Blog

5 Killer Strategies To Own University Recruiting in 2016

5 Killer Strategies To Own University Recruiting in 2016

“No matter what the circumstances behind choosing the University of Phoenix might have been for me and the rest of my graduating class, we had all chose to pursue our dreams and our degrees. What I thought was an admirable decision, instead, was greeted largely with scorn, shame or just plain silence.

This seems ridiculous, and you’d think that the value of someone’s education relies less on where they went and more on what they learned. But, sadly, in our society, you’d be wrong. It’s this focus on pedigree over pedagogy that, frankly, is one of the primary reasons why we’ve got such a pressing problem with the pervasive “skills gap” in the first place.

Since so many businesses and bottom lines seem to be getting schooled, maybe it’s time we reeducate ourselves. We think about the core concept and critical constructs of “education” in recruiting and hiring.” – Derek Zeller

Key Takeaways

Did you know that over 60% of students start their internship search on Google?

That means if you’re not using social media, developing your employer brand for millennials or implementing a solid strategy, your pipeline of the brightest talent will dry up.

And let’s face it. Students are the future of your workforce. Your success is dependent on building a strong university recruiting strategy. 

  • Don’t have a program? No problem. Learn how to start one with this webinar! 3 basic steps you need to take in order to build a solid internship program.
  • Understand the millennial audience and learn best practices around how to recruit and engage them within a new recruiting strategy.
  • Learn about technology that top companies are using for their recruiting program.

Hit ‘Em Up: How To Buy The Right Recruiting Technology.

“When I talk about money all you see is the struggle/ When I tell you I’m livin’ large, you tell me it’s trouble.”

Tupac ShakurI Ain’t Mad At Ya.

We talk a lot about “big data” in recruiting, but the truth is, while myriad solutions and systems exist to help employers discover which sources of hire are the most effective, the fact is that predictive analytics are incumbent on historical data, which means that any extrapolation is entirely predicated on what’s currently on the market.

That’s because there is no tool out there that can accurately predict when the next category killer or seismic shift in the talent attraction landscape (say, the rise of social media or mobile technologies); if such a thing existed, of course, VC firms wouldn’t make so many bad bets on market plays that never pay off.

You can figure out how well what’s worked in the past is going to work in the future, but like opportunity costs, you can’t calculate what doesn’t yet exist.

Recruiting Technology: So Many Tears.

2015-11-12_10-31-01_01This makes buying for the future, perhaps the most critical filter through which any employer should make technology purchasing decisions, inherently subjective; software sales is predicated largely on filling pressing needs today, not anticipating the more systemic, bigger picture problems that might arise tomorrow.

When applicant tracking systems first popped up, they delivered on exactly what they were designed to do, but there was no way of anticipating that that the more critical need than solving that existing problem would be figuring out a scalable, sustainable way of systematically engaging them.

This is why, although it’s easy to blame our systems, the real culpability lies just as much with the employers who signed long term contracts for short term solutions.

The fact that so much spend today is going to closing that gaping capability gap between, say, systems of record and systems of engagement evidences what’s become a vicious cycle of myopic decision making; 3-5 years is a veritable lifetime in the lifecycle of technological evolution.

By the end of your standard contract, many existing tools and technologies have diminishing returns and increasing capability gaps (often requiring expensive point solutions to address the most immediate needs).

Conversely, by that point, that technology has become so entrenched in recruiting processes and talent procedures that migrating systems can actually become a bigger headache than simply sticking around with the same sucky system. Plus, even the worst systems are known entities; for as risk averse an industry as talent acquisition, this gives the incumbents a decided edge, even with the legacy problems so pervasive throughout legacy systems.

But hey, you never get fired for buying IBM. You just might not make any hires, either.

Recruiting Technology: How Do You Want It?

2pacThere’s no knowing what you don’t know, but what you don’t know actually can hurt you when it comes to selecting, implementing and optimizing enterprise recruiting tools or talent technologies.

But there are a few key considerations every employer or talent acquisition organization can use during the software selection process to minimize the associated risks of recruiting technology selection and maximize their chances of success today – and tomorrow.

Here are some things every employer should consider before signing on the dotted line.

Starin’ Through My Rearview Mirror: Buying For the Future.

This one should be pretty obvious, but if you’re considering buying recruiting software, then your primary consideration should be on the actual product itself.

Many recruitment software buyers make the mistake of going to market without really understanding where their needs really lie and what process problems, capability gaps or actual business needs exist.

Before testing the HR technology waters, it’s important to understand not only what your process looks like right now, but what needs might exist in the future – and since, clearly, those are mostly undefined, buying for the future means finding the most flexible, scalable and sustainable solution. Just because a product can check a box on an RFP today doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily going to meet your needs of tomorrow.

Start by conducting a comprehensive audit to better understand which features and functions are at the most important; understanding and refining your list of requirements will not only help you streamline the selection process, but also easily eliminate any vendors whose core capabilities or case uses fall outside of the scope of your most critical needs.

Often, this deep dive into the current state of your talent acquisition organization reveals that it’s processes and people, not product, that are the real problem – and no recruiting technology in the world can fix a broken process.

Remember: recruiting software should support and augment, not displace or disrupt, the best practices you’ve already got in place.

Who Do You Believe In? Investing In A True Partner.

loveOnce you’ve successfully identified what you’re looking for and how they align with your processes, you’ll have a much better filter to screen potential partners.

As anyone who’s been forced to use a provider with a roadmap to nowhere, nonresponsive account reps or terrible customer service can tell you, this fit is almost as important a consideration as the actual product itself, particularly given the long term nature of most contracts and the high degree of customization and configuration most enterprise solutions need to succeed at individual employers.

“You’re not just buying a system; you’re buying a partnership,” says Mary Delaney, President of Recruitment Software at CareerBuilder.

“If your vision and values are aligned, then it’s a good fit – versus buying talent technology off a paper checklist.”

Once you’ve defined your requirements and identified a list of potential providers whose products meet the minimum qualifications defined during the discovery process, you’ll be able to concentrate on the bigger partnership picture than features and functions.

Remember: how you’re treated during the sales process is a much better indicator of the viability of any strategic, long term partnership than any product demo, website or one sheet. In short, it’s a pretty good preview of what a potential partnership is going to look like down the line.

Until The End of Time: Looking At the Long Term.

tupac shakur quote (2)If you’re an active prospect in the process of making a purchasing decision, this is as good as your relationship with any software provider will ever be; you’ll also never have the same sort of leverage with those vendors again – at least not until they’re trying to upsell you or renew your contract.

If you don’t like how you’re being treated during the honeymoon phase, remember: it’s only going to get worse once you actually sign on the dotted line.

Any lack of responsiveness, lack of professionalism or delay in meeting deadlines and deliverables during the sales process should be a pretty obvious recruiting red flag.

Another major red flag, conversely, is vendors who are a little too aggressive during the sales cycle. If you feel like you’re being oversold, chances are that provider is likely going to under deliver on those promises made during the selection process.  You know that scent of desperation from people trying a little too hard to win your business?

Anyone who’s focused too much on the close and not enough on what happens after will likely not survive for as long as the contract they’re chasing. The best partners out there want your business, but they don’t need it – a true partnership is truly mutually beneficial.

A true partner will be proactive, not reactive, in supporting your business and strategy, anticipating future issues or identifying current needs, and provide a range of resources and technical support for helping you get the most bang for your recruiting buck along the way.

Remember: you’re already paying a premium for those platforms – you shouldn’t have to pay more to buy a bunch of point solutions or implementation services to make sure that system is actually working as promised.

Because you spend enough time chasing down candidates and hiring managers where you shouldn’t have to worry about getting through to your talent technology partner, too. After all, you’ve got recruiting to do.

advice_mock

Does your current technology solution improve recruiter efficiency, provide data-driven talent strategy and give candidates a great experience?

If it doesn’t, it might be time to purchase a new solution that will help you evolve with the rapidly changing recruitment landscape.

Click here for more expert insights on choosing the right solution in Your Guide To Purchasing Recruiting Technology from our friends at CareerBuilder.

Disclaimer: Recruiting Daily was compensated by CareerBuilder for this post. But their data and action items are actually pretty priceless, so in this case, the facts and opinions contained herein do, in fact, represent those of the publisher.  Because we’re all about better recruiting through better technology, too.

 

11 Power Boolean Searches PLUS 7 Must-Have Sourcing Tools Every Recruiter Needs

 

[youtube url=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT0TMOFWB_4″ width=”500″ height=”300″]

Cut through the fluff and get the top 11 Power Boolean Searches we have to uncover hidden resumes, profiles and contacts of people you did not know exist.

This is a fast-paced 45-minute learning session with real searches, and real examples with a side of “no sales”. We will take your questions and challenges live on the air to show you how these searches work.

We share top searches including:

  • Country Coding and Top Level Domain searches
  • Experience searches, including patterns and brag searches
  • Interest search based on topic
  • Email searches (not the same old *.* stuff)
  • Activity searches
  • Pattern searching and Headlines

And of course, 7 of the most kick ass tools you can use as a sourcer.

 

Ryan creates the processes, ideas & innovation that drives RecruitingDaily. From search to solutions to design and implementation Ryan has lived through most every intersection of Talent Acquisition. Known for his ability to eclipse most peoples expectations on demand and lead generation, Ryan has advised some of the industries top companies at all levels.

Connect with Ryan on LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter

The Grifters: Con Artists and Agency Recruiting.

tumblr_m6p42kY7ev1qea72rRecently, it seems my rants against the rotten state of the recruiting industry have earned me the reputation of being “the angry recruiter,” an honorific that, while not entirely accurate, has been more or less true since well before I started writing these posts.

The truth is, I am angry; while I remain generally optimistic about the direction we’re headed in, I’m constantly reminded that we’ve still got a hell of a long way to go, too.

At this point in my career, I’ve pretty much seen it all, or so I had thought, until a couple of weeks ago.

Now, before I go too far, I’d like to reiterate my belief that recruiters, mostly, are good people, and that despite all of our transgressions, most of us have some sort of heart hidden in there. If you’re one of those recruiters who has any sort of passion for this business of ours – hell, if you have a soul – than the story I’m about to tell you is going to make your blood boil.

