I see your frustration about preferred status, etc., but once the client company figures out that their representative in the talent market place is hurting their brand, they’ll lose the status…

I think it’s important someone establish a single resource for all candidates to provide feedback regarding their recruiter experience, like the one a the top of this page: http://www.recruitingentrepreneur.com/ Check it out.

Some recruiters have this, but there needs to be a single, unbiased one, disconnected from any search firm to ensure it is untainted.

If an employer or recruitment agency wants to exceed the minimum standards then by all means let the free market run its course. True a manifesto in itself is nothing, but at least it outlines some standards to follow and benchmark against.

It is about time that the recruitment industry globally lifts the standards, is viewed more positively, and evolves.

Take a look at AESC.org and see their “standards” for candidate and client bill of rights. Nice eye-candy, but in the end it really doesn’t do any good. I say we guide ourselves by our own definition of honesty, compassion, integrity and ethical behavior. If my competition has a different perspective of what those definitions are, then good luck.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/the-right-to-earn-a-living-under-attack/

By the way, what more are most hiring entities willing to say to rejected candidates beyond the fact of rejection?

Not too much I imagine……

Though some employers and recruiters / RPO providers treat candidate care seriously, others, even if they have all the technology tools in place and talk the right talk, fail. I would suggest a recruiter’s remuneration and/or service level agreement include measurable candidate care KPIs. Ideally there should be a culture, supported by strong leadership, of wanting to provide service to candidates, but sometimes you have to enforce things to get behavior change. The question for me is whether this should be enforced at the industry level or the business level?

To help a candidate in their decision making, maybe there could be a criteria-based and real-time candidate care reporting dashboard which either sits on a recruiter’s website and/or on a dedicated website which consolidates data across many recruiters.

A consideration is that some unsuccessful candidates, despite the best efforts from the recruiter to provide sound service, will blame everything and everybody under the sun for the outcome. This negatively skews the measurement.

Out of interest, does anybody use “mystery shopping” (actors) to assess candidate care?

It’s Accolo’s view that candidates will vote with their feet — you treat them poorly, they won’t come back. You treat them with respect, they’ll come back and bring their friends. Unfortunately, this kind of employment market leads some recruiters to believe that respect isn’t required. I personally don’t think that a statement on the careers page that says “Sorry – due to the volume of applicants, only those that are a fit will be dignified with a response” is enough.

As an RPO, it’s part of our responsibility to our clients to protect their employment brand. Respect is obviously the right thing to do, but it’s also good business — every applicant is a potential investor, customer, partner, etc. We’ve generated over 25,000 referrals because we ensure that every candidate gets a response, even if it’s not the one they want. If ‘doing the right thing’ isn’t enough, maybe tangible business results will be.

We’ve had a Candidate Bill of Rights since 2003. Here’s the link:

http://www.accolo.com/the_career_network/bill_of_rights

In my applicant tracking system Recruiters are prompted to send an e-mail update whenever there was a change in a candidate’s status. Yes, they were e-mail templates, but candidates knew where they stood.

May companies strive to be the “Employer of Choice” yet most follow the same old process.

I think all Recruiters should experience what they put candidates through. It would be a real eye opener!