<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Boolean Black Belt-Sourcing/Recruiting &#187; Job Posting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/category/job-posting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com</link>
	<description>Leveraging LinkedIn, Twitter, Social Media, Resume Databases, and the Internet for Sourcing and Recruiting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:00:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why Sourcing is Superior to Posting Jobs for Talent</title>
		<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/06/why-sourcing-is-superior-to-posting-jobs-for-talent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/06/why-sourcing-is-superior-to-posting-jobs-for-talent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glen Cathey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Best Practices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job Posting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sourcing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sourcing and Recruiting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Candidate Acquisition Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Candidate Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finding Passive Candidates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[job posting limitations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job posting vs Resume Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Passive Candidates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Passive Recruiting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post and Pray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Posting Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proactive Candidate Acquisition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resume Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[searching for candidates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Recruiting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sourcing is Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Talent Acquisition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Targeting Passive Candidates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/?p=9153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Posting a job online is perhaps the first action most companies take to attract talent when they have an opening. However, posting jobs in an attempt to attract qualified talent has many intrinsic flaws, and here are the top 4 in my opinion: Posting jobs a passive strategy Posting jobs offers no control over candidate qualifications Job advertisements [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fwhy-sourcing-is-superior-to-posting-jobs-for-talent%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fwhy-sourcing-is-superior-to-posting-jobs-for-talent%2F&amp;source=GlenCathey&amp;style=compact&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p><a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Active_Passive.png"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-9167" title="Sourcing is Superior to posting jobs for recruiting because job posting can only net you active candidates. Sourcing can yield passive candidates and non-job seekers. " src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Active_Passive-e1308521417530.png" alt="" width="250" height="227" /></a></p>
<p>Posting a job online is perhaps the first action most companies take to attract talent when they have an opening.</p>
<p>However, posting jobs in an attempt to attract qualified talent has many intrinsic flaws, and here are the top 4 in my opinion:</p>
<ol>
<li>Posting jobs a passive strategy</li>
<li>Posting jobs offers no control over candidate qualifications</li>
<li>Job advertisements only attract candidates who are actively looking</li>
<li>Posting jobs isn&#8217;t social!</li>
</ol>
<p>In comparison, sourcing from Internet, LinkedIn, online resume databases, ATS/CRM systems and similar resources to discover and identify qualified candidates is an active strategy which offers significant control over candidate qualifications, can be used to specifically target passive and even non-job seekers, and is 100 times more social!</p>
<p>Read on for a more in-depth analysis of posting jobs vs. sourcing candidates, as well as to have your eyes opened to a new way of looking at the value/ROI of posting jobs.<img title="More..." src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/wordpress/img/trans.gif" alt="" /><span id="more-9153"></span></p>
<h2>Job Posting is a Passive (lazy?) Strategy</h2>
<p>Posting jobs online is a passive, sit-back-and-wait talent attraction strategy wherein there is no action taken other than that of publishing the job to various sites.</p>
<p>If identifying, attracting and hiring top talent is critical to any company&#8217;s ability to create and maintain a competitive advantage, does it make sense to rely heavily on a method of talent attraction that involves little-to-no effort?</p>
<p>Posting jobs online anywhere &#8211; whether it be on a corporate site, LinkedIn, Facebook, or a niche job board &#8211; is essentially the lowest level of effort anyone can take towards the goal of hiring your next game-changing employee.</p>
<h2>Job Posting Offers No Control Over Candidate Qualifications</h2>
<p>To me, posting a job is just like setting a trap. In setting a trap, the strategy is to set it in a place where you think your quarry might come across it and be ensnared.</p>