Frankly, I’m still a little bit pissed off (and amazed) at what went down.

The Agency Recruiting Con is On.

grifterWhat follows is a true story, and a tragic one, about what happens when crappy candidate experience, craptastic employers, con artistry and capitalism collide in a perfect shit storm.

This cautionary tale is exactly why I’m “the angry recruiter” – and if it doesn’t anger you, too, then you’ve got no business being in this business.

Meet Jimmy. He’s the kind of “top tech talent” that every employer out there is looking for – a good coder and an even better person, a top performer with high potential just a couple of years into his career.

He’s been busting his butt and exceeding every expectation at his current employer, but now that he’s a proven entity, Jimmy’s frustrated. He realizes that for all that work, he’s still underpaid (which isn’t uncommon in the tech sector, where competition has fueled wage inflation that’s made it nearly impossible for most employers to keep pace with the market) and underappreciated, being offered few opportunities for personal development and professional advancement.

So, Jimmy decided that even though his current gig wasn’t terrible, he’d put in enough time where it might make some sense to see what else was out there.

Like all candidates in the tech sector, Jimmy knew that his experience and expertise were in demand, and that anyone who’s a halfway decent coder can command a considerable raise just for switching companies, even if it’s doing the exact same job with the exact same responsibilities.

Gone Phishing.

octtoonJimmy, who was coming up on his two year mark at the company he joined straight out of his college computer science program, was at a critical point in his career. Within the technology sector, companies consistently see cadres of former college hires turnover approximately two years into their tenure, statistically speaking.

Employers combat this persistent phenomenon programmatically, which is why so many stock option or long term incentives, internal promotions and salary increases are scheduled to coincide with an employee’s two year anniversary.

No matter how these salary and bonus programs are structured, they share a common end goal, which is to effectively trap an employee into sticking around while the vultures perpetually hover, waiting to poach their prey.

Given the significant retention challenges rampant in the technology industry, the fact that most of these measures fail demonstrates that no amount of money in the world can overcome a toxic company culture. The fact is, as much as tech companies are paying to recruit and retain talent, they could pay a little more attention to what’s really causing their talent challenges.

Unfortunately, you can’t put a pricetag on treating your workers the right way, which is why so many tech employers continue to fight a losing battle in the proverbial “war for talent.” While tech talent might be insanely in demand (and know it), those seemingly infinite options can actually be overwhelming for candidates like Jimmy.

With limited experience in the workforce other than an internship that turned into a full time offer at his existing role (a fairly standard path into the industry), Jimmy had absolutely no clue how the hell to find the right job the right way. The good news is, most of the time, jobs find them – which is how Jimmy ended up on the phone with a “recruiter” from Robert Half. That, as it turns out, was the bad news.

The Agency Recruiting Get Rich Quick Scheme.

contingency recruitingI’d like to take a minute to tell you a little bit about the agency at the center of this cautionary (and morality) tale; perhaps you’ve even heard of it, since, for better or for worse, they’ve got something of a reputation in this business. Robert Half International, as the name would imply, is a multinational staffing firm with their hands in a number of verticals, from accounting to admins, and, to the detriment of everyone in the sector, technology.

This venerable firm has been around since 1948, which pretty much predates the codification of the “recruitment” function, and, I suppose, proves again the early bird indeed gets the worm, eventually expanding into the 4.7 billion dollar a year behemoth that it is today.

In fact, Robert Half (RHI) is considered such a bellwether, blue chip brand that it’s not only a component of the S&P 500, but has been consistently recognized as “The Most Admired Company” in the Recruiting & Staffing Industries in Fortune’s annual corporate reputation survey. In short, as staffing firms go, RHI is pretty much as reputable as they come – at least, it would look that way.

I had always thought of Robert Half as having a pretty solid reputation, one of those kinds of firms where good recruiters begin good careers, the kind of place where most of us in this business first accidentally fall into a recruiting role. Of course, their talent management model (not uncommon among third party agencies) is decidedly sink or swim; and those that sink can truly sink not only a global company’s brand reputation, but that of the entire recruiting profession.

Put someone with no experience in charge of a real req for a real company, sometimes, shit is going to hit the fan. At least that’s what happened when, let’s call her “Suzie,” for the sake of the story, found herself on the phone with Jimmy that day.

After it all went down, I checked out Suzie’s LinkedIn profile; somehow, after a whopping 1.4 years of experience, is considered to be a “Senior Recruiter,” which seems kind of a stretch in any circumstances. But the kind of shady shit this “senior” staffing pro pulls evidences that seniority and stupidity aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. Because, man, Suzie is, like so many shitty recruiters, not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed (although most definitely a tool, nevertheless).

Suzie has worked at RHI since she graduated with a communications degree from some third tier regional college a couple years back, and according to her LinkedIn profile has worked on some pretty prestigious sounding searches (of course, that source is always somewhat prone to hyperbole).

This means that her experience comes exclusively from the processes and procedures at RHI, who, ostensibly, also provided her sole source of professional training over the last year and a half she’s been in the business.

I’m not saying that what went down is explicitly Robert Half’s fault, but the fact is, they’re also complicit in Suzie’s complete breach of decor, professionalism and obvious lack of values of morals – bad behavior is learned somewhere. And when you’ve only worked for one agency, you don’t have to look too far to find at least one of the chief culprits.

Jimmy had applied for a role that RHI had posted on behalf of a client; he didn’t know, at first, he was talking to a third party agency, since there was no mention that the listing was not posted directly by the big name tech brand he thought he was applying for.

He was excited by that first call; the role was not only the exact kind of work he wanted to do and with more responsibilities and advancement opportunities than at his current company, but at an employer who had a great reputation in the industry as a great place to work. Suzy had Jimmy on the hook, and after that conversation, it was off to the races.

To Suzie’s credit, she was able to move Jimmy pretty quickly through the process (although his impressive background and niche skillset did most of the work on its own); it wasn’t long before he was extended a verbal offer, which he excitedly accepted. It was, the recruiter told him, a done deal; all that was left, pretty much, was the paperwork.

The Agency Recruiting Bait & Switch.

bait-and-switchNow, I’m not going to completely exonerate Jimmy from any blame; he made some serious mistakes, the kind of mistakes that while obviously premature and naive to anyone in recruiting, are exactly the kinds of “learning opportunities” (read: screwing ourselves) we all make early in our career. And, remember, this was Jimmy’s first real job offer, since he had earlier been converted directly after his internship.

But the fact is, most of what followed falls squarely on the shoulders of Robert Half in general, Suzy in specific, because they were the ones who not only led Jimmy to believe he had the job, but also, because they failed at one of the primary functions of any recruiter, agency or otherwise: counseling, consulting and coaching their candidates, who put absolute trust (for some reason) that the recruiter working with them is on their side.

So when recruiters stab those candidates in the back for the sake of expediency or just plain stupidity, then it’s tantamount to betrayal (at least in the eyes of the job seeker).

Jimmy, prematurely, thinking that he was moving onto bigger and better things, hung up after his conversation with Suzie and did what he’d dreamed of for a few months now: put in his two weeks with his manager, who graciously accepted his resignation, realizing that while Jimmy was one of his best programmers, he couldn’t blame him from wanting out of the Silicon Valley sweatshop that he himself felt trapped in, since quitting would mean forfeiting potential millions in options. So, he wished Jimmy well and accepted his resignation.

Now, any recruiter with any modicum of sense or sensibility would, sensibly, tell any candidate while extending a verbal offer that it’s a really, really bad idea to quit your job without a formal offer letter in hand. Of course, Suzi neglected to tell him this important bit of information; she also told him nothing about the particulars of the process between verbal offer and written letter, nor any advice on next steps.

So Jimmy didn’t know that he still had to pass a litany of background checks, reference checks, drug screens and all that other back office BS that almost always accompanies an official offer of employment.

Nope. All Suzie said was that it was a done deal, pretty much.

Catch Us If You Can.

Catch-Me-If-You-Can-3Jimmy waited, and waited, but after a week of not hearing or knowing anything other than he wouldn’t have his current job in a matter of days, finally heard from Suzy.

The offer had come in; but as so many candidates who have worked with recruiters who see people as nothing more than potential placements and paychecks, the offer Jimmy received looked nothing like the one they had talked about for weeks, or he had expected. It was like being punched in the gut.

Suzie went on to inform him that the offer wasn’t for a full time role, per se – something she’d failed to mention throughout the entire process.

She told him that it was going to be a six month contract, after which, of course, he’d become a full time employee. “It’s just one of those policies, you know?,” she said, but of course, Jimmy didn’t. He just knew he’d surrendered a real job to become a contractor – with no guarantees that it would last past six months.

Jimmy was, understandably, a little pissed off. When he told Suzie he’d already quit her job, her reaction was to laugh and tell him how dumb a move that was. When he said he hadn’t been told it wasn’t a full time role, she accused him of not asking during the hiring process, or not digging into the role more deeply.

The basic information every recruiter should tell every candidate as a matter of course, of course, somehow was Jimmy’s responsibility to research. It wasn’t her circus, or her monkeys – it was Jimmy’s situation, and if he didn’t want the job, she had plenty of other candidates in the hopper who did. So, he accepted this temp-to-perm position, pretty much shit out of other options. He sent in a signed offer letter, knowing that he’d pretty much sold his soul through a staffing firm.

Under most circumstances, the bright side would be that this was a lesson learned, one of those mistakes anyone could make at that point in their career, even if it was turning out to be one really expensive, really painful lesson. Jimmy had resigned himself to coming on as a contractor and had just about swallowed his pride when, two days after Jimmy sent in his signed offer, was told that the company had changed its mind.

They now wanted Jimmy to be a permanent employee, not a contract to hire, a last minute reprieve that, understandably, left Jimmy overjoyed – things really had all worked out, even if he had to suffer a little bit in the process. But wait…there’s more.

Persuasion Tricks: The Confidence Games Agencies Play.

imageSuzie informed him that, since he was going to onboard as a full time hire instead, would need to submit a new set of paperwork, and that he’d receive two documents; one, a standard offer letter, similar to the one he’d already executed for the contract-to-hire gig.

