We’ve been recruiting and hiring using only a few simple tools – an ATS, first round asynchronous video-to-video interviews, second round face-to-face interviews.
Everybody gets a chance, everything is completely transparent to the job seekers and best of all – it’s really easy to manage.

Admittedly, we are hiring using our own tools.
Still, a simple ATS + Video interviews is just a combination that *works*.

With most job searches beginning on general search engines and followed by Job Search Engines, the content becomes super important. The wording of your ads must match what job seekers are searching for if you want to maximize your results with these sources. I’m sure someone out there is teaching SEO in the context of job descriptions, but there is so much old, stale information out there that you really have to know what you are searching for in the first place to find it.

Also – no one really needs to take course on how to write ads (do it if you have the budget!)… just figure out job seeker behavior and mimic your ads to take advantage of what people are searching for.

Example: Don’t write computer programmer as your job title if you really want a HTML5 Developer. People with specific skills will search on that specific skill.

Cheers,

Keith

If someone can write in a certain language and is an expert in that language for 4 yrs and then has 4 yrs java experience, I would want that guy (in theory) over the person that has 5 yrs Java experience… but he would never make it through the prescreen qualifier.

It makes more sense to say “do you have java experience” and filter those out that don’t have any and then take a good look at the overall experience of the candidates to see who the best fit is.

@ Jon: Good point. That’s why a great deal of time and attention should be paid to the questions, so that they are truly vital to the job. Instead of asking:
“Do you have 5 years of java?”
Y or N,
it would have
“Java experience:”
0-1 yr
2-4 yr
5-7 yr
8 or more year
The goal is to maximize upfront the number of people who apply, but minimize the number of un(der)qualified resumes/profiles/assessments/whatever we have to eyeball. In essence, it works to automate what a screener or sourcer would do when they select
resumes/profiles/assessments/whatever to send over to a recruiter, or when the recruiter does it him/herself.

Cheers,
Keith

The HR industry, at least in my opinion, seems very slow to change. They key is to get them to know that you are working to improve their results (hire more, reduce costs, reduce time to hire, etc) and to get them to agree to be accountable for their results. Get them to measure what they are doing now, so that whatever you are promising to improve on is actually realized. If I save you 3 weeks per hire, that means nothing if they don’t know what the average time to hire is before the change.

Prescreeners are good if it is something like “do you have java experience” or “can you lift 50 lb boxes all day” if that is a core requirement of the job. But once you get into something like “at least 5 yrs java experience” you could be filtering out some really good candidates.

The challenge is that it is human nature to resist change. When working with clients you are dealing with the individual’s resistance to change and the organization’s resistance as a whole. What has worked for us is to find a champion within the organization that seems more open to listening and understanding.

Then we work tirelessly to tell them and SHOW THEM WHY what we are recommending is the best for them. Our genuine approach often helps the situation. They do not feel like we are making recommendations solely for our benefit. We make sure we are authentic and transparent in our interactions with clients. Sometimes we make recommendations that are great for them but not the best for us. At the end of the day it is more important that we give them what they need and not necessarily what we want them to have. At the end of the day this helps to build trust in the relationship and keeps them coming back for more.

It sounds a lot easier that it is. The key is to make sure that you are confident in what you are suggesting to a client and then do not fall prey to their initial pushback or any initial concerns you may initially receive from other players.

I hope all of this is helpful.

Happy 2013,
Imo

@ Jon: The goal should be 60 s or less to find the job, 60 s or less to apply-
1) Upload your resume to the company,not the job- you’re into the system and you get an acknowledgement
2) You apply for a specific job by answering 5-6 immediate- answer, vital-to-the job, pull-down menu, multiple-choice questions. You pass: you get a “Congrats! You’ve applied.” message. You don’t pass: you get a “Sorry, please try another position.” message.

This gets everybody into the system quickly and easily without discouraging them (as my slightly different method earlier might) and lets recruiters see only pre-qualified people.

@ Imo: how do you get (and keep) clients to do what’s best for them and not just what they want to do?

Happy 2013,

KH

As a vendor we interact with many clients both nationally and internationally. We often have to really push our clients to change the traditional thinking especially when creating videos about their organization.

@Doug I talked to one company that has all their HR Managers and senior executives apply for roles within the company each year. This really helps them to understand the candidate experience and simplify. I was told that when they first started doing this most people were shocked about the number of steps it took to apply.