EnticeLabs, whose first product is an online advertising platform, got an infusion of $2 million from a group of investors lead by First Advantage. The company says the money “will be used to accelerate system development, accommodate higher-than-anticipated sales, and build out the infrastructure warranted by the rapidly expanding client base.”

It also gained the expertise of former Monster VP Neal Bruce, who joins its board of directors.

HireVue, which facilitates video interviewing, received a Series A round of funding led by Peterson Ventures joined by The Garber Fund of Penn State University, and others.

The company didn’t say how big the investment is, though it did say the money would be used to expand management, “strengthen market awareness, and make product enhancements.”

Via its Virtual Video Interviews, employers can automatically screen candidates by having them respond on camera over the Internet to prerecorded questions.  HireVue also offers two-way video conferencing for live interviews. Both types of interviews are recorded for later review.

With companies counting pennies, there has been an upswing in the use of Internet video for initial candidate interviews. HireVue says it has grown rapidly — 500 percent — in the last year, adding such Fortune 500 clients as Dish Network, CDW, and Murphy Oil. It also partnered with Taleo to make its video interviews accessible from within the company’s software.

HireVue, which competes in an increasingly crowded market for video interviewing,  was named HR Product of the Year for 2009 by Human Resource Executive magazine just two weeks ago.

EnticeLabs, in part financed by the people who founded web analytics company Omniture, introduced TalentSeekr more than a year ago to positive reviews. TalentSeekr leverages some of the same principles as Omniture, but for job postings. Besides creating a variety of ad types from a standard job req, the program places the ad, monitors its performance, and makes adjustments on the fly. Recruiters can manually manipulate the process if they want, but the strength of TalentSeekr is that it can improve ad performance all by itself. (A more in-depth description of how it works can be found here.)

The most recent $2 million investment follows an initial $1.3 million. It’s not an official A series, and with the company a bit beyond startup, EnticeLabs is calling it a strategic round. Besides money, the company is also getting the benefit of recruitment industry veteran Neal Bruce, who joins the board as the representative of First Advantage, where he is is senior vice president of product management for First Advantage’s Employer Services segment.

The well-regarded Bruce is a former vice president of the global innovation group at Monster.com, where he worked for 4 1/2 years. He previously was a recruiter for Ernst & Young, and later director of global staffing for PTC before joining Monster in August 2003. He joined First Advantage in May 2008.

Let’s talk about the very interesting phenomena of communicating with potential candidates in ways that have not been there before. For years, we have been discussing whether to call first or email first. Some gurus suggest that you first send a detailed email, then leave a phone message, and then send a short email mentioning that you had called. Fine, but here are your other options today:

• Join a group on LinkedIn where the person is a member and send a message (which is free, by the way)
• Invite them to join a group on LinkedIn dedicated to their technical skills or their industry
• Look the person up on Twitter and follow him/her
• Re-tweet or reply to their tweets
• Share an article with them using the “share” button available on Ning and on many blogs
• Invite them to an interesting event posted on LinkedIn, or Ning, or elsewhere

(Note that when you invite somebody to an event or share content, you do not need to worry about the person not wanting to hear from you. All those systems have their built-in means of managing the person’s subscriptions.)

The above methods would let you reach more people, especially passive candidates. Your direct email may land in their junk folder. Your call may interrupt their day. (I can definitely say that as a former software engineer.) However, following them on Twitter or sharing news about their industry is a gentle, non-invasive way to get in touch with them. It also gives them a chance to take a look at your profile and figure out a bit about you before they respond. So, if you venture out on a particular network, make sure that your profile on whatever network that is, is professional, filled out, has your picture, and reflects your own or your company background.

Further on, built-in tools and tools built on top of social networks allow us to interact with lists of potential candidates with a touch of a button. It goes without saying that we need to figure things out about those people first, and avoid spam. But there’s nothing wrong in, say, following a list of people on Twitter whose profiles are promising, or sharing interesting content with a list of people who work in a particular industry. The “share” buttons available in many places, such as Ning networks, allow you to share an article with a list of email addresses. The (slightly buggy) tool twitterator.org allows us to bulk-follow a number of people on Twitter. You shouldn’t overdo this, of course; plus, Twitter has its (very reasonable) limitations and wouldn’t let you go too far in this direction. But these tools do increase our productivity.

Today most recruiters are on LinkedIn, many are on Facebook, and about 25% are on Twitter. This is based on some statistics that I have seen online, and is also true about my sourcing webinar attendees. There are endless online discussions on which network is the best, and whether some, such as Twitter, are “a waste of time.” Well, for one thing, Twitter and LinkedIn can hardly be compared. The functionality, the pace of communicating, the length and the nature of relationships are all very different, so your expectations also need to be different. And then, it makes most sense to me to use both LinkedIn and Twitter in conjunction, plus use other networks as well. If you have a targeted list of candidates, you can interact with them in different places simultaneously. You can look up information about them; they may be more present in one online place than the other. Perhaps they have a blog and would welcome your comments. You can invite the same person to a group on LinkedIn and follow them on Twitter, and so on.

There are ways to find the same people across networks. It’s, of course, easier if the person has a unique name and distinct keywords, such as technology skills, in the profile. However, if you get hold of an email address or a Twitter ID, this can sometimes get you pretty far in the sourcing process. In the recent SourceCon challenge I used the site pipl.com to look up people based on their username across networks. Pipl.com also allows you to look up people based on an email address.

An amazing, not explored by many, part of this communication with prospects is that the person may have very little info in their profile on one site vs. another, but based on what you have learned about them you might try to connect on either or both. Searching for candidates on one network and contacting them on another expands our sourcing capabilities.

Successful recruiting using social media requires new personal qualities. To conquer the social media world, we need to be fearless and open-minded. We also need either to be somewhat technical or to have coworkers who are. It’s not terribly hard to navigate different sites, but working with someone who is used to browsing and searching on the web helps. Then, there’s less structure out there now, so if you are creative, this is a useful quality; compare the well-defined ways of using a job board with the open-ended interactions on social networks. We need to get used to questioning our assumptions as we go. Facebook does not work like LinkedIn, so expect to see something different there. Assumptions do not work at all if you are used to searching in one or two places. Search syntax is different on Google, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Monster; though all these sites support Boolean logic, you can’t reuse the same searches around the social media.

Measuring our success is tricky. Since we still want to hire the best candidates and there are still traditional interviews and offer negotiation processes, perhaps checking how your social media activities affect your submission, interviewing, and hiring statistics makes a lot of sense. That said, we need to be spending a few hours here and there checking out what others do and what new tools show up.

It’s pretty exciting to be here, right?

During one recession I remember being young, working in retail, and thinking: “everyone in retail has to have a four-year or master’s degree, for that is what my co-workers all had.”

I didn’t know back then that I was in the middle of a recession, one that pales in comparison to today. People now faced with transition are diligently looking for the right fit, but are also considering applying for positions which they are overqualified for, and, then they are surprised, they are not getting them.

Overqualified workers will be quickly bored, frustrated and discouraged, and the moral in the office may suffer.

One hiring manager said the best time to hire overqualified is when a company is faced with rapid growth, needing to promote quickly without much runway. Having a strong bench with “A” players will position the right talent in key roles, easing the growing pains. This is not the time most companies are feeling that growth.

Some managers are tempted to create that strong bench even without that growth. They want accounting departments full of controllers instead of accounting clerks, or an engineering department full of senior-level designers.

Soon after hiring a clearly overqualified candidate, the manager sees the pitfalls.

One employee who used to be a SVP of finance accepted a controller’s position found that he quickly felt underused. Also, he was using systems that needed to be upgraded and felt very frustrated when his recommendations were ignored. Each day his frustration grew and his respect for his boss and the systems diminished. The manager wondered how he ever had an SVP-level position after seeing the attitude he displayed. This is a classic example of the right person in the wrong position. The controller was set up for failure.

A sales position was filled with a candidate who once was an industry expert, and a very successful sales manager who won outstanding performance awards. Selling is selling; she thought and felt she could quickly move up based on her prior track record. Once she joined the sales force she found that she really didn’t fit in. Placed on a team made up of mostly entry-level people she had no one to identify with, and felt like an outcast. Her co-workers viewed her as a manager — even though she wasn’t — and also had difficulty working with her. Her managers confessed they hired her to help bring the level of professionalism up on their team. The feeling of isolation was very difficult and resulted in a continued job search.