But it was the other required agreement that proved far more precarious. This attachment, which Suzie hadn’t really explained before shooting it over, was something of an unusual (and upsetting) addendum to the employment contract, an agreement that was tantamount to talent treason.

This little letter stipulated that by joining the company, Jimmy would be required to pay, at a prorated rate, the full $18,000 fee Robert Half would be receiving as their fee; Suzie, I found out later, would not, under this agreement, be required to give up one red cent of that commission. Nope. If he didn’t like the gig in which she placed him, it would cost him, not her, to head for the exits.

So, effectively, he was on the hook for at least a year, or else, he’d be liable for repaying the objectively ridiculously high fee RHI commanded for what was, to him, more or less submitting his resume, giving him a panic attack, and finally pulling through with what he hoped was finally the offer they’d been promising since that first phone call. Yup. The candidate, not the recruiter, would be penalized for making a shitty placement. Of course, Suzie hadn’t told him any of that before the fact, either – yeah, she sucks.

I’ll let you process that all for a moment; this is exactly the kind of bullshit game agencies play that gives recruiting the black eye that defines our piss poor professional reputation and business credibility – so many people, just like Jimmy, have been burned so many times by the Robert Halfs of the world, it’s no wonder that they hate us.

Suzie, after Jimmy had calmed down about this unexpected clause, convinced him that if he went and asked for his job back, he’d more or less be managed out anyway, and had already killed any chance he had of career advancement there – sure, they’d probably have him back, but he’d already shown that he didn’t want to be there, wasn’t to be trusted, and that it was only a matter of time before he headed for the hills again.

Saying no to the offer and staying, she told him, was tantamount to career suicide – and his only other option was starting from square one and hitting the streets without a job in hand, hoping someone would hire him. But as an “active” candidate, his odds were piss poor at best.

This was her advice to a candidate, her career consulting: “Take the offer, or else.”

Obviously, after a whole year and a half of doing this, she could safely say she’d seen what happens long term when her candidates accept counteroffers – even though she continued to reiterate that it was because of her experience and expertise that Jimmy should just do what she told him and sign the offer for his own good.

Which, with that “guidance,” is of course exactly what Jimmy did, knowing he was screwing himself, but thinking that this wasn’t just the best option, but the only one.

The Spanish Prisoner Scam, Agency Recruiting Style.

quote-remember-the-story-of-the-spanish-prisoner-for-many-years-he-was-confined-in-a-dungeon-winston-churchill-121-18-92

Now, not many people outside of hourly food service or hospitality workers, manual laborers and Google employees sign up for a job knowing to themselves that there was no way they’d be sticking any longer than absolutely necessary; certainly, very few skilled, exempt professionals start a new role knowing the relationship is doomed before they even begin their onboarding process.

But Jimmy started already disengaged, disenfranchised, and started counting down the days before he could finally quit and start picking up the pieces of his career. The only other time he heard from Suzie after he started this job he absolutely hated was to ask for any referrals for a role requiring a similar background. Did he know anyone?

Needless to say, he didn’t return her calls, messages or InMails. He tried to put his head down, forget she existed and remember that he’d learned what not to do when looking for his next job.

So he suffered. I mean, even with working so many hours for such little pay in his old job, the dream culture the recruiter had described turned out to be a waking nightmare. It was a classic bait and switch – it was as if every single thing he was told about working there by everyone in the hiring process (most, of course, coming from Suzie) was a complete and blatant lie. Hell, he would have been happier if he had ended up at Amazon – at least then, he’d have a few stock options.

But he was stuck, not able to afford the 18k it would take to quit, and wistfully ignoring the inundation of recruiting related e-mails he continued to receive, for positions that seemed like nirvana compared to the pitiable existence he faced every day he went into the office. That is, until one day, the phone rang. It was another recruiter. And even though he almost hung up after finding that out, he was so miserable he decided to stay on and hear him out. Good thing, too.

Now, the recruiter he was talking to is one of my close friends and closer colleagues, who I’ve known, worked with and respected for years now, one of those internal recruiters who genuinely cares about the candidate experience and is proud to represent his employer, and his passion for his company is pretty obvious to anyone he comes into contact with. In short, he recruits not with the goal of closing reqs, but improving lives by improving careers.

It’s a good feeling knowing that your company actually delivers on the promises you have to make to get candidates to accept an offer, where employer branding happens organically and people genuinely love their jobs. If you haven’t had that experience, I feel sorry for you – it’s pretty awesome.

And my friend knew, in that first conversation with Jimmy, that not only was he a great candidate, but a great fit, too. Jimmy was at the end of his rope, and agreed to at least consider the job, regardless of the fact he was effectively handcuffed. What was the worst that could happen?

The Pyramid Scheme.

con_artistAfter a few interviews, the usual dog and pony show and a whole lot of unnecessary pre-closing – they just wanted Jimmy, Jimmy just wanted out, easy enough – the kid made yet another fatal mistake. Fool me once, as they say. And this time, I’ve got to say, shame on Jimmy.

Because he did to my friend exactly what Suzie had done to him. He waited until the actual offer was on the table to bring up that minor detail that he couldn’t take the gig unless, you know, he could somehow come up with a way to cover the thousands he was contractually obligated to pay for leaving early. This, of course, put my friend in the precarious position of having to come back and tell Jimmy that, since he hadn’t disclosed that, there was nothing they could do but leave the offer as is. The choice was his.

After some soul searching, coupled with the hope that 7 months in, there was no way RHI would care or even notice (they’d been paid out months ago), he figured he’d take his chances and get the hell out of Dodge.

Well, he submitted his two week notice, and in return, a few days after onboarding at his new job, he was given a bill for $8k. That was the prorated amount he still owed Robert Half since he bailed. Sorry, not sorry.

Indignant, Jimmy thought about suing – or something – but he didn’t have the time, resources or experience to even think about litigation. Well, not only that, but at least he had the sense to know that it’s a bad idea at 25 years old to sue your former employer while also trying to find a long term home at the new company, where he felt he needed to focus. So, looking ahead instead of back, he got down to the matter at hand.

Jimmy was staring at a bill, printed on Robert Half letterhead, telling him that he had 30 days to pay the 8,000 in full, or face potential litigation or wage garnishment. These are scary words to anyone, much less some kid who has more coding skills than common sense (obviously). Knowing he didn’t have the means to cover this in a single month (this is a lot of cash early in your career), he reached out to the HR department at his former employer to plead his case.

He explained that he had first signed a contract to hire offer, then told after the fact that it was a perm position, and since he had already given notice, had no other option but to take the job. It wasn’t his fault – it was the agency they had paid to represent him that was the real culprit of this unfortunate series of events. The HR Lady, of course, professed ignorance at Jimmy’s accusations – and then, in an instant, it all became clear.

“We never agreed to a temp-to-perm position with them,” she informed him, “we only use Robert Half for full time jobs; they’re not set up for contingency or contract workers. That’s another vendor.”

She told him that the agreement he’d made to repay the money was made with Robert Half, not with them, so she could do nothing but tell him she thought they had probably put in this clause – which she’d never heard of happening before – as a hedge to make sure they got paid their full placement fee. She mentioned that Robert Half had several hires before him not work out, and, in fact, they were no longer working with them at all. They hadn’t been happy with their unprofessionalism and shady practices, she said, although this was all news to Jimmy.

Robert Halfway House: Why Recruitment Needs Rehab.

robert-half-quotes-9705Let’s stop for a minute. What the serious hell is going on here? I’ve worked with agencies in the past, both as a contingency recruiter and as a direct employer, and despite my continued daily exposure to third party recruiters and agencies, despite my having reviewed and vetted literally hundreds of RFPs for clients and contracts for external search firms, I’ve never, ever heard of this nonsense.

This, in my opinion, is exactly the kind of behavior that’s not only just bad for the candidates and clients companies like Robert Half purportedly partner with, but downright predatory, too – and that a recruiter working for a company that’s worth billions of dollars on the NYSE, has offices in 70 countries and rakes in billions of cash could somehow screw over a candidate means that for all their success, there are serious flaws in their model.

That they actually have a contract to handcuff candidates and ensure that they get paid regardless of how shitty the placement they make means that that revenue, that track record, has been built on a house of cards that’s exactly why we are hated. You know what pisses me off the most?

This is actually the most respected company in our entire industry. If this is the gold standard, we’re all screwed.

Agency Recruiting and The Confidence Game.

2011-07-04-its-a-confidence-gameSo, let’s recap this whole, sordid affair. On the one hand, the recruiter flat out omitted, overlooked or avoided critical facts about the position that would have probably led Jimmy to not even thinking about the job.

She failed to tell him how the position was being structured, then when she couldn’t get the client to agree to a temp-to-hire agreement (RHI makes better margins and more money with this structure than a one-off direct placement), she called him back with an offer letter and an addendum that he would be becoming an indentured servant, more or less.

On the other hand, both the recruiter and Robert Half were blatantly negligent in their duty to look out and represent the best interests of their clients and candidates; they deliberately followed a process and created a culture designed to deliver shareholder value at the expense of workers like Jimmy, monetizing what amounts to the ignorance of inexperienced, yet placeable, candidates.

They defer any risk for making a bad hire, preferring real revenue over the fake “relationships” they’re building so that they can close a req and get a paycheck. It’s sickening, and it’s a game that RHI and other global RPO/BPO/MSP and agencies have mastered (and monetized) by now.

The agency, I learned from an anonymous source, actually has an informal policy to try to upsell placement fees to consulting contracts, and the most common method is by providing a bogus initial offer letter, only delivering the real one if the client doesn’t bite and insists on the new hire coming in with immediate FTE status.

While I can’t divulge the sources of information, I will tell you that the fact that someone with 1.6 years of “experience” dialing for dollars can be on the front lines representing recruiters to candidates like Jimmy, and doing so on a scale where they’re raking in literally billions on the ignorance of top talent who could easily get hired even without an intermediary, is sickening. And it means that we, as a profession, really have to step up, and big time.

If you’re a recruiter who cares about this profession, your candidates, colleagues and clients; if you really do have a passion for this potentially powerful work of improving lives through improving careers, and I hope you all do, then this sort of incident should serve as a similar wake up call, and evidence that we need a change.