<p>Wherever you place the trap, you are essentially hoping that the specific type of animal you&#8217;re looking to capture will wander into it.  This is very much a passive, hope-based strategy, and hope is actually not a strategy.</p>
<p>For example, if you are trying to snare a rabbit, you could just as easily end up snaring a raccoon, a skunk, an <a title="Don't know what an opossum is? I grew up in Maryland - they were all over the place." href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opossum" target="_self">opossum</a> &#8211; or basically any small animal that wanders by, simply because you have no control over what, if anything, gets snared.</p>
<p>This is the same with job posting.</p>
<p>If you post a job for a windows system engineer with a minimum of 5 years of experience, an MCSE certification and web hosting industry experience - literally ANYONE can respond, whether they have the appropriate experience, certification, or industry experience or not.</p>
<p>As a passive, zero-percent control  strategy, <em><strong>you simply cannot control who responds</strong></em> &#8211; unqualified, under qualified, over qualified, out of area, etc.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t just my experience and opinion.</p>
<p>A recent <a title="Eye opening stats!" href="http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2009/09/07/daily60.html?ana=from_rss" target="_self">Atlanta Business Chronicle article</a> cited a study of 501 hiring managers by Robert Half and CareerBuilder which found that 44 percent of resumes presented to hiring managers are submitted by unqualified applicants. Additionally, <a title="Download your copy of the 2009 Edge Report" href="http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2009/09/07/daily60.html?ana=from_rss" target="_self">the 2009 EDGE Report</a> also found that 47 percent of hiring managers cited under-qualified applicants as their most common hiring challenge.</p>
<p>No one should be surprised by such a high percentage of un- and under qualified applicants, because you can&#8217;t control what wanders into the traps!</p>
<p>As critical as attracting and hiring the right people is for any company to perform well, does it make sense to rely heavily on a strategy that puts 100% of the selection control in the hands of the job seeker and 0% in yours?</p>
<h2>Job Posting Attracts the Smallest Percentage of Job Seekers</h2>
<p>Not only can you not control who responds to your job posting, but the only people who are going to get &#8220;snared&#8221; by the trap you&#8217;ve set are people who are actively looking for a job, and active job seekers represent the smallest percentage of the available talent pool.</p>
<p>According to data from the <a title="From Marvin Smith's ERE article &quot;SEO is not enough&quot;" href="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/passive-vs-active.jpg" target="_self">Bureau of Labor and Statistics</a>, here is the breakdown of job seeker status:</p>
<ul>
<li>32% passively looking</li>
<li>34% not looking</li>
<li>20% casually looking</li>
<li>14% actively looking</li>
</ul>
<p>Now, unlike many people, <a title="Interesting article that explores the statistics behind the fact that all active candidates cannot be low quality" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/job-boards-poor-candidate-quality-dont-believe-the-hype/" target="_self">I don&#8217;t think there is anything intrinsically wrong with active job seekers</a> &#8211; they are not all desperate, unemployable people (can you believe people in the recruiting industry actually believe that?).</p>
<p>However, the real issue at hand is that with job posting, you are essentially missing the other 86% of the workforce.</p>
<p>That means that when you post a job for an opening you need to fill in the next 2 weeks, you are realistically only tapping into 14% of the available workforce.  On top of that, many people who respond will not actually be qualified for the position.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s an issue!</p>
<p>One could argue that some of the people who are &#8220;casually looking&#8221; might stumble across your ad, but even if all of them did (which is highly unlikely), you are still missing 66% of the available workforce.</p>
<h2>Your Ads and Postings are Invisible to Most People</h2>
<p>Truly &#8220;passive&#8221; job seekers and certainly those who are not looking at all don&#8217;t even SEE ads for jobs right in front of their face, <a title="I think Entice Labs has a great product - but it's still just posting jobs, with all of the accompanying intrinsic limitations" href="http://www.enticelabs.com/" target="_self">no matter how &#8220;targeted&#8221; and well placed your ads are</a>.  Additionally, the reality is that most people tune out ads of any kind &#8211; on the Internet, on TV, billboards, etc.</p>
<p>When&#8217;s the last time you clicked on an ad or bought something/took action specifically because of a commercial or billboard you saw?</p>
<p>Even for those people who do &#8220;see&#8221; or &#8220;tune in&#8221; your ad/job posting &#8211; the reality is that most will not take action.</p>
<p>Changing a job is a big, stressful deal. Most casual, passive, and practically all inactive job seekers will not likely be inspired to take any action and explore leaving their current position just because they saw an online job ad, let alone one on their Facebook page.</p>
<h2>SEO Is Not Enough</h2>
<p>I agree 100% with Marvin Smith that <a title="Very well written article on SEO for talent attraction" href="http://www.ere.net/2009/08/12/sourcing-insights-seo-is-not-enough/" target="_self">SEO is not enough</a>.</p>
