Entries Tagged with hunting

Monday January 4th, 2010
Ignoring Feedback: In marketing, not all opinions are equal

So, a few weeks ago we launched a new video [embedded below - just scroll down].

'Irreverent' videos like ours are old hat in the B2C marketplace, but relatively new for B2B/professional services, and there aren't yet a whole lot of established best practices in this area, especially around recruiting.

With that in mind, here's some follow-up - if you've been thinking about doing a video in the coming months, you may find the following post helpful.

Ah, the feedback...

To me, the most interesting part of making a video like this is hearing what people feel/think/say about it.  For example:

John Zappe loved the video. 

Eric Shannon, on the other hand, did not. 

John says it could be the "....most honest career video ever made" and that it "....[nails] recruiting."

Eric, however, says that it has "...crappy message and positioning" and that it "Does more damage to the brand than the attention will benefit."

I've done my share of tv commercials and videos over the past 15 years, so these two extremes aren't surprising to me - in fact, it's been my experience that the more polarizing a video is, the more effective it's likely to be, overall.

Don't confuse 'total audience' with 'target audience'

Eric wasn't the only one who thought the video was entertaining but totally misguided.  Since the video was completed, scarcely a day has gone by without me having some version of the following conversation:

NON-MARKETING PERSON:  "Sarah, I've got some feedback about the video. People don't understand it at all.  They think it's funny and everything, but it's too confusing - they had no idea what the 60 hours thing was."

ME:  "Hhmmm...how many people have you shown it to?"

NMP:  "Well, 3.  But two of them said it was confusing."

ME:  "Who were they?  Clients?  Candidates?  HR people?"

NMP:  "Actually, it was my mother, and my aunt who lives in New Zealand.  They're retired now but they were both teachers."

ME:  (sigh)

NMP:  "Well, don't you care?"

ME:  "Not really.  They aren't the target - we wanted to reach recruiting decision-makers.  As long as the video didn't engender your mother's undying revulsion, I'm not really concerned with whether she understood the message."

NMP:  (secretly thinking that I probably don't know as much about marketing as I think I do)  "Harumph!"

We all feel like marketing experts.
We're not.

Since most of us have absorbed hundreds of thousands  of marketing messages in our lifetimes, and we've been absorbing them practically since birth, it's not surprising that most of us think that we have some level of marketing expertise.

But when your doctor puts a cast on your broken arm, you don't say, "Well, that looks okay for a first draft - just let me run this by 10 people in the sales and supply chain department to get their insight, and then I'll let you know the revisions." 

It's really all about the results.

Ultimately, the goal of marketing is simple:  To sell more stuff. 

It's not about whether people like the video; it's about whether it's effective.  It's not about how many people see the video; it's about how many of those people then do something as a result of seeing it.  

So what have our stakeholders done as a result of this video?

• Several past clients called to re-engage us, citing the video as a positive reminder of how much they like working with us
• Several potential clients requested meetings with us, because they wanted to hear more about our alternatives to contingency recruiting
• Increased web traffic by about 20%
• Increased average PPV (pages per visit) by about 33%
• About 25 of our 'brand champions' reported referring us to a boss, friend or colleague ("I sent Bob at Acme Ltd. the link to the video and told him he should call you guys in the new year.")

 
So far, our ROI on this video (measured solely on short-term revenue) is so high that it almost seems fake - in excess of 500% - and we expect to see more in 2010.  And that's the most important feedback the marketplace can give you.

WATCH THE VIDEO:

Permalink  Comments (2)

Monday November 30th, 2009
"Dear Sarah IV: Can I work with more than one recruiter at a time?"

A BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING:  A number of readers in the past couple of weeks have asked if they can reprint/reproduce these "Dear Sarah" pieces for use with their own candidates.  The answer:  Yes, absolutely - as long as they are properly credited, with a link to this blog and my email address (sarah@head2head.ca).   Dropping me a line to let me know you're using it would be great, too - I appreciate a good ego-stroke as much as the next person.

In the last "Dear Sarah" post, we talked about what happens when more than one recruiter submits your profile to a client, and how it can make everyone look bad.

But does that mean you should never work with more than one recruiter?

Well...no.  But.

Some recruiters will tell you that unless you (as a job-seeker) work exclusively with them, they won't represent you or present you to clients. 

Here's why:  Good recruiters will tell you when they're submitting your profile to a client;  the best recruiters  will ask your permission in advance.  But the not-so-great recruiters just submit lots of candidates to lots of clients and hope that something sticks. 

At the same time, many clients will engage several recruiting agencies to fill a given role, so they're getting candidates submitted to them from multiple sources.

That means that your profile could currently be in front of a whole bunch of clients, and the new recruiter doesn't want to look like an idiot by submitting a profile of a candidate that their client saw 2 weeks ago from some other recruiter. 

Going to 8 zillion different recruiters increases the chance of your profile being submitted to a particular client, and after a while it's not just the recruiter who looks like an idiot:  Once a client has been given your profile from 4+ different recruiters over a couple of months, they start to wonder just how desperate/unemployable you really are.