Oh, and one more thing. Never, ever let Robert Half represent your employer brand. You might have the bad luck of getting Suzie assigned to your search – or the ostensibly hundreds of her counterparts out there helping raise RHI market cap while lowering the standards of our profession and industry.

Screw that. Seriously.

I don’t know how often that happens, but if you’ve ever encountered anything like this, drop me a line and let me know. I’m stunned, but know that this can’t be an isolated case, something that I’ve confirmed in subsequent conversations and some old fashioned sourcing (read: digging up dirt). So let’s start talking about these worst practices. And maybe, just maybe, we can start to change them – and our profession – for the better.

Because it’s about damn time.

Derek ZellerAbout the Author: Derek Zeller draws from over 16 years in the recruiting industry. The last 11 years he has been involved with federal government recruiting specializing within the cleared Intel space under OFCCP compliance. Currently, he is a Senior Sourcing Recruiter at Microsoft via Search Wizards.

He has experience with both third party agency and in-house recruiting for multiple disciplines and technologies. Using out-of-the-box tactics and strategies to identify and engage talent, he has had significant experience in building referral and social media programs, the implementation of Applicant Tracking Systems, technology evaluation, and the development of sourcing, employment branding, military and college recruiting strategies.

You can read his thoughts on RecruitingDaily.com or Recruitingblogs.com or his own site Derdiver.com.  Derek currently lives in the DC area.

 

You Aren’t A Good Fit – Veteran’s Day Salute

My Mom used to hang up on the military recruiters when they would call. I still remember the way the recruiter on the other end of the line would stammer when my mother would say “This is Lt Colonel Deborah Richardson, US Army, and you will not be calling my house again. Do you understand soldier?” Then, when I would ask why I couldn’t join the Army too, she would tell me “you aren’t a good fit.”

My Mom, on the other hand, absolutely was. She was active duty Army for 25 years before she retired just a few years ago. In her 25 years of service, she completed airborne school, two master’s degrees, two war colleges (tactical military training school for the civilians reading this), managed billions of dollars in the Army Reserve’s budget and achieved the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. I’m confident I’m missing a litany of her achievements because my Mom was an all-star soldier and I know I went to more award ceremonies than I can even remember.

She accomplished all of this in complete chaos, by any civilian’s standards. How many of you can say your job relocated your family and changed your job without any input from you or sent you thousands of miles away with an order, not a choice? My mother can and so can most career soldiers. As a single mother, she raised her kids in 13 different cities in just the 13 years I was in school, all while attending various schools to continue her education to become a better soldier and leader. She was deployed to the Gulf War just 8 weeks after my younger brother was born. She missed basketball games and graduations – all the things most of us take for granted as we count the weeks until the sports season is over and we’re back on our couch at 6pm.

Now, picture all of that in a job description. I think it would sound a little like hell to most of us, right? She was right when she told me I wasn’t a good fit; I, most certainly, am not. I would be miserable under these conditions – trying to accept the lack of control over my life and future all while trying to take care of my family I can’t always be there for. Yet 21.8 million+ people have chosen that job. While all of their stories are different, their sacrifice is the same; they miss their people and they miss out on everyday memories that are only made once.

Considering all of this, I can’t help but think we spend a lot of time talking about the human element when it comes to recruiting – how important it is to know a candidate’s background or their job, whatever it takes to get their attention and interest in your job, right? We want to make sure they’re a good “fit.” We make this time investment for so many candidates yet when it comes to veterans, most of us draw a blank trying to translate military credentials into civilian terms. I watched it happen to my veteran friends who, coming out of the military, aren’t getting calls back because some (idiot) recruiter can’t understand how their skills translate into civilian jobs. So I wanted to do something about it. I do work at a blog whose goal is to make recruiters better at their jobs, after all.

I teamed up with Dean Da Costa to create a dictionary of sorts. It will explain the terminology, and language you need to learn to understand what a veteran did while in the military and how it correlates to the civilian world. There is no fluff – we literally listed the words and hyperlinked resources you can use. You can get your copy by clicking here.

And what better way to celebrate Veteran’s Day than to get them a really kick ass job?

ICYMI – 4 Trends and 12 Under the Radar Companies HR Tech Buyers Should Know from #HRTech

Have you ever been to a conference where the Expo hall is so big, you aren’t sure where to start interacting? Have you ever really wanted to go to a conference and your company was too cheap or too broke to send you? #HRTech usually falls into both of these categories.

Did you attend HR Tech 2015?

We did. And now it’s time to share that information with you. This webinar is straight to the point, no fluff and contain all of the Companies HR Tech Buyers Should Know  but may have missed at HR Tech this year.

The amount of information consumed in just a few days is enormous. Most of the meetings, sessions and handshakes will have been forgotten. That’s why we are here. The RecruitingDaily team spent the week in Vegas meeting the most innovative companies in our space, arranging live demos and gathering the information that you need to know.

Jackye Clayton, Editor of RecruitingTools.com presents the 4 biggest trends impacting the HR and recruiting industry today. She’ll dive deep into the conversations you may have missed, bring to light the debates that shook the vendor floor and of course the tools and technology that you need to know about.

If you did not visit every vendor booth and spend your day sitting with the tech start up companies then you’ll want to carve out the time to listen in.

During this webinar we cover:

  1. 4 of the biggest trends impacting HR and Recruiting today
  2. 12 under the radar tools and tech we met with while at HR Tech


Jackye Clayton, Editor, RecruitingTools.com
Jackye Clayton is recognized as a people expert who puts the Human in Human Resources. An international trainer, she has travelled worldwide sharing her unique gifts in sourcing, recruiting and coaching.
Twitter: @jackyeclayton  Connect on LinkedIn

The Nostradamus Effect: Seeing Into the Recruiting Future With Data Science.

futureIf you run a business or manage a team, then you’ve felt–or can imagine–the extreme stress of a talent deficit.

Experiencing a rapid-fire personnel change is comparable to being struck by a sudden earthquake. Unfortunately, in this situation, hiding under your desk isn’t a means to stay protected. If your company can’t access the right talent, it’s doomed.

Too often, when employees leave unexpectedly or a new need suddenly arises, companies aren’t prepared to fill the gap and the entire business is left flailing.

Other times, the company does anticipate the need, realizing that they’re growing and will need to hire, but isn’t prepared for the challenges they face in finding the right talent.

Either way, when crunch time comes around, most companies end up sprinting in circles, desperate to re-stabilize their workforce.

Currently, businesses are at the mercy of unforeseen employee turnover and random shifts in the labor market–and it sucks. However, new breakthroughs in data science mean that within the next ten years, our strategies for building our workforce will transform completely. And that’s something we desperately need, because acting reactively is holding us back.

The Biggest Problem with Living in the Present.

Retrofuturistic-Gadgets-Medical-Examination-MachineRight now, most hiring is reactive. When the market gets tight, we hustle to hire faster. When there’s less pressure, we slack off. Either way, we’re always playing catch up.

For a high profile public example, look at what happened at Twitter recently. The company lost its CEO and several key product executives, the stock tanked, and the board was left scrambling to fill the void. Obviously, an absence at the leadership level is going to create more chaos than the average departing employee, but the same general principle applies to any key team member.

Almost all companies realize the risk associated with losing an important employee (or several), but most resort to generic retention strategies like company perks as a solution.

That approach is useful, but also problematic. Of course, you want your employees to be happy and stay with your company, and you should certainly take measures to ensure they do so. But that’s simply not enough.

The fact of the matter is that people are going to leave. Maybe they have family issues that demand attention or want a career change, and there’s nothing you as a business can do to prevent those things. But you can anticipate them.

Imagine if Twitter’s Board of Directors had anticipated Dick Costolo’s resignation months before it happened based on warning signs in his digital footprint and had already sourced a new CEO to step in if and when necessary. Doing so would have saved the company a lot of turmoil (and probably a lot of money).

Maintaining a stable workforce isn’t about retention–it’s about prevention.

Hiring from here on out will revolve around using data wisely to stay one (or more) step ahead of the next vacancy. And the data we have access to, plus the capabilities that come with it, have HUGE implications for how companies of the future will manage their workforces.

Seeing the Future Through Data Science.

Brown,r_time_macine60In 2020, a business owner (let’s call her Martha) is facing a major talent deficit. Her company’s hoverboards are in high demand and the pool of hoverboard engineering talent is getting extremely competitive. Plus, three of her superstar employees are leaving to volunteer as settlers on Mars. Sounds pretty grim, doesn’t it?

From a hiring perspective, it shouldn’t. If businesses like Martha’s adopt new hiring technologies and implement data science, they’ll be fine even in a worst-case scenario. We can already write algorithms that track behavior patterns leading up to an employee leaving and alert us to warning signs before they ever give notice.

We can now run analyses on market trends and know which factors create a tougher hiring market, so we can strategize accordingly. We have all the capabilities we need–now we just need to use them.

The difference between hiring today and hiring ten years ago is the sheer wealth of data we have available. Repositories like GitHub, LinkedIn, and Quora as well as social media channels provide us more information about our current and future employees than ever before.

Many companies are already using that data to hire smarter, but we have the potential to significantly expand on this. As workers continue to develop a deeper and more distinct digital footprint, companies gain the ability to make more timely and savvy hiring decisions.

By marrying predictive analytics and machine learning with the massive online data sets available now, we can deploy programs to mine social media for keywords that indicate people’s dissatisfaction with their jobs or likelihood to leave.

Or, we can discover unlikely talent pools for future hires by cross-referencing skill sets and tracking career paths. We have the information we need to determine when we’ll need to hire, where we should hire from, and what we need to consider throughout the entire hiring process.

These capabilities will surface within the next decade or so, and when they do, hiring will look completely different for both workers and businesses. Instead of worrying about what is, we’ll be strategizing in anticipation of what will be.

foleyAbout The Author: Jonathan Foley is the VP of Science at Gild. Jonathan has always enjoyed working with interdisciplinary teams and applying technology to positively impact the world.

He holds a BS and PhD in Bioengineering from UC Berkeley and as an undergrad, Jonathan worked on a team building a low-cost microelectronic sensor for detecting infectious diseases in resource poor settings. His graduate work focused on the transcriptional regulation of HIV and HIV latency.

