Online Job Boards Suck: Recruiters and Staffing Firms Still Best for Employers
By: Mick, December 6th, 2006
Much is being made in the recruitosphere about the post in TechCrunch assailing the state of online job search and how very little has changed or improved since the first job boards arrived almost a decade ago. A second post at Recruiting.com explains that recruiting is a difficult business requiring human interaction and social skills — requirements that are impossible to automate or efficate through technology.
The ability to search for jobs and candidates has certainly been enhanced through technology and the job boards that pervade the online human resources industry. But the candidate selection and screening processes, not to mention the “sale” of positions to top talent, still remain a human skill practiced successfully by few other than dedicated and talented recruiters and HR professionals.
From the perspective of the job seeker, I would argue that job boards are a bit more useful than the above posts indicate. If nothing else, you can easily put countless lines in the water and the initial contacts will be informal enough to politely refuse any undesirable replies.
I can’t make the same argument from the perspective of employers. It seems as though it would be more time- and resource-efficient to outsource the hiring process, since payment is required only if an approved candidate is hired. It is true that the cost outlay for a recruiter or staffing firm is almost always going to be greater than a single job post on a major job board. But the screening process is entirely the responsibility of the recruiter and employers have the option of rejecting any candidates, even after trial periods, that they deem inappropriate. In short, recruiters relieve employers of the burden of the hiring process and are paid only when that process is successfully completed. No job board can compete with that level of efficiency or accountability.
Tags: job boards, recruiters, recruiting.com, recruitosphere, staffing firms
Entries
December 13th, 2006 at 1:18 am
I would disagree with your previous statement. Job Boards are the most effective tool available to identify talent. The boards drive recruiting costs down significantally for most major corporations. The screening and filter process should be delegated to the corporations HR/Recruitment teams internally. Smart hiring manager should use staffing firms as a last resort when all other resources are exhausted.
December 15th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
I see your point about staffing firms as a last resort for corporations that maintain a full-time HR/Recruiting department. However, for the majority of companies that do not have in-house recruiters, staffing firms are almost certainly a more efficient and cost-effective means of acquiring talent.
December 15th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
I actually agree and disagree on these points. Job Boards most likely ARE the most effective tool available to identify talent. Most of the time, at least. But they’re still sorely lacking. In short, they do “suck”. Monster has been bashed so much in the last few months that if you believe what’s being said, they’re about the worst job board out there. I’ve used Monster, but few others, so I don’t have much to go on. However, I often found that the level of quality among candidates in Monster was lacking. This led me to the impression that the candidates who were not actively seeking work, and who were therefore not on Monster (in many instances) may often be the best candidates as well. How do you find these candidates? In some instances, through recruiters, who will do anything possible to bring good talent and a good employer together. In short, the two methods of attaining talent aren’t mutually exclusive, but some instances definitely call specifically for one or the other AND the level of talent at some job boards is, shall we say…questionable.
October 5th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Hi, everybody!
I think, that this is a great forum. Very intresting and useful.
But I can’t find the search function, cause I want faster find the topics that could be intresting for me to express my opinion…
Please help me with search function on this forum!
October 5th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Hi Glaycletle,
The search box for the blog is at the top right of the most recent post, just below the job search feature at the top of the page. Any other questions, please let me know.
Thanks,
Mick
November 6th, 2008 at 1:53 am
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. says it will modify the terms of $70 billion in troubled, mostly adjustable-rate mortgages it holds.
The New York bank inherited many of the loans as part of its September purchase of a failed competitor, Washington Mutual Inc. (NYSE:WM), and its move will cover as many as 400,000 borrowers. J.P. Morgan said Friday the borrowers will be moved into loans carrying lower interest rates, smaller principal amounts or other more-affordable terms, The Wall Street Journal reported.
The move came shortly after the bank received a $25 billion capital infusion from the U.S. Treasury’s program to strengthen financial institutions and get credit flowing.
“Our goal in doing this was to come up with something that we think will lead the industry in helping as much as possible on this issue,” said J.P. Morgan executive Charles Scharf.
John Taylor, chief executive of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, said the action was “a gutsy move on their part. They are bending over backward to try to reach out to these people.”
November 27th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Mike Mossberg, I know you reading this forum, please contact me, because I can’t find your contact details.