I strongly disagree. Despite progressive tools….companies are still taking too much time in qualifying qualified candidates who resent being interviewed over a period of 3 to 6 months..There are also issues where companies may have 6 to 12 interviews to subject potential employers to ensure corporate qualifications. This is not only unreasonble but very unprofessional and shows a lack of respect for any potential candidate that shows interest in working for a company.

There are still far too many internal corporate obstacles that prevent job seekers from being successful in their quest to become corporate employees. It would be wise for most companies to demonstrate being practive by putting words in construct hiring actions rather than empty corporate political words that are false and misleading.

Josie Erent
President
Talented Minds
Division of Silicon Executive Search Inc.
416-232-0600
josie_erent@yahoo.com
josie.erent@talented-minds.com

Anyway, for those who understood the article, I agree with the approach proposed by Lefkow and have been involved in setting this approach up. I have seen the following challenges and am interested in ways to address them.

- For this model to work it is critical that the proactive sourcing team and the ‘transactional’ team dove-tail in order to acheive the ultimate result. This can be difficult to acheive when they are working toward different metrics. Are there metrics that can be common across both teams to ensure alignment?
- The conversion point from Prospect to Applicant can be a difficult one. If accountability for this process is not clear, a fantasic talent pool could lie unused. Which team should be responsible for matching pipeline talent to vacancies?
- Candidates sourced via proactive sourcing need often need to be treated differently to active applicants that have responded to an advert. Transactional recruiters and hiring managers don’t always see the distinction and a relationship built through the pipeline can be damaged by a manager or recruiter that treats them like a number. Are there and tried and tested means of addressing this?
- A two to five year pipeline built by a proactive team may not acheive a significant tangible ROI in the first two years. While I acknowledge the intangible benefits available in the short and long term, the accountants who guard the cheque book often don’t care. So, for businesses than value/chose projects based on speed of payback period (for better or for worse), can shorter term returns be generated, without jeopardising the fundamentals of this model?

Cheers

Also, the article has value for corporate as well as TPRs. The ’sales cycle’ time may be shorter for TPRs (especially if they focus on contractors and not perm candidates), or for corporate recruiters that may not have the support from management, but there is always a need to constantly build up your pipeline for the niche market you have decided to be in.

I absolutely agree with what you said Ron, about firing up recruiters and getting them on the phone. But it doesn’t hurt to know how often recruiters actually get on the phone as well. That is one of the metrics I keep: how often, and on what reqs, for example. It helps me manage my time and plan my activities.
Just my two cents.

I could not even make it through this one. Reason? There is corporate or in-house recruiting and there are third party search firms. The objective of both are the same; find candidates. However, the motivation behind each is completely different. Hopefully, I dont’t think I need to explain what that motivation is.

This article doesn’t address either specifically. He ‘morphed’ the two together.

Its very well written, don’t get me wrong. I just don’t understand who he was addressing.

I have said this before, and I have been critized for these comments; There are too many layers and too many intelligent individuals who subscribe to metrics and reports and percentages and statistics and blah and blah blah blah.

Put someone in charge of the recruiting department or firm who can inspire, manage and sell. Give your recruiters some tools for research to derive names and contacts and ‘capture contacts’ and then GET THEM ON THE PHONE!!! Continue to train and educate. Role playing is the best training tool anyone can use. Lou Adler has some amazing material, best I’ve seen and very innovative. Radin, Finkel and Chahill have some very good material as well. Never, ever stop training. Also Important you need to bust your recruiters out of thier comfort zone. Give them incentives and pay them well. If they don’t meet goals or quotas, sorry, but this might not be for you.

My point here is focus on results, not how you get to them. Be ethical of course, but as Nike says, ‘Just Do it’

You will get your results. I have and I do.

Gracias- Pobuta the Recruta