• Richard Araujo

    Social Media is nice, but last I saw very, very few candidates actually came from there at the end of the day. Until I see that change, I’ll always think LinkedIn is over priced beyond belief for what you actually get.

    In terms of the quality of candidate gotten, I’d love to see some attempt to objectively measure that vis a vi performance and tenure. In my experience if you simply tell someone a candidate is ‘passive’ or surround them with some magical jargon that implies they were hard to get or weren’t looking, or anything along those lines, they’ll immediately assume higher quality, an that assumption will carry through the interviews and hiring process. Even if the person just applied the day before through the corporate site or Indeed or other job board. I’ve done my own ad hoc experiments here that at least anecdotally confirm this.

    LinkedIn is a great tool, but so is a table saw. The latter is at least reasonably priced. Paying 20-30K a year for a few job slots and some tools that make using LI a little more convenient doesn’t strike me as a good value proposition.

  • Keith Halperin

    Thanks, John. Besides contributing only 1/35 of all hires, I’d like to see the typical time from initial SR contact to start date; I bet it’s very long. Once again, it looks like SR is best for fattening the wallets of those consultants who get paid to advocate its use, but not particularly good at quickly and affordably putting quality butts in chairs.

    Cheers,
    Keith

  • http://www.qualigence.com Stephen Lowisz

    Unfortunately very fre companies share their real success with social media in terms of cost per hire, time to hire, man hours invested, etc. I would venture a guess that the results will not be very strong at this point. The issue is not that LinkedIn is not a great tool – its becuase the tool is misused.

    Recruiters tend to use LinkedIn as their personal database of names – always eager to take from the platform but never building credibility within the platform. It seems that we really dont want to use social media – we just want to the database. Short term this could work, however the long term effective is quite negative. Just last week I had three SVP/VP level candidates that I found through other sources indicate no interest in connecting on Linked in becuase they cancelled their profile due to the number of recruiter solicitations they get each day. Had I relied on LinkedIn I would not have found any of them! The sorry fact is that we so bombard those on LinkedIn, we are tuning them off to a potentially great tool.

    Learn to use social media for the value it can create – branding, engagement, and traffic – and maybe we will start seeing real value in it. Its time recruiters avoided the “silver bullet” syndrom of this and other tools like it. Have a plan before you jump into it.

  • Keith Halperin

    @ Stephen: Quite correct. As I’ve often said, the more people use a given technique or tool to recruit, the less competitive advantage any given person will have using it, as long as they use the same way as many others. IMHO, LI long ago passed the “choke point” of no longer allowing easy access with a reasonable chance of response for the “Fab 5%” everybody wants…That’s why I encourage lots of recruiters to use GitHub, Stack Overflow, TalentBin, and Entelo, so those will quickly become choked/of limited use, too. That way, we can recognize that finding people through new means (or old) isn’t the main concern- it’s getting them (through having a competitive thing to offer) that’s the REAL problem, and some new-fangled digital contraption (No, I’m not quite that old, but it’s fun to write “new-fangled digital contraption”.) won’t solve it….

    Cheers and Happy New Years,

    Keith

  • Kathleen Smith

    From a “survey” standpoint, Jobvite being in the social media space is going to have an audience that predominantly uses social media and might not be representative of all recruiters. IMHO.

  • http://www.boooleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Not surprised that LinkedIn dominates social sourcing/recruiting, at least in the U.S., where LinkedIn represents two-thirds of the United States’ non-farm employed. Would you really want to avoid 67% of the U.S. workforce?

    http://booleanblackbelt.com/2014/02/linkedin-represents-over-60-of-u-s-non-farm-employment/

    Unfortunately, having access to and using LinkedIn doesn’t mean you’re actually any good at sourcing and recruiting with LinkedIn. That’s not LinkedIn’s fault. There are plenty of companies who get much more than 1/35th of their hires from LinkedIn – they just don’t publish their stats for everyone to see.

  • http://www.boooleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Also – Keith, I just checked with one of my recruiters for a recent example of a LinkedIn hire…iOS developer in NY – 4 weeks from initial find/contact to walking on the client site, so about 2 weeks from find/contact through interviews to offer acceptance.

  • standrean

    Social recruiting is definitely becoming more common (also recruiters often screen candidates using social media).

    I think mobile recruiting is worth a mention, too. More info on that in this article: http://blog.pocketsocial.co.uk/the-ultimate-guide-to-mobile-social-media-for-technology-recruiters-mobile-and-ipad-strategies-for-twitter-facebook-and-linkedin/

  • http://jobcoachjacqui.com/ Jacqui Washington, MBA

    Yes, social recruiting and mobile recruiting is very common.

  • Pingback: LinkedIn Marketing | Chou Projects()

  • Pingback: Web-Quacker()

  • Pingback: Why Actors and Job Seekers Need Headshots in LA | I'mMovingtoLA.com()

  • Pingback: 7 Resolutions from a Social Media Strategist | ProminentSocial()