Monster.COM or is it Monster.BOMB:
If your fortunate enough to be employed these days, you’re probably busy trying to keep up with the demands of a fast paced career as well as balancing your family life. For that matter, I guess it's doubtful that you actually had the time to search the dregs of the internet to find this Blog in the first place. None-the-less, if you have gotten this far, stop for a minute and consider how many Americans are on the hunt for a new job or career today. According to Bureau of Labor Statistic’s Dec-04 report, approximately 8 Million people are looking for work today.
What’s interesting to me is not so much the statistic of jobless Americans as it is the evolution of the career search process that they are all going through. If your unfamiliar with it, from the candidate's perspective, it is a daunting process that I feel has gotten worse due to the improper application of technology. Let’s shed some light on this issue. My hope is that by chance one Human Resource executive stumbles across this post and considers a fundamental change in their career placement procedures.
The Evolution of Recruiting
Over the years, there has been many instances where it was time for me to consider different employment. During these times, I can’t help but remember my father’s advice when it came time for me to move on. “Find a recruiter that you pay and let them work for you”. Okay… At face value, sounds like good advice. But, try and find an executive search firm that works solely on a retainer basis. Yes, they are out there, but the fact of the matter is any recruiting firm albeit executive or not is better compensated by a corporation than an individual. The ones that are working on retainer are far and few and very selective (That is, unless your salary has surpassed six digits and if that’s true and you’re reading this Blog, please see my resume – I can be available for the right price). Money and joking aside, the evolution of recruiting has gone through extensive changes over the past 10 to 15 years. From a candidate’s perspective, the personal touch is completely gone. Working through the normal channels (i.e. internet job sites) is like fishing in a small pond. Throw the bait in and see what happens… Something might take the bait but you rarely reel in a keeper. Furthermore the technology of job seeking has dramatically changed. With the introduction of these on-line systems, it certainly helped to fuel a multi-billion dollar industry out of “finding a job”
Determining the Complete Package:
If you recall days of high school or college, I'm sure one of your Business Ethics teachers (or any educator for that matter) explained the importance of proper communication and building relationships. Perhaps I'm making that fatal mistake of assuming here, but I think it would be safe to say that most of you know what I'm talking about. Heck, its common sense. Even with all of the technology that we have available to us today, the simple act of direct verbal communication is still the most powerful job landing tool we have. One’s ability to verbally communicate, inclusive of their mannerisms and visual queues, are as equally as critical as what their paperwork and credentials say about them. I often think of how many times I have had a potential job candidate in front of me. After carefully scrutinizing their resume, they made it in for the face to face and two scenarios typically played out. On one hand, the candidate completely understated their capability or potential and in fact had qualities that were much better than expected. Then on the other had we had individuals that completely failed the seven second rule (I will explain the seven second rule in a later blog but for now read on). In general, it was amazing on how many times the complete package didn’t add up to paperwork. To gain an effective employee you can’t just simply go by what the paperwork says about them. Now I’m not suggesting that this is the way most companies hire today. What I am suggesting is that the current screening process’s, (inclusive of the technologies being used) are not effectively lining up qualified candidates to the perspective jobs. It’s a dilemma that has many sides to the equation and no easy solution.
The Applicant Tracking Technology:
By now I’m sure we are all aware of internet based career/job posting sites that are available on-line. At the top, with the grand daddy of them all being http://www.monster.com/, this service literally paved the way to evolving the applicant tracking process into the industry that it is. Today, there are literally hundreds of sites that allow companies to publish job openings and candidates to research those openings. I guess you can say advancements have been made with the technologies used to manage the applicant tracking. Systems such as BrassRing and EmployEase certainly have advanced the applicant tracking process that Human Resource departments are faced with today, or have they? I would challenge to say that simply processing the volume of applicants that they are faced with is not enough if they are to recruit (and retain) quality employee’s. Note that I said quality and not qualified. There is a distinct difference here and hence the deficiencies of current applicant tracking systems. That is, the systems are designed to provide qualified individuals through complicated algorithms, but do nothing to isolate the quality individuals that may be buried in their database. I believe that these types of Human Resource systems are hindering a company’s ability to find that quality candidate and that this has far reaching implications than the industry has considered.
