f rusers' "tips and tricks" he could take and apply over his process in order to find development leads inside companies. It was an innocently enough "uninformed" request - but then, dontcha' jus' know it - within minutes - WHAM! BAM! POW! In come the responses - flying in - with opines being vetted left and right. I esepecially liked this one and do so hope Barb attends the "chat" tomorrow!
"I have listened to the "to ruse or not to ruse" argument several times and always find it interesting. Whether you like it or not, Researchers/Sourcers ruse. If you are using the telephone for research, you are rusing. Unless you are calling into the "gatekeeper" saying, Hi, my name is John Smith (no relation to Paul of course). I'm a Researcher/Sourcer working for one of your main competitors and I'm trying to get the name of your top sales people or top engineers (or whatever position you are trying to fill) you are rusing! You are not being 100% truthful. What would happen if you stated the REAL reason you were calling? The "Gatekeeper" would hang up on you. Just because you are NOT making up a story, doesn't mean you are not rusing. By eliminating information from the Gatekeeper you are creating a ruse. The definition of the word ruse is: an action or plan which is intended to deceive someone. By calling into a company for the purpose of finding employee names and titles and NOT revealing this fact when you first call into the Gatekeeper is an attempt to deceive. To deceive is to ruse. So, unless you are telling every Gatekeeper or person on the other end of the phone that you are a Researcher or Sourcer and are looking for the names of their employees for the recruiting team or for their competitors, you are rusing." ~ Barb
Huh? I can see it's time to bring THIS thorny issue (rusing) to the Discussion Table once again! It will be the subject of discussion today on Tueday's MagicMethod Phone Sourcing Classroom Chat at noon (EST). Bring your armor - you're going to need it!
By the way, this isn't the first time a firestorm over rusing has broken out - look here and here and here and here!
Time: 12:00PM (NOON-Eastern) / 11:00AM(Central) / 10:00AM(Mountain) /9:00AM Pacific) / 4:00PM(GMT/UCT)
Duration: 1 hour Click here for international, or if you do not know your time zone.…
g and marketing.
I am not arguing against branding and marketing being an integral part of the recruiting process but there is a notion that simply broadcasting a message to the masses is sufficient enough to reach your target audience. This is simply not true in all cases! Because, some people choose not to engage, they do not have access to certain channels or they may turn the noise off... the list goes on. Furthermore just because a company places an ad in the newspaper (past) or a job board does not guarantee that they will get a response with a qualified candidate (past and present).
What I am hearing is that a good marketing strategy supersedes a good recruiting strategy. A good Marketing and PR strategy is a part of but should NOT be thought of as the sole driving force behind a good recruiting strategy. This one size fits all mentality is unacceptable as it pertains to effective recruiting.
Case in point
An organization can use various channel to send a message out but, if the message falls on deaf ears it is pointless. Therefore I would argue that an effective recruiting strategy goes beyond “marketing broadcasting” or mass production recruiting- again it would depend on the organization, location and position.
For example let’s say a highly reputable organization with a strong brand presence is searching for a Maintenance Mechanic or a Center Director with specialized skills in Elkhart, Indiana (or any rural community). The job is posted on major job boards, tweeted, placed on Facebook fan page and ran in the news paper but the company has no success in filling the position. The message is broadcasted but the intended audience does not hear it so the position goes on unfilled. Now you can take those same positions and post them in another city let’s say Houston, TX and you get a floodgate of candidates. You can reduplicate the process across the US and get different results. I have seen organizations waste hundreds of thousands of dollar in advertising and get poor results. On the flip side I have seen them use the same strategy and succeed.
Experience has also taught me that one size does not fit all. Every organization is not a well know brand and they must decided if they want to put the resources into a social media strategy for recruiting purposes. Perhaps the number of hires they have per year does not warrant the need to employ someone full time for that effort.
