Is the title of this post a cliche? Yes. Does that make it any less true? Not from a recruiter's perspective.
These days there's no shortage of places to post a job and no matter where you post you'll probably collect a few resumes. In fact, job ads on free sites like Craigslist can pull in more resumes than mainstream sites like Workopolis or Monster, which is great if you've got the time to sort through a few hundred applicants. You might even get lucky, but I don't know many top-tier sales executives that go job hunting on the same site they buy used couches.
That would look great in my condo!
Having said all that, most recruiters will admit that job boards are valuable tools and it's not like there's only one way to find talented people. My point is that if you're judging the success of your talent search by the number of resumes you're receiving you might be missing the point. After all, you're only looking for one candidate, regardless of how many resumes you collect.
In fact, posting a job ad in the wrong place can keep your from tracking down the talent you need. You might be getting plenty of responses, but if your ad is posted in the wrong place those responses aren't adding value. Of course, if "# of resumes collected" is your success metric, it's going to be difficult to make the change. You'll spend months on a search that could be completed in a few weeks because you're waiting for a CFO to start surfing Workopolis.
As recruiters, it's our job to deliver the ideal candidate and save you the hassle that comes from sorting resumes, superfluous interviews and all the administrative headaches that go with hiring. In reality we'll probably show you 3 - 5 candidates, since we can't hit a home run every time, but that's much easier to handle than the 200 resumes you'll get from high school kids when you post your VP Sales position on Craigslist.