Follow Jonathan on Twitter @l337d474 or connect with him on LinkedIn.

 

From Pipedream to Pipeline: A Closer Look At Quality of Hire.

can-you-predict-candidate-quality-620x320The amount of time it takes candidates to go from passive prospects to active applicants has increased significantly since the job market surplus shifted (along with the balance of power) from too many candidate to too little talent.

Despite the cutthroat competition for new hires, employers are taking longer than ever before to finally decide on a final candidate.

In the last two years alone, our data suggests that the recruiting consideration funnel shows an increase of 41%, which is a pretty stunning slowdown in the hiring and onboarding process across the board.

This poses a big talent challenge, and significant threat, to many employers, as that same data leads us to worry that many candidates might get lost or simply lose interest before finally making their way through the funnel and into our open opportunities.

Since we spend billions of dollars every year investing in increasing awareness of open jobs and opportunities through paid media like online recruitment advertising like job ads, employer branding initiatives and other spend to stand out enough to capture job seeker attention, then why, exactly, are so many employers letting that slip away by not converting more quickly?

Why do we squander speed for the sake of holding out for that perfect candidate who might be out there, but never actually is – by which time, Plan B is normally already onboarded with the other guy, anyways. It’s a good question, and a deceptively simple one: why the hell, exactly, is recruiting taking so long these days?

Why are we statistically suffering such paralysis by analysis instead of having enough guts to make a choice and stick by it without second guessing ourselves? Why are we always looking out for the next hire when the right one’s almost always right there?

Quality In: Why Content Counts.

In the last year, I’ve heard less and less about the need to find more applicants. Filling the pipeline with names for each role is no longer much of an issue.
Instead, I’ve been hearing more and more about the need to increase candidate quality. Sometimes, that conversation comes in the form of “fit” and sometimes in the form of “length of interview process.” Sometimes it’s just a conversation about hiring developers in San Francisco. But the issue is the same: how can we get better candidates and improve quality of hire?

The more content a candidate reviews and considers before applying, the higher the likelihood that they will be deemed a higher quality candidate and hired.

Of course, too few companies actually do the hard work to report back into their ATS the quality level of most of their candidates, so trying to determine what channels are driving quality is nearly impossible. Instead, we were looking at an interesting metric: the number of candidates per hire for each channel.

What we’re looking for is the relative density of candidate quality. So if Channel A has 100 candidates per hire and Channel B has 20 candidates per hire, Channel B has a far higher density of quality candidates (we are assuming a company only hires candidates of quality).

Quality of Hire: The Glassdoor Effect.

why-understanding-the-evolving-candidate-journey-gives-you-a-recruiting-advantage-36-638In evaluating a huge retailing and logistics company, someone who hires blue and white collar candidates all across the country, we discovered that candidates from Glassdoor were being hired at a significantly higher rate than outside of Glassdoor.

While I can’t reveal numbers, the relative density of candidates from Glassdoor was 60% higher than from outside of Glassdoor.

At the same time, candidates from Glassdoor also made twice as many stops through the consideration funnel as those outside Glassdoor.

While this says positive things about Glassdoor, the potentially more important takeaway is that there’s a clear correlation between the amount of content a candidate consumes about the job and brand within the consideration process and the candidate’s quality level.

The more content a candidate reviews and considers before applying, the higher the likelihood that they will be deemed a higher quality candidate and hired.

When I first reviewed the data, I assumed that this was mostly for higher-status roles, where candidates tended to be more selective about where they applied. But this client hires a huge number of entry-level and blue-collar workers across all channels.

While we intend to look at this result across multiple companies to confirm its validity, this is a strong first indication that content drives quality candidates. Not that we ever really had any doubt.

Read more at Meshworking from TMP Worldwide.

james_ellis_tmpAbout the Author: James Ellis is a Digital Strategist for TMP Worldwide, the world’s largest recruitment advertising agency.For more than 15 years, James has focused on connecting cutting-edge technology to marketing objectives. As a digital strategist for TMP Worldwide, he helps some of the largest companies in America answer their most pressing digital questions.Follow James on Twitter at @TheWarForTalent or connect with him on LinkedIn.Learn more about TMP Worldwide at www.tmp.com.

 

3 Hiring Hacks to Up Your 2016 Recruiting Game

3 Hacks to Up Your 2016 Recruiting Game

Did you nail your major 2015 hiring goals or fall maddeningly short?
Refining key processes like interviewing are just one of our favorite ways to up a talent acquisition game in 2016.  Some hacks to improve.

 While running any kind of business is hard work hiring people for that business can be even harder. The amount of time and energy we dedicate to making every successful hire happen can leave most of us feeling downright exhausted.

Sometimes, that fatigue can set in, often in the form of picking the first candidate who walks in the door. If they’re even reasonably close to a fit, then you’re willing to make that hire.  Rather than having fatigue, do it right the first time. Sure.  Seems like it would be easy yet recruiting isn’t easy (contrary to popular belief). So we are here to help.

Watch this Recruiting Blogs and Glassdoor webinar for a timely, end-of-year session “3 Hacks to a Better Q1 2016 Recruiting Strategy.”

Key Takeaways

  • How to analyze plan vs. actual, leverage data wisely and build the case for more recruiting dollars in 2016.
  • How to “think like a marketer” to better define ideal candidate demographics, plan networking hiring events and research new hiring tools.
  • Refine your strategy by optimizing your interview process and setting realistic, upfront expectations with candidates.

The Problems with Chrome Extensions? Malware Pt. 3 of 3

The odds are high that there is a Chrome extension you are using right now is injecting advertisements into sites that you visit without your knowledge. The way it works is, companies pick ads based on the formatting on the sites you visit, and then they use data they took from you to show you ads that appeal to you. Most extensions walk a fine line between adware and malware. Don’t just download everything you see!  If you do, make sure you have one of these apps to help.

A report from Ars Technica has revealed that Chrome’s automatic updates also include extensions. By extension (pun intended), that will also update any code from developers that want to harm your system and use your data in ways that could cause you some harm. These aren’t the typical bad guys, either. Lots of very sterling-quality extensions have been taken over by developers that know how to “game” the automatic updating system to slowly and surely transform something that enhanced your browsing experience into something that makes it into a nightmare.

Aside from spamming the sites you visit with advertisements, they can also sign you up for newsletters and mailing lists without your consent. Your inbox will be much more loaded with spam than in the past.

In part 3 Dean DaCosta will discuss:

 

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.

 

 

The Top 10 Best and Worst Buzzwords for Recruiting Tech Talent.

6.9.15_Breaking-down-meaningless-“Tech-abularly”-buzzwords-1-680x380Language is constantly changing; the world we live in demands consistently finding new ways to define the previously undefinable, describe the indescribable (or inconceivable) and reflect our ever evolving society.

Take the term “human resources,” which first appeared in 1958; even that inescapable and omnipresent phrase “big data” only showed up in print for the first time in 2001.

Of course, the rate of linguistic change in the talent function pales in comparison to the frequent, frenetic changes in technology.

Tech-related buzzwords and business terms evolve every day, and one of my favorite aspects of Textio is our ability to actually see the way that language changes in real time.

Nowhere is this phenomenon more evident than in word choice within job listings. As of today, we’ve recognized over 50,000 distinct phrases that impact the quality, quantity and diversity of applicants through such a seemingly superficial change as the language recruiters use to attract top talent.

The list of the most effective phrases for job ads, as you can imagine, is as dynamic as the technology market itself, largely mirroring both hiring demand and bigger industry trends. For example, one of the most hackneyed  of business buzzwords, “synergy,” which experienced such inexplicable popularity only a few years ago,has been reduced to such a cliche that its very presence within a job description serves as a strong predictor of negative job ad performance.

With this in mind, we took a look at our job listing data over the last 12 months to find out the biggest winners and losers when it came to speaking the language of top tech talent to effectively drive applicants and convert candidates from job ads.

And even in such a short period of time, we were able to produce strikingly clear evidence that not only does language change, but it changes fast: none of today’s losing lexicon had a negative impact on average job listing performance only one year ago, and only two of today’s top terms were even on our lexical map back then.

The 10 Best and Worst Words For Your Tech Job Ads.

So if you’re looking to improve your tech job posting performance, here are five winning words you should try to target – and five that you should try to avoid at all costs. ‘

The biggest winners and losers in tech job ads over the last year:488x-1

Tech Recruiting Terms: 5 Top Terms for 2015

  1. Artificial intelligence (or AI). This is the biggest winner in our data set over the last year, and we swear we’re not just saying that because we’re an AI company and we’re hiring. The phrase has been around a long time, but over the last six months its usage among the strongest performing tech job listings has quintupled.
  2. Real-time data. It’s not news in 2015 that software built on a static foundation has a hard time competing, and tech companies are increasingly bringing this forward in their job listings. Real-time data shows up twice as often in the top 25% of job listings as it does in the bottom 25%.
  3. High availability. Creating personalized and relevant experiences means that you’re making products that are always available. High availability (along with its close kin high availability service and high availability architecture)shows up in 42% more job listings than it did a year ago.
  4. Robust and scalable. Both robust and scalable have shown up in tech job listings on their own over the last couple of years, but the use of the two together broke big in tech job ads over the summer and it’s still on the rise: usage has tripled over the last two months alone.
  5. Inclusive. The diversity conversation looms large in tech, so it’s not surprising that job ad language reflects it. But the specifics are changing. Last year, equal opportunity statements were fifty times more likely to contain the words diverse or diversity than any other phrase. While diverse is still everywhere, its positive impact on attracting applicants from underrepresented groups is slowing down. Over the last six months, many forward-thinking tech companies have replaced diverse with inclusive in the broad workplace culture statements that have themselves begun to replace conventional equal opportunity statements.

