Receive daily articles & headlines each day in your inbox with your free ERE Daily Subscription.

Not logged in. [log in or register]

Maureen Sharib

Maureen Sharib is a phone sourcer who’s been doing a good deal of work in healthcare in the last couple of years. She owns the phone sourcing firm TechTrak.com, Inc. that helps companies find and telephone contact candidates for their hard-to-place positions at a fraction of the cost of traditional recruiting venues. You can contact her at Maureen at techtrak.com or call her at (513) 646-7306.

Maureen Sharib RSS feed Articles by Maureen Sharib...

How Many Phone-Sourced Names Do I Need to Make a Hire?

by Jun 4, 2014, 5:54 am ET

The short answer: It depends.

The long answer: It depends on a lot of things but the biggest qualifiers are what and where the job is.

If the job is one in which there is a plentiful supply of talent in the local market (relocation still being a big issue in recruiting today — most of my customers prefer not to do it!) and the job itself is one in which there is a healthy employee turnover rate (four to five years), usually between 35 and 50 telephone sourced names will effect one immediate hire.

Why do I put those words in italics?

I say usually because there is no magic bullet in recruiting, and several factors play into this formula: keep reading…

Recruiting Belongs Under The CEO

by Dec 24, 2013, 6:14 am ET

Dear Mr. CEO,

It’s come to my attention that many of you now believe recruiting key talent is the No. 1 priority nowadays.

If you really believe this — and those of you with the sense God gave mules should — then you’re probably wondering how in the world are you going to do that. keep reading…

The Probable Candidate

by Nov 13, 2013, 6:45 am ET

We hear a lot in the Recruitersphere about the potential candidate.

“Potential” candidates have traditionally been looked upon as job seekers but also as anyone not looking for a job who a recruiter might call and present a job to.

Those persons usually include the lower-hanging fruit easily observable on job boards and (today) on social media and semi-job board sites (like LinkedIn).

The probable candidate is the candidate who has been specifically chosen — who has been earmarked for a specific position. keep reading…

LinkedIn Privacy Is a Contradiction In Terms

by Jun 20, 2013, 5:10 am ET

Just give me one thing that I can hold onto.  — Bonnie Raitt

It bothers me that LinkedIn sells the fact that I have viewed someone’s profile to people who are willing to pay for Upgrades.

It just does.

When I joined LinkedIn years ago I didn’t expect the morphing of its Privacy Policy that has gone on over the years to the point where it resides today:

http://www.linkedin.com/legal/privacy-policy

Maintaining your trust is our top priority, so we adhere to the following principles to protect your privacy: keep reading…

The Problem With Cell Phones

by Jun 5, 2013, 12:53 pm ET

Byod-PhoneMost cellphones are not appropriate for conducting business — especially if you’re selling something!

This may come as a surprise to many of you, but part of your poor performance is directly linked to the interference your cell phone (or your Voice over Internet Protocol/also known as VoIP) is running during your presentation.

Let me give you an example. keep reading…

Has Sourcing Become Scouring? (Then What?)

by Apr 23, 2013, 5:59 am ET

HD-Scour-PadsI was reading an article today about the ferocious talent wars for tech going on right now in Silicon Valley and a sentence caught my eye.

“Whether she is scouring Stanford or Parsons for up-and-comers or more established candidates, de Baubigny says, ‘I am always very open-minded about what good talent looks like.’”

Maybe it’s because I watched a new show this morning called Brain Games

or maybe it’s because I’m a compulsive anagrammer, or maybe it’s my Dyslexia kicking in — for whatever reason when I read the word “scouring” I saw “sourcing.”

I started to think.

Has sourcing become scouring?

I believe it has.

What a few of us began doing (and talking about) in the latter days of the 20th century and on into the present century has turned into an incessant scouring (for many) of what can be found on the Internet. keep reading…

11 Things Phone Sourcers Say (Most) Everyday

by Feb 15, 2013, 4:56 am ET

There are many different things a phone sourcer says everyday, but there are some that are said most everyday.

You have maybe three seconds to engage a Gatekeeper.

What you say in those first few, fatal moments will determine in what direction your sourcing call will go.

The following are the most used words and sentences you’d hear if you could sit next to a phone sourcer for a day. keep reading…

It’s How You Say it — Not What You Say — That’ll Influence Gatekeepers and Candidates

by Dec 28, 2012, 5:54 am ET

There is no index of character so sure as the voice. – Benjamin Disraeli, British prime minister and novelist 1804-1881

When we open our mouths, we reveal all sorts of things about ourselves that can have nothing to do with the words we’re using.

We all know that our tone is important when talking with a Gatekeeper, but how many of us realize that pressing on just one word in a sentence can change the impression and sometimes even the meaning that the emphasis gives?

