological backwater, the very thought that the most ubiquitous, transformative and, arguably, the most innovative company in the history of technology has thrown its hat in the recruiting ring is, well, unbelievable.

So, if today’s official launch of Google Hire, the Mountain View based behemoth’s first foray into the HR Technology industry, causes some sort of cognitive dissonance and disbelief, well, that makes two of us.

Even the most casual of industry observers would agree that when it comes to recruiting and hiring, this market has long been underserved and underappreciated, consigned to something of a back-office backwater when it comes to technology.

Oracle’s dominant market share should be evidence enough to fully appreciate the absolute lack of innovation and disruption that’s occurred within the talent technology vertical.

That the other major players in this space include SAP, ADP and IBM should serve as a further sign that, well, this is an industry where even the most basic iteration is considered an innovation. This notion, frankly, is laughable when you consider that the major Tier One players in this space are so stagnant and stuck in the status quo that they’re still touting basic stuff like device agnosticism or SaaS enablement (that’s “mobile recruiting” and “The Cloud,” for all you HR Generalists out there) as selling points for their software and solutions.

Of course, these companies have little or no incentive to reinvent or redesign their core product offerings, considering they’ve long enjoyed something of a captive user base within the recruitment function, and going to, say, Workday Rising or ADP’s “Meeting of the Minds” (one of the more ironic naming conventions out there) is like getting into a Delorean and revving it up to 88 miles an hour.

In recruiting, the past isn’t prologue, it’s product – which is why if you ask any recruiter if they like their ATS, their reaction is likely to be about the same as asking someone with a college degree whether they approve of the Trump administration, albeit in aggregate, POTUS’ approval ratings still probably outpace those of your average HR Technology vendor.

Sad!

Feeling Lucky.

It’s become something of a cliché to claim that hiring is broken, and one that’s not entirely true, if we’re being honest. Recruiting, in fact, works just fine – look no farther than the fact that we’re essentially at full employment and record job creation for proof. If anything is broken in this industry, it’s the technology that recruiters and candidates are forced to make work to find work; filling out their manifold (yet mandatory) forms and fields can be a full-time job in and of itself.

This is why today’s announcement of Google Hire can be considered something of a watershed moment in the annals of HR Technology history. If that sounds like hyperbole, consider the fact that, to date, the only real major consumer technology company to commit to trying to serve the recruitment market is Microsoft through their acquisition of LinkedIn.

While this product play may yet prove prescient, a year into this marriage of inconvenience (for end users, anyway), there’s been no real product innovation or development of new features and functions beyond an annoying new UI/UX that has turned the site recruiters love to hate into something that looks and feels a lot like Facebook for old people, but with way less utility and a lot more fake news (er, “employer branding”).

LinkedIn has been allowed, largely, to function independent of the larger Microsoft ecosystem, and while the company paid a staggering price for this “professional network,” the billions of dollars spent on this acquisition look like the only real investment the company has made in recruiting and hiring, since apparently little to nothing has been spent on R&D.

The fact that the company which owns Dynamics and Access has yet to release an applicant tracking system (which they more or less already have) speaks volumes as to Redmond’s real recruiting intentions, which seem to be more focused on PII population than product development.

Not so with Google, which has invested significant resources into developing and building a proprietary recruiting technology from the ground up (more or less) – signaling that the company’s commitment to recruiting and hiring transcends the somewhat limited scope of Hire product unveiled today.

And, obviously, unlike LinkedIn, Google’s roadmap is aligned with those of the end users it’s trying to serve, which is why, per the company, Hire was built explicitly to meet the real needs of real recruiters and employers.

The company, which has put an inordinate amount of time, resources and attention into developing G Suite into a comprehensive B2B offering, has succeeded in displacing MS Office, in particular, as the productivity suite of choice for nearly 3 million businesses (and counting) in the span of only a couple of years, demonstrative proof that there’s not only an appetite for Google products in the workplace, but also a very real demand.

And it’s these end users, the company said, that represent Google Hire’s obvious advantage in gaining market and mind share, since the system is available only to G Suite business customers.

Why Google Got Into the Game.

Google, obviously, knows a thing or two about tracking data and optimizing processes, which is how the company first noticed that many of its G Suite customers were actually using the software for recruiting and hiring. “A lot of companies have a tool that they’re already using to recruit today called G Suite,” said Google Hire VP Bogomil Balansky.

“If you think about the activities happening in Google apps – from emailing candidates in Gmail to scheduling interviews in Google Calendar to using Google Hangouts for video interviewing – you see every part of the recruiting process except for an optimized ATS experience. Today, people have to jump between tools and apps, and have no real way to capture the recruiting process in a centralized or cohesive manner,” Balansky said.

Google Hire was designed to resolve some of those inefficiencies, the answer to a question Google first posited when noticing the significant number of G Suite customers effectively using it to handle hiring: “how do we bring the recruiting process directly into G Suite?”

Hire adds functionalities like posting jobs, managing and communicating with candidates, video interviewing, consolidated scheduling and conversion tracking to the core G Suite experience, providing a powerful tool in the war for talent – and one that, like most Google products, is both elegant and intuitive, staggeringly powerful yet surprisingly simple.

It is, in short, the product that many employers – not to mention the candidates they’re hiring – have been waiting on for a very long time.

What Google Hire Means for Recruiting.

While I’ve only seen a short demo, all I can say is that it looks and feels a whole lot like the ATS of the future, and for all the lip service our industry has paid to the “consumerization” of HR Technology, Google has actually created the convergence between these two dissimilar and disparate worlds.

The company sees recruiting as a ‘greenfield’ opportunity, recognizing that most G Suite clients don’t have an ATS or any sort of dedicated recruiting system, and sees Hire as a way to create efficiencies in the hiring process and help primarily small employers – who, Google points out, account for about half of all hiring in the US – level the playing field when it comes to finding and hiring top talent, helping them save significant time, money and effort by standardizing and streamlining their hiring processes.

Hire, which has been in an “early adopter beta program” for a year, already has over 100 paying customers – and these early adopters, unlike many emerging ATS aspirants – are not the usual suspects, with an impressive diversity in the geography, industries and company size of customers already using Google Hire. These include a pizza delivery shop, regional real estate companies, plumbers and even, yes, a few Silicon Valley tech startups.