The manager was relieved when she moved on. It takes quite a different approach in managing the overqualified.

The right fit is still the goal for many hiring managers, even though the temptation is there. The best candidate for a position is one who can do 50 to 75% of the work with the need to learn and grow to master the task. This period of time will give an employee the challenges and rewards most seek and provide a give and take with the manager. This provides a success track, putting the candidate in the best light to perform and succeed and display a positive attitude.

As far as what we can do with the overqualified, one senior level HR strategic planner suggests the best fit for an overqualified candidate would be a staff-level in a totally new area, such as putting an operations person in a staff-level human resource role, or a retrained engineer in an entry-level IT position. Switching industries or areas will give a candidate the right opportunities to grow and learn, preserving their enthusiasm and optimism. These retrained or redirected employees, with their prior experiences and successes, will usually be on a faster growth path, and be able to pull on past experiences to become a valuable contributor to the new area.

There’s the report from Monster this week that says vast numbers of workers are ready to switch careers for a new job. Another survey, this one from SearchPath International and Antal International, give us a global view of hiring — and firing — trends.

The Global Snapshot offers clues to where the hottest markets in the world are for managers and professionals. (Hint: Think Russia, China, India, Egypt, and Eastern Europe.)

That report dovetails with last week’s USA Today report about an emerging brain drain of managers and professionals from the U.S. to China and India.

Vivek Wadhwa

Vivek Wadhwa, executive in residence at Duke University and a senior research associate at Harvard University, surveyed some 1,200 immigrants who returned to their native country. He reports that improved opportunities at home, coupled with U.S. visa policies, makes it likely that up to 200,000 white collar migrants will return to China and India in the next five years.

A UPI version of the story includes this comment from Wang Baodong, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington: “China needs a lot of well-trained personnel.”

No surprise there, especially no surprise after you peek at The Global Snapshot report that says 74 percent of the surveyed companies in China report they are hiring skilled managers and other white collar professionals now. Also not surprisingly, the report commentary notes that there has been a better than 10 percent rise in the companies shedding workers, which the report notes, suggests “that employers are taking advantage of current conditions to ‘weed out’ less productive members of staff.”

Other hot Asian markets for these same workers: Singapore, Pakistan and Hong Kong. India is bit less robust with 51 percent of the surveyed companies hiring now. But give it a quarter and 66 percent say they’ll be looking for managers and professionals.

In the U.S., 55 percent of respondents report hiring, with the same percentage planning to hire next quarter.

The recession has also got workers thinking that it may be wise to find a new career.

Monster released a poll of workers in North America and Europe showing 89 percent of them would consider or would make a career change if it meant finding a new job. While only 11 percent of the 22,444 visitors to Monster’s sites in Europe, Canada, or the U.S. said they wouldn’t change careers — at least not now — 49 percent said they’ve been wanting to change careers and are ready now.

In Spain, 92 percent of the visitors to the Monster site who took the poll said they were ready to make a career change. They’re feeling the pressure; 44 percent said they feel they must take the first job that comes along. That percentage contrasts sharply with respondents elsewhere, only 23 percent of whom felt they needed to pretty much take anything.

No doubt those who visit Monster sites are motivated job seekers, and probably more willing to switch industries than those who aren’t looking. But when half of those taking the poll answer the question, “Would you consider a job in another industry?” with a “Yes, I’ve been wanting to make a career change,” you can figure that change is underway.

The article cites a lady who specializes in what she calls energy profiling. She claims she or one of her licensees can examine your photograph to determine with perfect accuracy (her words) your personality type. Amazing! And to think all those psychologists who worked their way through graduate school, suffered peer-reviewed research, and spent tons of money pursuing advanced degrees for the last 100 years could have just looked at your photograph! Go figure.

I searched, but aside from watching an engaging streaming video taken in front of some very picturesque mountains, I found little proof that she was qualified to produce legitimate hiring tools. Her PR firm did claim she revolutionized the fashion and beauty industries by sharing her simple beauty/fashion assessments with women around the world; helped women align their physical features in perfect harmony with their clothing, jewelry, hair color and style; and provided pioneering insights on weight, sex & intimacy/relationships, depression, self-esteem, parenting, finances, physical health, and spiritual health. Wow. After all that, I guess hiring was the only field left to master.

I don’t know about you, but I like to see a writer have professional certifications or special education that would convince me they actually knew what they were talking about. You know, the same way we would expect a medical correspondent to actually have practiced medicine, a legal expert to graduate from an accredited law school, or an engineer to a have a legitimate engineering degree. But that’s just me.

She presents, as proof of her work, a collection of streaming video segments and personal testimonials from people claiming her system changed their lives for the better. Sorry, folks, this kind of “proof” is nothing more than personal opinion. If you want to know whether something is fact, you have to produce facts to support your opinion. Unbridled enthusiasm unsupported with expert knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I’m sure she is sincere about what she does. No one would make such wild claims unless they were. Unfortunately, using a photograph system to type people and predict job skills is a shining example of pure nonsense.

Let’s list a few facts prepared by the DOL, published in 1978.

As I claimed before, if you want to see an example of a rare event when the government got it right, read through the 1978 Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures.

Clearly Define What You Want to Measure

The Guidelines suggest it’s a good idea to conduct a professional job analysis before starting any hiring project. A professional job analysis includes talking with employees to learn what they do, talking with managers to learn what’s important, and talking with people who know if the job will change in the future. Since these folks cannot be expected to know about testing, the analyst converts their information into measurable competencies and verifies it with a wide range of job content experts.

You know this step has been missed when people in the hiring chain argue among themselves or complain the recruiter keeps sending them the wrong people. A good job analysis reduces job confusion. BTW… I’ve never yet seen a professional analyst break down a job into this lady’s purported energy types. We must have all missed that class.

Step Two

Now that we know what to measure, it’s time to hit the books to choose trustworthy measurement tools. In some cases, this will be structured interview questions, pencil and paper tests, job simulations, realistic job previews, case studies, planning exercises, technical knowledge tests, and so forth. The important thing to remember is that any process used to separate qualified from unqualified applicants, even if it is a yardstick, is a test. I cannot repeat this enough: interviews, resume screens, application blanks, and even specialized recruiting sources are tests!

It would be nice to know the tests you used were accurate.

The DOL says you cannot rely on validity claims made by vendors, marketing literature, third party statements, or any other source. These claims probably have nothing to do with your job. Can you use a test developed for bankers to hire your banker? Only if you can show the two jobs are highly similar. That’s a good thing. Why spend tens of thousands of dollars based on false assurances?

Conclusion

Read up on the Guidelines. I’m sure this won’t be the last time someone will naively try to expand market share. But making a hiring decision based on a person’s photograph is not only bad science; it is completely irresponsible behavior

I can just see the future. “Position open for individual with a well developed root chakra, median energy navel chakra, and a mature third-eye chakra. Candidates with an overactive sacral chakra or an undeveloped heart chakra need not apply. Mature crown chakra’s always welcome.”

Does HR need any more trouble with gaining credibility?

The job posting data released today by The Conference Board suggests that the U.S. recovery is as tepid as economists fear.

“While the trend has been modestly upward and averaged 40,000 per month over the last five months, the labor market continues to have a hard time gaining momentum,” said Gad Levanon, senior economist at The Conference Board. “The Conference Board Employment Trends Index, which has been basically flat for three straight months, also helps highlight the difficulty the labor market is facing. With a growing consensus of a weak recovery, businesses seem to be slow to boost advertising for vacant or new positions.”

The Conference Board and its data partner, Wanted Technologies, survey some 1,200 online job boards counting all the unduplicated jobs and comparing them to the jobs listed the month before to come up with both a total online job count as well as a new job  count. For September there were 3.363 million jobs listed; 2.018 million were new.

Despite the drop, there were still 67,000 more jobs advertised online in September than two months earlier, thanks to a big jump in postings in August. The listings increased by 169,000 in August, the second biggest increase in the year. (In May, listings increased by 199,000.)

Regionally, there were more jobs advertised in the South than elsewhere in the nation. There 1.215 million jobs were online, a drop of 45,400.

As might be expected, healthcare job openings continued to outpace other occupations. In the Healthcare Practioner and Technical category, some 28,000 listings were added. Every other occupational category listed by The Conference Board saw a drop.