In all of our jobs there are times when we must think about how we’re going to say something (in order to get the best result) before we say it. So my advice below applies not just to phone sourcing but to any recruiting or business-related call, such as a call with a job candidate, not just a gatekeeper.

Nuances that include inflection, stress, and context are all meaningful signals that convey information but inflection is the one that can change entirely the meaning of a sentence and the idea(s) behind it.

The emphasis on a particular word implies additional information than what the words say.

Say the following sentences with emphasis on each bolded word. keep reading…

9 Ways to Restore the Human Recruiting Experience

by Oct 3, 2012, 12:01 am ET

“Send me a text!”

“I’ll text you!”

“Visit my webpage.”

“See the attached file…”

“Please electronically sign the contract and email it back to me.”

“Apply online.”

 “’Like’ me on Facebook, Twitter, whatever…”

“Join my “GoToMeeting.”

It’s not at all unusual for new technology to produce crude results.

In our case, new technology is opening the door to weak communication skills.

Few stop to consider that all these impersonal communications may be endangering our work! keep reading…

LinkedIn Lemons to Lemonade

by Jul 5, 2012, 5:58 am ET

Age is a very high price to pay for maturity. – Tom Stoppard

I recently did a search for managers and senior managers in Tax out of second- and third-tier accounting companies on the East Coast.

The customer had sent me a list of names he already had — informing me they’d be a nice addition to my “database.”

The problem with that is 90% of his names were on LinkedIn.

I’m just not that interested. keep reading…

4 Reasons Why Gatekeepers Reject You

by May 29, 2012, 3:50 am ET

There are many reasons why gatekeepers reject your efforts to breach their lines. I’m going to go over four of them with you in this article, but first I want to tell you a story. keep reading…

Knowing Where To Tap: 3 Messages That Matter for Building Value With a Customer

by Apr 30, 2012, 7:01 am ET

There are three messages that need to be conveyed to a customer early in a prospective sourcing transaction.

Most sourcers never discuss these concepts that are directly linked to building the value of your services and obtaining exclusivity of your services in the future.

The three messages that matter are:

  1. All sourcers are not the same.
  2. It really matters who represents a customer’s interests.
  3. My market knowledge and search skills are superior to other sourcers.

Let’s look at each of these messages that matter: keep reading…

Here Comes the Anti-Trust Lawsuit — Finally

by Apr 12, 2012, 6:45 am ET

Hello?

Anyone see this?

Just when you thought not poaching another company’s employees was the right thing to do – BAM!

You get blindsided by none other than the United States justice system.

All this havoc resulted from this in which the U.S. Justice Department settled in 2010 with Google, Apple, Adobe, Intel, Walt Disney’s Pixar, and Intuit for not “cold calling” one another’s employees.

In their defense, the companies argued that they “LinkedIn” mailed other company employees and contacted (by email) those they found on the Internet.  keep reading…

1 Recruiting-Sourcing Stone for 2 Birds?

by Mar 29, 2012, 5:16 am ET

You get what you pay for.  You sometimes get less, but you never get more. – Something I heard a long, long time ago, somewhere

One stone for two birds?

I don’t think so.

I know all you hiring managers and staffing officials out there would like your recruiters to be expert sourcers and your sourcers to be expert recruiters.

I know you all would like to kill two birds with one stone, but I can tell you right now, right here, it’s not going to happen.

It’s not going to happen because the two types of personality types are generally not found (in one person) in an organization.

They’re found outside organizations in the form of third party recruiters who have been cutting this mustard for years.

Now that we’ve given this brave and heroic special set the recognition and laurel crown they so richly deserve, let me tell you why you’re not likely to find these people inside your organization. keep reading…

Call, Call, and Call Again!

by Feb 27, 2012, 5:47 am ET

I saw an interesting discussion posted in one of the LinkedIn groups I belong to. It asked:

When “cold calling” on a company for the first time, what is the best way to make contact that gets results? Assume you have no “in” at the company.

There were 64 votes. The voting results follow:

  • Email (4%)
  • Telephone (until you reach them live) (18%)
  • Inmail once (1%)
  • Email, then follow up by telephone (28%)
  • Telephone, then follow up by email (46%)

I don’t think it’s too far of a stretch to change “company” to “person” and change “assume you have no in at the company” to, “You don’t know this person.”

Which would you choose?

I’m a phone sourcer who’s asked many times to take my research one step further and contact each of the names I’ve sourced to “profile” them for their interest in the opportunity my customer represents. So, I would choose Door #2.

Telephone (Until You Reach Them Live)

I know that makes me a minority, but I have my reasons for doing this. keep reading…

The SingSong Sourcing Experience

by Jan 27, 2012, 5:37 am ET

I had that singsong experience again yesterday while (phone) sourcing.