In other words, theirs is a user base that’s representational of the customers their hiring solution purports to help, unlike many of their competitors, whose heavy install base involves disproportional representation among Silicon Valley startups, with roadmaps, features and functionality largely designed for their needs rather than those of the wider base of employers they purport to serve.

That’s why, on Day One, Google Hire is already light years ahead of most of its competition in terms of helping drive hiring efficiency and productivity within the SMB market – and will, surely, motivate many current entrants in the SMB market to continue their upstream swim for the enterprise space, which Google Hire is (to date) not targeting, with its average customer having somewhere between 10-12 job openings posted at any one time, according to company data.

For those whose vendors whose solutions aren’t built to scale, or who only target the SMB space, such as Jazz or Workable, today’s announcement should signal the beginning of the end. For other vendors, the mere presence of Google in the HCM and ATS space should serve notice that if they’re not innovating and meeting the real needs of real customers, they’re likely not long for this world. While the company maintains its currently only open to existing G Suite customers within the US, the fact that Google has built a distinct business unit with a dedicated sales and product team likely means it’s only a matter of time before they make a move for a bigger piece of the pie.

For now, though, the company plans to build partnerships with other vendors, such as SmartRecruiters and Lever, around their new Jobs API (among other integrations) to ensure that Google is able to serve the needs of the broader market, specifically, employers who aren’t already on G Suite, non-US based companies or those with over 1,000 employees.

That means that, for now, most TA organizations or enterprise employers will see little to no impact from Google Hire’s launch. Of course, that day will probably come, and when it does, well, legacy vendors and emerging enterprise solutions had better be ready. Because as of today, they’re officially on notice – and while few have the resources or technology to win against Google, any efforts to rethink and retrench their current offerings will be good news for their customers, candidates and clients.

Which means, even if you’re not one of the target companies for Google Hire, if you’re in the business of hiring, it’s anything but business as usual in the world of HR Technology. And that, my friends, is good news for everyone in our industry. Except, you know, if you happen to work for Oracle or Workday.

Karma is a bitch like that, and what goes around, as they say, comes around. And Google Hire is one of the most exciting products to come around the HR Technology space in a very long time. Here’s hoping that they, indeed, are not evil – because frankly, there’s enough of that in this industry already.

Most Workers Don’t Fear Losing Their Job to Workplace Automation

It’s an ongoing mantra that supposedly has a lot of people spooked — automation is growing rapidly and is eventually going to eliminate a lot of jobs.

Well, a new survey says that those fears may be considerably overstated.

Research released today by Randstad US found that “only 14 percent of U.S. employees worry that automation will take their job away, and nearly one-third (30 percent) say they think automation will make their job better.”

And according to Randstad Sourceright’s 2017 Q2 Talent Trends survey, business leaders feel pretty much the same. According to a survey of C-suite and human capital leaders, Randstad Sourceright’s survey found that “only 6 percent of U.S. respondents believe increasing automation will have a significant impact on workforce planning and shifting the talent needed.”

Workers aren’t afraid of automation

Given the steady drumbeat of fears about how automation might impact the workplace, these are pretty amazing numbers, and a clear sign that the average worker, and their managers, aren’t buying what the technology naysayers are selling.

Linda Galipeau, CEO Randstad North America, echoes this sentiment from Randstad’s Employer Brand Research:

It is evident from our research that not only are workers not afraid of losing their jobs to automation, they are more than willing to retrain to leverage the efficiencies and benefits of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics in the workplace, These sentiments should be welcome news for companies as they seek greater adoption of automation to drive productivity and innovation. As we have known for quite some time, the success of organizations in the future will depend greatly on their ability to strike a balance between valuable human insight and interaction with technology.

In addition, it has become necessary for today’s employees and job seekers to continually cultivate, develop and update their skills to work successfully alongside AI and automation. In conjunction with retraining and upskilling efforts, workers should focus on growing unique human skills that AI and robots are unable to replicate, such as strategic and abstract thinking, complex communications, creativity and leadership competencies.”

Workers feel AI and robotics will have positive impact

Robot Job InterviewsHere are some other findings from the Randstad research that give a little more insight into how U.S. companies feel about the potential benefits of automation and AI on their business operations:

  • A clear majority (84 percent) of U.S. respondents say they believe AI and robotics will have a positive impact on the workplace in the next three to five years.
  • Nearly half (48 percent) say automation/machine learning has either transformed or had a positive impact on their business in the past 12 months. Some 45 percent say the same of robotics.
  • A whopping 74 percent believe automation/machine learning will have sustained or greater influence on their business. Some 68 percent hold the same view about robotics.
  • Perhaps due to these beliefs, 31 percent of employers said they have increased their usage of automation/robotics in their business in the past 12 months.

Yes, the negativity has been overblown

Here’s my take: Just like the obsession of so many to overly obsess on the work habits and motivations of the younger working generations (and almost always in a highly negative way), the worries about more automation coming to the workforce are equally overblown — and as this research shows, an overwhelming majority of America’s workforce believes so too.

Just two months ago, The Christian Science Monitors had this to say about the automation revolution:

One study, published … by the National Academy of Sciences, looked at the probable impact of information technologies. The conclusion from an academy panel: “We expect new job opportunities to emerge as increasingly capable combinations of humans and machines attack problems that previously have been intractable.” In addition, Americans will see a boost in income, wealth, shortened work time, and new goods and services.

(Another) study, from the Washington-based think tank Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, looked at the dislocation and creation of occupations from 1850 to 2010 using U.S. Census data compiled by the University of Minnesota. It came to a very counterintuitive conclusion about the impact of technology: In the past two decades, the level of occupational churn – or the rate at which some occupations expand while others contract – is at a historic low. The rate is 38 percent of that from 1950 to 2000, and 42 percent of the levels from 1850 to 2000. If anything, the United States is not being innovative enough, a fact reflected in the low rate of worker productivity in recent years. …

The public may be ahead of the doom-sayers. In a Pew poll last year, two-thirds of people agreed that their own jobs were secure even though they believe robots are taking over much of the work done by humans. Like farmers in Britain looking at the advent of robot tractors, they see the upside and ignore the fear.”

Yes, The Monitor is right because the public IS way ahead of the “doom-sayers” here. After all, innovation, modernization, and technology has helped make everyone’s lives better — as we see with those ubiquitous smartphones that so many people can’t seem to live without — and people intuitively know that the same benefits they personally derive from technology will most certainly help them on the job as well.

