Thursday 29 May 2014

The Recruiter's Guide to Fishing

One of the questions I often get asked by clients who are contemplating using my recruitment research services is "wouldn't it be better just to place an ad?"

Certainly, there are recruiters who believe that the best way to find candidates is to place an ad in a print  publication or online. If you are looking to find a large quantity of candidates, placing an ad can yield results. Think of it as dropping a large shrimp net in the ocean: chances are you will get a big haul.

The trouble is that you won't just catch what you were seeking. Did you know that when shrimp trawlers drop their nets, on average they catch 5.7 kilos of non-shrimp (known as bycatch) for every kilo of shrimp?  Bycatch consists of other kinds of fish, birds, dolphins, tires, old shoes… A big part of shrimp fishing is sorting through the haul. It's an expensive and time-consuming process.


Dude, where's my shrimp?

Placing an ad yields similar results. It used to be that in order to apply to a job, you had buy a newspaper, cut out the ad, pull out your typewriter, type a letter, type a resume, find a stapler, find an envelope, type the address, buy a stamp, and go to the post office. You would only go through this process if you thought you had a good chance of getting the job. Now, all one has to do to reply to a job ad is hit "send." Because it's so easy to apply to jobs, people looking for a job tend to take the throw-the-spaghetti-against-the-wall approach and fire off hundreds of resumes to see if anything sticks. Recruiters will often use ad placement as a Gee Whiz tool, since they can brag to their clients about having 3000 people apply for a job. The thing is, you aren't looking for 3000 people. You are looking for one. And unless the main skill requirement you have is the ability to sport a hair net and ask, "Would you like fries with that?" you are after a pretty specific person. The extra 2999 applicants make the process of finding the one candidate who can best fill the role much more complicated.

I prefer to see recruiting like fly fishing: a targeted and specific craft. I meet with my client to find out what kind of fish they are after. Let's say they are looking for a Creative Director for their agency. As it turns out, Creative Directors are not so different from trout. I will start by studying them in their natural habitat: what schools did they attend, what companies employ them, what LinkedIn groups do they frequent, what conferences do they attend? I will go to a high vantage point and dive deep to figure out what is going on in the surrounding environment: who is hiring, who is firing, what trends are impacting the field? I can find out what people are being paid and let a client know if their compensation system is competitive. I will uncover the best fishing grounds: those hidden private gems that one can only discover through word-of-mouth. With the industry information I find, I will help the client craft a strategy to attract the very best candidates. Just as some trout respond best to a Royal Wuff fly and others to a Parachute Adams, candidates like to be approached differently. Sometimes it makes sense to reach out to people through LinkedIn. Others want to be tracked down at the office. Others can be tracked down through an industry association. Sometimes placing a very targeted ad might be part of the broader strategy, but it will only be part of the approach and will be written to appeal only to candidates with a very specific skill set. Less is often more.

I will also help a client position the pitch. From my research, I might discover that Creative Directors are a generally happy bunch: they are well-treated, well-paid, and always have the option of freelance work should they tire of their current role. I might have to offer a very tasty looking fly to draw them to the surface to contemplate changing jobs. I will place the fly with accuracy and when a good candidate surfaces, I'll be ready. I know how to recognize the "take" and will raise the rod tip and set the hook.

Once I've landed the candidate  - they are interested in meeting with the client and finding out more about the job - I won't toss them in a net with the tires and old shoes. Because I am dealing with a focused group of candidates, I can give them individualized, velvet-glove treatment that reflects well on my client. Nothing is worse than telling a great candidate you will  get back to them in a few months - if at all - because you are reading through a stack of irrelevant job applications. If you have a take-a-number approach to recruiting, it makes people feel like you not very discerning or don't know what you want. If someone is going to leave the security of their current job to join your firm, they want to believe that you  know what you are doing. You want a candidate's first impression of you to be positive as it helps when you decide to make them an offer. It's hard to convince someone in a good job that you will treat them well if their initial impression was negative.

There is a place for targeted advertising -letting hidden candidates know that you are looking for someone like them - but the days of casting a wide net are over. A client's time is too valuable to sort through the thousands of resumes that a broad ad will generate. It's far better to have a well-crafted, focused approach to finding your ideal candidate.

Happy hunting!

Nancy


No comments:

Post a Comment