Death of Contingent Search

I read an interesting article over the weekend. It's called "The Death of Contingency Search", written by Adam Robinson, Founder & Editor of Better Hiring Today (http://betterhiringtoday.com/2008/09/10/the-death-of-contingent-search/). He makes some interesting points. One of them is - "Recruiting is no longer about who you know. It's about throughput". I thought this paragraph was particularly relevant:

"Which brings me to the issue at hand - the massive change going on in the recruitment business model. Pre-Internet, search firms would charge you 30% of their candidate’s base salary to access their network of potential candidates…and it was worth it. Back then. Now, those Rolodexes have substantially decreased in value. These recruiting technology innovations have served to greatly increase the amount of candidate information available to a corporate HR team, and HR departments across the country are now dealing with a huge influx of data. Their problem is no longer “how do I find someone for this job,” it’s now “who can help me sort through these 250 resumes?” That, my friends, is a throughput issue, not a recruiting issue. And throughput issues are solved with efficient and low-cost operating models."

Now a shameless plug:
This is where joblish can help. If recruiters, corporate & agency, were to use joblish in their job ads and were to demand that applicants submit resumes with joblish codes, it would allow them to machine search the 250 resumes, reading those that met the criteria and qualifications they are looking for. How much time could you save if you had to read 10 resumes instead of 250? Start using joblish and it will become a reality faster than you think.

Just a thought.

Comment by Kevin Jenkins on October 22, 2008 at 9:34am: by use them consistently i meant recruiters will not interpret identical resumes exactly the same and choose the same code for the resume.

Comment by Kevin Jenkins on October 22, 2008 at 9:38am: as far as contingency recruiting ... it will have more staying power than any other type of recruiting. the fact that their is no financial risk at all to a company for utilizing the services of a contingency recruiter is really all i have to say about that. when they are not successful with all the online tools for finding talent they will turn to contingency recruiters for help. i would hazard a guess that retained recruiting has a much bleaker future than contingency recruiting.

Comment by Jerry Albright on October 22, 2008 at 9:50am: Just to address coding here - over my years I have learned that any type of label is bound to be anywhere from slighly inaccurate to entirely off base. So any new way to put a label - as in "this person is a ________" is not a tool I would have much interest in.

When I got started I recall the several meeting we had about recruiters' desire to add comments in candidate files such as "not interested, won't move, jerk, only interested in more $$$" to which my boss would always say DON'T EVER DO THAT. (for many reasons we don't need to go into here)

So coding, labeling, etc. It's all the same to me.

I like to code people by area code and last name. Old school? You bet - but still kickin'!

Comment by Kevin Jenkins on October 22, 2008 at 9:53am: Good comment Jerry. But i highly disagree with the second part. I think it is very important to document your experience with candidates and impressions of them after speaking to them. It has saved me from wasted effort numerous times over the years.

Comment by Mark Bielecki on October 22, 2008 at 9:58am: Kevin - Codes do work if you take the variability out of them. We know that titles are a minefield, so we didn't include them in joblish. Titles are chosen for many reasons - organizational philsophy, status, looks good on a business card, presents an image etc. They aren't chosen to inform an uninformed person about duties & responsibilities. Take a minute to read the joblish website - www.joblish.com. You'll see that we are using joblish to define things that are definable - Industry you work in (this describes industry knowledge), industry your company serves (this also describes industry knowledge), education (common search terms), what department & sub department you work in (where does your expertise lay), where you fit in the pecking order (are you the head cheese or the lowest of the low) & what are your supervisory responsibilities (are you a boss or a worker). This is basic information that can help you decide whether or not to spend any more time on this candidate. These are all quantifiable things, and that makes a coding system work very well.

Comment by Jerry Albright on October 22, 2008 at 10:00am: Let me add a little more though - the files I mention were where all the resumes were kept. Believe it or not it was called the "bone file"....why I don't know. Funny - haven't thought about that in years.

So - what would happen is every night if you didn't have a few solid interviews scheduled (we only interviewed after 5) you would take your hot job order and go through the bone file and grab a stack of "pink sheets" and start dialing.

What we found though was it was usually the "newer" recruiters going through the bone file and - being a newbie all you need is half a reason NOT to call somebody. What new recruiter would dial a phone number with "jerk" written above it? :)

So it was decided that only "Data" could be captured on the pink sheets. Emotional info - stuff that was "reactionary" in nature was not to be noted. A new recruiter might not have the same experience or impression.......

Comment by Mark Bielecki on October 22, 2008 at 10:01am: In this whole discussion, I wonder how many folks have taken the time to review joblish at the website, www.joblish.com. I'd be interested to know.

Comment by Slouch on October 22, 2008 at 10:04am: Jerry, you bring up a great point. That is a whole different discussion.

Comment by Amitai Givertz on October 22, 2008 at 10:08am: As I follow the thread I keep reflecting back on a recent interview that Bill Vick did with Margaret Graziano and her vision of the future...you know, as an aside:

Comment by Kevin Jenkins on October 22, 2008 at 10:09am: I have checked your site out. I am an enthusiastic supporter of the entrepreneurial spirit and certainly wish you great luck.

Comment