“Real connections require human involvement”

CEO Linda Galipeau of Randstad North America concurs:

The inescapable reality is automation and AI are here to stay, and will continue to grow substantially in the near future. As business leaders invest in digitization, automation, AI and other emerging technologies in the workplace, they must continue to evolve their workforce alongside these advancements.

While the productivity and efficiency benefits of automation are unequivocal, the need for skilled humans to operate, utilize and advance technologies is equally unmistakable. And, we know that real connections aren’t made from algorithms or robots, they require human involvement and irreplaceable abilities such as empathy, communication, engagement, intuition and instinct.”

The Randstad Employer Brand Research is the most comprehensive, independent and in-depth employer brand research in the world, identifying the most attractive employers among thousands of companies. The U.S. research captures the views of over 5,300 respondents (general public, aged 18-65) through online interviews. It provides insights into the perceptions and drivers of choice of potential employees. The research, conducted since 2000, was done by Randstad’s international research partner Kantar TNS. Respondents for the 2017 research were polled from Nov. 25 – Dec. 15, 2016

A Comparison of the Top 8 Contact Finders / Chrome Extensions

Chrome Extensions can add a boost to your productivity, but if you are not using the right one for what you need, they can be a major time waster.

As you may know, Google Chrome is the most popular web browser. In fact, almost half of all users are using Chrome over Safari or Internet Explorer. That’s because it’s easy to use, syncs with most mobile devices, and is fast. But the other reason it is so popular is because of Chrome’s extension capability.

Of course, there can also be too much of a good thing. If you use too many Chrome Extensions, your computer can become clunky (at best), or completely non-responsive at worst. That is why you need to choose your extensions wisely.

This year, the Lusha team had a 3rd party company compare the eight (8) most popular chrome extensions used for finding contact information: Lusha, Connectifier, Prophet, Hunter, FindThatLead, Hiretual, Contactout and JobJet.

There are lots of tools that want to tell you that they are the best, but there are few that are willing to show you that they truly ARE the best. Lusha dared to compare and find out once and for all. Below you will find the Chrome Extension performance report.

A Comparison of the Top 8 Extensions to Find Contact Information

Overview

Browser extensions are a natural choice for most of us when trying to be more efficient and productive. However, with a slew of new extensions continually being created, it’s hard to weed out the really great ones.

Instead of cluttering your browser with tons of extensions, we decided to test the top extensions for finding contact information and see which came back with the most results. To see the complete results (including the info found for each), go here.

Lusha decided to research the best methods of getting in contact with potential applicants because many of their users have stated their dissatisfaction with the results they receive when using inMail. In fact, the Marks Group — an IT, Sales, and Marketing Recruiting firm — conducted a study and found that “The response rate is typically somewhere in the 15 percent realm. That’s only about 1 out of 7 responding! Doing the math, on average, people sending lots of InMails will spend more than $30 per response!”

So, since the results from using InMail are not great, we decided to test eight (8) extensions that can replace LinkedIn InMail as the best means of contact.

Methodology

We compared the top eight (8) extensions for finding contact information against 300 random LinkedIn profiles and recorded our results.

Search Criteria

We started by choosing three different job titles to search for — Investment Bankers in New York, Product Managers in San Francisco, and Corporate Lawyers in London. Then we picked a random sample of the first 100 people in each job category to perform the test on.

Search Categories

We choose to test the extensions to measure the following conditions:

  1. No results (The number of times the extension brought back zero results for a profile (not one piece of data among the four categories tested);
  2. Private emails;
  3. Work emails; and,
  4. Phone numbers (personal and corporate).

Sometimes, the extensions found more than one result per person, say, if the person has several numbers or emails, which is why some results in the following categories add up to more than 100: Private Emails, Work/Other Emails, and Phone Numbers.

Extensions Tested

Results

Chrome Extension Performance Report

Category Winners (Top 3):

  • Most Results Found: Lusha came back with the most results, finding 240 different contact information. Next came JobJet with 184 results found, and then comes Prophet, which found 106.
  • Private emails: JobJet found the most amount of private emails with 66 captured. Hiretual came in a close second with 62 private emails found, and, rounding out the top 3 is ContactOut with 58 emails found.
  • Work emails: Prophet found 101 work/other emails, making it the most successful. Next comes FindThatLead at 87 emails found, and in third is Lusha, with 80 emails found.
  • Phone numbers: Lusha came in first by far with 117 personal phone numbers found. Coming in second is JobJet with 42 numbers found, then ContactOut with five (5) phone numbers found.
  • No results: Lusha and Prophet are in the top spots at five (5) each with FindThatLead following next with 13 profiles.

Full Results:


Chrome Extension Performance Report 
 

Product Managers in San Francisco

Category Winners (Top 3):

  • Most Results Found: JobJet found the most results, returning a total of 229. A close second is Lusha with 228, followed by Connectifier with 163 found.
  • Private emails: JobJet came in first with 112 private emails found. Next, comes Hiretual with 91 results found. Then comes ContactOut with 81 emails found.
  • Work emails: Prophet found the most amount of work/other emails with 97 found. In a close second comes FindThatLead with 91 found. Next, comes Hunter with 89 emails found.
  • Phone numbers: Lusha came away the obvious winner with 115 phone numbers found. In a far away second is JobJet with 39 numbers found. Following in third is Hiretual, with 12 numbers found.
  • No results: Hiretual came in first because it found results for everything except for one profile. The next, with only eight profiles missing, is Lusha, and coming tied in third are Prophet and FindThatLead.

Full Results:


Chrome Extension Performance Report 

Corporate Lawyers in London

Category Winners (Top 3):

  • Most Results Found: Lusha came back with the most results at 208. Next, comes Prophet, which found a total of 114 results found, and following in third comes ContactOut, with 96 results returned.
  • Private emails: ContactOut found the most private emails with a total of 45 private emails found. A close second is Lusha with 42 numbers found. Next, comes JobJet with 35 private emails found.
  • Work emails: Prophet came in the lead with 103 work/other emails found. Next, comes FindThatLead with 83 found, followed by EmailHunter, which found 82 emails.
  • Phone numbers: Lusha came in first by a landslide with 94 phone numbers found. Next, comes JobJet with ten numbers found and in third place comes ContactOut with seven phone numbers found.
  • No results: Lusha found the most amount of profiles with only three not found. Next, comes Prophet with only four profiles not found, and following in third comes FindThatLead with 16 profiles missing.