Tech Recruiting Terms: The Year’s Biggest Losers 

  1. Big data. Two years ago big data was everywhere. Companies bragged about using it. New investment funds and top 40 bands were named after it. Engineering job listings containing big data were significantly more popular than those that did not. But today, big data has become so highly saturated that its use has passed into cliché; engineering job listings that include it perform an average of 30% worse than those that do not.
  2. Virtual team (or v-team). Corporate jargon performs poorly in every industry, but nowhere more so than in tech. Job seekers are neutral on distributed team and working group, but virtual team is more than ten times as likely to appear in job ads with low applicant counts as it is in more successful listings.
  3. Troubleshooting. Both IT people and software engineers are excellent troubleshooters, hopping on problems or debugging challenges wherever they pop up. But while the skill remains relevant, the term to describe it has shifted. Job posts containing troubleshooting perform twice as poorly as those containing problem solving, fixing, or diagnosing in a similar context.
  4. Subject matter expert. In many senses the subject matter expert is the opposite of the full stack engineer: the subject matter expert knows one thing very well, but only one thing. Listings containing full stack engineerperform an average of 32% better than listings containing subject matter expert. In a world where versatility and job mobility are the way to make more money, no one wants to be a one-note piano.
  5. Drug-free workplace. Want to torpedo your tech job listing? Advertise that you’re a drug-free workplace. Job listings containing the phrase are over twenty times more likely to perform in the lowest quartile of listings – and six months ago, the effect was only half as strong.

The language that works in recruiting changes as time passes; what was hot a year ago, or just a few months ago, may leave candidates cold today. And if you’re trying to reach top talent, it’s imperative to make sure you’re speaking their language – or else, it’s likely you’ll never truly be heard.

Read more at the Textio Word Nerd Blog.

KieranSnyder-MediumKieran Snyder is the co-founder and CEO of Textio, a recruiting technology startup based in Seattle. Kieran holds a PhD in linguistics and has held product and design leadership roles at Microsoft and Amazon. She has authored several studies on language, technology, and document bias.

Kieran earned her doctorate in linguistics and cognitive science from the University of Pennsylvania and has published original research on gender bias in performance reviews and conversational interruptions in the workplace over the last year. She participates actively in Seattle-based STEM education initiatives and women in technology advocacy groups.

Follow Kieran on Twitter @KieranSnyder or connect with her on LinkedIn.

 

HR Tech 2014 Startup Pavilion : Where are they now? – Celpax

I love the concept the Celpax brings to the table. Celpax, of course, was featured in the Startup Pavillion in 2014, and I am thrilled that it was.  The Celpax measures employee mood at the exit door. Continuously. Check it out:

FireShot Capture 126 - Celpax I A device to improve employee mood. Continu_ - http___www.celpax.com_

How and when did the idea to develop your product/service begin?

In 2012, we wanted to find out what people do to get their employees engaged, so we interviewed 100 leaders. This is how they Celpax device to improve employee morale was born.

How did being part of the HR Tech Startup Pavilion provide meaningful business opportunities that otherwise might not be possible?

People usually find us online. It’s great to meet HR professionals in person! Not everyone is comfortable buying directly from a website, and you can close bigger deals, faster.

What was an unexpected outcome from being part of the HR Tech Startup Pavilion?

That so many big companies made their way to our (very!) small stand. And that so many signed up.

What updates have you made to your product/service is the 2014 HR Tech Conference?

We increased our pool of free device to improve employee mood with a green and red button. As a result of this new technology; we have had sign ups in 56 different countries to measure mood.

 

Looking ahead, what does the future hold for HR Technology?

It’s great to see that there are so many companies providing really cool services with high potential. Hopefully, this will translate into a workforce with higher employee mood, worldwide!

 

002a763e26f4f41639bdb9883f67c4e2

 

Jackye HeadshotAbout the Author: An international trainer, Jackye Clayton has traveled worldwide sharing her unique gifts in sourcing, recruiting and coaching. She offers various dynamic presentations on numerous topics related to leadership development, inclusionary culture development, team building and more.Her in-depth experience in working with top Fortune and Inc 500 clients and their employees has allowed her to create customized programs to coach, train and recruit top talent and inspire others to greatness. Follow Jackye on Twitter @JackyeClayton  and @RecruitingTools or connect with her on LinkedIn.

The Recruiter’s Guide to Digital Marketing.

2015-11-05_05-21-02The first childhood memory I have is of my parents acting like children; this, when you are very young, is a rare and exotic novelty indeed. For all the times they’d scolded me for such seemingly trivial acts as jumping on the couch, screaming in the house (inside voice only) or running indoors, it was precisely because this one time where they themselves were so delighted that they could not contain their inner, impish impulses.

The reason for the ruckus, and foundation for my first memory, was the Kansas City Royals winning the 1985 World Series.

I grew up watching this team that somehow took home the title sink further and further into irrelevance; it was, after all, the family tradition. ‘

My parents used to describe how there was a packed house in the K (then Royals Stadium) every night; this seemed impossible, since the place was so empty that at several games, the guy doing crowd shots for the Jumbotron had to ask if we’d already been on. And yes, for an entire half inning.

From Worst to First.

WorldSeriesRoyalsMetsBaseball-0ef38 metsSluggrSo it went; we lost 100 games, the place was deserted, and yet, my parents still bought season tickets every year and listened to Fred White and Denny Matthews call games on AM radio when they weren’t in town.

Meanwhile, I was a mediocre catcher who always felt a sense of identity with the worst team in the league – hey, at least we were trying.

That’s gotta count for something, right? Our shared futility brought us closer together, in a way. We were playing for pride, and I was for some reason proud of a team that spent the formative years of my youth in the cellar, the laughingstock of the league.

That drought, of course, continued for 30 years, until finally, this week, the Royals brought the crown back to Kansas City; for a moment, a generation removed from their uncharacteristic outburst, I too felt a little like a kid again, which is cool, since obviously this entire anecdote makes me sound (and feel) old.

But as they say, with age comes wisdom. While I’m still waiting for that, what the Royals did remind me that even when you completely suck, when there’s pretty much no hope that you’ll ever be anything more than a shred of your former self (and maybe a punchline, too), that losing, even epically, is ephemeral. Eventually, with enough dedication and a belief that somehow you can beat the odds, an entrenched mentality and conventional wisdom and come out on top.

This, if anything, should be good news for recruiters and the talent acquisition industry. Because when it comes to our professional reputation and impact, it seems, not only are we somehow always at the bottom of the business standings, but we’re constantly playing from behind. But if the Royals can turn it around, even after 30 years of futility, trust me: there’s still hope for recruiters.

The Farm System: Minor League Recruitment Marketing.

bull-durham_320“There are three types of baseball players: Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen and those who wonder what happens.” – Tommy Lasorda

Rebuilding starts with having the right building blocks in place; in baseball, like in talent acquisition, it’s all about developing raw skills and building a pipeline to ensure that your organization has all the pieces it needs to succeed tomorrow, today.

But instead of making it happen, recruiters, it seems, would prefer to watch, and wonder, instead.

Recruiting, unfortunately, appears to be suffering from its own industry wide Curse of the Bambino, or perpetually getting its own Billy Goat, when it comes to marketing; there’s a really long legacy of losing that has to be overcome, one that’s so entrenched in our ethos that we’re willing to ascribe it to anything other than the fact that we’re playing minor league marketing ball with major league talent.

You’re never going to knock it out of the park without focusing on the fundamentals, first. And like batting in baseball, making contact is everything in recruiting. This is why engagement is so imperative for building the lineup of all-stars you’re looking for when you’re recruiting top talent.

The problem is, so many recruitment marketing and employer branding initiatives ignore the scouting reports, meaning that most of these would be clean up hitters swing and miss so much of the time.

A recruiter is a lot like a pitcher; you’ve got to know how to pitch to a candidate if you’re going to throw the right strikes to hit an often improbably small zone. There’s little warm-up involved anymore, since candidate information has become completely commoditized due to a spate of new sourcing tools and talent technologies that give us so much information about candidates without our actually having to put in a whole lot of effort.

That means when we’re trying to convert them, we’re often coming in cold. Not having built any prior engagement or brand awareness into a candidate interaction prior to throwing that first pitch almost always ensures that it’s going to miss the mark. And even if you’ve got the best closer in the game, there are no save opportunities when you’re playing minor league ball.

Getting the closer relies on consistency; you’ve got to consistently reinforce your employer’s mission, vision and values in every single candidate or career communication and make sure that you’ve got the designated hitters to really make marketing initiatives like social media, talent networks or e-mail campaigns score at every opportunity.

It takes an average of 8 brand impressions to positively impact a consumer purchasing decision, which is why when it comes to digital marketing, you’ve not only got to build your lead, but constantly protect it, too. Every inning might not go your way, but what matters is that your brand wins in the 9th.

Digital Marketing, FTW…

hardshot1“The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers.” – Earl Weaver

As former Orioles manager and celebrated curmudgeon Weaver suggests, the key to winning in recruiting is a lot like baseball.

It comes down to three things: pitching (or employer branding); fundamentals (engagement) and finally, that three run homer: digital marketing.

Rounding the recruiting bases and hitting it out of the park require every employer have at least three key players in the lineup.

Leading off is search engine optimization, better known as SEO; 85% of candidates begin their job search on search engines, so it’s important to make sure to put the right strategy in place to lead off by getting you on base with candidates.

Obviously, organic is the best way to do this, but if you want to advance that candidate, Pay-Per-Click (PPC) or Pay-Per-Action (PPA) advertising platforms, such as Google AdWords or retargeting, are a sacrifice that’s worth investing to make sure you’re able to at least put yourself in scoring position.

Finally, the potent third bat in the lineup, the hitter responsible for driving it all home, is social media; while social recruiting rarely has enough power on its own to clear the fences, it can be invaluable for creating enough contact to bring your next hire home.

Every recruiter is like a manager, and the job, similarly, is all about situational judgement and playing the odds; big data, like sabermetrics, replaces gut feeling with hard numbers, but in recruiting, like in baseball, sometimes the numbers just don’t factor in the manifold variables that evade explanation.

Whether that’s chemistry, destiny or just plain mojo, sometimes magic happens; the underdog wins the World Series, the little company somehow scores the big candidate with an average offer. Things happen. That’s what makes all of this stuff so damned fun.

What’s really cool is that in recruiting, like in baseball, these million variables – and occasional miracles – unfold in real time, and if you’re keeping score at home, you not only have a record of what’s happened on the field, but the numbers behind the action. In digital marketing, similarly, staying on top of the action means being able to adjust spend in real time, test campaigns and optimize results instead of simply sitting back and filling out some static scorecard, as so many employers seem wont to do.