When crafting a social media recruiting strategy, I think the most imperative questions an organization must ask itself is: who I am looking for, where do they hang out and what effective tools should I use to find and connect with them. In my experience this "manufacturing style" of recruitment was not always successful based upon the type of position in which, the company was recruiting for. If the position is an entry-level customer service role it might work but if it is a physical therapist position you better have a well thought out strategy because everybody is doing the same thing…
Again, every organization is different and they must decide how and when they will use social media to attract talent; it can be used for building communities, marketing, branding and pr or actually sourcing people thorough various channels. At the end of the day you still have to connect with people. ..…
standing of what you intended.
Research the company, the leadership, the industry, the competition, your competition. This is a never ending task, not a one time event. Put at least one additional set of eyes on this. It’sthat important. First, I’m not clear on this question relative to the purpose of researching “your (my) competition”? And is this a job interview or an information gathering interview? There is a difference between approaches.
Create an agenda. It’s really a game plan. OK.
Prepare your questions. OK.
Let the interviewer do most of the talking. This involves skillful means. Here I’m confused. I agree if this is an information gathering interview. However, in a job interview the interviewer ideally allows the interviewee do most of the talking (again my confusion as to which way this “interview advice" is going).
Be subtle and skillful in how you handle questions and answers. How does one “Be subtle” in a job interview. And why would they want to be subtle in an info gathering interview? And does that work in your favor? I can understand being truthful and straight forward, but being subtle? Isn’t that closer to being: coy, devious, elusive, crafty, sly or difficult to understand?
Uncover/discover who will make the hiring decision and when. Smart.
Allow yourself no assumptions. I always have one assumption—that this will be a mutually benefiting experience.
Do not close. I disagree. Particularly for “sales jobs”, but for all jobs, assuming this is a job interview, I better CLOSE by asking for the job if it is the job and employer I want to pursue. If I don’t “close” I may leave them wondering if I’m even interested.
Do not make a presentation. But you better be presentable….
Demonstrate your qualifications and abilities without making declarative statements. Going in without passion about what I have done and can do will not get me the job. I as an interviewer want to get a sense of that passion in an interviewee…about what they’ve accomplished and their ambitions…what they care about.
Stay focused and disciplined throughout. This particularly applies to the interviewer and is logical for the interviewee.
Take notes. Clearly...for information gathering interviews. Not too much for a job interview--unless the questions border on illegal...then you want to get the quote down correctly.
Prove to those interviewing you that you’re listening; it’s a compliment. Yes, lean forward without falling forward.
Make sure you have the basics right and appropriate to the situation: dress, grooming, demeanor etc. And arrive ahead of time so that you’re composed and ready--not perplexed because you just rushed in.
Be yourself. Relax. Enjoy. Smile. Yes.
Trust yourself, your ability, your powers of discernment, your judgement. Yes, indeed.
ll not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission." They haven't had a problem because the content is still real; there is no fraud or any attempt to beguile or spam people.
In some cases, the pressure points almost seem the opposite. We've had several clients complain that when projects go out to bid, venders search for them and then bombard them with connection requests. We then remind them that they are not obligated to friend anyone, especially personal accounts. In other case, I remember someone I follow being professionally threatened for their politics even though they had a personal account and never talked about where they worked, specifically.
Just recently, we created and managed a "team account" for independent movie release because the people I connect to on Facebook would have been bored to death reading too much about the movie. While there is some cross over, the demographics and content are largely different. (Enough so that when I did mention I had two tickets for the premiere in Los Angeles on my personal/professional Twitter account, which gets pick by Facebook too, not one person responded.)
Of course, I never intended my account, which is a dual professional/personal account, to market a movie. And while I mentioned it now and again as it applied to me personally; I never engaged in conversations to the extent that the team account did, which is only about that movie (whether I was managing or someone on staff).
In terms of bad behavior or perhaps simply behavior that doesn't convey a company image (eg. someone with a tattoo, even though that has become more acceptable), companies have always been concerned to some degree. However, they seem to be even more concerned now because of the potential for mass exposure. The reality is that they always had the potential for exposure. Employees have always been the biggest distractors and/or ambassadors for a company. Nothing has changed.