Full Results:

Chrome Extension Performance Report

Conclusion

The plugin with the highest number of results is Lusha with 673 results found. Then comes JobJet with 417 results, followed by Prophet with 331 results found. Here are the best extensions by category:

  • Phone numbers — Lusha
  • Private emails — JobJet
  • Work emails — Prophet

Main Takeaway:

Since you can’t use all of these without cluttering your browser, the top three standouts that you should have on your browser are Lusha, Prophet, and JobJet.

Disclaimer: Yes, Lusha is one of the extensions listed, but we aimed to be as objective as possible; the findings have not been influenced or manipulated. In fact, we encourage users to compare the apps on their own. We will then publish the results in the document. We’re doing this open-source! The results are available Google Docs by clicking here.

Please Don’t Leave Me! How to Fix a Bad Retention Problem

“I always tell you how I don’t need you but please, please, don’t leave me.”Pink

Being in a corporate recruiting community, we expend lots of energy to find, coerce, and close talent for our clients — only to have them leave based on bad choices from our management teams, or head offices wanting a bigger bonus or higher profits.

The better you are, the more expendable the people seem to be for them. They stare with mindless eyes when a swath of very non-expendable people up and leave to take other roles because they feel unappreciated or undervalued.

Why is that?

This is not a race thing, a woman vs. man thing, or even an old vs. young thing. No, it is a survival of the ordinary thing, and something that needs examining. Hell, we need a lot of reconsidering in this world.

Here’s why retention levels are so bad

Middle management is killing us, and the brilliant minds that run great companies do not see it or are sadly ignoring it, so it’s no wonder that the retention levels are so bad (like 30 percent).

Say what you will about Millennials, but I get their frustration when it comes to getting an opportunity and being hired. Too many companies these days are asking for people with “experience” instead of hiring the smart, hungry, and young, who, straddled with debt, need a career starter. These are educated people with skills that just need some seasoning.

Companies who do hire young, vibrant minds seem to do nothing or resist pushing programs to retain the people we worked so hard to get for them. They want to move on to another company after a year or two, and no one is asking the big question — WHY?

Is it they can make more money? Yes, some of the larger firms will increase salaries based on the fact that a 3 percent raise and a holiday party once a year does not really earn their loyalty. It seems that everyone is feeding off the same table and just stealing from each other than doing legitimate training programs and then, oh I don’t know, maybe promoting them? Or, perhaps giving them better raises by sharing the wealth a little bit since they were the ones that were driving billables for their organization?

Ways to motivate and retain employees

I know many companies, some of whom I worked for, that have so-called “management training programs,” but in reality, they all are smoke-and-mirrors. People work diligently toward a Golden Carrot that is always just out of reach until they burn out, realizing that traveling 48 weeks a year is not as glamorous as they thought.

Three years in and they’re still doing the grind, while their pals that went to that “other company” are making more than they are and actually in a healthy relationship (and not with an airline company).

People have choices, and they have the right to do what they want. But many make the choices you don’t want them to and they just leave, causing a revolving door effect, and it’s partially your fault.

Is this really your problem?

Now, I know you are asking yourself, “How in the hell is this my problem? It’s not my place to call this out to my company! Besides, this is job security, right? This is why they need us.”

Oh my friend, but it is your problem, and here’s why: You are on the front lines every day, and if you’re good, you know both the ones that are going to bolt the organization within six months and the ones that are going to stay, because you, more than anyone, are aware of the company culture.

That’s because you eat it and breathe it every day. Your “C” level types, on the other hand, are in an ivory tower dealing with high-level issues and have little idea what happens down at your level on a day-to-day basis.

So, you need to educate them. Yes, you. OK, I know this is now to the point where you’re not sure about reading further, but please indulge me here.

Believe it or not, upper management is going to be impressed and befuddled yet interested in your opinion if you bring facts and figures with you. The “C” level types base most of their decisions on simple metrics and numbers, so make sure to have some of your own. You have that fancy ATS that shoots out reports, so shoot out a few and show them the cost per hire and the time it takes to make that money back.

Numbers don’t lie, and believe me, there are more frustrated people then there are those who are copacetic in most companies, and if that is not the case with your firm, maybe now is the time to dust off your resume and call me.

Helping to turn the company the right way

But back to the point: Get your facts together, show them the people who have left, and call the VP’s and COO for a meeting to inform them that the mid-level Joe’s and Jane’s you keep losing are mucking up the system and causing the company to lose money. This is high-risk move but can turn into a Jerry Maguire-like moment if you play it right!

CFO’s and CEO’s — hell, any C level person in a company — have an incentive to make their bonus. It’s a fact kid, and they need this type of information because many times they are being treated like mushrooms (you know — kept in the dark and fed manure?) What they know can and will help them make the right choices, but it also will begin to shape and turn the company into the correct direction it needs to go in.

Look at you, superstar; you have put together accurate data and informed your business superiors where they are going wrong.

The next step is to give them a plan of action:

  • Start promoting the good employees. Give them raises and teams to lead.
  • Also, give them performance bonuses sooner rather than later, and maybe even spot bonuses for doing good work.
  • And, have some pizza parties for jobs well done, or, take everyone to a sporting event, or something!

Also, have some real life work balance; don’t just talk about it. This is not rocket science. While HR is sitting around trying to make sure the company is compliant they have lost sight of one of the core roles of the job — being there for the employee as well for management. I have seen this in action before, and when people were cool with coming to work, and happy, the teamwork flowed with goodness.

A solution to your problem

Here’s the bottom line: When this happened, people stayed.

I believe we can be more than just sourcers and recruiters; we can effectively change the culture in a positive way instead of just complaining about it.

I have always lived by this statement: “If you come to me with a problem, and no solution, then you are just complaining.” Well, I’m offering you a solution to a problem we have now and will continue to have unless we start stepping up.

#truestory

Week that Was 7.14.17: Twitter, CareerBuilder, Glassdoor, Google

Editors Note: In case you missed it, ‘The Week That Was’ is all you need to know about anything that matters. This is your source for insight to this week’s breaking news, current events, and money swapping in Recruiting. That and the stuff we like. This week we learned traditionally male dominated roles are becoming extinct, you can use Twitter to recruit, asking about salaries is not polite, one day you will have intel inside and it is time to grow a pair.

