Cutting the recruitment overheads
recruiter...@gmail.com
(expenses that are lost mostly because of our negligence as
recruiters.
1) Talking to the wrong candidates (over the phone)
2) No shows
3) Interview rejects
4) Time and effort wastage because of candidates' not joining
In this article, my friends, I would like to address the above cases,
and how, we, as recruiters, irrespective of the backgrounds, our
respective industries, the type of organization we work for, the level
at which we recruit, and the numbers we have to deliver, can add value
to our professional and the organization we work for, at ground level,
at various stages during the recruitment process, by reducing the
various overheads and losses we might come across.
I guess an initial pointer towards talking to the wrong person is
something that comes out of our experiences in recruiting. Further
more is the need to have clarit in the position to be filled. A good
recruit begins with a good job description. Of my little experience, I
have come across lots of good, bad, and ugly JDs (yeah! you would have
figured out, I love that movie too much!) And the most successful, and
quick hires have been in the positions that have had a clear and
expressive job description.
While searching for the 'right' guys, it is not always a skills-set
match that yields a hire. We might also want to look at certain
underlying things that make 'the' difference in hiring. It is more
essential that we talk to potential candidates before judging on their
fitment for the various positions we might have. Not surprisingly, I
have seen a good business development professional fit into program
management role! It just made me realise again that it is not our
qualifications and experience that determines what we are capable of.
Factors such as inherent characteristics, ability to adapt and also
choices that we make also contribute a lot to what we can become. And
as recruiters, it is our job to be capable of understanding the
potential of the person(s) we talk to.
Well, this is all said and done, but how does this help cut time
wasted while recruiting? The idea is, if we invest time in finding
talent, then we should also dis-invest time from talking to the not
'right' guys. Such as, those that do not have clarity of thought in
their resume. (This certainly does not mean not talking to people who
do not know to write good resumes). I am talking about cases where the
objective states "Looking for a full-time position in software
development" and applying for a sustenance/maintenance job, or vice-
versa.
When we talk to candidates, it is not just about understanding what
they want to do and what they are etc., it should also include time
dedicated to understanding their level of desperation/interest in
finding themselves a job, or in the job openng with us. Moreover, the
discussion should involve a briefing about the job opening, and if
possible details of the project or assignment that the candidate has
applied for. Hence, with the information you already have about the
candidates' interests and choices, and the details of the opening, it
would be relatively a lot easier in comparing and contrasting the
match/mismatch of interest.
Time invested at this level saves the time that revolves around
scheduling and rescheduling interviews. Moreover, once there is a
clear picture of what is expected out of the candidate in terms of the
positioning, identifying the interviewers becomes a lot easier. Tihis
in turn ensures fair evaluations of candidates on the skills that they
are best at (or choosing to work on). The point here is that the
expectation of the interviewers is set right because of the match in
what is beeing seeked for by the job seeker and what is being searched
for by the recruiter.
The contrary situation would be not actually understanding candidates'
choices, and blindly scheduling interview based on 'what-is-there' in
the resume and 'what-is-expected' by the candidates.
Another notable point here is that the level of excitement that an
interviewer undergoes while talking to a person that s/he perceives as
the 'right' hire is remarkable. This helps in a short, but very
effective, job selling session done by the interviewer itself.
So, with more fruitful interviews and a good position-applicant match
happening, and the mutual clarity in terms of expectations, the degree
of honesty between recruiters and candidates actually increases
manifolds. This also improves the understanding of whether the
candidate would like to take up the assignment or not. If there is a
need to look for a back-u, it would be almost immediately evident.
These were observations over the last few years of hiring, and I have
been enforcing the same at work. I have actually been able to save
interviewers time as well as mine. Moreover, when I make an offer, I
am close to sure already about what the candidates' opinion on the
same would be.
Try the above for just a few days and let me know your experiences. I
have made even better friends out of recruits than ever!
Peace, Love & Empathy!