Job boards, like Monster, have given companies access to more candidates that ever before. Because of free sourcing technology, many companies are tempted to skip using a recruiters and perform the job search for themselves.
As a recruiter, what challenges do you face as companies have increased access to job-filling technologies like job boards, VMS systems, and social media?
How do you convince companies that using a recruiter is the better route?
Hi Jessica, I think the distinction is not whether or not the company will use a recruiter - it's will they use an outside recruiter. If a recruiter is the person sourcing the candidates, screening for skill/culture fit, coordinating interviews, test close on salary, offer negotiation... then that can be happening with an internal person OR an external person. Both are valuable and there are reasons companies use either or both.
At the end of the day recruiting is an investment. Companies can invest in internal recruiters, or hire 3rd party on a contingent or retained basis. I personally don't find one to be "better" than the other, based on the company needs and what makes sense from a ROI standpoint.
The question is not does a company have a list of names and titles, i.e. social networking or Monster resumes. It's does the company have a recruitment strategy (in house or 3rd party) that can DELIVER.
As far as your question on how to convince companies that using a recruiter is the better route, you have to have a really good understanding of what their alternate "route" is. If the internal system is working just fine thank you very much, probably not much reason to chase that business. If they're consistently losing top candidates, unable to get people in the door, or there's no urgency, then you speak to how you solve those problems. Access to candidates doesn't have a damn thing to do with real recruiting as far as I'm concerned. Sometimes that's the easy part. :)
As long as companies want the best people recruiters are able to access which they can't, then recruiting will be alive and well. When companies can access and effectively approach everyone, we'll be out of business.
Recruiters that do passive recruiting will always have clients.
The recruiters that "throw resumes againest the wall to see what sticks" will be long gone.
So true and thank you for the insights. I was more or less thinking of a place where RBC folks can post articles and news pertaining to their state recruiting laws and such. So rather then a group perhaps just a forum category dedicated to the topic for sharing of information and opening discussion.
When recruiters start talking about what the law is and isn't folks tend to get themselves in a lot of trouble.
Your point is extremely valid.
Recruiting is a basic economic process, (like accounting or manufacturing), which is done everywhere and always. Thus recruiters cannot become extinct unless all economic activity stops (e.g. a comet strikes the Earth).
Now who pays who and when and why may wax and wane...business models come and go, but basic processes never do.