Word of the Week:

Fumbs (NOUN)

1. When a person’s thumbs are so large that they consistently mistype while texting.

2. Fat thumbs.

Tweet of the Week: 

 

How – to of the Week:

Twitter is a great platform for sharing but what about recruiting?

New Study: Women are Breaking Male Dominated Careers

We can talk about diversity needs until we are blue in the face but if nobody is doing it the world will never change. According to a 2017 study by CareerBuilder, people are doing something. One of the more striking surprises is that more women are moving into leadership roles as well as occupations tied to science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). Of the 12,385 new chief executive jobs that were added from 2009 to 2017, women accounted for 28 percent of them. Women also took nearly half of new jobs for lawyers, veterinarians and marketing managers and nearly a third of new jobs for surgeons and web developers.

On the flip side, 30 percent of new jobs added in female-dominated occupations from 2009 to 2017 were taken by men. Today, 27 percent of all female-dominated occupations are held by male workers. Men have grown their presence in roles ranging from education administrators, pharmacists and interior designers to cooks, accountants, and human resources managers. Click here to read more of the studies findings.

My Money, My Business

In a recent survey conducted online by Harris Poll on behalf of Glassdoor, U.S. Workers think it is rude for employers to ask about salary history. In fact, over 50%. Currently, several states and cities are currently considering laws that would ban employers from asking about salary history, following similar laws recently passed in New York CityPhiladelphiaSan FranciscoMassachusettsDelaware and Oregon, among others.

“The time of looking backward to go forward to determine pay is over. Asking prior salary history questions can trigger unintended consequences and introduce bias into the hiring process that disadvantages women from day one,” said Dawn Lyon, Glassdoor chief equal pay advocate and senior vice president of global corporate affairs.

“We need to reframe the conversation to pay expectations around the value of the job and the skills and relevant experience required to do it. Many companies are already doing this without legislation or regulation because it’s the right thing to do. And, candidates can help change the conversation by offering answers that address their pay expectations based on the role and their current market value, while also taking into account how the company structures its overall pay and benefits package.” Click here to read the entire article.

Grow a PAIR:

July 10th, Google announced the People+AI Research Initiative (PAIR.) PAIR brings together researchers across Google to study and redesign the ways people interact with AI systems. The goal of PAIR is to focus on the “human side” of AI: the relationship between users and technology, the new applications it enables, and how to make it broadly inclusive. That being said, the goal isn’t just to publish research; we’re also releasing open source tools for researchers and other experts to use.

PAIR’s research is divided into three areas, based on different user needs:

  • Engineers and researchers: AI is built by people. How might we make it easier for engineers to build and understand machine learning systems? What educational materials and practical tools do they need?
  • Domain experts: How can AI aid and augment professionals in their work? How might we support doctors, technicians, designers, farmers, and musicians as they increasingly use AI?
  • Everyday users: How might we ensure machine learning is inclusive, so everyone can benefit from breakthroughs in AI? Can design thinking open up entirely new AI applications? Can we democratize the technology behind AI?

Read more about the PAIR initiative by clicking here.

 

I Am a Robot: One Day You Will Have a Chip in Your Brain

A recent article in Wired.com says that one day we will all want chips in our brains.

The next frontier of human aspiration is inside our brains. We currently understand the world through our sensory mechanisms, and we will find thousands or millions of Everests as we unlock our brains.

I have no words. Um – click this to read the article.

ICYMI:

Last week we had a great RecruitingLive with Jo Weech that offered great tips for learning how to #RecruitHuman as well as how to recruit and interview introverts. Great stuff. Watch the video below:

The 7 Reasons Why People Change Jobs

There are many reasons people quit their jobs.

It’s not always because of salary, like many people, including managers, have been led to — sometimes erroneously — to believe.

The other reasons people quit could be different: they are getting married and moving; they have an unlikable boss; their goals are changing and they’re leaving due to inadequate motivation or vision; they’re leaving to acquire an advanced degree.

All of these reasons differ for every individual, and because of that, they can be quite difficult for a manager to address.

That being said, employee retention is squarely in the domain of managers, and the majority of employees quit their jobs for reasons that are under the control of managers.

That is a fact.

When it comes to retention, managers make a difference

In every workplace, managers have the power to control elements such as culture and environment, clarity of vision, employees’ perceptions of their roles and responsibilities and providing tools to increase employee success. Because of this, managers can be one of the big reasons employees decide to leave.

If managers are doing their jobs and are in touch with their staff through regular communication, problem-solving feedback, and recognition, they CAN reduce turnover rates.

As a manager, you have the power to prevent issues with employee retention by creating processes, systems and requirements that will make employees stay longer and work productively in your company. It is critical for managers to put these systems in place and support the needs of employees, increase market compensation and benefits, generate meaningful work and have a meaningful and significant effect on employees’ work and workplace.

Someone once said, “People leave managers, not companies,” but is that true? Is this really the main reason why people leave?

Around June 2005, I had been working as a recruiter for almost a year, and I found an article titled The Main Reasons Why People Leave Their Jobs. It focused on one topic: That managers are the main reason why people leave jobs, and the second reason is for a higher salary.

I have always been interested in this topic. As a recruiter, it’s crucial to know the reasons why employees leave for another opportunity. It’s also important to know why any one person is leaving the company because, in many cases, if one person is not happy then other team members could be unhappy for the very same reason.

That article made me question whether those two things were the real reasons why people leave their jobs. At that time, I was still new in recruitment, but during my first year, I had already heard many reasons why people wanted to quit.

Some of them were only looking for more money, and others shared scary stories about their bosses, but many cited other reasons. I could not compare my findings with those in the article because I did not have the data and I just don’t like to guess.

At that moment, I decided to start my own research. I was not sure if it was a good idea or not, but as always, the only way to find out was to start. So. I started collecting data.

How Curiosity Turned into a Long-Term Hobby

I have always said that the hardest part is when you start doing something. Once you get past that, the rest is easy.

However, if you want to collect data and generate some good results from it, starting is not enough — you also need a plan. I thought I would never say this, but my sociology studies came in handy here. In 2005, I started collecting the reasons why people left their jobs.

During every single exit interview (over the phone and in person) I always asked, “What is the main reason you are leaving your current job?” If the answer was “Because of the boss,” I added a point to the data set representing this reason in my Excel spreadsheet. If the answer was different, I just added a new row to the spreadsheet and started a new count.

