How many recruiters would ever conduct a search for candidates who bring absolutely no originality to the table? The practice is actually more common than you might think. While every person has worth and there is a niche for just about everyone, most hiring managers would prefer to interview the go-getters and hire them to ignite their teams. On the surface the choice between these two extremes would seem to be obvious, but if some recruiting campaigns are any indication the appeal would appear to be designed to attract chumps rather than champions. Projecting an image of a stagnant and unstimulating culture gives the impression that marginally qualified people are the best candidates for the job.
What are you doing to excite people to talk to you about an opening? Seeking to hook perfection with imperfect bait is likely to fail. On surveys, forums and Twitter chats job seekers are talking about this topic and it is obvious that it adds to their constant frustration. Yes, if they are really desperate for a job a lackluster approach at courting them may just work, but how much better would it be if the courtship was exciting and challenging? There are many factors which contribute to a mediocre recruiting drive.
Lifeless Job Specifications – We want a candidate to prove through their communication with us that they possess the skills to do the job. When we are not specific about what skills are needed there is a mismatch in communication. Unless we can define the absolutely essential requirements and differentiate them from the nice-to-have skills we are at risk of failing to apply the correct discriminators in decision making. There is little wonder that candidates who are constantly hacking through the jungle of confusing and conflicting ideas lose interest and sink to the level we set for them. There needs to be a clear roadmap to successfully performing the duties of the position or the probability of finding that perfect fit, or at least the one with the fewest tradeoffs, is virtually impossible.
Recruiting Passively – Knowing what to recruit is only the first step. Engagement is putting it all in motion. Posting a job and waiting for the right person to come through the door may actually work, but it is probably not the most engaging method of talent acquisition. Whether by policy, preference or plain laziness, the lack of enthusiasm shines through. Candidates notice this. Attitude impacts all human endeavors and in recruiting we set the stage of our expectations by the way we reach out to those we hope to influence. People are usually drawn to glamorous and exciting concepts and a laidback and passive attitude does not fit into that category. If we are not really looking for mediocrity, then we should not take a mediocre approach at finding talent.
Uninspiring Job Postings – A company’s careers site or a job board should probably not be the sole sources of candidates, but in most cases this has become the entry portal to the ATS database which drives everything from interviewing to onboarding. Since this by necessity is the front line for attracting outside interest it should be given the same care and attention as window dressings to a department store. Job postings that are run-on paragraphs are hard to read. Grammatical errors and misspelled words are seen as representing an unprofessional company. Most job postings end up being a standardized template spewing out of the details of generic job descriptions. Often the robotically generated job advertisements are not even spell-checked by a human being before publication. Missing is the personality of the job being present in any form. To reach people other than the dull and boring, intelligent and bright people need to see what is in it for them and where the challenges are.
Arrogant Entitlement Mentality – Perhaps in the current economy there are fewer companies who are so arrogant as to think that the candidate experience doesn’t matter, but somehow there is a job seeker perception that they are fighting an uphill battle to bow down to an employer, kiss their ring and beg for a job. Whether justified or not, looking at it from their perspective it is as if a company feels that everyone should want to work there and it is a rite of passage to endure hardships to get in. More than just an initiation, it can be a negative experience if they ultimately don’t get the job. In a five candidate interview pool where only one is hired, by definition 80% of the people interviewed are not happy with the results even if we see it as bringing the campaign to a successful close. The fact that they got past so many others to get an interview has to be highlighted and they should get some sort of acknowledgement that they did not fail. Those who were a close number-two candidate should be nurtured as a known talent who would be on a short list for the next opening to happen.
So if we are not really looking for the dull, boring and unimaginative employee then we should stop acting like that is what we want. A negative recruiting brand is hard to overcome once it becomes deeply rooted in the minds of the candidate population. There will be enough competition for talent and situations that will go wrong without our setting ourselves up to fail.