The Conference Board’s monthly Help-Wanted Online Data Series is the earliest of the monthly reports detailing the condition of employment in the U.S.  The Monster Employment Index will be released on Thursday and Friday the much-watched Employment Situation Summary (better known as the unemployment rate) from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will be announced.

Study after study has confirmed the notion that many employees would have left their employers months/years ago had the option to do so been viable. The economic downturn, combined with the mortgage crisis, has forced many frustrated, disappointed, and unmotivated employees to stay put. The trend is not a new one and is consistent with past downturns.

While turnover rates are at an all-time low, they most certainly cannot be taken as an indication of a firm’s status as a desirable place to work.

Just as in years past, when job opportunities become more prevalent, employees will exercise their right to demonstrate just how much they appreciated the treatment they received throughout reductions in force, furloughs, clumsy mergers, travel freezes, and budget cuts. The level of animosity among many will render most traditional retention approaches ineffective.

Some studies indicate that as many as two-thirds of employees are ready to go. Unfortunately, few corporations are preparing today to handle the dramatic increase in voluntary terminations that will come tomorrow.

While few organizations completely decimated their staffing functions, the majority have cut back to the point where capability has been negatively impacted. Strategic programs that deliver retention have been cut, and in most cases, no one is held accountable for retention solutions. It might seem outrageous, but unless you consider the phrase “let’s keep them all” to be a retention strategy, it’s a fact that most HR and recruiting executives can not even list common retention strategies, let along devise their own.

Retention Is One of the Most Poorly Managed Goals in HR

It’s hard to argue that retaining key employees isn’t a high-value activity, and I can’t say that I have ever visited an organization that would argue otherwise. In fact, most HR leaders and recruiters talk a lot about the importance of retaining the very best employees that the organization has invested so much time, money, and development resources in. Unfortunately, talk is where most HR organizations end when it comes to formalizing retention efforts.

Among organizations that force-rank satisfaction with HR deliverables, retention often ranks high in importance but extremely low in execution. In fact, it’s often lower than compensation and benefits, if you can imagine that!

Its perennial position at the bottom of the list qualifies it as the most poorly managed staffing activity. However, its position at the bottom should come as no surprise, since few organizations can identify who’s in charge of it, what is the strategy, and how retention efforts are measured and evaluated.

These three factors are the reason behind most organizations’ poor retention performance:

Reason #1 — Who is in charge of retention?

In many organizations the answer to this very basic question is no one! Rarely does the organization’s design for the HR function include a role(s) charged with designing, developing, and executing retention programs. When such a role does exist, rarely is it positioned at level with enough resources and power to make a difference (i.e., Senior Director or VP).

When it comes to organizational design, nothing says “low importance” more than lack of budget or executive-level leadership at the helm. Some might argue that all are responsible for retention, but merely listing it as one among many responsibilities essentially guarantees a mediocre enterprise-scale effort.

While great managers may assume ownership of retention activities in their group, because there is no clear support organization, their approaches will largely be ad hoc in nature and inconsistently leveraged, opening the door for anyone disgruntled to scream discrimination!

Reason #2 — The real costs of key employee turnover are not reported.

Retention metrics in most organizations begin and end with overall turnover by period. Absent are metrics that measure the business impact of turnover and specific goals to mitigate predicted impact. If your retention function doesn’t measure and report these five key metrics, chances are your efforts are under-managed:

• The cost of turnover. Reporting a percentage turnover rate seldom excites executives, but converting that turnover rate to a dollar impact on business performance can establish the visibility on talent issues needed to transform a good recruiting function into a great one.
• Top performer/key employee turnover. Often called regrettable turnover, this measure prioritizes the jobs and individuals based on the degree to which their leaving hurts the firm.
• Competitor win/loss ratio. This metric is simply the ratio of the number of top performers you have successfully recruited away from a competitor compared to the number of top performers who voluntarily terminated to join a competitor. If a top performer quitting goes directly to a competing firm (vs. retiring), it raises the costs because it hurts the firm while aiding a competitor.
• Preventable turnover. If turnover is occurring for silly or preventable reasons, the percentage of cases where that is true needs to be reported and fixed.
• Percentage of “at risk” employees. The best firms proactively identify high-priority individuals who present a high risk of leaving during the next one or two years. Reporting the percentage of target individuals at risk alerts managers helping them put into place proactive programs attacking retention issues before they get out of hand.

Reason #3 — What is the name of your retention strategy?

The economic impact of losing 10% of the workforce each year in a major corporation amounts to tens of millions of dollars. With that amount of money and disruption involved, retention is clearly a strategic issue. To develop a competitive advantage around a strategic issue requires a strategy that is measurably superior to that of your competitors.

Unfortunately, it’s rare for organizations to develop a formal retention strategy. To make matters worse, most HR executives don’t even know the common retention strategies in use that they could adopt.

Before launching into a comprehensive list of common retention strategies, note that all retention strategies fall into one of three categories and usually contain five common elements.

The Five Common Elements of a Retention Strategy

1. Goals of the strategy. This element identifies the goals and specific results the strategy should produce.
2. Prioritization process. This element specifies the methodology that will be employed to determine which (if any) employees should receive priority treatment.
3. Identifying turnover causes. This element specifies the methodology that will be employed to identify the primary factors that “cause” employees to leave.
4. Retention solutions. This element contains a catalog of proven counter measures or solutions that can be employed by managers to halt or reverse a trend of turnover categorized by common cause.
5. Success measures. This last element covers the process for selecting retention metrics and reporting the results.

The Three Categories of Common Recruiting Strategies

Retention strategies usually fall into one of three categories, but world-class organizations often employ a hybrid approach that uses different strategies for different groups within the organization based on their role in achieving wildly important organizational goals. The three common categories include:

• Laissez-faire approaches. This group contains decentralized retention strategies that rely almost exclusively on operating managers to solve the retention problem.
• Comprehensive approaches. These approaches attempt to retain all employees by improving the treatment, pay, or benefits of all employees. These approaches are also called “peanut butter” strategies because they attempt to spread the improved treatment evenly across all employees.
• Targeted or personalized approaches. This category concentrates retention efforts on high-priority individuals and jobs and then customizes the treatment as much as possible in order to fit the individual needs of the targeted employee.

Next week, part two will continue with the top 15 retention strategies in use today.

Note: If you have corporate experience operating a retention function, I welcome your comments on critical factors that can make it more/less effective. In addition, if you have questions that you would like answered on corporate retention strategies, please post them in the article comments section following this article.

• Sign up for this week’s free webinar on Wednesday at 2:00 p.m. ET – Emerging Workforce Trends: What the Next 6 Months May Hold, led by ERE columnist Kevin Wheeler. Kevin will take you on an exploratory journey of emerging workforce trends and how they’ll influence your talent strategy.
• If you missed the news last week, we just announced the 10th annual ERE Expo 2010 Spring conference. The agenda is starting to come together, and once again will feature a brand new panel of speakers, many of which you have never seen present at an ERE Expo conference. And make sure to register by Friday to take advantage of the $600 early bird discount. Check out more about the conference at www.ereexpo.com.
• Speaking of events, tickets are going fast for the next #socialrecruiting summit, taking place in New York City on November 16. Last week we also added another exciting session to the agenda, Electronic Arts’ VP and Global Head of Talent Acquisition Cindy Nicola who will be talking about how social networking is at the heart of CRM.
• Think you’ve seen and heard it all? Maybe not. On Tuesday, Wendell Williams writes about a new way to select employees that he says is “a shining example of pure nonsense.”

Have a great week, and feel free to ask any questions you have in the comments section below.

Besides spending like it was 1999, Jobster changed, enhanced, modified, enlarged, annexed — choose your favorite adjective — business models often enough that the enterprise resembled Mrs. Winchester’s house. All of this playing out quite publicly via leaks, corporate PR, and the CEO’s own (defunct) blog.

In fairness to the now departed Jason Goldberg, he was a visionary. When Jobster launched in 2004 it tapped into the then-unnamed and not even  recognized phenom we now all know as social recruiting. To briefly, and only inadequately, explain it, Jobster was a corporate recruiter’s tool to tap the connections of the company’s employees; a digital employee referral program.

Over the next three-plus years Goldberg made well-timed investments, buying a job search engine called WorkZoo, a job tagging service called Jobby, and the blog Recruiting.com. Jobster would eventually relaunch as a career networking site, loosely tying in the referral program of its youth and bits and pieces of the acquisitions. Much of the best parts, however, languished, suggesting the visionary lacked a vision.