In that first year alone, I interviewed 679 people from various fields (IT, engineering, finance, marketing, sales, and more), and my spreadsheet was full of reasons as to why people left their jobs. After the first year, I asked myself whether data from one year was enough to cover every possible reason.

I knew that the test group was not big enough because I had only a small number of people whom I had interviewed. I was also curious as to whether the reasons would change over the years. That is why I continued to collect data, unsure of how long I would have to continue.

This curiosity turned into a hobby, and I continued collecting data for the next 10 years. The pool of people grew from 679 to 8,509 (although I did not collect reasons from all the people that I interviewed). The pool of answers came from people with various levels of seniority and different fields, cities, and locations.

The Top 7 Reasons Why People Change Jobs

These are the seven (7) main reasons why employees quit their jobs, based on my 10-year research:

1 – Lack of Opportunity

When people can put their skills and abilities to use in the jobs they’re doing, they tend to feel a sense of usefulness, self-confidence, and accomplishment. Employees are happier if they’re engaged in activities at which they are good that exercise their skills and abilities even more.

People want to develop their skills, and if a job doesn’t give them the ability to do that, they will start looking for one that offers it. This same applies to opportunities; if a workplace does not offer opportunities for growth and advancement, employees will go where they can find them.

People want to apply their knowledge and improve at what they’re doing. They’re looking for a challenge, and if they feel that their skills are not being challenged, they will feel unfulfilled. It’s like a pilot who loves flying but isn’t able to fly.

Remember: People are looking for fulfillment, purpose, and growth in their job.

2 – Bad Management

In the article from 2005, managers were cited as the main factor causing employees to leave. During my research, I found that managers remain among the top three reasons why people quit their jobs.

Because a managerial position is usually a step up on the company’s ladder, and any worker can be promoted irrespective of their skill level, many organizations make the mistake of promoting the wrong people into managerial positions. This is s a mistake because a manager is a leadership role and requires skills such as interpersonal communications as well as the technical skills that are required for the job.

However, not all managers have these skills or have had the right training to acquire them. Many organizations have managers that do not give feedback or coaching, but instead, resort to screaming and yelling at the employees they’re supposed to guide. In addition, unclear expectations can leave employees frustrated and make them want to leave an organization.

If company leadership is not helping managers to develop into leaders, they will start losing employees, and in the end, they’ll lose the managers themselves. The impact of this on hiring activities will remain for a lot longer, though, because people who have already left due to a bad manager will not be sharing any positive reviews about that company.

Note: Bad management very often means that people had a bad boss or bad local management team. For example, people who work in France for a company with headquarters in the UK very often blame the local managers in their country for being bad, but it could also be bad management in HQ in the UK and a great management team in France. People can have a great boss, but other colleagues (very often from other teams) may not and could create a toxic work environment. I know that there is a thin line between bad management and a toxic workplace, but I decided to not to combine them together in my data but to share it in the way I collected it.

3 – A Toxic Workplace or Company Culture

In an ideal workplace, everyone behaves with courtesy and colleagues complement one another. Bosses even check up on staff occasionally and are interested in what’s going on in their personal lives.

However, as we all know, there is no ideal workplace, and personalities do not always blend so seamlessly. In every organization, some occasional clashes, interpersonal conflicts, office gossip, cunning workers, sly bosses, attention-seeking colleagues, and inconsiderate co-workers could appear, and any of those could turn into the reason that workers consider leaving a job.

One of the problems could be inter-office competition. Even if a workplace is generous, providing flexible hours and generous vacation, a workplace filled with competitors might actually hinder workers from making full use of the benefits available to them. Employees may feel that making use of them by, for example, scheduling vacations, could get them penalized, causing them to be at a competitive disadvantage and making them feel dissatisfied.

Company culture can vary from department to department and even from manager to manager, so leaders in every company need to be consistent in building the same culture throughout the entire organization.

4 – Career Advancement and Promotions

When most people they realize that they are not moving up the ladder, they leave. If they find out that, despite how hard they have worked or how well they are doing at their job, they will not be promoted to a higher paying and more demanding position, they will leave.

In the same vein, if a less qualified or less capable member of the team gets a juicy position that the more qualified employee wants, he or she may start to look elsewhere.

Sometimes, the company does not have space for six managers in one small team of 10 people, but people still want to move up the ladder.

5 – Excessive or Too Little Work

Good employees are often asked to take on many tasks, primarily because they may have, at one time or another, used their initiative to do more work than they were initially asked to do. Extra tasks can cause a good employee to work long hours, causing frustration and lack of motivation, which could ultimately lead to total burnout. In the same vein, a very good worker might encounter roadblocks when they are asked to take on new tasks, which can result in boredom and a lack of fulfillment.

More work or bigger projects come very often with more responsibilities. Adding more tasks and not giving employees the right level of guidance or ownership only leads to frustration. Nobody likes micromanagers.

6 – A Better Salary and Financial Stability 

During his most notable monologues, the brilliant British philosopher Alan Watts often asked, “What if money was no object?” Watts would try to encourage people to ignore the trappings of money and instead follow their hearts and passions as if money was, indeed, no object. If they truly committed to that pursuit, he suggested, then the money would come.

However, let’s face it: money matters. It pays the bills. After all, everyone has to think about their personal finances when he or she decides which organization he or she wants to work for.

Because of all of that, money is also a reason why employees leave their jobs. If a new job offers just a small raise, people do not care; if you offer them a significantly higher wage, you will get their attention.

7 – A Lack of Rewards and Benefits

No employee wants to work eight hours a day on full throttle without being recognized or well compensated. When an organization has no bonuses or benefits, and employees go unrecognized, it significantly reduced loyalty.

Bonuses that were promised but not delivered would definitely not encourage employees to make any extra effort or work more hours if needed. For any company to encourage workers to stay, it should recognize and encourage its employees financially and publicly or else they will be forced to look elsewhere.

It’s important to celebrate their wins and be there for employees if they need your support. People who feel appreciated and are noticed and recognized become more productive.

A Bonus Reason Why People Quit

I’m sure that you have probably never heard this reason, but it is my favorite one.

Many years ago, I got this from someone: “My boss told me that I can’t bring my turtle to work anymore, so I’m looking for a new job.” I’m still not sure if that lady was joking or not, but she sounded pretty serious about it.

