Winter Rant - what's wrong with the recruitment profession?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Paul Jacobs on June 23, 2010 at 1:37pm

I will kick this off. I would like to see third-party recruiters, who have a Twitter account or Facebook page, spend less time promoting themselves and more time showcasing their clients, especially if they have an exclusive or retained relationship with a client. I raised this in a Twitter debate recently with members of this community and an agency recruiter joined in and said that this would be inappropriate and be a risk to their agency. If I was their client I would love the agency not just to post vacancies all over the show (job boards, linkedin, twitter etc), but to actively promote at every opportunity - shout from the rooftops - what's great about the employer and their culture. I spoke with a recruiter this morning who works mainly on contingent assignments and they said that they would not want to promote a client too much, just in case a candidate with a competitor was attracted to the same role. Whether this is a fair point or not, I see this as a lost opportunity for agencies to use social media effectively and differentiate from their competitors - and look to show they are adding more value to their clients. What do you corporate HR profs / recruiters think? What do you agency recruiters think? Am I being unreasonable / delusional?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thomas Shaw on June 23, 2010 at 5:34pm

If recruiters no longer use a social media site, they should delete their profile. No point in having it, if they don't use it. Quite embarassing. That is all.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Jacobs on June 24, 2010 at 12:23pm

A few things come to mind: 1) agree, but at least they have a placeholder , and 2) that no activity is slightly better than vomiting static vacancies onto the social web, polluting news feeds/streams - I know there are pros and cons to this argument, and 3) it is going to be very interesting watching the increasing integration between Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn - we will probably see more recruiter uptake and activity on platforms outside of LinkedIn.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared Woods on June 24, 2010 at 5:36pm

There is a point - they're holding a login/username. Even no activity is better than having a competitor hold a brand-aligned username for their own ends, or to deny you an opportunity to start again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Aaron Dodd on June 23, 2010 at 5:48pm

Paul, I'd be very surprised if contingency recruiters ever promoted their clients for the reasons they outlined. At Mindset we actively encourage our clients to promote themselves and who they are to candidates. It is our policy to place open ads whenever possible (for example; http://www.maxhire.net/cp/?E5546F361D43717B7E50182A7755166C06627B4D). But then we are a retained recruiter, so are focused more on getting a quality candidate rather than a bum on a seat, unlike the contingency boys (and girls). I guess that's another argument why employers should use retained consulting companies...they'll get much better value for money from their advertising spend as their logo will be on the advert!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Jacobs on June 24, 2010 at 12:53pm

Thanks Aaron for commenting. I believe retained recruiters should be representing the client, selling their EVPs / work culture etc to jobseekers / candidates. The recruiter should be intimate with this stuff, otherwise I question what value the recruiter is offering, other than a job posting service with some shortlisting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Kempton on June 24, 2010 at 1:47pm

I don't think this makes sense for clients or recruiters Paul. I mean I work exclusively regularly and I've also done my fair share of retained work. Even with a retainer, clients will get very angry if you don't eventually fill the role. Just sharing their merits to the digital world is unlikely to get your more exclusive business or retainers if you never actually make a placement. Also it sounds more like the kind of stuff "marketing" should be doing, Recruiters aren't in marketing, they're in sales. And the ones who don't know that probably won't be in recruiting that long unfortunately.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared Woods on June 24, 2010 at 5:39pm

Good recruitment agencies should act as brand endorsement vehicles for companies, and should be focused on building rapport as an intermediary between the company and the individual. It isn't their job to build the brand - it's their job to educate talent in why the brand is good/bad for that person. Public brand building is the role of the company.

Think of it like a car yard. The salesman matches person to vehicle, but isn't responsible for keeping the car running afterwwards, or for advertising the car brand.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ross Clennett on June 24, 2010 at 3:16pm

Yep, agree with Steven. It is the client's role to promote their employer brand publicly. The agency recruiter does the promotion of their client's employer brand privately. Why would an agency recruiter do a lot of promotion simply for candidates to contact the client directly? Clients always do what's best for them and recruitment agencies should do the same (within ethical, moral and legal boundaries of course)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Jacobs on June 24, 2010 at 3:40pm

Guys I hear what you are saying - I have some contrary views obviously - I will let others jump in first... would be good to hear some views from the employer side

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Talamelli on June 24, 2010 at 5:18pm

I think recruitment is increasingly taking on marketing/branding responsibility. This is becoming more important especially as we put our hand deeper into a shrinking candidate market.

I can see the reasoning why external recruiters may not want to take this on, however reading a previous comment I believe there is no such thing as public branding and private branding. In today's world our communication is becoming more open and transparent than ever before - almost everything you say is in the public domain and if you have a good brand you should use that brand to full effect - as such I think those that will be successful in business will be the ones that can adapt to the changing business environment. I am reminded of the new Charlene Li book I just read on open leadership - "you need to give up control to get control".

I probably went off on another tangent here, but I hope that makes a little bit of sense

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared Woods on June 24, 2010 at 5:33pm

Internal recruitment teams need to be more active in developing a link between the open door (the role) and the room beyond (the company). Candidate care needs to become a focus - not a bare minimum, but a comprehensive strategy of one-to-one company employment marketing. Corporates need to be more strongly invested in building a brand, to reduce reliance onthe worse external agencies and increase their value as a partnership brand with the better agencies. Recruiters (as a whole - some are already doing this very well) need to partner and understand business needs of their clients. And everyone needs to be evaluating the success of placements and hires on a much longer-term basis. Social media and community building will become stronger, but it's not the place of recruiters to facilitate this for companies. Rather, they should become an active part of digital discussion around talent and psychological EVP segmentation.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page