What’s the singsong experience?

It’s when a Gatekeeper starts offering information, in a continuous pattern, to your request.

Don’t misunderstand — I had spent several hours sourcing into a particular entertainment company with very little — almost none — success.

Several hours.

Admittedly, the customer said it was a challenge.

Then I got “lucky.” keep reading…

Give Me 48 Hours

by Jan 20, 2012, 1:48 pm ET

Someone called me yesterday in a rush.

“I need to find Application Engineers installing medical equipment — x-ray equipment to be exact — and I looked on LinkedIn and there’s not much I can use. Oh, sure, there are some application engineers who list ‘medical equipment’ in their profiles, but I need people from specific companies — companies like GE, Johnson & Johnson, 3M, Medtronics, Becton-Dickinson, Boston Scientific, Stryker, St. Jude, Varian, Cordis — you know, the majors. And I don’t need them if they worked at those companies in the past — I need them working at those companies today!

“I also don’t need all the desperate substitute offerings LinkedIn is giving me because they don’t have exactly what I need –I can’t wade through that mess of misfits.”

“Can you help me?”

“Yes,” I said.

“Can you help me fast?” he asked.

“Yes,” I said again.

“I have to warn you, though, a couple of those companies you listed are customers of mine so I won’t be able to source them but I think we’ll be able to add some other companies that will yield you a list of 30 or 40 that might do the trick for you,” I added.

“And you’ll be able to get me names of the application engineers at those companies who are installing medical equipment today?” he asked. There was an emphasis on the word “today.”

“Yes,” I answered.

“And you’re sure they will be application engineers — the guys in the field installing the equipment?” he pressed, still unsure I knew what he was talking about.

“I promise,” I solemnly swore.

“How long will it take?”

“Give me 48 hours,” I answered. I’ll be able to send you probably half of what’s out there to get you started. Give me another 48 hours and I’ll send you the rest.”

I heard the surprise in the silence that followed. keep reading…

Fishing in a Small Pond

by Dec 15, 2011, 5:07 am ET

Krista Bradford recently wrote a timely and provocative article here on ERE about LinkedIn.

One of ERE’s long-time members, Ted Moore, in a comment to that article, stated, “If you rely heavily on LinkedIn and similar tools to connect with those your clients can easily find and recruit on their own, at least as they perceive it (and what else matters?), I look forward to competing with you.

I know Ted and I also know he means what he says.

I also know as time marches on those who think LinkedIn is sourcing are eventually going to pay a heavy price for their growing addictions.

In my “Help Me Help You” document that I send to all my new customers requesting telephone names sourcing, there is a paragraph that instructs the customer to provide me:

– Any names you might already have — this does two things: 1) avoids me duplicating your efforts and 2) gets me in to the targets faster. Be sure to include their titles and any contact info you have on them — their titles help me understand how close I am to the target and what these folks may be called at the respective companies and their contact info gives me clues as to how to get inside their organizations.

More and more we have the LinkedIn discussion. keep reading…

Fear of the Phone

by Aug 26, 2011, 5:06 am ET

I was talking to a dear friend this morning who told me all the rain we had recently washed out the rear of her house and caused substantial damage to her foundation and the low-lying rooms on that level of her home.

“Insurance doesn’t cover this. I need a second job,” she said, matter-of factly and in the common-sense tone I have always known her to adopt.

We went on to talk about several other things — how the “guys” in her male-dominated industry don’t appreciate or are willing to pay her fairly for the tremendous extra volume of business she has drummed up for the sales team in the past three years she has been with the company she works for now.

Granted, that’s her side of things and there may be another.

However, at the end of our conversation she happened to mention that she had developed a business relationship with someone who hates the telephone.

“How does that work for him?’ I asked, laughing. keep reading…

Choking On the Firehose

by Jul 8, 2011, 1:39 pm ET

When I first started names sourcing I used to think to myself, “I wish there was a database of names with titles.”

In fact, I used to do wistful dogpile and altavista searches that looked something like this:

“Hewlett Packard” “employee list”

or this:

“Hewlett Packard” employees

You get the idea.

That was back in 1996.

Once in a great while I’d get lucky and something would come up but not usually.

I’d search for something — anything — that could get me inside of a company and then I’d call and bounce around until I got the information I was tasked to find.

It’s pretty much what I do (still) today.

Someone called me a “dying breed” on the Recruiting Animal show the other day because I use the telephone.

I’m okay with that.

In fact, I’m glad to be recognized as such because in this dying I am experiencing a rebirth.

More of that in a bit — let’s get back to the late 90s in this industry. keep reading…