Maybe just having a pet-friendly workplace would have helped her employer keep her.

What could be the game changer?

More people will be interested in companies that offer private medical services so that employees do not have to wait days to see a doctor. Also, companies offering advanced programs of professional training or even private career coaching could gain an advantage over their competitors in the market.

However, remember this: A great company culture will always beat any good benefits.

What I Learned About Why People Quit

So, what did I learn from this survey?

Some of the reasons that employees quit their jobs have changed over the years. Most of the people in 2008–2011 preferred job security over cool benefits, an amazing office, or the environment. In the years before 2008, a higher salary was the main motivation.

After 2011, the main reasons employees left started shifting toward things like benefits and the environment. From 2014 and on, more people started leaving their jobs for better opportunities that provided career advancement, a more supportive culture, and one where managers gave them more responsibility than their current managers did to decide things for themselves.

If employees do not trust management to lead them in the right direction, they lose respect for them and will eventually leave. If you want happy employees, I strongly urge you to recognize their work, pay them fairly, and invest in them. They could still leave for any number of reasons, but if you are not investing in them, they will most certainly leave for sure.

Yes, the reasons for leaving a job can vary wildly, but sometimes the reason is very simple.

Sometimes, another offer somewhere else is so tempting that people are not able to say no to it. That’s not because of the money, but rather, because they believe that the next opportunity is THE big challenge in their career.

Combine Tools to Make Sourcing Magic

sourcing MagicThere is not one Chrome Extension or add-on that can do everything. But if you combine extensions, you can create sourcing magic. In my latest video, I show you how to combine the following tools:

Facebook Search Guide from Airs:

This tool allows you to leverage the Facebook search graph to find candidates on Facebook easier.

Data Miner:

Data Miner is a Google Chrome extension that helps you scrape data from web pages and into a CSV file or Excel spreadsheet.

Blockspring:

Blockspring simplifies the processes of accessing, aggregating, manipulating and processing the API data, thereby reducing central IT’s load.” “By building itself into Excel and Slack, it’s bringing the data to you, rather than you having to go out to the data.”

Hiretual:

Hiretual is a Chrome Extension that shows you more information on candidates you find in LinkedIn. This tool is great. Especially if you have found a candidate in Linkedin and wanted to know more. Hiretual reveals things such as like compensation, likely fit, expertise, and relativeness.

 

Watch as I show you how to put all of these tools together in the video below. Let me know in the comments what tool combinations you like.

 

 

dean_dacostaAbout the Author: Dean Da Costa is a highly experienced and decorated recruiter, sourcer, and manager with deep skills and experience in HR, project management, training & process improvement.

Dean is best known for his work in the highly specialized secured clearance and mobile arenas, where he has been a top performing recruiter and sourcer.  Dean’s keen insight and creation of innovative tools and processes for enhancing and changing staffing has established Dean as one of the top authorities in sourcing and recruiting. Connect with Dean at LinkedIn or follow @DeanDaCosta on Twitter.

Beyond Buzzwords: A Recruiter’s Guide to Picking New Tech

No one got into recruiting or human resources to spend their time wading through new technology. And yet here you are, awash in apps, tools, startups and tech that you don’t really understand and the company is looking to you to evaluate it and develop a digital ecosystem that drives the not only the most, but the best candidates.

Kinda makes you want to go back to classified ads in the Sunday papers, don’t it?

That’s unlikely to happen. Instead, recruitment marketers and employer brand managers need a framework to evaluate new technology. It’s far too easy to be swayed by flashy features and demos only to end up with an expensive dud sucking up precious budget dollars.

The framework is simple. When looking at any new piece of tech, you need to consider the ecosystem, the audience and the action.

To learn more, check out this webinar sponsored by GetTalent for the tips, hacks and best practices when considering your tech to help you engage with the best candidates out there.

Consider the Ecosystem

Your digital ecosystem is all the tools and processes through which candidates find, engage with and apply for jobs at your company. At some companies, this might simply be a simple ATS (or even just a shared spreadsheet and a Dropbox for resumes) and Craigslist. Bigger companies might also include a employer referral program, social media and ads.

At some of the larger companies, we might need to add onto that list a career site, micro-sites, content marketing in multiple formats, multiple social media channels in a single platform, predictive media, re-targeted media, search engine marketing, analytics, tracking tags, and specialized marketing campaigns.

And now, take a breath.

Each one of those tactics, tools and systems has to connect to the others in order to be effective. What good is an amazing career site that doesn’t connect to the ATS, or a social media campaign that doesn’t connect to jobs? No good at all.

So, when you are looking at the next new tool to demo, find out how exactly it connects with your existing ecosystem. Will you have to scrape jobs out of your ATS? Will you have to input data by hand on a regular basis? All these things take time and money and should be part of your evaluation process.

Here’s a great example: Someone might be talking about Facebook’s new jobs tool, explaining how it can put your jobs in front of potentially 2 billion people. Sounds amazing, right? But if I explain how it doesn’t connect to your ATS and will force you to create its own silo of “applications” separate from how you do everything else, the value diminishes severely.

Consider the Audience

When someone is showing off a new tool or piece of technology, they are expected to have an assumed use case. But that isn’t always stated. If I hand you an umbrella and tell you it will keep you dry, I am assuming a use case of rain (I’m not assuming you’re jumping into a swimming pool).

In recruiting, we aren’t looking for quantity, but quality. One qualified applicant is more useful than a million unqualified ones. But marketing tools, especially those adapted from consumer marketing spaces, don’t take that into account.

For example: Let’s say I was selling you a tool guaranteed to put your recruitment marketing message in front of a million people for an unbelievably low price. Your instinct might be to jump on the idea to start your candidate pipeline.

But who are these people? Are they people in the same region as your jobs? Are they qualified? Are they people worth talking to? A million new applicants who live on the other side of the globe and aren’t able to actually do the jobs are effectively worthless. Actually, they’re less than worthless as they will clog your recruitment funnel, making it harder for your recruiters to identify the qualified candidates.

Suddenly, it’s not much of a deal.

You need to walk through how a given tool connects to the audience you care about and how they will engage with it. An amazing desktop one-click apply process sounds amazing for getting resumes from entry level applicants without degrees, until you consider that this audience is far less likely to have a desktop computer than a smartphone. You have to truly understand your audience when considering the tool.