Now, just about two years after Goldberg announced he would leave the company, Jobster has been reborn as a recruiting services provider with the name Recruiting.com, which it adopted in the spring. Jobster.com lives on as a classic job board where you can pay to post.

The product now that is the hope of the investors who have poured some $55 million into Recruiting.com nee Jobster is a sourcing, searching, and organizational tool. It’s an ATS without the jobs; candidates only.

The key job of Recruiting.com is to quickly search your talent database (Talent Bank), which can be imported from multiple sources, including an ATS. A recruiter drives — there’s no job matching here. The process relies on keyword combinations or Boolean search to produce relevancy ranked lists of candidates. These prospects can be organized into folders named as the user desires.

Pull up a prospect and you can see from where they were sourced and see if there’s any contact history. You can add a note yourself.

Now what does this sound like? Say it with me, “ATS.” Or, if you prefer, “talent acquisition system.”

Jeff Dixon, the VP of product who handled the demo, was insistent that Recruiting.com is not an ATS. For one, he says, there are no jobs in the system. And without a req and the candidates associated with it, there is no tracking.

In that sense, he’s quite right. He’s also right that many of the systems on the market do a poor job of sourcing. Some of course, do a fine job. The bigger, beefier, and costlier ones can search internal and external candidate databases, social networks, and the web at large, creating lists of prospects and handle the contact management. Just this week a new tool from Jobvite was released that can do the same.

Dixon, though, says Recruiting.com’s market research revealed that even users of these systems find them intimidating. That’s my word, not his. What he actually said was, “What you hear (from recruiters) is ‘My ATS is a necessary evil’.”

Recruiters either can’t source from their ATS (very unlikely), find it too difficult (much more likely), don’t know how (?), or simply don’t. The latter is my choice for the most probable explanation for a datapoint from Dixon that one of Recruiting.com’s test companies discovered that 40 percent of its hires sourced externally were already in the ATS.

Think of the waste, even if the percentage was half that.

Considering that many companies have decimated their recruiter ranks, Recruiting.com may have just caught the tide of another trend, not as glamorous as social recruiting, but eminently more marketable in this economy: efficiency.

“Our tool is much more of a how-do-we-make-the-lives-of-recruiters-easier approach,” Dixon said.

My demo didn’t cover all the ground, but compared to some ATS search demos I’ve seen, Recruiting.com is simple to use. Once, that is, you have built the Talent Bank index. Some ATS databases are easier to port to Recruiting.com than others. Inbound resumes still go through your ATS or can be processed by a Recruiting.com connection, which I didn’t have time to see.

Capturing and parsing data from LinkedIn I did see and it was a snap. Dixon told me it was equally easy for resumes found elsewhere on the web. As a pure sourcing tool, it’s not as versatile as some of what’s coming on the market now, but it does the job.

Oddly, Recruiting.com shies away from the social networks. Certainly the unpredictability of formats and the content, as well as the accessibility issues are all, undoubtedly, part of the reason. But Recruiting.com CEO Jeff Seely’s belief that social networking is not  recruiting’s “secret sauce,” as he put it, is a factor.

“I just don’t get it,” he candidly said during a conversation earlier this week. “I’m a reluctant participant in Facebook. I’m not on Twitter.” He believes that the social networks will never be fertile ground for recruiters.

So in the year after he assumed the CEO job, he decided the company’s best bet was focusing on products to improve business performance. With Recruiting.com, that’s what he has done. It’s a bet that needs $55 million just to cover.

You can see Recruiting.com for yourself if you are heading to Chicago next week for HR Tech. The company will officially unveil the new product at the show.

Some look at the social networking trend and say that it’s all a bunch of hype. Some look at it and feel the need to, and will try to, be everywhere. Some will consciously decide to be nowhere — we have the phone and that works very well, thank you. Many are feeling overwhelmed by what’s happening, the pace of change, and the fears about transparency. In most cases you don’t need to be and shouldn’t be everywhere. And, you may decide to be nowhere, but make sure that’s a conscious decision and not just resistance to inevitable change.

As for fear of social networking, the pace of change and transparency, think of it this way — whether you engage your brand in the discussion or not, the conversation moves on — nothing stands still, except that eventually people may just not care about your brand at all, and, well, at that point you won’t need to recruit anyways. If you want to influence the conversation about your brand and if you want to engage people in your brand story, then social networking has a lot to offer. The complete article featured in the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership October issue, will delve further into that, but here are my more brief thoughts for the time being.

Social Media and Social Networking: Strategy or Tactics

The underlying premise of this article is that social networking is not a passing fad and that it deserves significant positioning in your talent attraction and management strategy.

Let me begin my differentiating, for the purposes of this article, the difference between social media and social networking. The terms are often used interchangeably, but I see an important distinction, especially for recruiting. Social networking is the application of social media, which provides the tools to share content and information, engage in conversations, and build networks. The key difference is what you choose to do after sharing your information. Social networking is pursued with the underlying intention of dialogue, engagement, and interest. It also results in a more sustainable talent strategy that differentiates your brand and brings forward many other business benefits. If you are simply pushing jobs out to Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn, you are socializing job postings by using social media, but not necessarily engaging in social networking. If you’re engaging prospective talent in discussions and building active communities, you are pursuing a social networking strategy.

There’s also a significant difference between the two that influences how you design an effective strategy and how you define your desired outcome. Social media is in part strategic but mostly tactical and is really saying: “Hey, these are new channels through which we can reach people and we should broadcast our jobs.”

That may be fine, but it limits the value and doesn’t fully realize the potential or move you toward a sustainable solution. Also, and most importantly, when you use social media there is an expectation for networking! If you push a job out on Twitter and someone reaches out to you, they expect a response. When you don’t respond, the brand can be viewed unfavorably and over time this type of behavior will dilute the brand reputation and value.

This is similar to what job seekers expected with the introduction of corporate recruitment websites. They wanted a way to reach and connect with someone in a company they were interested in joining. Remember all the discussions about the “black hole of recruiting”? Well, in a social world, the expectations and consequences are higher. And, while today’s job market may be in favor of the employer, the cycle will turn again and the strategy that you develop and implement today will absolutely impact future talent attraction effectiveness — positively or negatively. If you want to develop a sustainable talent acquisition strategy and actively invest in the longevity of your brand, then it’s time to engage.

They Really Are Interested in You — Really!

The evolution of technology, social tools, and ease of access are driving rapid advancements in communication. People like to play, create, share, and comment about your company and brand. The fear you may be feeling about letting people “in” to your brand, so to speak, can be looked at one of two ways. You can either be fearful of what they may do to your brand, which “they” will do anyways, or, you can celebrate that people are interested in your brand, products, and services. Listen to what they have to say. You may learn something. Engage them in your business challenges; they may solve them for you. Yes, they want to hang out with you — if, that is, you have something interesting to say! A UK student who found his job through Twitter shared this with me:

Personally, the companies that I’ve been most interested in have been the ones that are blogging and therefore appear to be knowledgeable industry leaders … also, some companies have begun posting jobs on blogs, which I think is better than on a recruitment website or in a newspaper, because the candidates applying have read the blog and are interested in the company.

Now, that’s something to think about. Does silence imply your company has nothing interesting to say? That you’re not knowledgeable about your industry? Pursuing a social strategy isn’t just a way to attract and engage talent. It can also be a way to expand the innovative capacity of your organization — perhaps something we should consider as the talent function evolves.

Clearly the impact of “social” is still emerging and the potential is just beginning to be understood — although it’s already profound. We are still at the edge of what the social media wave will bring. The potential for sweeping change is enormous. We will certainly see the future impacted and unfolding before our eyes.

Look for the complete article in the October edition of the ERE Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership. Visit me online at TalentSynchronicity.com and follow me on Twitter @TalentSynch.

Validation is a best practice that can provide both critical information about the ROI of an assessment and the documentation required to support its legal defensibility. Unfortunately, proper validation is not the norm when it comes to the use of assessments. While many companies make use of assessments that have been validated in the past or that do satisfy some of the requirements for test validity, conducting the validation work required to fully satisfy best practices and gain an understanding or ROI is often not on even on the radar screen.

When it comes to validation, my experience shows that the biggest stumbling block is a lack of understanding of just what validation is and why it is so important. While the concept of validation definitely has its complexities, it can be boiled down to a few simple concepts which are discussed below.