The Root Cause:
Lets approach this issue from a root cause analysis process. That is, to solve complex problems, you typically need to start by asking yourself these very basic questions:
Question: What is the goal we are trying to achieve?
One would speculate that the industry (yes the infamous “they”) answered this in its most simplistic form:
Answer: To find candidates for available jobs.
In general, I think the industry has been answering this question the wrong way thereby solving the wrong problem in the first place. If you back into the problem from the answer above, it is easy to see how we got to where we are today. But, what if we were to answer the question in this fashion:
Answer: To allow requesting department heads to communicate with quality candidates.
I would challenge to say the technology and workflow that support this methodology would no doubt ably be far less complicated to operate. Yet the outcome achieved would most likely result in solving the problem that the initial answer was trying to work out.
The Evolution of the Information Quagmire:
Putting the concerns of quality candidate tracking aside for a minute, consider how we got to were we are today. How is all of this information being managed? If you step back a look at this for a moment, it almost comical how this has evolved.
H/R and recruiting departments alike are still faced with the daunting task of managing tremendous volume. In some cases, the availability of these on-line systems has force fed literally thousands of perspective resumes to be submitted to companies. To ease the pressure, many of them have either built or bought their own applicant tracking systems. However, what they didn’t seem to consider is that if not properly thought out, most new systems often generate added layers of intricacy to the problem. Read on…
To make it even more complex, hundreds of web crawler based scripts run each night while we are tucked in bed duplicating potential job descriptions from one rival site to another. Remember that volume problem we had? Yep – it just got exponentially worse…
So... great! Now they have a wonderful new container to hold all of this information in, but the issue of volume still hasn’t been addressed. This is where things actually become worse. Because the volume of candidate information (resumes) that was submitted through the various venues is still overwhelming to manage, most (H/R Dept's) implement a procedure to purge potential (but slightly outdated) candidate information on a regular basis from their databases. Depending on the size of the organization, this process could happen as frequently as once a week. Knowing how often folks brush up on their corporate policy & procedure manuals, it is safe to say the requesting manager is unaware that his/her potential connection with quality candidate has been severed. At this point, the only way to make a connection with perspective candidate is for that candidate to resubmit their resume over again.
What a mess… The job sites (like Monster) may have spawned a new industry and initially started what was believed to be an innovative communications system. In actuality it has evolved into an unmanageable workflow process for all sides of the equation (H/R, Recruiter and Candidate).
The One Way Exchange, The candidates perspective:
Now that I have put this in perspective, lets get back to the potential job candidate. If you haven’t been through the job search lately, the folks that are going through it now are in an exhausting cycle of a one way exchange of information. At first glance, this statement may not make much sense. This is understandable, but humor me for a minute, read on and let me clarify. Assuming that what I have analyzed is even somewhat correct (and I think it’s fairly close) the ability for a candidate to keep up with all of this “enhanced job search capability” and properly mange their job placement through these on-line systems is nearly impossible. From the candidate’s perspective, information is submitted to the requesting company almost immediately after it’s posted; that’s the good side of it. The bad side is, that depending on the H/R process (not so much what system they use), little or no feedback is given to the candidate as to the status of their pending inquiry. And no, the system generated message that “we have received your resume” does not count. Remember the previous paragraph where I was talking about direct communications? Yep – this is where our H/R processes start deviating from that fundamental quality. During which the candidate is left with little or no information as to the status of their inquiry and, in many cases, no contact within the company to find out the status. Who exactly are these wonderful procedures and systems helping?
The Human Resource Department Perspective:
Unfortunately this is a problem that may not be evident to the company. From the Human Resource department’s perspective, they are happy because they believe they have a system in place that is managing the enormous amounts of information that was bringing them to their knees not too long ago. From a requesting manager’s perspective, he/she is happy because they can go into their H/R database system while having their coffee in the morning and search for the perfect employee for which they are looking for. The candidate is seemly happy because as of today he/she has just posted the 59th job application. This sense of accomplishment is satisfying, but short lived. I would challenge that this system is broken and I’m not sure anyone is doing anything about it. All of this simply amounts to qualified candidates dropping through the cracks because connection between candidate and requesting manger is potentially broken. Perhaps its time to get back to basics.