<p>How could it be anyway?</p>
<p>For SEO to work, you have to have someone searching for jobs and/or information about your company, and as we&#8217;ve already seen, that is going to be the active job seekers and perhaps some of the casual job seekers &#8211; which is only a small sample of the available talent, the clear minority.</p>
<h2>Posting Jobs isn&#8217;t Social</h2>
<p><a title="Read this post to learn what social recruiting is not" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2010/01/what-social-recruiting-is-not/">Social Recruiting</a> continues to the quite the rage in the talent acquisition community.</p>
<p>However, most people HR and recruiting professionals agree that posting jobs online isn&#8217;t social, even if they are on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s simply because in order for something to be social, it has to involve engagement and interaction between people.</p>
<h2>Sourcing is an Active Strategy</h2>
<p>Whereas posting jobs online is a passive method of <em>attracting</em> talent (I would argue that it&#8217;s not even a method of <em>identifying</em> talent), searching for candidates in Applicant Tracking Systems, recruiting CRM&#8217;s, job board resume databases, and LinkedIn is an <em>active</em> method of talent identification.</p>
<p>Instead of setting a trap and taking no effort other than to wait for the right person to stumble across it (aka, &#8220;post and pray&#8221;), when you create and execute searches to source for potential candidates, you are actively &#8220;hunting&#8221; for talent &#8211; targeting people with specific qualifications and experience, who live in specific areas &#8211; regardless of their job search status.</p>
<p>Instead of waiting (and hoping) for the right people to respond to a job posting, sourcers take decisive action to go out and identify and proactively engage and attract talent.</p>
<h2>Sourcing Affords Significant Control Over Candidate Qualifications</h2>
<p>When it comes to searching for candidates, I&#8217;m focusing specifically on resume and LinkedIn profile search, because searching for deep human capital data offers significant intrinsic advantages over shallow data. Resumes and some LinkedIn profiles offer more depth of identifying information, which enables sourcers and recruiters with a high degree of control over critical candidate variables.</p>
<p>Sourcers and recruiters who are adept at leveraging deep human capital data (resumes and detailed social network profiles) create queries that control critical candidate qualification variables, allowing them to quickly identify people with highly specific experience, who live in specific locations who are likely to be interested in the role and compensation offered by the position the recruiter is working on.</p>
<p>Remember that windows system engineer with a minimum of 5 years of experience, an MCSE certification and web hosting industry experience I used as an example earlier in this post?</p>
<p>While it is impossible to post a job that can guarantee you that only people who perfectly match the requirements will apply, it is entirely possible (and quite easy!) to write a query to find people who do have the right type and years of experience, the required certification, as well as the right industry experience.  That&#8217;s because 100% of the control over who you find and identify is in your hands, not someone else&#8217;s.</p>
<h2>Sourcing Can Target Passive and Non Job Seekers</h2>
<p>Unlike posting jobs online and SEO which require some action on the part of candidates (e.g., actively looking at ads or running keyword searches) and are quite literally invisible to those who are not taking any action to look for a new job (the majority of all people), when you actively search for candidates, you can target people who are not actively looking.</p>
<p>How can you search for resumes of passive and non-job seekers? Quite easily.</p>
<p>Are you ready for a <a title="If you're not familiar with the concept, click here to learn more" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift" target="_self">paradigm shift</a>?</p>
<p>If someone responds to a job posting you posted recently and they enter their information into your ATS/recruiting CRM &#8211; they are most likely actively seeking a new job, although there is a chance you could also be collecting a casual job seeker.</p>
<p>Statistically, many people who respond to job postings are not actually qualified for the position they applied for. If they are not a match for any current openings, it is likely they will find a position with another company with a position they are actually qualified for.</p>
<p>But you still have their resume in your ATS.</p>
<p>Alternatively, their resume may still be posted in an online resume database somewhere (many people either don&#8217;t or forget to take them down after they take a new job). In fact, my own research has shown that approximately 75% of all resumes on the job boards are over 30 days old. So if you think that all of the resumes stored in online resume databases are of active job seekers, you are quite wrong.</p>
<p>Statistically, the majority of resumes in online resume databases are of people who are likely to be not looking or passively looking.</p>
<p>In about 3 months to 2 years&#8217; time, those active job seekers turn into people who are likely to either to be not looking at all for a new position, or who may be satisfied with the new position they took, but open to better opportunities (passively looking).</p>
