Comments on: Why You May Not Always Want the Most Efficient Recruiting Process

By: CJ Donnelly

CJ Donnelly — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:52:00 +0000

Although technology can sometimes make life easier, we must remember the applicant experience and not always choose the easy way out. Thanks for the article!

By: John Kennedy

John Kennedy — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:32:00 +0000

Actually, no, speaking from experience, generally SmartSearch GENERATES a couple of NEW jobs in training and ‘client customization’.

It’s a fine product, but, as with any other ATS, it’s only as good as the people using it.

By: Alise Cortez

Alise Cortez — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:15:00 +0000

Lisa,

As a company focused on measuring and improving candidate experience and its relationship to employee engagement and employer brand, we could not agree more! Your fan in Dallas,

By: Cancel Cancel

Cancel Cancel — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:40:00 +0000

Excellent article. In all disciplines that touch customers, candidates, vendors, etc., it is important to consider the usage of technology for contact/communication. Many companies fail to consider the application of the technology itself – the who, what, when, where, and why.

Technology is outstanding when it comes to automating certain tasks or facilitating a process, etc., however it cannot be leaned on for communication that, as you mentioned, should be personal. Unfortunately, this seems to be a growing trend because not all Recruiting Leaders such as yourself feel this way. With a growing emphasis on cost-cutting and HR budget reduction, these systems are often sold as a way to shave further expenses. Until HR and Recruiting carve out a truly respected seat at the executive table, we’ll continue to see solutions sold this way.

Often in technology companies (especially smaller ones), it’s easy to over-romanticize your product and forget about what the customer really needs and wants. This normally happens when you build a product with the entrepreneur’s vision of what they believe the market needs in mind – in the B2B world, this is a recipe for disaster.

By: Ann Kay

Ann Kay — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:49:00 +0000

I read your article with great interest!! How funny someone who has so much too say, doesn’t practice what they preach…I was someone who did not get a position in your group and while you did call me, you had no answers to my questions as to why I didn’t get the position, just I will get back to you and of course never did…yes, getting back to a candidate is very important but get back to them with some information or else….you might as well send them a canned letter…

By: Sylvia Dahlby

Sylvia Dahlby — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:40:00 +0000

While presenting my ATS to a prospective customer, my #1 ‘favorite’ question I’ve ever been asked by a recruiter is: ‘Won’t this software put me out of a job?’

My answer was: ‘Only if you’re a bad recruiter, because it will help you do more of the wrong things, faster.’

I’m keeping your article on file for next time someone asks me if technology will do their job for them. Thank you!

By: Jim D'Amico

Jim D'Amico — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:49:00 +0000

Excellent article, but frightening that a vendor would be so off base. I wonder if they would want a prospective client to decline their service electronically!

I think many recruiters lose sight of the value of conversations with candidates, particularly those that did not get the position. I have always believed that whether or not we select someone, they should leave the process as both a customer of ours (if they aren’t already) and a ready source of referrals.

By taking the time to have the difficult conversations, you can differentiate yourself from other companies. More importantly, candidates truly appreciate it when a real person lets them down with the dignity that no automated system can offer.

Again, great article, thank you Lisa!

Jim

By: Jon Bryant

Jon Bryant — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:00:00 +0000

Great article Lisa. Maintaining the human touch is essential in recruiting. Early in my career, one of my mentors taught me to always weigh efficiency vs. effectiveness. In doing so, you have to consider ‘what am I trying to achieve’. Failure to consider the ultimate goal often leads to misjudgements in efficiency vs. effectiveness. Your example of the ‘automated rejection letter’ is appropriate. If the goal is to avoid a tough conversation and quickly blast through a stack of non-selected candidates, the automated letter is both efficient and effective. However, if the goal is to build a relationship with a non-selected candidate and/or leave them with a good impression of your company, the efficient method is not going to be effective (in fact the efficient method might cause quite the opposite effect). This same thought process can apply to a multitude of business decisions.

By: Scott Schoenick

Scott Schoenick — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 05:34:00 +0000

I am a Business Consultant for a major recruiting technology firm, and have had the opportunity to help design or streamline many Fortune 500 staffing processes. I can tell you from extensive first-hand experience that we would never recommend (nor would our clients ever accept) the idea of an automated ‘rejection’ letter after an interview.

The role of technology is not replacing the human interaction or relationships that are central to a high-performing recruiting process. It is also NOT wisely utilized as a stand-in for common sense, common courtesy or, I might add, proactive management of the recruiting function.

By: Bill Wilhelm

Bill Wilhelm — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:47:00 +0000

Quadruple Amen!!!!
Lisa, thank you for putting your thoughts out for all of us to see. I have feared that maybe I was the OLD FUDDY-DUDDY for trying to hold on to what I have known to be the basics of the recruiting field. I have been a recruiter since 1973 and I have literally seen hundreds of recruiters come and go. Those that have stayed the course are invariably ‘people-persons’ who care about the feelings of those we attempt to place with clients.Automatically generated Dear John/Jeanette letters are certainly better than none at all. However they remind me of the automated receptionist with the ‘press-1-for’ so and so mentality. Doesn’t that leave all of us bewildered,disappointed, and angry and belittled?
Let’s all do our best to replace some of our automation with our best personal touches and show the job-seeking world and the clients who hire, just how caring and professional that we are.

By: Rob Levin

Rob Levin — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:44:00 +0000

I’ve long argued that you can’t remove humans from a process that is all about humans.

By: Graham Williamson

Graham Williamson — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:23:00 +0000

Good article , the interview process, and all feedback & communication with candidates is a chance to differentiate

By: Bryan Baldwin

Bryan Baldwin — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:21:00 +0000

Technology is part of the solution, not THE solution.