Great! So if you are still with me, you have just spent the better part of your leisure time, (hopefully not company time), reading these observations and, by now, are hoping for a solution in the near future. I’ll do my best for you, but let's agree that at least you’ll get a conclusion that will provide some minor course corrections that all sides of the issue (the Recruiter, the H/R Contact and the Candidate) can consider. Hopefully, these will be course corrections that can start to make a difference in the applicant tracking arena:
For The Recruiter:
- Regardless of where your bread is buttered, remember one simple thing. The candidates that you are processing today could very well be the managers you will be filling positions for tomorrow. Believe me, being on both sides of the fence, I have certainly made my personal notes about what recruiters I will and will not use in the future for filling positions within my organization. Take the time out of your busy schedules (and I realize time is money) to follow-up with candidates even if it’s simply to say hello. You may actually find that over time your track record of successful placements will actually go up if you spend equal time with the candidates as you would with the company.
- Take a minute to understand the deficiencies these on-line systems have. Increase your value by educating your Human Resource contacts and better ways to manage the work flow. This will help to build a solid relation with your client, not just one based on how many candidates you can process.
- On that note you probably know better than anyone quantity does not mean quality here. Make sure that your screening processes involve face time or at least adequate phone interviews. This may sound elementary, but you would be surprised on how many entry level recruiters I have dealt with that haven’t even done this basic step prior to contacting the requesting manager with a “hot lead”.
For the Human Resource Representative:
- Don’t hide behind the technology. The database alone is not the answer. If you want quality and qualified employee’s your going to need to allow your H/R staff to devote some time to good old fashion verbal communications during the screening process. Simply reading resumes that have surfaced by these applicant tracking systems are not enough.
- Choose your applicant tracking system wisely. Simply processing volume is not enough. Seek out help for your IT area and consider implementing systems that have embraced more formal Knowledge Management practices. You may just find that your department workflow will increase dramatically if you invest properly up front.
- The system alone won't do it. Recruiters are a necessary evil (no offence intended to the beloved head hunters out there). If your recruiting function is outsourced, build your relationship with a reputable firm that augments your staff function. Again I know this is elementary. But now take it to the next level and incorporate procedures where they (the recruiter's) are directly involved and are part of the process. You will both be happy since this step may help to eliminate redundant work on both sides.
And last but not least, For the Candidate:
- The Monsters, CareerBuilders, Dice’s and Worktree’s are all good tools, but they can not be the “be all to end all”. Be careful… It is very easy to get sucked into spending enormous amounts of time looking for work on theses systems. I know this is old news but 80% of the people I know who have been out of work, have found alternatives either by reinventing themselves (i.e. starting up their own business’s or consulting) or have found employment through their contacts. Take the time to setup a procedure to go through all of your professional (and as equally important your personal) contacts on a regular basis no matter how off base you may think they are. You may be pleasantly surprised at the potential opportunities or additional contacts that may surface.
- Know your playing field. Be aware of the limitations discussed above as well as having a basic understanding of the procedures H/R and/or the recruiter has to follow. How? If you're employed now, ask around or discuss with an H/R contact as to how the company handles the process. If your not employed, get your intelligence for a peer that is currently employed
- Setup a Career Search Objective Plan. Consider it a strategic plan that you will follow in the days to come as you search for work. It should be a high level guideline to keep you focused and motivated during your search process. I have one and can share it with you, but try this on your own first. It’s actually a good soul searching exercise that makes you think about your personal career objectives.
So lets wrap up here…. In comparison to a more mature system (lets say a financial systems –or- to be P.C. – ERP System), Applicant Tracking systems are in their infantile stages. Unlike ERP, they haven’t had enough time to work out the kinks yet. As some of the deficiencies are refined they will only get better over time. The trick is to realize they aren’t a silver bullet, just another tool. Knowing the strengths and weakness of the system you're using so you can get value from them in the current state they are in.
Good luck to you and I welcome additional dialog on this topic!