What is Validation?

Webster’s online dictionary defines the word “validity” as:

….well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory> b : logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>

….appropriate to the end in view : effective <every craft has its own valid methods>

These definitions definitely hold true when it comes to employment testing. Ask an I/O psychologist and he or she will tell you that validation simply means the act of establishing two key things: 1) That anything used to make employment decisions is job related, and 2) That the assessment actually measures what it is supposed to measure (i.e., that the test is “accurate”).

There are a variety of ways to document the job-relatedness and accuracy of a test as a decision-making tool; however, a working understanding of validation should focus on two general types of validation, content validation and criterion-related validation.

Content validation: Quite simply, content validation involves the documentation of the personal characteristics (i.e., experience, education, knowledges, skills, abilities, values, etc) required to perform the job.

At a minimum, claiming a selection measure is content “valid” requires an alignment of test content to job requirements so that support for the job-relatedness of the test can be documented. This means that the job or jobs in question must be carefully evaluated and that the input of subject matter experts (incumbents and supervisors) be used to create a full understanding of the various things that are required for successful job performance.

The process used to establish the job-relatedness of test content is known as “job analysis.” Once information about job performance and related characteristics has been documented via job analysis, selection measures can be mapped out to match job requirements. For instance, if job analysis shows that the job requires fast and accurate typing, then the use of a typing test to hire applicants for that job is assumed to be content-valid based on its relation to job performance requirements.

Content validation can satisfy EEOC requirements for claiming a test is valid (provided that proper procedures were followed). However, settling for only content validation is selling yourself way short. The real value proposition when it comes to validation lies in the evaluation of the ROI provided by a selection measure. This information can only be provided by criterion-related validation.

Criterion-related validation: Whenever possible, the statistical evaluation of the relationship between selection measures and valued business outcomes is desirable. This type of validation is known as “criterion-related validation” and it can provide concrete evidence of the accuracy of a test for predicting job performance. Criterion validation involves a statistical study that provides hard evidence of the relationship between scores on pre-employment assessments and valued business outcomes related to job performance. The statistical evidence resulting from this process provides a clear understanding of the ROI provided by the testing process and thus helps document the value provided. Criterion-related validation also provides support for the legal defensibility of an assessment because it clarifies the assessment’s accuracy as a decision-making tool.

While criterion-related validation may seem mysterious, it has much in common with two more well-known concepts that are used to help find value within business processes: six sigma and business intelligence. Both of these methods require that data be examined in order to help clarify relations between various process components. The resulting information can be used to help streamline business processes and uncover meaningful relationships between various streams of data. The creation of a feedback loop using criterion validation is really no different.

The 1-2 Punch

In an ideal world it is best to have both content and criterion validity evidence. Documenting content validity is a minimum requirement for any pre-employment selection measure; however, content validation alone can’t provide any evidence for the ROI associated with a test or selection measure. Adding statistical validation bolsters the legal defensibility of an assessment and provides insight into ROI. Unfortunately, most companies do not perform criterion-related validation.

There are a variety of reasons for this.

• Criterion study not possible: A legitimate reason for not conducting validation studies is that there are simply not enough people in the job to allow for a reliable study to be conducted. The greatest shortcoming of statistical validation is the fact that its results are not credible unless the sample size is well over 100. Therefore small companies and jobs with few incumbents will preclude the ability to gather criterion-related validation evidence.
• Lack of resources: Many companies feel that conducting criterion-related validation studies simply takes too many resources. They are unwilling to spend the money needed or take the time to collect the data required to perform such studies.
• Lack of understanding: Many companies do not understand the concept of criterion-related validation and are not aware of the value it can provide.
• Lack of guidance: Test providers often sell tests as being “valid” because they have been validated for jobs similar to the one in question. While this may be true, it is not always an “out” that allows one to avoid doing criterion-related validation. Many test vendors do not provide advice or services related to criterion validation, leaving the user on their own to figure out this part of the equation.

What does all this mean to staffing professionals?

• At a minimum all measures used to select employees should be content-valid. Failure to document content validity means the legality of your selection measures is compromised.
• Whenever possible, it pays to conduct criterion-related validation to add additional support for content validation efforts and to gain insight into the ROI of selection measures.
• When reviewing tests provided by vendors, make sure to understand that a claim that a test has been “validated” can mean different things. Don’t assume that just because the test has been validated in another setting, that it is automatically valid for your particular situation.
• Lack of proper validation for tests and selection measures can be costly! Citing lack of resources as a reason for not validating is like passing over dollars to pick up pennies.
• Both types of validation can add value. Content validation provides legal piece of mind and criterion validation bolsters this and provides the ROI evidence needed to build a business case for using assessment.
• Educate yourself about validation and the options available to you. For more information talk to an industrial psychologist about validation and legal requirements and consult resources such as the Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection Procedures.

As with anything else, it may take a bit of extra time and resources to do things right, but the extra effort will provide value and piece of mind.

Below, Toole talks about these job-market trends, and the upcoming need for a lot of recruiters who have left the profession to come on back.

Google is a sourcing tool, but while it may get the job done, how long will it take to sift through the results? Jobvite Source is more of a blend of the best attributes of ZoomInfo and Broadlook with access to the social networks as well as the entire Web.

Last week, during a demo, Chief Product Officer Jamie Glenn did a search for an online marketing manager and came up with the resumes of, maybe, a couple hundred possibles from all the Web’s free sources. A similar search on Google turns up results in the hundreds of thousands.

The difference is Jobvite Source can compare the results to the job req, sifting out the job listings and other stuff, leaving you with resumes that match the requirements. It does the same as a well-structured query to your ATS or a resume database.

Before you say “Yeah, so,” consider that what Jobvite Source does for the job req, it can do for the candidates. Once you’ve compiled the initial candidate list, applied whatever additional filters you want — Glenn limited the search to candidates in the San Francisco Bay Area — and are satisfied, you can toggle over to a view of the candidate and whatever background is available online about them. The compilations are not as extensive as the summaries on ZoomInfo, but they are detailed enough to let you decide whether to look more closely.

Once you’ve narrowed your candidate list, you can import them into your ATS or create a campaign right in Jobvite Source. Either way, you send them a Jobvite, inviting them to apply and letting them know you’re interested. Likewise, any employee can use Jobvite Source to send a personal invitation to friends and connections in their social networks that the technology has matched to the job description.

The candidate contact is the very essence of Jobvite. Says Dan Finnigan, Jobvite CEO, “The Jobvite is the way to engage the candidate.”

Earlier this year, Jobvite introduced an application allowing it to access the  LinkedIn and Facebook connections of a company’s willing employees. It searches out contacts who best fit the job requirements and suggests to whom a Jobvite ought to be sent. To use it, you had to take the whole Jobvite package. Jobvite Source is a standalone application that works with any ATS.

With so many companies moving toward integrated products, Finnigan explained that Jobvite choose to make Source available as a separate product in order to reach that part of the market that already has an ATS and doesn’t have the money or the inclination to switch.

Companies, Finnigan says, have been “obliterating their recruiting departments.” But they still need to fill jobs. He believes that recruiters are moving away from the for-fee resume databases to search for candidates elsewhere. “The world has changed to the open Web,” he says, mentioning all the networks and personal blogs and sites that have cropped up in the last five years. “What we think recruiters need is a way to integrate with all this stuff.”

Jobvite Source, with its automated searching and parsing and filtering, makes it possible for what remains of the recruiting staff — or an HR generalist, in the smaller shops — to source, rather than post and pray. It isn’t going to replace a sourcer like a Shally Steckerl, but there isn’t an employer who wouldn’t welcome a way to cut down on the average recruiter’s time spent looking for candidates.

With a starting price tag of $500 a seat, Jobvite Source can help the SMB market play on a leveler playing field with the bigger firms at a competitive price.

The world of employment advertising is no exception. Attractive logos, extensive benefits packages, flexible schedules: all these can be used to make an impact on job candidates and affect how many people read and reply to your postings. When considering how to initially attract readers to your employment ads, the key opportunity may lie in your job title and/or headline statement. These prominent statements give advertisers the chance to attract the attention and readership of job seekers, and motivate them to respond.

