The end of sourcing/recruiting?

Open Question to sourcers & recruiters: What happens to our industry once we have “full market” involvement with Social Networks?

As any economist knows 100% employment (meaning 0% unemployment) is neither possible nor good for the market, and they (you know those experts) typically believe that something in the range of 3-5% unemployment (known as full employment) is pretty much a best case scenario for the market. With this in mind I’ve been thinking lately that as we continue to move further into this Social Networking experiment what happens to sourcing and recruiting professionals as more and more of the people who currently are “hard to find” put their private information into the public domain?

Assume for a minute that somewhere in the next 3,5 or 10 years we hit the proverbial “full employment” level (90+ percent) of potential candidates who put their information on LikedIn, Facebook, or some other social network where they can be readily found by anyone. This poses many questions like:

How do we evolve with the market and continue to be a viable option?
What different services do we offer that will still entice companies to utilize our services?
What happens to the fee structure/pay rates?

Or simply

Does our industry just dry up and go away?

Understand that I’m not Chicken Little crying that the sky is falling, and certainly I have my own opinions, but I’d like to hear yours so please post a comment and let us know what you think.

Comment by Maureen Sharib on January 17, 2008 at 5:30pm: Didn't they say the job boards would put an end to recruiting?

;)

"Change is the only constant.” ~ Proverbs

Maureen

Comment by bill martineau on January 17, 2008 at 5:40pm: Maureen,

I'm sure that that was some sort of technical gliche and that your not THAT adamant about this topic. Of course I concur, but I do think it will be something that we'll be fighting down the road, just like all those companies that wanted to claim that anyone on Monster (job board of choice) was theirs even though they had no knowledge of them, much less a resume on file.

Comment by Maureen Sharib on January 17, 2008 at 5:55pm: Yes that's a technical glitch. I'm not THAT concerned.

;)

M

Comment by Paul DeBettignies on January 17, 2008 at 8:23pm: My take is that even if everyone puts their information online, that means they will be bombarded with daily contacts.

Lately I have been on the soap box about recruiting being a relationship business.

All of the information online will likely develop new things like "private groups" and those that manage them will be "leaders".

I do also think that a short term slower economy and more information online will result in some shrinking of the industry. Frankly, I think it is needed.

Maureen as an example will always have a business model because not every company has the time, ability, or talent to do what she does. And, they are not as good as her.

Comment by Paul DeBettignies on January 17, 2008 at 8:26pm: Even if everyone does have their information online, that does not mean everyone is A, B or even C talent.

Someone will still be needed to evaluate skills, offer new opportunities, and close deals.

Comment by Slouch on January 18, 2008 at 11:12am: Hey Paul, I think that is called the Recruiter and the Hiring Manager. This made me think of this post from 46 weeks ago.

http://www.recruiting.com/recruiting/2005/03/sorry_we_alread.html

Comment by bill martineau on January 18, 2008 at 11:22am: Jason,
I just read the old post and your right. That's part of my thinking as I put this together. I had those companies that claimed all the names in the phone book belonged to them even though they had no knowledge of the person, much less a resume on them. Of course, I fully expect companies to do that again

However, those are the companies that don't understand the true value of what we bring to them and if they aren't your source companies today they should be soon.

Comment by Paul DeBettignies on January 19, 2008 at 2:17am: I have only run into the issue three times in my career. The first time (10 years ago) right after I got started in the business, shame on them.

The second time (8 years ago), shame on me.

The third time (7.5 years ago with the previous fresh on my mind) I was prepared. I told them they were violating our agreement. They disagreed. I offered to cancel the agreement.

They agreed. They hired my candidate. I recruited a project manager and two developers away from them.

That makes me "even".

The lesson learned is adding the line in the fee agreement which helped. The other is bringing it up in the beginning of the relationship, bring proactive. If they balk, walk.

Comment by Amybeth Hale on January 20, 2008 at 11:10pm: There will always be a need for sourcing and research. As it is now, social networks ARE a good resource for recruiters, and they know it. Oh boy do they know it! And the people with information on those networks know it also. Which means they are already becoming jaded to recruiters' attempts to reach them. So, I think that just because the information becomes more readily available doesn't mean that people will use it properly and be able to inspire those folks enough to make a change. You still must be able to tell an interesting story and be compelling enough to capture a potential candidate's attention. As more recruiters 'use' (abuse) social networks for recruiting, this personal touch will become more crucial to begin building trust and relationship.

Comment by Kristin Kalscheur on January 28, 2008 at 12:10pm: Here, here, Amybeth. The more information that becomes available, the harder it will be to sift through it all and identify the diamonds in the desert. To Amybeth's point, the most successful Sourcing/Research professionals will be able not only to target the right candidates, but to engage them in a way that is compelling and effective. That combination of skills requires strategy and focus that many of today's multi-tasking generation will not have the patience to muster or leverage.