<p>Unlike job posting, when you are searching for resumes, you can actually specifically target people who are not likely to be actively looking.</p>
<h2>Sourcing is Social</h2>
<p>Yes, you read that right &#8211; I said sourcing is social.</p>
<p>Unless your idea of sourcing involves name generation only with no candidate engagement, sourcing is most definitely social.</p>
<p>A sourcer or a recruiter sourcing their own candidates can and should engage prospective candidates socially via InMails, Facebook messages, tweets and DMs, LinkedIn and/or Facebook group discussions, or just plain old email dialogues for that matter.</p>
<p>However, sourcing can go even more social &#8211; actually picking up the phone (gasp!) and calling a potential candidate and having a live conversation with them is a 100 times more social than any online/social media exchange. Imagine that &#8211; real, live conversations in today&#8217;s social media-crazed world. <img src='http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<h2>An Alternative View of Job Posting</h2>
<p>While most people see the primary value of job posting as a method of trying to attract the right person at the right time &#8211; I see it quite differently.</p>
<p>If I post a job, I am not <em>expecting</em> results &#8211; experience and statistics show that most people who respond are not qualified for the position. Certainly, there have been times when the right person has responded to a job posting at the right time, but as an intrinsically passive strategy with no &#8221;built-in&#8221; ability to control the experience and qualification of respondents, to rely on job posting would be folly. After posting a position, I will not wait and hope that the right people find my position. I am going to take control of the process and go out and actually FIND the right people.</p>
<p>So if the main value of posting jobs isn&#8217;t finding the right person at the right time, what could it be?</p>
<p>Another way to look at the value of job posting is that it can essentially become a method of cultivating your ATS/CRM into a wine cellar of sorts. All of those active job seekers who respond to your ads but who are not qualified (or simply not selected) for the specific position they applied to today may in fact be well qualified for other positions you have in the future.</p>
<p>Active candidates who enter your ATS/CRM today (or post their resume online) become tomorrow&#8217;s casual, passive, and non-job seekers.</p>
<h2>ATS Search Capability is Critical</h2>
<p>In order to capitalize on your database of casual, passive, and non-job seekers &#8211; you need to have an appropriately capable candidate search interface coupled with the ability to run precise queries, enabling you to quickly target and access candidates of ANY job search status.</p>
<p>An ATS with poor/limited candidate search capability is like having a well-stocked wine cellar that you can&#8217;t access because you don&#8217;t have the key to the door.  Or even if you had the key &#8211; you had no way of finding the exact bottle you were looking for.</p>
<h2>Final Thoughts</h2>
<p>Will there ever be a time when jobs aren&#8217;t posted online?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure if we will ever get to that point, because it could be argued that posting jobs online is a logical thing to do and is certainly a part of a balanced &#8220;diet&#8221; of recruiting methods, and it can produce results.</p>
<p>However, if you or your organization relies heavily on posting jobs to find the right candidates at the right time, let alone the best candidates available, I believe you are at a serious competitive disadvantage.</p>
<p>Job posting is essentially like trapping: set the snare and do nothing but wait (and hope!) for the right person to stumble by &#8211; an inherently passive, hope-based strategy that affords you absolutely no control over what wanders in. To make matters worse, the only people who will search for or even &#8220;see&#8221; ads for jobs are those who are actively or casually looking, which is the smallest slice of the talent pie.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s right &#8211; you simply can&#8217;t snag those highly sought after &#8220;passive&#8221; candidates via posting jobs online.</p>
<p>On the other hand, as a truly active strategy, sourcing candidates affords everything that job posting fails to: control over candidate qualifications and the ability to specifically target and engage passive and even non-job seekers socially. Instead of waiting for the right people to come to you, you simply go out and find them, without a care for whether they woke up that morning thinking about finding a new job or if it was the furthest thing from their mind.</p>
<p>I am aware of many companies that spend quite a bit of time, effort and money on their job posting efforts, including &#8220;<a title="Generally regarded as the best job posting solution available" href="http://www.jobs2web.com/">interactive recruiting solutions</a>.&#8221; It makes me wonder if as much time, energy, and money is being spent on enabling their proactive sourcing capability, which would afford them with significantly more control over candidate qualifications and quality, as well as more truly social engagement with the highly coveted &#8220;passive&#8221; talent pool.</p>