According to marketing legend David Ogilvy, five times as many people read a headline as do the entire ad. Therefore, without a strong headline statement, your ad may be skipped entirely. Another source (copyblog.com) says that while 8 out of 10 people will read a headline statement, only 2 in 10 read the entire ad. By designing a strong, compelling lead-in, you’ll increase the number of candidates who do go on to read your ad, and apply to your job, while your competitors’ ads get skipped over.

Creating Job Titles or Headline Statements

What makes a good title/headline?

You’ll most clearly know you have a good headline statement when candidates you interview tell you so. Your message will get candidates thinking, wanting to know more, and ultimately, responding to your ad. Headline statements are about positioning and most tout the strengths of the position, opportunity, situation, and/or company. When done well, the statement will differentiate one job or company from another.

How can you create a great headline statement?

A good headline depends on identifying what all the strengths of the opportunity are, choosing the strongest of those, and then communicating that in a well-crafted phrase. To start the process, ask and answer the following questions:

• What are the key positives prospective candidates must know about your company and/or job opening?

• What makes you (or the position) different and/or notable?

• What do your current employees like about working at your organization?

• What tone in a headline statement best fits your image/culture? (Cleverness, Humor, Formal, etc)

• What are your competitors saying in their ads?

• After compiling the above, what single key advantage do you have that should be front and center?

Key Areas

There are a number of key areas around which headline statements can be built. These include, but are not limited to:

• Awards won/recognition given
• Strength of the company – stability/longevity/culture
• Strength of the product
• Needs/wants of the candidate
• Dollars and cents
• Quality of location/atmosphere
• Culture/mission of the organization
• Quote from employee(s)
• Play on words

Here are two examples of headlines positioning the advertiser as an “Award-wining” employer:

Want to join a company that was awarded more Media and Methods portfolio awards than any other company last year?

Join a company recognized by Fortune magazine as one of the most admired food companies!

Stability and longevity of your organization can be very attractive to job seekers. If it works in your favor, consider using it:

Since the opening of its first franchise in 1940, International Dairy Queen, Inc has established itself as one of the world’s best-loved brands of food and dairy treats

Or, a more concise example:

Customer Service Rep – 110 year-old company and stronger than ever!

(Note: this ad received 73% more views and more than twice as many applies as competing ads simply titled Customer Service Representative.)

Just as Saturn pioneered the no-haggle pricing that customers enjoy, they position this as a benefit to their salespeople. This tackles several areas (strength of the position & culture, wants of the candidate – i.e. not having to haggle as a primary duty) with one headline:

Auto Sales – “No haggle” sales philosophy!

Another car dealer stands out by promoting the strength of the product:

Sales Career – fastest growing product in the U.S.!

Case in Point

One advertiser was receiving a low response to a posted ad and sought assistance. The job title? Inside Sales. We didn’t need to probe much further for the reason for their low response – the title generates no interest or differentiation.

After a few questions about the organization, the title was revised to highlight their company culture:

Inside Sales – Family-owned, great work/life balance!

The results? During the two-week period prior to the title change, the ad received 132 views. During the two-week period after the change, 290 people viewed it. That’s an increase of 220%! Clearly, job titles matter.

What Do Your Employees Say About You?

In business-to-business dealings we often use testimonials because often what your peers say carries more weight than what a Sales Representative says to you. The testimonial not only speaks to your product or service, but also to the belief the person giving the quote has in you. It’s no different with prospective employees — they want to know what their prospective peers say about the organization. Using employee quotes can have a powerful affect on candidates.

The culture at Eide Bailly has directly influenced my ability to succeed. I’m trusted in my work and have the freedom to make decisions. — Shannon (with the Firm 12 years)

Eide Bailly, a Top 25 CPA firm, uses quotes like this in its recruitment advertising. So, does it work?

I used to think (using the quote) was a little hokey… until I tried it in an ad. I received more comments regarding the employee quote we used. One person even wanted to meet the person who was quoted. The comments I received ranged from ‘the reason I applied was because of the quote from your employee’ to ‘that quote made me want to find out more about your company’. With that in mind, I would say that using quotes can really add an element of personalization and differentiation to your ad, as long as your company is depicted accurately by the quote. –Lauri Dahlberg, PHR, HR Manager

Using a quote from an employee can be a terrific way to pique interest and get more candidates in your pool. By using this or some of the other techniques pointed to above, you will increase your chances of attracting talent that otherwise might have overlooked your opportunity.

Tone

In addition to the key areas to build your title around, you will want to consider the tone of your headline as it relates to your image and/or culture. The tone can be:

• Serious

• Fun, playful

• Inquisitive (ask questions)

• Creative/outside the box

You might think a legal publishing firm would project a staid, stuffy image. To combat that, one advertiser has used the fun, play-on-words headline: Do Your Career Justice. Now they don’t sound so stuffy after all — right?

Which large bank do you think uses the headline: Success Comes in Stages (hint: stagecoach)? Another case of a play-on-words, which in this case, ties into a company symbol and shows a sense of humor that others in banking do not.

Getting Non-conventional

Some advertisers use a traditional approach and embellish it such as: Auto Sales – Capitalize on the hot new Saturn products! Others scrap the conventional angle all together. A district manager at one of the country’s largest financial and insurance services companies, says, “I try to consider the basic facts about the opportunity, and then highlight a selected part which the reader might find especially intriguing.”

For example, while his competitors use traditional (i.e. boring) titles, the district manager mentioned above uses the headline: Take Charge of Your Career Selling Products Everyone Needs! While his competitors’ ads lead to pre-conditioned or limited ideas about insurance sales, re-framing it with a headline statement presents a positive and informative picture. This brings results.

The district manager says, “I often ask responders what caught their attention in my recruitment ad. More often than not they reply, ‘The headline, that got me thinking…’ When I hear that, I know I have a good headline.”

Another recruiter in the Financial Services field presents his job as a “Small Business Opportunity.” His title reframes the posting and turns it from a “job” into a different kind of opportunity, one that attracts entrepreneurial people.

Why Re-invent the Wheel?

In addition to brainstorming new ideas, don’t overlook past ideas that can be re-worked. It can make the job of finding new headlines easier and be as effective (or more) than dreaming up new ones. Also, you can possibly piggyback on the branding message of the company.

For example, you may have heard the Saturn tag “A Different Kind of Car Company.” Recently, one Saturn group conducted a search for a sales team — two individuals to share the role of one sales position. It’s a different approach to a traditional role. Their headline?

A Different Kind of Car Company — Again

According to Lou Adler, you have 10 seconds to capture readers’ attention. A strong headline statement that helps you stand out and strongly positions the strengths of your opportunity will help you capture that readership and deliver candidates.

The most important aspect is to understand who you are targeting. I’m not talking about recognizing the technical skills or requirements you want to see in the candidate. Temporarily, throw the job description out the window. Then conduct an early reference check. This is a performance check you can cash.

If the results confirm a prized candidate, think of him or her as a pearl. The Encarta Dictionary defines a pearl as “somebody or something highly esteemed or valued.” The gems themselves take years to develop and the art of pearl cultivation is a long and delicate process. As it relates to candidates, we all recognize the best as valuable. But we often overlook what it took for them to become who they are and therefore do not treat them accordingly. In many cases, we are talking about years of dedication and hard work to perfect their craft. Those who rise to the top of their profession are a select bunch. They are select but not scarce and are very much open to being recruited. But unlike any other, it takes a dedicated, specific plan to successfully recruit them.

Another thing to keep in mind in the initial approach is that many of the finest desire a certain amount of recognition that comes with their achievements. They take great pride in their accomplishments and want you, the recruiting or hiring entity, to pay attention to it. Still, there is a fine line between preferential treatment and the acknowledgement of greatness. The latter commands the stage without demanding that it be so. Those are the most sought after “pearls.”

However, there may be friction if the top candidates are required to follow a set of routine guidelines without explanation. A greater amount of latitude should be given when scheduling interviews, for example, as their time is of the essence. It will be difficult to control the process if a certain amount of patience and flexibility are not demonstrated.

Selling must be at the foundation of any strategy designed to capture the best. Why do so many fail to recruit top talent with any consistency? The lack of sales skills and persuasive techniques are the bane of otherwise successful organizations. Essentially, they are unable to convincingly sell the talent on the opportunity or the company. At best, they produce a half-hearted effort expecting a job description or the company bio to suffice. Or they rely on a formulaic hiring process to do the trick. This does not work. Each candidate should be individually courted. Studies suggest that there are staggering numbers of top performers who are not recruited because they are not “sold” on the recruiter or the position.

