The embodiment of push/pull lives in the constant struggle for a Recruiter working to meet the needs of a hiring manager, while ensuring the candidate has a positive experience. It's an amazing juggling act.

 

The Hiring Manager/Recruiter/Candidate relationship is one that can dangerously cyclical in nature. Hiring Manager says I am looking for "Candidate X." Candidate X could actually look a lot like Candidate W or Candidate Y...hey, even Candidate Z might work. So the Recruiter brings alphabet soup to the Hiring Manager hoping to snare someone as close to Candidate X as possible by using their amazing selling skills. All of those candidates (by the way) believe they ARE candidate X. Imagine their discontent when they find out that they are not moving forward in the hiring process? (Especially after we called them, in the first place!) 

 

The Recruiter, once so confident about the candidates offered, must now go back and rain on each of those candidate's respective parades. And then, search for other Candidate X's in the making. The Recruiter may not even be confident that Candidate X is even alive and working in the world. So they go out, and group together some additional folks - whose hopes and spirits they will potentially squash.

 

Angry candidates, potentially frustrated Hiring Manager. Recruiter looking for ledge to leap off. Sound familiar?

 

If you aren't lucky enough (or strategic enough) to have a dynamic relationship with your Hiring Manager it can be very difficult to provide meaningful candidates. In an effort to get it right, a Recruiter can spend countless hours screening for perfection. I like to call this conveyor belt recruiting. Recruiter drops candidate on belt, watches for the "reject" or "approve" stamp to come falling from the sky. It's very tactical, very repetitive and a very poor use of resources.

 

Each candidate you touch believes their impact on this recruiting cycle as critical. And they are correct. As our candidates leave the recruitment process feeling confused, misinformed and inappropriately contacted - they risk reaching out to their network to say, "Company X really has a terrible process. I was called about this job - I apply for it, and then they tell me I'm not qualified. What did they even call me for??"

 

The danger in recruiting within a silo is that our efforts become wildly erratic. We augment our process, or search methodology to tailor a "unique" search for a "special" candidate for a "specific" geography in an effort to be responsive to a major need. Without some strategic planning – we set ourselves up for failure. There has to be a management of expectation. We create this for our candidates in ensuring they are communicated with throughout the process. We tell them the potential cycle - when they can expect follow up and what steps they can take to learn more about us during that time. We field their questions and scan for additional selling points to promote those we really feel passionately about.

 

We need to ensure the same clarification of expectation for our Hiring Managers - to avoid wasting time and candidates. We can consider the following with Hiring Managers to make candidate experience more manageable:

 

1. Having a clear, open dialogue about the needs of the position
2. Carefully noting "must haves" and separating them from "nice but not required"
3. Creating the ideal candidate profile - with Hiring Manager's input and consent PRIOR to candidate delivery
4. Honest communication about potential pitfalls: compensation, trouble geography, prior reputation in market and other factors that may require special attention in unearthing the best candidates

 

As the gatekeepers of talent, if Recruiting doesn't do a good job of partnering with our Hiring Managers on a strategic level, our candidates are going pay the price. Unhappy candidates, can do terrible, terrible things to an employer brand.