<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Close the Deal and Land the Candidate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/</link>
	<description>Recruiting intelligence. Recruiting community.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Maureen Sharib</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/#comment-1044</link>
		<dc:creator>Maureen Sharib</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2005 11:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/#comment-1044</guid>
		<description>Remark about the potentially troublesome passive candidate:

Yesterday a post (by Jason Davis) popped up on his recruiting website about the subject/it follows:

Been At the Company Too Long

I know I am going to get flack for this posting.

I remember reading many years ago a recruiting book that said that as a recruiter, no matter what the skill set of the candidate, if that candidate has been at the same company for 10 years or more, you should take a red marker and draw a big x through it and throw it in the garbage. Pretty harsh eh?

Well, I can say for the most part, the author of that book is right.

You have to ask yourself

1.  Great Skills? - Yes
2.   Past opportunity to leave? - Probably
3.   Have they received an offer in the last ten years? - Probably
4.   Accepted a counteroffer? - probably
5.  Is this a good use of my time? - probably not

Now, I am not saying that every candidate who has been at the same company for 10 years will prove to be a colossal waste of your time but for the most part, they will. Of course this does not apply to every candidate. 

How to combat this - Don't try, your recruiting life is too short. Remember you (the recruiter) control your business or at least you should.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remark about the potentially troublesome passive candidate:</p>
<p>Yesterday a post (by Jason Davis) popped up on his recruiting website about the subject/it follows:</p>
<p>Been At the Company Too Long</p>
<p>I know I am going to get flack for this posting.</p>
<p>I remember reading many years ago a recruiting book that said that as a recruiter, no matter what the skill set of the candidate, if that candidate has been at the same company for 10 years or more, you should take a red marker and draw a big x through it and throw it in the garbage. Pretty harsh eh?</p>
<p>Well, I can say for the most part, the author of that book is right.</p>
<p>You have to ask yourself</p>
<p>1.  Great Skills? - Yes<br />
2.   Past opportunity to leave? - Probably<br />
3.   Have they received an offer in the last ten years? - Probably<br />
4.   Accepted a counteroffer? - probably<br />
5.  Is this a good use of my time? - probably not</p>
<p>Now, I am not saying that every candidate who has been at the same company for 10 years will prove to be a colossal waste of your time but for the most part, they will. Of course this does not apply to every candidate. </p>
<p>How to combat this - Don&#8217;t try, your recruiting life is too short. Remember you (the recruiter) control your business or at least you should.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Haley</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/#comment-1042</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Haley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/2005/08/02/close-the-deal-and-land-the-candidate/#comment-1042</guid>
		<description>Howard, a good article and a refreshing new subject to discuss. (See I can agree with you......except the war bit of course)

Passive candidates are far more likely to be the troublesome ones than active because it is unlikely they were looking to change their jobs when first approached.  

With that in mind, job acceptance is something that needs to be tested right from the very first conversation as part of the testing the counter offer process.

We have lost 4 candidates this year who turned job offers down.  Could any of them have been prevented?  I'd like to think that they could could but I'm not so sure.  

If we are honest with ourselves, the signs are always there but if the candidate is keen to progress and the client is keen to interview, it would take a very brave person to pull the plug.  We all hope that it will work out once they meet and often it does.

I lost one 2 weeks ago who after 2 months of interviews, and a very good offer decided to turn it down.  He just could not let go of the bonus he is likely to receive in January 2006, or rather his wife couldn't even though the package was a lot better.  

This could be point 19.  Find out if their  partner is happy.

If we ever get wind of the partner's concern, we always try to speak to them when the candidate is not home.  In this instance, we missed the signs.

I have found the best action, and I guess plan B is to always have a backup candidate.  As a seach company, we always have more than one candidate anyway and our personal goal on every assignment is to give our clients a problem of which candidate to choose.

Of the four instances mentioned above, three have been filled within 2 weeks by the backup candidate.

The latest one I hope will be the same. (famous last words).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Howard, a good article and a refreshing new subject to discuss. (See I can agree with you&#8230;&#8230;except the war bit of course)</p>
<p>Passive candidates are far more likely to be the troublesome ones than active because it is unlikely they were looking to change their jobs when first approached.  </p>
<p>With that in mind, job acceptance is something that needs to be tested right from the very first conversation as part of the testing the counter offer process.</p>
<p>We have lost 4 candidates this year who turned job offers down.  Could any of them have been prevented?  I&#8217;d like to think that they could could but I&#8217;m not so sure.  </p>
<p>If we are honest with ourselves, the signs are always there but if the candidate is keen to progress and the client is keen to interview, it would take a very brave person to pull the plug.  We all hope that it will work out once they meet and often it does.</p>
<p>I lost one 2 weeks ago who after 2 months of interviews, and a very good offer decided to turn it down.  He just could not let go of the bonus he is likely to receive in January 2006, or rather his wife couldn&#8217;t even though the package was a lot better.  </p>
<p>This could be point 19.  Find out if their  partner is happy.</p>
<p>If we ever get wind of the partner&#8217;s concern, we always try to speak to them when the candidate is not home.  In this instance, we missed the signs.</p>
<p>I have found the best action, and I guess plan B is to always have a backup candidate.  As a seach company, we always have more than one candidate anyway and our personal goal on every assignment is to give our clients a problem of which candidate to choose.</p>
<p>Of the four instances mentioned above, three have been filled within 2 weeks by the backup candidate.</p>
<p>The latest one I hope will be the same. (famous last words).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