If you want to look at the pitch, click here to check out The Recruiter’s Guide to Content Marketing; if you want a deep dive into the fundamentals, check out The Recruiter’s Guide to Inbound Marketing. But if you want that three run recruiting homer, here’s what you need to turn your team into the big leagues – and into a big time contender for top talent.

Leading Off: Search Engine Optimization.

2015-11-05_05-40-38We’ve been talking about building Boolean strings for years now. We’ve discovered other innovative and often overly elaborate ways to stalk candidates on the internet (see this Jim Stroud post on using Singles Ads for sourcing as evidence), and, turns out most of the information we find on candidates has absolutely nothing to do with their candidacy whatsoever.

Forget compliance; when we look for information on candidates, we can’t always control what we find out about them.

For example, I once had to knock two direct sourced candidates for the exact same search out of the process because in trying to figure out the best address to send their interview prep packet to (yeah, we did that), I also happened to discover they were registered sex offenders.

Which makes some sense, I suppose, given I was slating for some random corporate gig at the Walt Disney Company.

Similarly, I lost a retained search once because, turns out, in trying to find some sort of shared musical interest on his MySpace page so I could build that connection you need for pre closing, this mild mannered CMO by day was, in fact, a dominatrix at night. I really wanted to tell her she should move to HR and kill two birds with one stone, but instead I had to ditch the only person in the Southland with this really niche skillset, industry experience and credentials and start from scratch.

The downside of direct sourcing is you never know what you’re going to find, and sometimes, it ruins everything. I know this from experience.

Similarly, Search Engine Optimization is the digital dirt candidates are digging up on you when they do perfunctory research on your company, careers or corporate culture. Like the sexual deviants I disqualified who were otherwise consummate professionals, there’s probably some skeletons out there in the company closet that are likely to be deal killers when it comes to closing top talent. But while you can’t suppress a digital footprint, the at least you can bury it – and make sure that candidates only see the information you want them to see.

Think of it as the digital version of reference checking – when you can control the information, it’s really unlikely that any of your sources are going to raise red flags. This means the emphasis in recruiting on SEO isn’t getting found by potential, as is often the exclusive rationale behind implementing search strategies, but also, what they’re finding.

While you can potentially control messaging and overcome objections while direct sourcing individual candidates, you’ll can’t control what people are saying about your employer brand online; only in what order they see it. The same goes for your available jobs, which is why it’s so important to know what phrases applicants are most likely using to find you, and making sure that your results appear before your competitors.

In SEO, like real estate, location is king, but in SEO, it’s content marketing that owns the crown; the higher you rank, the more likely it is the right talent is going to find you, first. Content marketing is the currency of SEO, and by continually creating optimized and targeted content with consistent, compelling messaging, you’ll not only organically control search results; you’ll largely be shaping reality, too, at least as far as candidate conceptions about your company are concerned.

Recruiting might not have the silver bullet, but SEO ranks right up there as among the most potent tools of the talent trade.

The Squeeze Play: Pay Per Action Recruitment Advertising

usa-appleSometimes, organic traffic isn’t enough to rule the rankings roost. This is particularly true in recruiting, where there are so many direct employers, agencies, job boards or service providers bidding on the most common keywords.

In fact, paid traffic is one of the largest revenue sources of online job boards, with aggregators like Indeed or retargeting networks like Monster’s CAN offering more or less making money on the margins of the traffic jobs-related search terms redirect.

It’s obviously important to have visibility any time a candidate researches your company, function or specialized position for which you’re hiring; if you’re not on the first page of those search results, you’re irrelevant. While there’s no way to measure opportunity cost, the costs of strategic PPC in talent acquisition pale in comparison to the price employers could potentially pay for losing priority over the keywords required to drive candidates.

One common tactic, for instance, is for companies to buy out “jobs” and “careers” related searches linked to a direct competitor, so that when someone searches for jobs specifically at that company, the most prominent result often belongs to the career site of their chief competition. If you’re not already owning your own name, chances are the other guy is.

While it’s expensive to buy a term like, say, “Software Engineer in San Jose,” it’s far less expensive to buy keywords around your brand. When you bid on terms like “Working at” or “Life At,” you can control your employer brand message, have targeting capabilities around location, demographic information and behavioral targeting like online user history and other far more powerful content destinations than generic job ads.

Because you’re facing less competition and eliminating the intermediary, you only have to pay for results – not a flat fee regardless of results, as is most commonly the model in online recruiting today; instead of a flat fee for a seat license, employers can control costs by spending on what’s working, and throwing out what’s not.

Like having status on an airline, having priority in search results can not only make you look like a baller, but over time, will quickly add up into the positive impressions required to move a potential prospect into an active applicant. If they’re looking, this is the one way to make sure that you can be found by any candidate out there.

And, you know, have the ability to directly correlate spend with actual results, which in recruiting is nothing short of revolutionary.

Cleaning Up With Social Media.

276716_web_Baseball-Social-Media_GoulSocial media is the three run homer of recruiting. Results show that it doesn’t work, but when it does, it’s a game changer. Only problem is, to achieve this end result requires an odd confluence of circumstances.

You’ve got to have the right number of base runners, be in the right part of the lineup, get the right pitch and hit the sweet spot, and even if you really connect, there’s a chance variables like where you’re competing or outside conditions can minimize the damage of even the most powerful hits.

There’s obviously no formula for this, nor predicting if social media is going to work. It’s trial and error in a field where there are no experts, success is largely anecdotal and subjective and there’s no real established “best practices” since the medium is so new everyone is pretty much still figuring it all out.

But if you’ve ever had that moment of connecting with a candidate based on a shared interest you saw on Facebook, or engaging them about their personal interests or professional aspirations on a network like Twitter, seen the world of work they live in through their eyes on Instagram, then you know what it’s like when the ball flies out of the park. You don’t even have to watch it leave the park before circling the basepaths – when an employer and a candidate really connect, you just know.

Big data be damned.

Taking Your Recruitment Marketing To The Major Leagues.

2015-11-05_05-51-52

To learn more about what recruiting and HR pros really need to know about accelerating their talent pipelines through digital marketing, make sure to download my latest eBook, “The Recruiter’s Guide to Digial Marketing,” brought to you in partnership with our friends over at Smashfly Technologies.

Check it out today.

I promise you’ll learn something. And if you don’t, well, you know where to find me.

DISCLAIMER: This post was obviously sponsored by Smashfly, but the opinions contained in this article are exclusively the author’s, who also wrote a pretty kick butt e-book on the exact same topic this post is designed to promote. For any global readers, sorry for the baseball references. It’s kind of a thing over here.
To our friends at Smashfly – sorry about your Sox.

How to Deal with your Deluge of Data – Wanted Analytics

Big data is a buzzword that is thrown around daily. But what is it and what are we supposed to do with it? Let’s get something straight – just because you have a ton of data, does not mean that you have “Big data.” What you could have on your hands is just frankly, is a big mess. In fact, you could just be a data hoarder.

That is part of the problem that more and more companies are experiencing. Terabytes of worthless, unstructured data are just begging to be something beautiful, but no one knows what to do with it. Author Bernard Marr said it perfectly. “After all, a picture paints 1,000 words – but only if we know how to read them.” The other thing to consider when trying analyzing your data on your own is that you don’t know what you don’t know.

What do you do with all of this information?

Recruiters are expected to recruit, market, collect data, test, analyze, post and report but are usually only “experts” on well… recruiting. A wise person told me once to do what I am good at and outsource the rest. Your first instinct may be to find a data scientist to go through your data collection, but I can tell you; it is easier to find a leprechaun. But don’t worry there is help – Wanted Analytics. Back in 1999, while we were all looking for Y2K compliant blenders, Wanted Technologies started collecting information from the Wanted ads in the newspaper, (get it? Wanted!) to see which companies were doing the most hiring. So they were “Big Data” before big data was cool.

What does Wanted Analytics do?

“Begin your global workforce strategy by measuring talent supply and demand. WANTED Analytics shows how many candidates meet your requirements and which companies around the world are also hiring for similar talent. This data helps you decide if the best strategy is to fill a position from the outside, develop talent internally, or recruit from another city or country where competitors aren’t hiring as aggressively.”

Analytics provides HR professionals with the data to:

  • Guide a global workforce strategy
  • Develop talent acquisition tactics for hard-to-fill positions
  • Survey the entire candidate universe and competitive landscape
  • Use competitive intelligence to understand the external environment.

Well, that is what they say they do anyway. I wanted to see for myself.

How will Wanted Analytics help you become a better recruiter?

Well, what if before you even begin recruiting for a position, you know whether or not it was even plausible that you would find a candidate? For years, we have asked hiring managers just to take out word for it. We have wanted all who would listen to know a job is hard to fill. On the surface, it may just look like we are a bunch of whiners. With Wanted, we have proof and evidence is power.

Truly the product does a ton but I am going to attempt to break it down into bite-sized chunks. For testing, I pretended to be looking for a personal trainer in Austin, Texas. The search fields were normal enough when getting started. I just plugged in “personal trainer” and Austin, Texas. After it had done its thing, I was left sitting with my mouth open. I mean how and where did it get all of this information based on my simple search? Well, they use “real-time, global business intelligence with years of hiring demand and talent supply data to help make better strategic business decisions.” OK fine. So would it be easy to find trainers well right away I was able to see that yes, it should be relatively easy. Here is part of what the report kicked back.

 

wap

48 Other companies in the Austin area where looking for trainers. Seems like a lot but it also told me that there were 1400 potential candidates to choose from – Awesome – my odds look good so far right? Now remember – all I but into my search string was Fitness Trainers and Aerobics Instructors in Austin Texas. At first glance, this may be all that I need to know before I get started recruiting. But what should I pay my trainer? Wanted will let us know.

wap2

What if, like what happens all too often, the hiring managers changed their minds and decided they needed ten trainers. Is Austin still the best place to hire from? Wanted will give you a “Hiring Scale Heat Map.” The Heat Nap shows you the “hottest” places for your job. In other words, where are you going to have the best odds of filling the job.

wap3

 

This feature allows you to make sure that your location is the ideal spot to hire from. This can be extremely helpful; not only for where you may need to open a new office but also what cities and states you may want to recruit from. Speaking of which, you want to poach? There is a report for that too! Wanted has Active Competition reporting as well as Historical Hiring trends. This is awesome because you can also see if local competitors have posted new positions.

