As promised by the incoming administration earlier this year, immigration is fast becoming a focal topic within the confines of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. And where there is immigration, jobs are not far behind in the discussion. And jobs have played a prominent role in the early days of this administration. Specifically, American jobs. The ones allegedly being lost to the recipients of 85,000 annual awarded H1B visas. Read More
Over the years, one of the many things I’ve given quite a bit of thought to is the relationship between recruiting and sourcing, and how these functions fit in with the bigger talent acquisition picture. At first glance (for those outside our industry), we all pretty much look the same.
You know what I’m talking about – the whole (not uncommon) “recruiters suck” sentiment that’s so persistent for so many hiring managers and job seekers alike.
But a closer look reveals infinitely more nuance. When you really take time to examine the details of sourcing and recruiting, there are a few disparate tasks and tactics, but there are also a ton of pieces that tend to overlap. This leads to an interesting question:
Why do so talent organizations treat these two similar roles as separate (and often unequal) functions?
Before I try to answer that question, let me take a minute to explain why I wanted to address this particular topic. Read More
I had the opportunity to spend some time with my colleague, Lorne Epstein and a few guests to debate the core principles of the Massachusetts salary law, and it’s effect on the recruiting industry.
Take a listen, hope you enjoy. I promise to dress up the next time I’m on the radio.
When you are in Talent Acquisition, there are few certainties in your world. Job descriptions will change at the 11th hour, and budgets will be slashed, and candidates will change their minds with the frequency of strobe light. But one thing has remained the same through all the hiring (r)evolutions in the last decade or so – the resume.
It may have changed in its look and feel, or the method of delivery to you the recruiter, but it still contains the core basic information as it always has. From the resume, one is able to tell where the candidate went to school, what they have accomplished professionally, and a few other odds and ends needed to assess if there is a baseline fit for a role. Depending on the candidate, you may also have additional sections to glean information about the candidate. They usually fall under a banner of “volunteer experience”, “hobbies”, or something similar. And this section, for all its brevity, it’s where the gold can be buried. Read More
Oh, “time to fill.” If you’re a recruiter, the very mention of this metric is enough to send shivers down your spine; after all, it’s been used for years now to beat recruiters into complete submission (and completing submissions).
For as long as I’ve been a recruiter – which, by the way, is longer than I’d like to admit – the concept of “time to fill” has been one of the most commonly leveraged baselines for assessing recruiter productivity and output; it’s also commonly utilized as a convenient crutch for building a completely biased benchmark to determine whether or not a recruiter is worth keeping.
In recruiting, there’s a need for speed; if you’re working for a third party, getting your fee often requires sacrificing depth of screening for expediency of submission, a devil’s bargain that most are willing to make (rightfully so, too). Read More