Ok big venting post coming. You have been warned.
Read this article real quick which was posted recently on www.ere.net - go ahead I will wait:
Okay - now let's get 15 things straight about why this is absolutely, and completely wrong:
1. Recruiters and Recruiting will always be a "HUMAN" Business. You can't train or coach a computer to match completely what a manager wants.
2. You can't tell a computer to magically transport a HUMAN being to fill your role.
3. You can't tell a computer to meet a manager's core cultural, technical and other criteria simply by automating sourcing. Sorry it just can't work.
4. Can a computer interview a person? No I don't think so.
5. Can a computer conduct an intake session where the manager will then say - okay that was nice. I feel fulfilled in having this computer take me forward in my search.
6. Can a computer analyze the assessments completely without human intervention....I am waiting. Sorry - can't work.
7. Can a computer help coordinate the logistics of offer close and negotiation? Try that with a candidate please. Our core value is just selling? How about offering core career based matches that leave both parties satisfied. Yes - let's let a robot coordinate that. Sorry not going to work either.
8. So you are telling me that you are going to automate EVERY portion of the recruiting process and hope candidates come to your team? Something tells me they will go elsewhere where they feel the "human" touch.
9. Resume screening - so a computer will be able to find the candidate, all by itself, without any human intervention, and then determine soft skills, hard skills, and cultural fit by an algorithm? Somehow doing this scientifically? I'll let that common sense there settle a bit.
10. Dare you to compare the methodologies suggested in this article to a "human" functioning recruiting team. Who will win the war for talent then? Hint - it has "HUMAN" in the title.
11. Can a computer negotiate offer packages and relocation needs? Will a "human" want to speak to a computer that is a robot acting in such a capacity?
12. Will hard to find technical talent be thrilled to approach staffing in a "scientific and technological" way - with a robot asking them to "trust" this non-human focused entity that has no personal touch? Chances are those high in demand technical gurus will go where they can find a "human touch" and a "human culture" in the company.
13. Lets see so a robot is going to explain their benefits, the carrot, and will sell the candidate on our company. Good luck with that.
14. Will top Graduates and Millennials decide to trust a "non-human" approach? Sure they are technologically savvy but they also like to feel valued. Don't think a robot/machine/computer can quite do that.
15. You may be saying by now - yes Mike I get the point, and why is this important? It's important because staffing will ALWAYS be about Candidate Experience, Fit, Assessment, Resume Screening, and Sourcing. Those areas and focus points of our business will NEVER go away, no matter how scientific, technological, etc. we get. We will have recruiting jobs in the future. Why? Because I dare this writer of this article to explain to all of us logically what will happen when Baby Boomers start retiring, and you will have to fill seats in a labor shortage without the Human Touch. Bottom line - let's fast forward 10 years from now, and I guarantee the Human Element of Recruiting will never go out of style, out of touch, and the phone, the social tools, and other matters will ALWAYS have a human interaction. People hire people. And yes data driven decisions in your recruiting/staffing choices showing the HOW and WHY will show just how much Human Interaction is still important to the recruiting function. That's where this writer fails in his analysis. And that will always be the way it is.....