For most recruiters, changing your recruiting strategies is a major transition. You see, we recruiters seek endlessly after the holy grail of recruiting: superior quality of hire. Most recruiters use boring, generic, job description-based postings that attract a high volume of applicants, and then we must take additional time to weed out the bad candidates. The expectation is always that maybe, just maybe, a few good people remain at the end.
Mercedes Benz would quickly be out of business if it manufactured its automobiles this way. A better recruitment strategy would be to build quality in every step of the process, rather than at the end.
The strategy begins with a job posting designed to screen in the highest quality, diverse candidates.
If you ask most hiring managers to identify the most essential quality for candidates — gaudy credentials, or documented accomplishments in meeting the key job deliverables — the vast majority of the managers would choose the latter. They realize that just because a candidate possesses the listed credentials, there is no guarantee the candidate can actually achieve the deliverables necessary for superior performance in the job.
The best method of identifying these deliverables is to pose this question to hiring managers: “If we could fast-forward to the initial annual performance review for this position, what accomplishments must the incumbent achieve to merit a superior performance rating?”
Success essentials are then created to capture the five or six results that must be achieved for success in the position. Success essentials replace the job description as the foundation of your talent acquisition process. Success essentials can be featured in job postings, job ads, the cover letter screening process and in performance-based interviews.
Many recruiters think that posting job descriptions on the employer website, or sending vacancies to an internet job board is the essence of recruiting. Savvy talent acquisitioneers know that posting jobs is … well, posting jobs. Real recruiting may involve market research to find out where your “A players” hang out when not job hunting. Recruiting is determining what “triggers” top candidates to apply to your positions. Recruiting is also identifying the factors that will influence a candidate to accept a job offer.
A better example of real recruiting is to merge some old-school talent acquisition with the newest technology. Passive candidates represent up to 80 percent of the qualified applicant pools available. Active applicants, who will search out and apply for anything that “moves,” represent approximately 20% of available candidates. The math is fairly simple — recruiters need to spend the majority of their time sourcing, recruiting, and closing on the passives. Passives are often not in the buying mood, so simply posting a generic job description ad on a job board doesn’t excite them. The solution is to “Black Friday” them by creating ads that address the candidates’ employee value proposition — i.e., What would motivate a passive to leave their current employer and uproot her family to come work for you?
Most recruiters will admit that we tend to source all candidates the same way. We often post jobs for two to four weeks and expect our ideal candidate to be active in the job market, to discover our generic posting, and be motivated to apply for the position. We have little data on how to communicate our “compelling career opportunities” in a way that will engage the interest and participation of the top candidates.
While the talent acquisition process may be broken, there are a number of “fixes” for the problems. I have identified two low-cost, low-labor alternatives: