I just got off a demo call with LinkedIn Corporate Recruiting Solutions. (Pricing is not available without the demo.)

I was surprised to find out the cost is comparable to a Monster or CareerBuilder solution, $15,000 per year buys 2 license, 9 reusable job postings and 150 per month In-mails-

Because this is packaged as a "passive candidate" solution you do not have direct access to the candidates contact information only In-mails (which reports a 60% return rate) which is pretty decent, however a very passive approach in contacting a candidate in my opinion. Of course the option to search using a spoke.com pipl.com jigsaw.com or zoominfo.com is always an option ( I use currently to locate contact information.)

The upside to the corporate LinkedIn solution was having search results to include candidates that are not directly linked to you by degrees!

Is anyone currently subscribed to LinkedIn Corporate Solutions, and what has been your experience or ROI?

Views: 2507

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hmm, isn’t this making Linkedin even more like a new incarnation of the job boards? I must say that my first reaction is something like “wow, securing alternatives is really getting important now”. For myself the last months I’m moving away from Linkedin.

Although response rates are still good I feel that the edge Linkedin used to give us is melting like snow on a warm spring day. The site once was like recruiters heaven, but as far as I can see the low hanging fruit is almost gone. But perhaps I’m negative and ruled by the feeling that if the whole world “is doing it” its time to leave…
I'm thankful I have the hack. As such, there is nobody I can't find on the entire LI network, anywhere in the world.

If you can find domain name and email thread, then you can reach out personally. It's research 101 meets candidate touch-point #1.

Now, LI could make the argument that there is a greater level of trust associated with using the InMail tool. I don't agree . . . and I think it's a convenient counterpoint to a salesperson who wants me to drop him a check at 15 Gs'.

LI was never built to be an email tool . . . so the emails are bunched in with the other messages, Qs & As', etc. In other words, your message has to be seen in the first place. Also, let's keep in mind that the more LI Intros' somebody gets, the more desensitized they become. The first few times, it's cool . . . and then, over time, the shine wears off.

If I may toss out one small point, it's this: There may be a strong economic case for certain companies to use the corp solution. For example, if they lack research expertise, are too lazy to reach out personally, just dont' have the time, and/or are doing some very high-volume hiring, shelling out $15k might be worth it. Personally, I think the high-volume house would have the strongest economic case here, but that would mean it would be in LI's best interest to open up to 3rd party staffing companies.

. . . And, being me, I have to throw out the last key point I often see forgotten in our world: Just because you have the name; just because you know the title of someone at your competitor; just because you can find their number . . . doesn't mean you can recruit them!!!! Analogy: You can put an average driver in a Corvette, but that doesn't mean they can drive it; Likewise, you can put a Nascar driver in a Kia, and that doesn't mean they can win races in it.
Hans, I think your point goes to one of further niche-ifying yourself. For me, there are hardly any other exec search/strategic sourcing firms playing in my sandbox . . . for a couple reasons:

a. I don't believe in targeting waters that are already full of other sharks eating each other up and cutting each other's margins to death just to get some business (i.e. Finance/Acctg, IT (nearly ALL disciplines), and Engineering (some disciplines, but there are niches here).
[Note: if you join a big firm, then you'll likely wind up in shark-infested waters because leadership only sees the top-line number of the market: "IT in Atlanta is a $3 billion USD market annually, so all we have to get is a little piece of that!" Translation: the top-line or market size is like a nice perfume that is really on a donkey.]

b. I make it a point to network so high into my clients that it would take an act of God to move me off the top of the hill. There is no wolf or pack of wolves (who are coming up the mountain to try and knock me off the top) that can do so . . . and it would take extreme events to move me (blizzards, cyclones, terrorism, etc.)

P.S. If you're a corp recruiter, pehaps you can gain advantage by moving faster than your competitors trying to kill you and take your candidates. :)
Hi Joshua
Well I’m not going to try you out in your sandbox :-)
Thanks for the comment I do agree at most of it. But sometimes sharks do leave some nice food on the table. They tend to be messy eaters. Still, not a foundation a business is build upon….

Take care,
Hans
Hi ,

We pride ourselves in finding the best candidates for Consulting, Staffing & Executive Search Firms. We believe that to understand the benefits and capabilities of remote staffing, agencies need to experience it firsthand.

AVAIL our excellent free trail offer… This offer will be free for ONE WEEK

This offer is for the companies, who are seriously interested in taking our RPO Services and reducing their expenses and get benefited…

Esprit assures and guarantees you the quality recruiting, productivity, profitability and speed... Call us today to try our experienced recruiter equipped with resume portals! Esprit RPO provides a FREE, no-obligation trial work.

I look forward to hearing a decision from you soon. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me or write to me.

Best regards,

Matthew Jones
E mail :matthew@espritamerica.com
I wouldn't pay the $15K either for what they are offering. If there was a step up from the Business Pro/Plus plan that I pay $500/month for now that offered the ability to see the "entire" network - then it would be worth it - but not at $15K. Reusable postings are good. More InMails would be nice too, BUT they don't get near the 60% response rate like they are reporting. I'm seeing more like 10-20% at best. Most recruiters have to remember that people outside of the recruiting field look at LinkedIn as a networking community, and not a database full of potential candidates or a job board/career network. I think that time is better spent on building a large network, and learning how to use search engines like Google to find more people outside of your network.
Just one note to add to this, if you have a decent-sized network, you will probably not benefit from accessing the profiles that are not connected to you. That is because those profiles typically have too little data to judge whether they are of interest to you.
Besides, you can always complement your search within LI by doing a Google "site:" search, which finds fewer profiles, of course, but is independent of your connections, and is MUCH faster.

Irina
http://www.linkedin.com/in/irinashamaeva
I have to disagree - and of course the results and/or interest will vary by organization. We're using this to replace a traditional job board. It has increased exposure for us, and we've already made 15-20 hires from this since March 1. (About 20% of our hires, and low CPH). So while it may not work for all organizations, it has certainly been a great tool for us.

That said, we still continue to build our regular LI networks, but use this to reach additional people. The response rate is about 85% and of that about 60% being positive, interested candidates (I think that has alot to do with the message you send). So this has been a useful tool for us. We do also use google and other types of boolean searches via engines, but this has been a strong alternative/addition.
Goodness people.....

What I am going to say will probably get me flamed, but someone has to stop the madness on this.

Just use the “site:” command in most major search engines and wolah!, a new world opens up.......25mill people

Then pick up the phone and call the so called "Passive Candidate" and sell them on why you should be chatting about an opportunity now or for the future.

Emails should be a) the last resort b) used in conjunction with a phone call.

I understand we are all very busy running around trying to fill a bazillion reqs, but time and time again people “buy” (insert - open to hearing/discussing opportunities) from people they trust. You will have a much better chance of success when the beginning of a relationship is established by a human voice on the end of a phone. It’s very hard to establish rapport with a static tool like email. Once you have rapport you can start to establish trust. Once you have trust you can gain credibility and then finally you are on the road have a mutually beneficial relationship (You filling your req or getting lots of referrals and they feel understood of what they career needs are).

My advice to the heavy email users is stop using it as a crutch as the method of first passive outreach.

Sorry if I bruised a few people but I felt it needed to be said given this and the dozens of other threads I read on passive candidate outreach and the abundance of so called solutions out there.

Rob

p.s – Myself and my teams use LI all the time but as a targeted laser, not a shotgun.
Paul,
I had been using it since the day it came out-
-Very good Branding tool - through postings, networking ,reverse connections
- Search alerts - great feature
-I subscribe to zoominfo and had used spoke (+pipl/jigsaw). I would rank linkedin CS as better
-I would agree with 60% on return rate but lower for +ve rate but on long run I get that person info and can always reach back even if they aren't interested now.
-Its definetly not a monster or CB and can't expect similar ROI but you are generating the buzz about your co and thats for marathon run
there.
- Like any other tool- You have to use to get the most out of it.
Buyer BEWARE: LinkedIn has punished too many high traffic users as of late, so to me the thought of spending 15K on an account with them and the looming possibility that your LinkedIn account could be suspended if you send too many InMails to the wrong passive candidates scares me! Really, I had a $20 a month account but became so petrified to use the InMails because I had been dinged already bothered me - and dealing with customer service was like working in a circus.

I would be more apt to embrace the idea for corporate recruiting if LinkedIn would make a committment to better the overall paid "customer experience" - I might even renew my previous business account - they need to get more web 2.0 and allow for "networking" - after all, they are a "social network" they just need to start acting like one. Why pay for something you can get for free or at least much with a third party service?

Imagine spending 15K and then having your account suspended? Yikes, that would hurt.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Subscribe

All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.

Just enter your e-mail address below

Webinar

RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

© 2020   All Rights Reserved   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service