There are three important dimensions to selling as it pertains to recruiting top performers:

1. Selling one’s own credentials as a recruiter or hiring authority (Why should I listen to you?)
2. Selling the position or opportunity (Why should I be interested in the opportunity?)
3. Selling your company or the organization to which you desire to connect the candidate (Why would I want to work there?)

Think of the candidate as asking the questions in parentheses. Sometimes they are expressed aloud; other times they are not. However, the questions are typically key in their own decision-making process. You should be able to make a compelling argument as you engage the candidates. So, having a thorough understanding about what you offer from your side of the fence is a necessity; the ability to present that information in a saleable, attractive package is even more important.

For the most part, great candidates have options so they need to be sold on you and yours. I would suggest that if you or anyone on the interviewing or hiring team is uncomfortable selling, that you address it immediately. There are a good number of professionals who can be called in to assist with training and providing classes, courses, etc.

Every successful recruit should make the next one just that little bit easier to onboard. Be reminded that recruiting does not occur within a vacuum. The goal should always be to build a vital network. I’ve seen companies get so excited by a great hire that they forget that they’ll have to do it all again before too long. They shelve their recruiting hat only putting it back on when an opening needs to be filled. This is a big mistake. As can be intoned from the foregoing, recruiting the best is a major time commitment. There are few shortcuts, but the process can be made much more expedient if it is viewed as collaborative and proactive rather than a singularly reactive activity.

Call a brainstorming meeting with all the new top hires. Ask them to provide at least two names and some background on people that they know or have worked with who they consider to be outstanding contributors.

Soon you will have created a database of top prospects and be able to tap into them as needed. This will allow a quick jump into the process and save a considerable amount of time.

There can be no substitute for professional dedication to this endeavor. It takes total immersion with repetition to master the top talent recruitment process. Keep abreast of new material on the subject and customize it to your own needs. It is a continual learning journey. The combination of the appropriate education and practical application will produce some measure of success. As Julius Caesar once said, “Experience is the teacher of all things.”

The closing price is a bit more than triple the $5.95 low for the year Monster hit on March 10.

The bullish article, “Turning Into A Monster Of A Competitor,” talks about Monster’s international reach, noting it accounts for 45 percent of the company’s revenue. The article approvingly cites the acquisition of China.HR and Trovix as well as the makeover of its website, with its new emphasis on tools for the passive job seeker.

These steps, plus a reorganization of its sales force and the improving global economy, says Barron’s, makes Monster “a good long-term bet.”

As if to second that recommendation, UBS Investment Research upgraded Monster Monday to “Buy” from “Neutral” while raising the price target to $27 from $15. It’s the second “Buy” recommendation in a month for Monster. The first was from Oscar Gruss & Son.

Meanwhile, Monster has launched a new round of humorous commercials for the career tools it introduced earlier this year.

Riffing on the popular CSI franchise, one of the new commercials has a detective’s tag-along friend mucking up the evidence in a crime scene. Another has a job shadower pulling on surgical gloves anticipating he’ll assist in what the video implies will be a proctology exam as the patient frets and the doctors says no.

“Until there’s take your friend to work day,” says the voiceover, “There’s career mapping.”

Adweek called the videos “mildly amusing.” They’re better than that, even if they’re not knee-slapping hysterical, which, considering the number of desperate job seekers out there, might not have been entirely appropriate.

• If you missed the news, #socialrecruiting Summit is coming to New York City on November 16. Following the first-ever event in June that sold out, this event will continue the conversation that we started to deconstruct the hype, understand how social media tools play a role in the recruiting lifestyle, and think about the possibilities as new and emerging technology come to the forefront. And make sure to reserve your spot by Friday before the early bird discount expires.
• If you weren’t able to make the trip earlier this month to South Florida, and missed any of the live streamed sessions, you can check out videos and slides from the Expo here. You can get some first hand tweets from those who attendeed by checking out the #ereexpo hashtag archive. And there are some photo albums posted to the ERE.net Facebook fan page. And stay tuned for the launch of our Spring ERE Expo taking place next March in San Diego. More info coming this week!
• Register for this week’s free webinar on Wednesday at 2:00 p.m. ET, 2009 Corporate Staffing & Recruiting Part II: Trend Updates and Survival Ideas, led by Dan Kilgore and Jeremy Eskenazi from Riviera Advisors.
• Job posting on jobs.ere.net are still just $25 through October 1, so don’t miss out on this opportunity to fill your open recruiting positions with one of your fellow ERE community members. And if you are looking for a new position, there have been fourteen new positions posted in the past week.
• Check out the article this week from Minneapolis StarTribune ad exec Jeff Perry about how to create better job ads.

If you have any questions about anything I have posted above, please leave them in the comments section.

However, if you view recruiting as a marketing and sales job (as I and many strategic recruiting leaders do), knowing what channels brought the prospect to the organization and what messages led to conversion (talented individual > applicant > candidate > hire) are by far the most critical bits of data the function can collect. Without this information, it’s extremely difficult to scientifically budget for sourcing or build strategic sourcing systems capable of impacting organizational performance.

Luckily, however, there is a simple approach that ensures much more accurate and helpful information that doesn’t rely on transaction-minded recruiters documenting the source of hire.

If you rely on weak sources, chances are you’ll get weak results.

Why Source of Hire Data is Almost Always Wrong

There are numerous reasons why corporate efforts to capture accurate source of hire data are almost always doomed to failure. Some of those reasons include:

• Recruiters don’t care — not all recruiters are involved in selecting the sourcing tools they will have access to or even using them in general, so coding applicants is an activity that realizes little apparent direct benefit. Even recruiters who do source or play a role in their organizations’ sourcing strategy tend to be overconfident that they already know which sources work and don’t need data to inform them. Other recruiters are just old-school and will use the same sources over and over no matter what. Unless recruiters are made aware of how identifying source of hire accurately is critical to their success, no one is going to spend a lot of time on capturing it accurately.
• Conflict of interest — while some recruiters may care about scientifically validating which sources produce which results, the truth is that capturing data that makes the recruiting function more efficient is seen by some as identifying ways to make line recruiters less necessary.
• Not asking in a systematic way — most corporate recruiting processes are relatively flexible and give the recruiter a lot of leeway in determining source of hire. It’s rare to find a process that forces recruiters to specifically ask candidates which source most influenced their decision to apply. In other cases, the way the question is posed to candidates is so inconsistent that it dooms the reliability of the answer.
• Not segmenting clouds the data — many organizations that do collect source of hire data do so in such a way that the value of the data becomes so diluted it is virtually useless. For instance, can you segment your source of hire data by manager perception of candidate quality (used to validate their assumptions) or by post-hire performance rating? Knowing how top and bottom performers approach the organization is much more valuable than knowing the most common source, or how the average employee is found. Further, knowing how sourcing effectiveness varies by job family or region is essential.
• Technology forces bad choices — many corporations use applicant tracking systems to capture the source of hire data at the time of application. Although this is a good concept in theory, studies show that asking prior to hire doesn’t always yield the accurate answer, but rather the answer the applicant thinks might result in the best result. When recruiters enter applicants who have come via internal channels or who have been direct sourced, they tend to choose the first source in the drop-down list available. Few systems send validating questions periodically to confirm applicant data downstream, so errors in the front of the process produce bad data at the end of the process.
• Forcing a single source — it is common for active candidates to use any and all sources available to apply to an organization, while passive candidates may first be exposed to an opportunity via one channel, but ultimately apply via another. Few data-gathering approaches identify how the opportunity was first encountered, what channels influenced a decision, and what channel ultimately produced the application.

Perception Isn’t Always Reality

Periodically testing assumptions or perceptions is key to being a good leader. In 2007, we surveyed more than 15,000 hiring transactions, comparing the pre-hire documented source of hire to results from a post-hire candidate experience survey. The results were shocking, even for those of us who tend to be cynical. Only 26% of the time did the post-hire result match the pre-hire entry.

Further, the variances were much higher with certain sources than others. While recruiters and recent hires generally agreed on the percentage that resulted from employee referral and events, they radically disagreed on the percentage that resulted from the corporate career site, job boards, and even third-party recruiting partners. In the 2007 study, only 12% of new hires attributed the corporate career site as their source of introduction, while the pre-hire data attributed the career site with 57% of hires.