 

wap4

wap5

 

Now, Wanted Analytics does a great deal for you but it does not do everything for you. To get actual accurate information on the candidates that your report says are available. Currently, you will need to use tools like ZoomInfo, TalentBin, and data.com.

 

wap6

I like this tool primarily because it allows you to show to the big wigs upstairs where they should expand to, pay more competitive strategies and let them know when a competitor may have a new offering up their sleeve. It will also help you to justify recruiting spending.

My colleague, Derek Zeller gave other reasons as to why Wanted Analytics should be on your radar:

Historical Hiring:

Historical hiring will list direct employers that have posted for jobs that meet the search criteria over the last four years

Skills & Certifications:

Skills and certifications in demand provide a real-time view of tools, technologies, and certifications currently in demand by employers

Graduates Programs:

Number of graduates of the selected university or college for the most important programs

Search Criteria:

The search criteria allows the user to refine their search using filters like locations, functions, occupations, levels of experience, skills, certifications, and more

Job Listing:

WANTED Analytics has a complete set of hiring demand data, collected from more than 25,000 job boards and corporate sites

Hiring Demand Dashboard:

The Hiring Demand Dashboard App stores more than one billion detailed data records

Candidates Supply:

The candidate supply count is the total estimated employable workforce available for the job position entered based on the Occupational Employment Survey (OES)

At the end of the day, Wanted Analytics will give you the power and the evidence you need to be a better recruiter.

In November 2015, WANTED Analytics™ became a CEB company. CEB (NYSE:  CEB) is a best practice insight and technology company that partners with its customers to develop innovative solutions that unlock their potential and help them grow.

WANTED Analytics combines real-time business intelligence with years of hiring demand and talent supply data to help make better strategic business decisions. When fully integrated, the WANTED Analytics and CEB Talent Strategy & Analytics offerings will help businesses leverage talent intelligence for more impactful workforce planning.

Jackye Clayton Editor RecruitingTools.comAbout the Author: An international trainer, Jackye Clayton has traveled worldwide sharing her unique gifts in sourcing, recruiting and coaching. She offers various dynamic presentations on numerous topics related to leadership development, inclusionary culture development, team building and more.Her in-depth experience in working with top Fortune and Inc 500 clients and their employees has allowed her to create customized programs to coach, train and recruit top talent and inspire others to greatness. Follow Jackye on Twitter @JackyeClayton  and @RecruitingTools or connect with her on LinkedIn.

 

Fuzzy Math: Why Time to Fill Sucks.

cartoon1Oh, “time to fill.” If you’re a recruiter, the very mention of this metric is enough to send shivers down your spine; after all, it’s been used for years now to beat recruiters into complete submission (and completing submissions).

For as long as I’ve been a recruiter – which, by the way, is longer than I’d like to admit – the concept of “time to fill” has been one of the most commonly leveraged baselines for assessing recruiter productivity and output; it’s also commonly utilized as a convenient crutch for building a completely biased benchmark to determine whether or not a recruiter is worth keeping.

In recruiting, there’s a need for speed; if you’re working for a third party, getting your fee often requires sacrificing depth of screening for expediency of submission, a devil’s bargain that most are willing to make (rightfully so, too).

As we’ve entered the digital age in recruiting, though, at least as far as our sourcing and talent attraction practices are concerned (applicant tracking systems and job descriptions are a different story), and have learned to stop worrying and dropping big data bombs, that crucial “time to fill” metric that every recruiter considers a core competency has become more and more meaningless.

Today, we have the ability to measure recruiters, their productivity and talent acquisition efficacy across multiple levels, across multiple platforms, systems and sources. Say what you will about “big data,” the truth is that we’re actually talking about meaningful metrics and actionable analytics in recruiting for once is a big deal – even if the practice of said theory remains a little flawed.

This means that, finally, the “time to fill” metric has become more or less obsolete, a hand-me-down from the olden days of recruitment that’s about as old and archaic as most enterprise ATS systems. And while even the most obsolete HCM technologies can track something as simple as days to fill.

Even this is flawed, since the amount of time something is open in the system in no way reflects the infinite variables, hiring manager obstacles and process delays that inevitably occur while the clock inexplicably keeps on ticking. But, in the absence of real data, it’s something.

I just wouldn’t want to stake my job to what the hell those systems say, and I’m betting I’m not alone on this.

Why Time To Fill Is Such A Stupid Metric.

59073347While recruiters, as a rule, kind of suck when it comes to anything involving analytics, for some reason any recruiting department that tracks any sort of metrics seem to have made this the standard way in which success is measured.

Superficially, this makes sense, as time to fill provides a pretty even, ostensibly objective snapshot at how well any particular recruiting department or individual recruiter is doing at any point in time.

But while this is a convenient (and easy) way to deconstruct recruiting to a simple, standard and scaleable number that anyone can understand, what time to fill lacks is the nuance and understanding of the infinite fallibilities that occur within the recruiting process.

Some of these, like time from submission to time of screening, are entirely up to the recruiter; most, however, have have nothing to do with anything but a broken process and the frustrating delays and unforeseen circumstances that inevitably arise in recruiting.

But the reqs keeps aging, and their Time-To-Fill (TTF) continues to rise regardless; bad news when this is the metric by which you’re measured and managed, pretty much. When it comes to TTF, the devil truly is in the details.

Which is to say, that when calculating this metric, what isn’t factored in is almost as important as what’s normally included in calculating TTF.

6 Big Reasons “Time to Fill” Really Sucks for Recruiters.

untitledWe’re looking at the wrong stuff, it seems; TTF looks at the bottom line: how long did it take the recruiter to fill this position?

But what it leaves out is all the shit that we, as recruiters, have no control over whatsoever. For example:

  • Manager Drag – Every recruiter has or has inevitably had a manager that without fail takes days (or weeks) to respond to candidates that have been submitted, regardless of how “critical” the position is to their team.
  • Unskilled Interviewers – Remember the VP who bails on an interview last minute and lets their junior employee interview the senior candidate? The same junior employee who has little to no interview experience? Their inexperience in effectively interviewing that candidate impacts the decision, and hence time to fill. 
  • “Moving Targets” – There’s the always-fun role that for which you need a candidate with 3-5 years experience, only to submit 5 people for that role and find out you really need someone “more senior”, with 8-10 years of experience. Feels like the clock should start over here, if you ask me. Especially if we’re really looking for a whole new set of attributes or a major change in core skills needed for the role. 
  • Candidate Availability or general “flaking out” – People are an unpredictable lot, and any recruiter with any tenure knows that candidates can have tight schedules, and can go M.I.A. at times for seemingly no reason. All the “candidate control” in the world can’t save every candidate from going sideways every now and again. While I’m at it, “candidate control” is another really shitty anachronism we need to drop. No wonder candidates think we’re assholes – we talk about them as though we were plantation owners in 1834. 
  • Rare or In-Demand Skill Sets – When you are recruiting for the same skill set as 70% of the rest of the tech companies in the country (I’m looking right at you “Big Data”…) or a skill that maybe 40-50 people in the industry possess, that can be a hindrance to meeting the 28 days to fill expectation that your company has arbitrarily dictated. This isn’t recruiter whining, its a fact. 
  • Improper Broad Use – Piggybacking on the in-demand skill set, we also need to look at how we apply TTF. In many cases, TTF is measured as a whole-company strategy/outcome when the reality is that it is a metric that is quite departmentally specific. We’d be better served to measure this at a Business Unit or departmental level to accurately reflect where efficiencies are and where areas for improvement exist. 
  • Positions On Hold – TTF rarely takes into account the external business factors that impact hiring. Budget shortages, changes in the priorities for which positions can be hired and when, and business performance (IE – quarterly earnings) can put roles on the back burner. Are those cumulative add-on days being taken into account as well?

Sound familiar?

The End Times of Time To Fill.

What_Time_Is_ItThere is reason for optimism in how and what we measure on the recruiting front in the coming years. Recently, Rob McIntosh, Chief Analyst for ERE, proposed a standardized set of metrics that will measure not just an overall time to fill, but that will look at metrics between segments within the recruiting workflow, and at key intervals in the process.

It will also be incredibly helpful to use a metric like Recruitment vs. Business Consideration, which, in his words.

“Compares how many business days the Recruiting function takes to identify and screen the candidate vs how many business days the business (hiring manager) takes to interview and hire the candidate.” 

That is one sexy metric I can get behind, because it helps to tell the story behind the numbers. More metrics like this one will give us more information than TTF alone ever will.   

The currently-forming national association for recruiting (Currently under the working name Professional Recruiting Association) could be a major influencer for introducing additional definition and streamlining, particularly as it relates to industry breakdowns, as well as discussion at the local level.

Recruiting is clearly in that awkward teenage phase. It’s growing up, and growing up is ugly in many ways. Now is the time to embrace a new way of thinking about how we measure whether or not we’re actually effective at the job we do.

We waste hours of our time debating each other on pointless issues on Facebook or Twitter, defending our profession to outsiders while attacking each other inside; we’re content to argue theory instead of driving best practices, and we’re happy to talk about the importance of data instead of implementing it.

It’s time to grow out of this phase and realize that if we’re going to make any meaningful difference in our business, or the impact we make for our candidates, clients and colleagues, we’ve got to shut up and start doing more than simply scratching the surface.

The key is using data from different sources to tell the real story about what’s really going on with recruiting – because TTF ain’t nothing but a number.

unnamed (11)About the Author: Pete Radloff has 15 years of recruiting experience in both agency and corporate environments, and has worked with such companies as Comscore, exaqueo, National Public Radio and Living Social.

With experience and expertise in using technology and social media to enhance the candidate experience and promote strong employer brands, Pete also serves as lead consultant for exaqueo, a workforce consulting firm.

An active member of the Washington area recruiting community, Pete is currently a VP and sits on the Board of Directors of RecruitDC.

Follow Pete on Twitter @PJRadloff or connect with him on LinkedIn, or at his blog, RecruitingIn3D.