<p>When assessing job posting solutions and efforts, I believe the less obvious but true value of job posting lies primarily in the collection of active candidates and the ability to cultivate them over time through regular engagement (electronic and over the phone) into more experienced/qualified candidates who will inevitably become passive/inactive job seekers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/06/why-sourcing-is-superior-to-posting-jobs-for-talent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The #1 Mistake in Corporate Recruiting</title>
		<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/05/the-1-mistake-in-corporate-recruiting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/05/the-1-mistake-in-corporate-recruiting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 13:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glen Cathey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job Posting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mistakes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Passive Sourcing and Recruiting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sourcing and Recruiting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[#1 corporate recruiting mistake]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3 degrees of candidate separation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ATS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[black hole ATS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Capital Data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[job posting limitations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new candidates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Old Resumes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resume database]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time value of resumes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/?p=8930</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While no company has a flawless recruiting system, process or solution, there is a glaring problem shared by many corporate recruiting functions from which the Fortune 500 and the Big 4 are not immune. As some of the most respected companies in the world invest quite a bit of time, energy and money into social recruiting [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fthe-1-mistake-in-corporate-recruiting%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fthe-1-mistake-in-corporate-recruiting%2F&amp;source=GlenCathey&amp;style=compact&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/doobybrain/360276843/"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-9032" title="Failing to fully realize and leverage the human capital data every company already possesses is a HUGE mistake!" src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Mistake-Small.jpg" alt="" width="240" height="142" /></a></p>
<p>While no company has a flawless recruiting system, process or solution, there is a glaring problem shared by many corporate recruiting functions from which the Fortune 500 and the Big 4 are not immune.</p>
<p>As some of the most respected companies in the world invest quite a bit of time, energy and money into <a title="There is quite a bit of hype surrounding the concept of &quot;social recruiting&quot; - I suggest you read this article on what Social Recruiting is and is not" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2010/01/what-social-recruiting-is-not/">social recruiting</a> efforts, <a title="Jobs2Web is one of the most respected interactive recruiting solutions" href="http://www.jobs2web.com/">interactive recruiting solutions</a>, <a title="LinkedIn Recruiter Corporate Recruiting Solution" href="http://talent.linkedin.com/Recruiter/">LinkedIn</a>, Facebook, Twitter, and career site optimization, one critical piece of the recruiting puzzle seems to be all but completely overlooked.</p>
<p>Before you read any further &#8211; do you believe you have an idea of what I might be talking about?</p>
<p>From the conversations I&#8217;ve had over the years with many corporate recruiters and recruiting leaders from small companies all the way to the Fortune 500 and the Big 4, as well as the contract recruiters who are hired to help these companies source and recruit talent, I believe that the #1 mistake in corporate recruiting is the failure to fully realize and take appropriate action on the value of the human capital data they already possess.<span id="more-8930"></span></p>
<h2>The #1 Mistake in Corporate Recruiting</h2>
<p>In my opinion, the single biggest corporate recruiting flunk is the failure to accurately value and appropriately leverage the human capital data they have in their applicant tracking and/or CRM systems.</p>
<p>Let me show you the depth and complexity of some of the contributing factors of this issue.</p>
<h2>The Shiny New Candidate Syndrome</h2>
<p>A bachelor&#8217;s degree in psychology certainly doesn&#8217;t make me a psychologist &#8211; but it doesn&#8217;t take an advanced degree to recognize that it seems to be human nature to want what they don&#8217;t already have.</p>
<p>Certainly I cannot be the only person to be confused by companies investing a large amount of time, focus, energy and money into social recruiting, fancy and high-tech job posting systems and optimized career sites in order to identify and attract new candidates when they might already have the best candidate sitting in their ATS.</p>
<p>Getting a shiny new candidate via your Facebook advertising campaign or your LinkedIn Recruiter account is perceived by some to be &#8220;cutting edge,&#8221; sexy and seems to afford bragging rights at recruiting conferences. Heck, anything recruiting related that can be tagged as &#8220;social&#8221; is certainly cooler than ATS mining (for those few companies that can and actually do mine their ATS!).</p>