Consider the Action

Remember the days of classified ads in the Sunday newspaper as the main focus of our recruiting efforts? Those were the days in which we could take someone unaware of our brand to application in one step, jumping the entire length of the consideration funnel in 30 seconds (plus the time to mail a cover letter and resume).

Those days are long gone, not just from a technology perspective, but from a process one. With the exception of graduate students who are so desperate for a job they’d click anything with the word “apply” on it, we can’t expect talent to just jump through the funnel in one shot.

In the modern recruiting world, we need to recognize that tools and tech can make people aware of your brand; it can help them consider your brand and jobs; it can help validate interest in your jobs, or it can facilitate the action of applying. No tool can do all those things.

So, it is incumbent on you to understand where your issues are and what action you want candidates to take when evaluating new technology.

Will it help make candidates more aware of your brand and jobs and if so, do you need help in that space? If you have a well-known brand, you might not need tools to get your name in front of new audiences. Your issues might be around helping candidates gain a better understanding of why to select your company over others. Or you might need tools that make it easier to take action.

In the end, selecting technology can be boiled down to a single idea: Understand what problem this tool is going to solve, and, if that’s a problem you actually have. Focusing on the areas of ecosystem, audience, and action can help you avoid costly mistakes and ultimately have better conversations with your technology and agency partners.

You may not love evaluating tech, but now you’re armed with the tools to keep from getting taken advantage of.

Thanks again to GetTalent for sponsoring this article.  If you missed the webinar check it out here!

 

James Ellis currently runs The Talent Cast podcast (found on iTunes, Google Play and wherever you get your podcasts) where he can be found doing deep dives on all things employer brand and recruitment marketing.

Previously, James has spent the last three years helping companies get serious about the recruiting content and inbound recruiting strategies.

James currently lives in Chicago, where he spends his time partnering with Fortune 1000 clients to develop recruitment marketing, digital and content strategies to find and attract the best talent.

You can reach him via Twitter @TheWarForTalent or on LinkedIn.

It’s About Time: Recruiters Are Screening Candidates With Text Interviews

Here’s a trend I can get behind — Using text messaging for early-stage interviews with job candidates.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported on this new trend recenty, and it made me wonder: Why didn’t somebody think of this sooner?

According to The Journal:

Claiming that prospective hires are too slow to pick up the phone or respond to emails, employers are trying out apps that allow them to screen candidates and conduct early-stage interviews with texts.

“People don’t want to have that 10-minute [phone] conversation any more if they could just reply with a quick text,” said Kirby Cuniffe, chief executive of staffing firm Aegis Worldwide LLC. After Aegis recruiters reported that fewer potential hires were answering their phones, the firm decided to try texting. Since March, Indianapolis-based Aegis and Priceline Group’s restaurant-booking service OpenTable have been using Canvas, a messaging app from Canvas Talent Inc. for text-based job interviews.”

3 reasons why text interviews make good sense

The driving force for doing this is simple: According to a report on Internet trends by venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, only 12 percent of Millennials prefer to use the phone for business communications. However, 45 percent prefer to chat online or exchange text or email messages.

Yes, the data shows why these texts-as-early-stage-interviews make sense, but there are three (3) big reasons beyond that:

  1. Improving the time to fill rate. It has been taking companies longer and longer to fill jobs, and the average time to fill a job (from initial posting to accepted offer) increased by 62 percent for large global organizations between 2010 and 2015, according to research from CEB, which is now part of Gartner. In fact, the average time-to-hire for white-collar positions is now at 68 business days, or 26 days longer than it was in 2010. I don’t know how much that early stage text interviews are going to improve that, but they surely are one step that will help to get people hired more quickly — and improving time to fill.
  2. A better candidate experience. I’ve written about this before, but job candidates are treated horribly by a great many companies. That’s not a big surprise, but what is a shock is that more organizations aren’t using text interviews, and text communication in general, to stay in close touch with candidates. With texting being the preferred method of communication for most Millennials — the largest segment of our workforce — it’s a perfect way to not only engage them but also to make the candidate experience just that much better.
  3. It adds a very personal touch. There’s no doubt about it — texting is a lot more personal, and anything personal gets the candidate out of the cattle call environment that seems to permeate so much of the recruiting scene today. When you can get more personal, you learn a lot more about the candidate. In my experience, that dramatically improves your hiring batting average.

Speeding up the process

What a text interview does most effectively is to not only speed up the hiring process, but also to engage and screen candidates earlier in the recruitment cycle. This is a good thing for both recruiter and job candidate.

The driving force behind text interviews, according to The Journal, is Canvas, a messaging app from Canvas Talent Inc. that is designed for text-based job interviews. The newspaper says it works like this:

The app suggests interview questions employers can use, such as: “What motivates you?
Its software analyzes candidates’ responses. Interviewers can rate answers with a thumbs-up or thumbs-down visible only to the employer and share transcripts of those text exchanges with co-workers.
Canvas charges employers around $300 per recruiter, and competes with similar apps such as Monster Worldwide Inc.’s Jobr.”
People have been talking about text interviewing for a few years, but we’re just now reaching a point where critical mass in taking hold and text interviews for early-stage candidates are really becoming a viable option for recruiters.

It’s finally here, so better get going

It’s about time that text interviewing got here. My friend, San Francisco State business professor John Sullivan, predicted that this was going to happen about a year ago. Of course, when Dr. John makes a prediction, people need to pay close attention because he’s generally well ahead of the curve.
Here’s what he said about text interviewing last September:
The time is right for shifting to an “interview from anywhere” approach, where text-interviewing is one additional option. Even if you use face-to-face interviews for the final interview, consider text interviewing for at least the initial interview. This is because it has so many advantages, including a higher quality of hire, less bias, a lower cost per hire as a result of lower travel costs, a reduced environmental impact, an improved candidate experience, and a shorter time to fill.
At a time when texting is all the rage, jump on the bandwagon and add it to your list of interview options.”

Here’s my take: Text interviewing is a natural evolution of the recruiting process, and it is particularly effective as an early-stage tool to narrow your options to the very best candidates. My guess is that it will rapidly become a standard practice and that there will be a great many apps that pop up to help recruiters and hiring managers to do it better.

So, if text interviewing is upon us, what are you waiting for? If you’re not at least looking into it today, you’re missing out on a tool that can make your recruiting team a lot quicker, more efficient and better focused.

Better get going before you get left behind.