The Social Media Maze
Do you feel like a lab rat these days?
As recruiters our job is pretty simple. Find clients, find candidates, and put them together.
But the tools we use to accomplish that end have become increasing complex. When I started in this business everything was paper. Then came the computer, proprietary databases, the internet and e-mail.
Now we are dealing with “the cloud” and social media.
I am computer literate. I can build my own computers. When pressed I can write code (not well) and I keep up with current technology. I have to admit, however, that Social Media has my perplexed. I’ve done a bit of research of late to try to figure out how, or if, my firm should participate in Social Media. To be honest, I don’t know if I have reached any conclusions. Much of what I have read is based solely on opinion and not solid research or anything close to what the average person would consider substantiated fact.
So you might ask, what do you mean by Social Media? Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media as “a group of Internet-based applications… that allow the creation and exchange of user generated content.” The books and articles on this subject seen to be written by starry-eyed twenty something’s smitten with anything new and warning, as forcefully as possible, that you will be left behind if you don’t have a the latest social media tool. I’m having a hard time figuring out how these tools contribute to the basic formula that I put forth at the beginning “Find clients, find candidates, and put them together.”
Much of what has been written about the subject is predicated on the notion of “being found” that means, using social media as a tool to raise your profile so that client and candidates can come to you. For those of us who have been brought up in a traditional sales background this is counter-intuitive. You find clients and candidates by searching for them! (The one exception to what I have said is LinkedIn, an indispensible tool that should be in every recruiter’s toolbox.)
Do other Social Media tools play a role? I’m a sure that they do. But I also think that it may be some time before their role is clear for recruiters.
In the mean time I am going to keep reading and researching.
Category: Uncategorized |
The Case for the retained Search Firm
The debate about whether to use a retained or a contingency search firm has been a contentious one
The decision to use a contingency firm is largely based on the false premise that you can get the same service from a contingency firm as a retained firm.
When using a contingency agency your firm only pays a fee if a candidate is hired. Therefore, the effort a contingency firm invests in a search is directly proportional to how likely they believe it will —pay out“. As such, contingency firms focus on the identification of individuals to fill their candidate database.
The goal is to get as many searches as possible in the job sector and throw as many résumés against each search as possible. Essentially, the same résumés are recycled for every search. Although it seems counter intuitive, the likelihood of uncovering the successful or best candidate is low. The hiring company receives many résumés in the first few days, with recruiter effort at a dramatically reduced level after that (with the hiring manager doing the screening). As time passes, a reduced likelihood of identifying the successful candidate equates to a reduced likelihood of earning a fee, which in turn equates to a reduced effort by the recruiter. And so the cycle goes. The contingency recruiter moves on to a fresher possibility; he will e-mail or fax the same batch of résumés to your competitor in hopes of a —hit“, as opposed to a fit.
Given the nature of the workplace, individuals who send their résumé to contingency recruiters may not be the happiest employees, and typically have their résumés everywhere. Good candidates who are concerned about confidentiality know this and many prefer not to participate. The clear disadvantage for the hiring firm is that the contingency recruiter will not have access to the best available talent.
Many people have touted the Internet as a panacea for many business problems including recruiting. The truth is that the Internet is a poor way to recruit as well because it is reactive not proactive, that is you wait for the right candidate to find you as opposed to going out and finding the right candidate.
This reality defies the most rudimentary business model. If one of your managers were to suggest that your firm should fire all its sales people and just wait for the customers to call you œ you would think them crazy and with just cause.
Although the Internet has been used successfully to recruit high tech talent, the bottom line is that the net begets the net. Middle mangers and above typically avoid using the Internet to find employment. With tens of thousands of jobs and hundreds of thousands of résumés posted, just in Canada, the Internet is unwieldy. Corporate firewalls and the shear volume of information make the Internet —user unfriendly“ for recruiting. In fact most reputable career counseling professionals recommend good old fashioned networking as the preferred method of successful job search. As with contingency recruiters, candidate quality is a real concern when recruiting on the Internet.
The advantage of using a retained search firm is that the short list of candidates you interview is pre- screened against a position description and corporate style. Retained search firms take the time to meet with the hiring manager to develop an understanding of the strategic business issues unique to your company and industry. They talk to the key players within your firm to quantify the skill sets and personality needed to succeed. They then identify, source, and actively recruit qualified candidates in targeted firms on a confidential basis, and only candidates who meet the profile are presented.
In real estate the most important considerations are —location, location, location“. Retained recruiters believe that the most important consideration in recruiting is —fit“. In fact, experience says that candidates are hired on the basis of hard skills and fired because of —fit“. Retained recruiters work with the hiring manager to quantify —fit “issues and then focus on the recruitment of happy, motivated individuals who are making a move for all the right reasons; that is, they are going to an opportunity, as opposed to leaving a circumstance. As such, the retained search process is qualitatively and quantitatively superior.
Using a retained search firm is about a fundamental truth; you are paying for service and knowledge. Hiring the best available talent the marketplace has to offer is the reward.
By Frank Bruni, President, Career Lab Inc
& Alan Derhak, Past President, Derhak Ireland & Partners
Category: Retained Recruiting |
The Problem with Recruiting
My friend Alan Derhak (R.I.P.) used to say that this would be a great business if it weren’t for the clients and the candidates.
It always made me smile, and still does.
Those of us who make our living as executive recruiters, or head-hunters or whatever term you like, know too well the frustrations of this business.
What is the problem with recruiting? In my opinion it is the disconnect between client expectations and what recruiters can actually deliver.
I think many clients believe that search firms are like personnel agencies, you know, the kind where people register every morning and wait to see what jobs come in during the day. I can’t count how many times I have heard “do you currently have someone for this job?” as if the person were actually waiting in the lobby.
Lets face it nowadays clients want fast; but the only way to do it fast is to do it wrong. By the time most clients decide to use a search firm most have exhausted other recruitment methods and are under the gun to hire someone…fast.
This is completely contrary to what good executive search should be. A systematic and methodical search of the marketplace to recruit and qualify candidates against a well prepared job description/profile, and then and only then, to produce and present a short list to the client. The heart and soul of executive search is search. The recruiter actually goes out and looks for and finds suitable candidates. A recruiter’s database is an aid to that process, not the answer.
I would love to say this is the all the clients fault, but that would be too easy. We recruiters have been too eager to land searches by promising what we know is not doable.
And the cycle continues. Client expectations cannot be met and the whole industries reputation suffers; and lets face it, ours is an industry that doesn’t have the best reputation to start with.
We need to be honest with clients about the time required to do a proper search and the roadblocks that may exist for a particular search. Only then will we be considered true partners to our clients.
My two cents.
Frank Bruni
Category: Client Relations |