<p><em><strong>However, who is to say you don&#8217;t actually have faster and lower cost access to better qualified candidates already in your database?</strong></em></p>
<p>To be sure, the most recently identified candidate is not necessarily the best candidate, and I can speak from experience when I say that some of the best candidates I have ever placed came from &#8220;old&#8221; resumes &#8211; some as old as 4 years since the last update. Someone I recently trained was happy to report he had made a placement by calling a candidate whose resume had not been updated in over 6 years!</p>
<p>Instead of focusing so heavily on trying to find &#8220;new&#8221; candidates from external sources, companies should spend more time leveraging the candidates they already have at their fingertips.</p>
<p>Resumes acquired in the past that were never reviewed by someone are essentially new candidates &#8211; they might be &#8220;old&#8221; in your ATS, but they&#8217;re new to you when you finally dig them up and review them for the first time! There are plenty of &#8220;new,&#8221; unidentified candidates in corporate ATS/CRM resume databases &#8211; you just have to look for them!</p>
<h2>The Big Fat Ugly Assumption</h2>
<p>Why are so many companies and recruiters focused on looking outside their own database in places like LinkedIn, Monster, Twitter, Facebook, etc. for talent?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll tell you why.</p>
<p>Although largely unspoken and unrecognized, the big fat ugly assumption in recruiting is that every candidate captured in an ATS/CRM has been reviewed, and that if a candidate fits for any position, someone would know.</p>
<p>Nothing could be further from the truth!</p>
<p>I&#8217;d estimate that a good portion of every ATS consists of candidates whose resumes have been acquired, but not reviewed, and thus not identified. If that sounds a bit backward, that&#8217;s because it is.</p>
<p>When relying on job posting for the majority of the acquisition of candidate resumes, you can actually acquire a resume that is not reviewed. And if you haven&#8217;t reviewed a candidate&#8217;s resume, you can&#8217;t identify them as a potential match for any position, let alone the one they responded to.</p>
<p>If your organization isn&#8217;t putting enough emphasis on searching your resume database, you can be assured you have plenty of candidates that have technically been &#8220;acquired&#8221; because you&#8217;ve captured their resume, but have not been identified because no one reviewed them, and thus they cannot be matched to any position.</p>
<p>Even if a company does review 100% of all applicants for the positions they apply to, many great candidates are still overlooked, are not properly identified and are never matched to positions they are qualified for. See &#8220;Right Candidate, Wrong Job,&#8221; and &#8220;The Time Value of Resumes&#8221; below.</p>
<p>Do not make the mistake of assuming that someone has searched for and reviewed every possible candidate match in your corporate ATS/CRM. As I said above, there are plenty of &#8220;new,&#8221; unidentified candidates in corporate ATS/CRM resume databases &#8211; you just have to search for them.</p>
<h2>A Heavy Reliance On Posting Jobs</h2>
<p>Many companies rely heavily on posting jobs for talent attraction and acquisition. I&#8217;m aware that some companies get such a high volume of responses from their online job postings and career sites that their recruiters are so buried with reactively processing applicants that they practically have no time to proactively source candidates from their own ATS.</p>
<p>While it may sound like a good thing to have a steady stream of people interested in joining your company and applying to your job postings, no matter what technology or solution you use, there are some serious limitations and universal truths to using job postings to identify talent:</p>
<ul>
<li>Posting jobs is a <em><strong>passive candidate identification and acquisition strategy</strong></em> &#8211; you are 100% reliant on the right people finding or stumbling across your opening.</li>
<li>Posting jobs offers<strong><em> no control over the qualifications of the candidates who apply</em></strong> &#8211; the phrase &#8220;post and pray&#8221; is quite accurate, because it comes from the fact that you are essentially hoping that the people you want and need actually find and apply to your opening.</li>
<li>While 100% of the people who apply to online job postings are interested in the positions they are applying to, <strong><em>a good portion aren&#8217;t actually qualified for them</em></strong> (which is both a bad and a good thing &#8211; more on this later).</li>
<li>Posting jobs &#8211; via web 1.0, 2.0, or x.0 &#8211; primarily <em><strong>attracts the attention of </strong><strong>active job seekers only</strong></em>, which is the minority of all people. The Bureau of Labor and Statistics estimates that approximately 14% of all people are &#8220;actively&#8221; seeking a new job. Even if you add in the estimated 20% of people who are &#8220;casually&#8221; looking for a new job, <strong><em>you are still missing nearly 66% of the workforce</em></strong> if you rely heavily on posting jobs to find your next great hire.</li>
<li><em><strong>Passive and non-job seekers simply do not &#8220;see&#8221; job postings</strong></em>, even if you place them on their Facebook or LinkedIn pages. Sorry.</li>
