In a recession, should companies use 3rd party search MORE or LESS?

I think MORE - but that's just me. What do YOU think?

Of course in a recession we all got budgets cut - and recruiting got the meanest cuts of all. But most companies still need to hire and keep some recruiting muscle in the marketplace. 3rd party search is still an excellent (arguably the best) way to source passive talent, especially for hard to fill roles. We just released an article today about managing 3rd party vendors, but would love to know whether others have increased or decreased the # of jobs they are posted thru 3rd parties.

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Slouch on April 13, 2010 at 7:39pm

Hey Mike, let me ask you this, before I read this article you linked to is it going to tell me that I should use BountyJobs? I'll read it anyways in any event. Don't be pissed I asked. Thanks.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Hard on April 14, 2010 at 8:51am

Hey Jason - how could I be pissed? You're keeping it real.

After you read the article, let me know what you think. The goal of the article (my first effort BTW so amateur) is to get debate going about two important things: 1) whether using 3rd party recruiting (especially during a downturn) is a GOOD and STRATEGIC thing (not everyone agrees); and 2) if you choose that route, whether using recruiting marketingplaces to create more choice and manage the hassles is a GOOD THING (even more debate on this one - which I think is GOOD).

Bountyjobs IS an online marketplace - so yep you got me - but I hope I'm careful to note we're not the only one. I don't want to use this to blatantly toot our own horn. But I do think the issues underlying vendor choice, competition, and management are worth discussing. Some people in recruiting think having 5-6 search firms engaged on a job is heresy - others think it's critical (and reality).

I'm bracing for impact...I know people have strong opinions, but I hope they answer the question I opened with. What do YOU think?