• maureensharib

    The first “rule” I’d suggest isn’t even listed here.

    These “candidates” aren’t “candidates” until they say they are.

    Until then they’re “potential” or “prospective” candidates and unless we step back and
    assess how we think about these “candidates” and the places in the Recruitosphere they occupy we’re never going to get very far.

    Many of them were lured into the LinkedIn Venus flytrap with the promise of “business networking” alliances dangled before their career-minded eyes and little did they suspect they were signing themselves into a database that was becoming the biggest food trough for recruiters in history.

    Now that just about every recruiter in the world uses LinkedIn as their database they also have the mindset that everyone on LinkedIn is looking for a job.

    Like the Democrats in this past election, they’re taking a whole lot for granted.

    • Pete Radloff

      Maureen, thanks for injecting politics. I havent been seeing enough of that lately. This was more about the outreach and less about the status of the candidate nor the source they came from, but thanks for your input. I appreciate you reading it.

      • maureensharib

        Hey! You’re welcome! But I’m talking about the outreach and how we think about and platform the message to who we’re “reaching out” to.

        😉

  • https://www.recruitring.com?ref=disqus Sujay Maheshwari

    Thanks for sharing this @peteradloff:disqus . As a candidate (and who has hired a lot of people in the past as manager), I would love to share one more.

    One of the frustrations for a serious candidate who is looking for a change is that first screening call – where scheduling is a pain – either planning where to take it from (from car, has to work from home, conference room on another floor :)) etc). Or, it takes days to just have that first call done with the recruiter. (multiple this by all the recruiters you are talking to).

    I thought of solving this via Recruitring.com – all it does it records your questions as a recruiter (in your own voice) and candidates can answer your questions (via a call) whenever they have time – and you can hear their answers (or get transcript too).

    Would love your feedback on such an experience.

    • Pete Radloff

      @sujay_recruitring:disqus

      I think that there’s some merit in a tool like that, but I want to here the inflection in someone’s voice, how they answer off the cuff questions, etc. I think there are a number of calendar invite tools out there (Calendly etc) that can help reduce the back and forth with scheduling. Thanks for reading.

      • https://www.recruitring.com?ref=disqus Sujay Maheshwari

        @peteradloff:disqus I completely agree with your point. Infact, we are advocating that a tool like Recruitring.com can provide a better filter mechanism – and then the recruiter and hiring team can place that in-person screening call. But now they are using their and candidates time with better conviction and data.

        There are tools which help you rank resumes – for productivity purpose – Recruitring.com is also a time saver tool to rank the pre-screening calls priority.

        I am a fan of Calendly myself – however it manages calendar more effectively.

        Thanks again for your time and feedback!