To your first and last point, I really think of this in terms of teaching employees the difference between transparency and authenticity, especially if the account is used for professional purposes. Authenticity might mean sharing that you went to a club; transparency is talking about how you drank too much and danced on the bar. One might be suited for a professional account while the other is best kept among friends. Conversely, authenticity might mean sharing how busy you are for a day; transparency would include you fell behind because your boss doesn't know what they are doing.
The real problem, it seems to me, is that companies don't communicate with their employees enough. When I teach, I often use an example of two different utilities and how they handled rate case increases. One communicated to employees first; the other communicated to the media first (and inaccurately). The first found community allies when the employees went home and communicated with neighbors (as they always have); the second caused their employees hardship because the public was angry and they knew even less than their neighbors, resulting in morale problems and an internal crisis inside the company.
So the solution, while different from companies might be used to, is to communicate with employees first; and to help draw those distinctions between personal views and professional responsibilities. If the employee cannot distinguish the two, then the best course for the company is ask those employees to refrain from talking about their companies, specifically, on personal accounts for their own right to privacy.
I think its fine for companies to monitor what is being said about them (we even provide the service), but it's another thing all together to monitor what employees say about everything 'except' the company. In many cases, it's not even ethical.
While consulting with companies on the most effective and efficient method of sourcing candidates, I recently stumbled on this software. It’s AMAZING! As owner of PARADIGM, I never intended to get involved with software; but once I realized how much more effective it was at identifying candidates, I wanted to share it with everyone in my network. We all know that the most time intensive part of a Recruiters job is finding the right candidate. And Rifle hunting is always more effective than using a shotgun.
PD eGrabber’s Resume Grabber acts as a super search engine that creates search queries and then combs every portal on the internet – Linkedin, Craigslist, job boards, Google, Yahoo, etc. You input the title you are searching for, it populates a customizable list of words that are the definition of what your targeted position is. So, if you input “Financial Analyst”, the list will include “financial analysis”, “modeling”, “ad hoc” “financial statement analysis”, “macros”, “MBA”, etc. The software allows you to add or subtract words from the list, as well as select which ones are more important (or required). You click “Search” and within minutes PDeGrabber returns a list of candidates in a neat Excel file with all of the candidates’ contact information separated into cells. You can then download all of the resumes (or only the ones you select) directly into your database.
Why this is so great?
• With only a few clicks, you can search every portal on the internet rather than having to log into each job board separately.
• PD eGrabber’s semantic search technology allows you to source job seekers (both active and passive) to find exact matches. If you input “Financial Analyst”, you’ll get a true “Financial Analyst” rather than a bank teller who has added key words to his/her resume.
• Searches can be fully customized for your company and can be saved for future use.
• The boss will be amazed at your ability to identify perfect candidates for his/her hiring need almost immediately
Please join me TODAYat 4:30pm for a quick 15 minute demonstration of how this software can save you both time and money. As the economy rebounds, hiring will increase – and there’s nothing worse than scrambling for candidates to fill a dozen urgent new openings at the same time!
Send me an email and I’ll send you the Webex information to see the demonstration.
Stacey J. Relton
PARADIGM Career Solutions
5944 Luther Lane Ste 601
Dallas, TX 75225
Your job search...Redefined!
Wendy Kerkhoff said:As a researcher and sourcer, I have tried a lot of tools as many of you have and it is unfortunate that there is no silver bullet out there, but eGrabber does a very good job of simplifying the boolean process and takes the hard work out of developing search strings. It can net strong results when used properly. I also use the Broadlook tools and find they still require a lot of messaging. Talent Hook is a good tool combined with an ATS. At the end of the day, there are many tools available and you need to learn how best to use what tools for whatever purpose so building a tool kit is a necessity.