</ul>
<p>It is a HUGE mistake to place a large amount of the control over your talent acquisition  strategy in the hands of others &#8211; the talent you&#8217;re hunting.</p>
<p>Without a strong focus on proactive ATS/resume database mining, you&#8217;re primarily in reactive mode, waiting for the people you want and need to come to you, and you can simply cannot target and tap into the elusive and highly valued &#8220;passive candidates.&#8221;</p>
<h2>Right Candidate, Wrong Job</h2>
<p>Assuming that every resume submitted into an ATS is reviewed (remember what I said earlier about this assumption), <strong><em>what happens to all of the people who apply online to job postings who are great people, but just aren&#8217;t qualified for the specific position they apply to?</em></strong></p>
<p>If a person doesn&#8217;t meet the basic qualifications of the position they directly applied to, does that mean they don&#8217;t meet the basic qualifications of other open positions?</p>
<p>Of course not.</p>
<p>The unfortunate reality is that every company in existence is sitting on a pile of people who are a great match for a position other than what they directly applied to. Unless a recruiting organization focuses specifically on mining their resume database, a great many of these people will never be matched to the positions they actually are qualified for.</p>
<h2>The Time Value of Resumes</h2>
<p><strong><em>What happens to all of the people who apply to positions that they are not yet fully qualified for, but will be in 1-3 years?</em></strong></p>
<p>Unfortunately, in most cases the answer to the above question is absolutely nothing, which is both unacceptable and a significant opportunity for all companies.</p>
<p>If I had $1 for every time I have heard a recruiter say that it&#8217;s a waste of time to search &#8220;old&#8221; resumes because they&#8217;re old and &#8220;out of date,&#8221; I&#8217;d be a millionaire. Resumes don&#8217;t spoil, and they don&#8217;t have a &#8220;best used by&#8221; date &#8211; I cannot stress enough how shortsighted it is, as well as just plain wrong, to believe that a resume over 1 year old is worthless.</p>
<p>Just as a point of reference &#8211; not too long ago I spoke with someone in a recruiting leadership function from a Big 4 firm that mentioned their organization &#8220;purged&#8221; millions of resumes during a migration to a new ATS. Ouch!</p>
<p>Failing to search your resume database for people who applied to positions 1-3 or even more years ago is an epic #fail.</p>
<p>While I could write a small book on the many reasons as to why, for the sake of this post, let me just say that it&#8217;s quite easy to calculate a person&#8217;s career trajectory, and calling people with &#8220;old&#8221; resumes is a <em><strong>very</strong></em> effective way of recruiting passive candidates &#8211; including non-job seekers that you simply cannot identify and acquire through any other means.</p>
<p>Resumes do not lose their value as they age &#8211; <a title="Resumes are like wine - they actually do get better with age!" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2009/10/resumes-are-like-wine/">they actually do gain value over time</a>.</p>
<p>If your organization is burdened by a large collection of worthless old resumes &#8211; I will gladly give them a good home. <img src='http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<h2>Black Hole ATS</h2>
<p>Practically every company has an internal database filled with actionable information on thousands to literally tens of millions of applicants, candidates, and professionals.</p>
<p>You would think that a private internal database of people that an organization has actively and passively, tactically and strategically collected over the years would be a prized possession and be viewed and leveraged as a significant resource and competitive advantage.</p>
<p>However, <a title="Weddle's post on Applicant Tracking Systems" href="http://www.weddles.com/recruiternews/issue.cfm?Newsletter=248" target="_blank">this post on Weddles</a> gives us a glimpse of just how wrong we would be to think such a thing. An Online Sourcing Survey conducted by TalentDrive found that almost two-thirds (64%) of the employers represented by the survey&#8217;s participants did not know how many qualified candidates were in their own ATS databases.</p>
<p>Yes &#8211; you read that correctly. Most companies don&#8217;t even know how many people are in their Applicant Tracking Systems.</p>
<p>Surprised?</p>
<p>While that is an especially disturbing statistic and a sad reality, I&#8217;m actually not that surprised.</p>
<p>Many Applicant Tracking Systems have horrible search interfaces and extremely limited search capability. <strong><em>Prospective candidates go in, but they don&#8217;t come back out.</em></strong> If you can&#8217;t easily search your internal database, how can you find the top talent hidden within, let alone determine the total candidate population?<img title="More..." src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/wordpress/img/trans.gif" alt="" /></p>
<p>This problem is not isolated to small companies with home-grown Applicant Tracking Systems. I recently spoke with a corporate recruiter from a well-known and highly visible Fortune 500 brand who told me that it&#8217;s easier for her to find candidates on Monster and then cross reference the names in her ATS than it is to actually source candidates from her ATS.</p>