Gathering Valid Sourcing Data the Quick, Cheap, and Easy Way

Sales and marketing professionals have for years used a simple solution to accurately identify the “real reason” why people make the decisions they do. They ask after the decision has been made.

After a product has been purchased or a job offer accepted, the prospect has no reason to lie. The answer will not influence the process. Telling a salesperson that you only came to their dealership because you are interested in a car that only they have in inventory is a fact that could impact the dealer’s willingness to negotiate.

Shifting data collection to follow completion of a transaction removes any value of manipulation.

Additional Reasons Why Asking Post-Hire Is a Superior Approach

• As new employees, new hires may respond more thoroughly to questions out of a newfound sense of obligation to help out the new employer.
• Post-hire collection instruments can be built to collect smaller fragments of data over time as part of the onboarding process, allowing for both better collection activities and validation efforts.
• You’re only capturing data from the highest-quality applicants; in other words, those you actually hired.
• The risk-adverse worried about privacy issues might be more than willing to provide this type of information post-hire once they are made aware that the information will be used exclusively to help recruit high-quality teammates for them to work with in the future.

Action Steps to Implement a Post-Hire Source Identification Process

Consider the following tips when designing and implementing a post-hire source capture process:

• Ask during onboarding — while recruiting doesn’t always own onboarding, recruiting should be permitted to use the onboarding process to collect information from new hires. Ideally, a recruiter can ask the questions and probe for more information in person, but surveys work almost as well. Work with the onboarding team to ensure that the source of hire questions are always completed. If recruiting does not own the onboarding process, using secret shoppers to occasionally test that recruiting-prescribed activities are being completed as desired is advised.
• Email a questionnaire — if an onboarding option is not available, send a questionnaire or survey invitation via email to the individual before they start (because they are new, they are likely to spend some time on it).
• Ask when the candidate accepts — because recruiters administer the selection and offer presentation phases of the recruiting lifecycle, a possible alternative is to include an acceptance criteria survey in the actual offer acceptance process. After thanking them for their acceptance, ask for their help in improving the process of identifying future top-quality candidates like them.
• Educate the new hire — the first thing you want to do is educate the new hire about the importance of the process and how capturing the right sources will result in them eventually working along-side some other great hires. Educate them about the different factors that you’re most interested in; company awareness factors (employer branding factors) and how they learned more about the company/opportunity; what specific sources made them aware there was a current job opening; and what factors triggered their decision to actually apply.
• Ask the right questions — after “when you ask” and “who you ask,” the next most critical factor in getting useful data is what you ask. The following are the minimal questions I recommend. You shouldn’t limit respondents to one answer, but rather allow them to choose all that contributed to their decision to apply. Consider providing them with a detailed list of answers to choose from, based on the sources used and past new-hire answers along with a few blanks. When multiple factors are identified, ask them to rank them in descending order of the importance.

Recommended Questions:

1. Which source made you aware of our company as a desirable place to work?
2. What factors about our company or opportunity best got your attention?
3. Which source or factor made you aware that we had a current job opening in your field?
4. What factor or source convinced you to take action and apply for a job?
5. Were there any sources that provided information that discouraged you from considering our firm or applying for a job? If yes, what were those negative factors?
6. What were the key factors that convinced you to accept this job and what aspects or factors of the hiring process had no value or discouraged you?
7. Who else is exceptional at your previous firm that we should consider hiring?

Note: other powerful recruiting questions that you should be asking can be found here.

• Improving the accuracy of your current system — if you choose not to adopt a post-hire approach or if you decide to run tandem data capturing processes pre and post hire, it is still important to improve your current data capture process. Run a validation study that collects post-hire data for a limited time and compare the data received from the traditional approach to that collected. If both processes produce similar results, there’s no reason to change your approach. If you continue letting recruiters enter the data, spot check or use a random validation study to periodically check the accuracy rate of their entries. One recruiter throwing bad data into the system can throw off all of the results. Merely knowing that there is a chance that entries will be checked periodically will drive most recruiters to improve their accuracy. Adding a reward for accuracy will further improve results.

Leveraging Source of Hire Data

Collecting data and doing nothing with it should be a cardinal sin in a corporate setting.

Recruiting leaders need to develop a formal process at least twice a year to review sourcing data and adjust sourcing processes accordingly. Adjustments should include dropping bad sources, modifying recruiter training, shifting budget allocations, and determining the impact of sourcing changes on new-hire retention rates and job performance.

Final Thoughts

There are some in the recruiting profession who look down on sourcers and the sourcing function as something that’s necessary but not mission-critical. In contrast, there is nothing more important than great employer branding and placing the right message in the right communication channel to drive the desired action by the right people.

If you recruit basketball players for an NBA team from elementary schools, you’ll never win a single game, but if in contrast, you recruit exclusively at NBA All-Star games, no matter how bad the rest of your recruiting processes, you will have some great hires. I go by the axiom that “great sourcing is everything.” If you believe so too, you will act immediately to eliminate actions that lead to unreliable sourcing data. Using a post-hire source capturing approach is cheap, quick, and much more accurate than pre-hire source identification. It’s a slam-dunk.

As always, if you have tried this approach and want to make others aware of your success, or have questions/suggestions you would like others to focus on with regards to improving the process, please post them to the comments section following this article.

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission today, Monster Worldwide says it will pay $4.25 million in full settlement of the action. “A substantial majority” of the money will come, the company says, from insurance “and contributions from another defendant.”

The filing, Taylor v. McKelvey, et. al.,  does not name the other defendant. However, the now-deceased former chairman and CEO Andrew McKelvey is one of at least six former Monster executives and directors who were sued.

Monster said it will reverse $6.85 million it had previously set aside in connection with this litigation in its 3rd quarter financials.

In its most recent quarterly filing with the SEC, Monster said the now-settled Taylor case was “one civil action pending against it in connection with its historical stock option granting practices.”

That may not seem like much until you consider that employers reduced this year’s college grad hiring by 21 percent. That seven percent is on top of this year’s cuts, meaning that there will be almost 30 26.53 percent fewer jobs being offered to the current crop of seniors than their counterparts had in 2008.

For comparison, each NACE Job Outlook from 2004 to the spring of 2008 predicted double-digit increases in college senior hiring. The spring 2008 hiring preview predict 8.1 percent growth.

Besides cutting back on their hiring, NACE’s Job Outlook 2010 Fall Preview says employers are shifting their recruiting to the spring. Not in big numbers; only about a 5 percent change from the 2008 survey when the split was 63 percent planned to hire in the fall, while the rest were looking to the spring.

The only region of the U.S. that expects to increase college hiring is the northeast, though only by about 5 percent, which, if you are following the numbers here, will still be below the 2007 hiring level.

“Traditionally, employers tend to be conservative about their college hiring when the economy is in flux,” says Marilyn Mackes, NACE executive director. “Although employers anticipate doing most of their recruiting in the fall, we are seeing some movement to recruit in the spring. This is likely due to anticipation that the economic recovery will be underway by then.”

What this means for college seniors should be self-evident: Get a resume, portfolio, or profile together now; network with alums, professors, your parents friends, and your friends’ parents; go to the on-campus job fairs; talk to the careers office, even if you think it’s lame. If you’ve been thinking of grad school, apply and at least keep the  option open.

For recruiters, the survey suggests opportunities to hire top seniors who might have had their sights set on bigger fish. With fewer jobs and fewer employers pursuing them, even the kids at the top of the class are likely to be more willing to consider smaller firms who aggressively recruit now, instead of next spring.

Don’t make the mistake, though, that it will be a cakewalk to get the best. I got an unusual press release pitching the benefits of an internship with SRC (formerly Syracuse Research Corporation) in Syracuse, NY. It’s unusual in that it is the first internship sales pitch in a press release we can recall receiving at ERE.

The first line of the release says SRC is sweetening its internship benefits “specifically to increase the number of top applicants and retain the best talent for full-time positions.” By the way, “sweet” is the right adjective to apply to the internship benefits. The company is offering to pay for the temporary relocation costs of interns, a housing stipend, referral bonus to former interns, paying positions after the internship as campus ambassadors for SRC, tuition assistance, and more.

What’s more, the research and development firm makes a point of telling interns that they’ll be involved in important and valuable work almost from the moment they arrive. “SRC interns are involved in the same activities as full time employees, including research, design and development, customer interaction and occasional business travel,” the press release says.