<p>Epic #fail!</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re sitting on a stockpile of resumes and applicants, you should be able to quickly, easily, and precisely retrieve exactly what you need. If your ATS/CRM doesn&#8217;t have advanced information retrieval capability &#8211; it&#8217;s time you took action to remedy that so you can begin to fully leverage all of the human capital information you&#8217;ve harvested, likely at significant cost.</p>
<h2>You Don&#8217;t Need LinkedIn to Leverage 3 Degrees of Separation</h2>
<p>One of the great features of LinkedIn is that it is easy to see beyond your direct connections and to leverage 3 degrees of separation.</p>
<p>However, you don&#8217;t need LinkedIn to leverage degrees of separation. To think the value of an ATS resume database is limited solely to the direct access to the people contained within is a serious mistake.</p>
<p>Every person in an ATS database knows other people, who also know other people.</p>
<p>The resumes you have direct access to essentially represent 1st degree connections, through which you can reach 2nd and 3rd degree connections and beyond.</p>
<p>You&#8217;d be surprised what happens when you call people from your ATS simply to network with them and ask for help. Why more companies don&#8217;t realize that the value of their ATS goes FAR beyond just the people contained within is a mystery to me.</p>
<h2>Lessons to be Learned</h2>
<p>While it is a huge mistake for companies and recruiters to fail to fully realize and take appropriate action on the value of the human capital data they already possess, mistakes are simply opportunities to learn.</p>
<p>It won&#8217;t take much effort for recruiters and the companies they work for to begin to fully leverage the human capital data buried in their ATS databases.</p>
<p>Lessen the obsession with finding the next &#8220;new&#8221; candidate via external sources and bright shiny social channels and focus more time extracting the value from candidates that are already in your possession but have yet to be truly identified or acted upon. Not fully leveraging an internal resume/candidate database, which has likely been built through significant time, effort and money is a serious flaw in any talent acquisition plan. In some way, shape or form, every candidate record in an ATS has been paid for, and there is simply no sense in paying for something that you don&#8217;t use.</p>
<p>Recognize that while posting jobs online can open the candidate floodgates, posting jobs to attract talent some serious limitations, not the least of which is the fact that it is a completely passive talent acquisition strategy offering no control over candidate qualification variables. Also, don&#8217;t forget that job postings can only attract active and casual job seekers, limiting you to only 1/3rd of the talent pool available at best.</p>
<p>Mining your ATS is a proactive sourcing and recruitment strategy which affords you significant control over critical candidate qualification variables, and you can specifically and strategically target and tap into the other 66% of the talent pool by searching for resumes that have not been updated or acquired in over 6 months. If you get &#8220;too many&#8221; applicants to your job postings, make sure there is at least 1 person (ideally more!) who doesn&#8217;t have anything to do with processing applicants &#8211; you need to have resources that spend 100% of their time proactively mining your ATS as well as external sources.</p>
<p>Ensure your ATS/CRM is highly searchable &#8211; if your ATS/CRM is as easy to search as it is to put candidates in, you will be able to fill more of your company&#8217;s openings from talent you&#8217;ve already sourced. Any opening you can fill with candidates already in your internal system saves you the time, effort, and cost of advertising and searching for &#8220;new&#8221; candidates. Filling openings with candidates already in your ATS can afford you significant and measurable cost-per-hire, time-to-identify, and time-to-fill benefits.</p>
<p>Having a highly searchable ATS/CRM can help you reduce your reliance on paid resources if you currently use them (LinkedIn, Monster, etc.). Strive to ensure that your ATS/CRM is more searchable than LinkedIn, Monster and even the Internet itself. It should not be easier to search and identify potential candidates via external sources than it is to mine your own private candidate database!</p>
<p>In addition to high searchability, your ATS/CRM should have robust and easy to use contact management functionality to enable recruiters to stay in touch with the people who enter the ATS. Maintaining regular communications with candidates, regardless of their job search status, allows an organization to be ready to take appropriate action when the candidate&#8217;s status changes, or when a new position opens for which the person is an excellent fit. Plus, staying in touch with candidates ensures that resumes never get too out of date (if you&#8217;re bothered by that sort of thing)  - it&#8217;s easy to request an updated resume each year using solid contact management functionality.</p>
<p>And last but certainly not least &#8211; be sure to recognize that the value of your ATS database goes well beyond the people contained within. Every person in your internal database knows people, who in turn know other people. Leverage those degrees of separation for professional networking and ask for help in the form of referrals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2011/05/the-1-mistake-in-corporate-recruiting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