However, putting all your eggs in one basket with one recruiter isn't wise, either, especially if you don't know how successful/connected that recruiter is in your field.

Some guidelines for working with more than one recruiter:

1. Be honest and up-front.  If you're already working with a couple of recruiters, let the new recruiter know.  If you know you've been submitted to an opportunity, tell them about it.
   
2. Depending on your career stage and profession, you probably shouldn't work with more than 5 recruiters at a time.  (If you're quite junior and trying to get a foot in the door, it's probably okay to talk to a whole bunch of recruiters; if you're more senior and working in a field where 'word gets around', you probably shouldn't work with more than 2 or 3 recruiters at a time.)
   
3. A recruiter who refuses to work with you because you've spoken to another recruiter either thinks you're not a particularly good candidate ("I can't trust this person to tell me about the other positions s/he has been submitted to") or doesn't do his/her homework ("I just submit all my candidates to all kinds of clients - I can't be bothered to call you to double-check to see if you've already been submitted"). 
   
   Either way, s/he probably isn't the best recruiter for you, anyway, so don't feel too badly about walking away.
   
   (NB:  There are exceptions to this, especially in industries in which the talent pool is very small and where there may be only a handful of qualified candidates for a given role.  In these situations it's appropriate to work with a single recruiter.)
   
4. Try to build long-term relationships with a couple of recruiters who specialize in recruiting people in your field.  A recruiter who's known you for 5+ years is more likely to 'sell you' into a potential employer than someone you just met yesterday. 

Again, if you're a junior just into your first or second job, it's worthwhile to make the rounds of lots of recruiters - it'll help you get a feel for what's out there, who has the best opportunities, and who might be a great long-term contact.  As you become more senior, you'll be able to leverage these long-term relationships to make your job search much easier - and more painless.

Permalink  Comments (3)

Tuesday November 17th, 2009
"Dear Sarah: Who pays recruiters and how do I get one?"

Think this blog post is 100% wrong?
Tell me why on the "I totally disagree with Sarah" page.

If you're new to the job market - and even if you're not - your biggest source of confusion about recruiters (aka 'headhunters') is probably a simple one:  Who the heck pays them? 

(Yes, if you're a recruiter here on ERE, you - presumably - know all about headhunters and how they get paid.  But as I explained in the first "Dear Sarah" post, this series was created so that the next time you get a  question from a non-recruiting friend or relation, you can just send them this link rather than having to spend too much time explaining.)

First, a word on lexicon:  Though you and your friends may talk about 'headhunters' - i.e. the people who call you and try to sell you on a Fabulous New Job Opportunity - that's not a word used by headhunters themselves.  It's sort of like how real estate salespeople never call themselves real estate 'agents', even though the rest of the world does. 

There's a fair amount of recruiting-industry lexicon with which you may not be familiar, actually.  The more you know about the lexicon, the more 'in the know' you'll seem to recruiters, so I've provided brief descriptions below.

Anyway, it's the client - i.e. the company who makes the hire -  who pays the recruiter, not the job-seeker. 

Here's how it (typically) works:

1. The client decides they need to fill a position (also called a 'role')
2. They send their requirements (also called a 'job requisition' or 'job req') to a recruiting agency.  In most cases, the client will send their job reqs to more than one agency at a time
3. The job requisition will be assigned to one or more recruiters, who will then look through their database, make calls to their network of contacts, and/or search online to find potential candidates.  It's at this stage that they might call or email you to see if you're (a) interested and/or (b) meet the skills/experience parameters of the position
4. If they think you're a good potential candidate, the recruiter may arrange to interview you
5. If the interview with the recruiter goes well, s/he will send your profile (which could include your resume, a summary of your strengths/weaknesses, and recommendations) to the client
6. The client is likely receiving profiles of potential candidates from several other recruiting agencies at the same time
7. The client reviews your information.  If they think you might be a good fit, they tell the recruiter to schedule an interview with you
8. When the client makes a hire, they pay the recruiting agency a fee.  This fee is typically 16-20% of the new hire's annual salary
9. The client pays the fee only to the recruiting agency who sent the successful candidate (i.e. the one who got hired).  The other recruiting agencies receive nothing.

This is called contingency fee-based recruiting, because the fee is contingent upon a hire being made.

(There are other recruiting models, and fees can vary - such as much lower fees for junior/high volume roles and higher fees for very senior/executive roles - but this is the basic contingency model and the one you're most likely to encounter if you're working with a recruiting agency.)

Typically, recruiters are paid a base salary by the agency they work for, plus a commission based on the contingency fees they generate for the agency.  So when you're hired through an agency, the recruiter you've been working with gets a piece of the 20% of your starting annual salary that the client pays to the agency.

I know it sounds like a lot of money - if your starting salary is, say, $60k, then the client pays $12,000 for the privilege of hiring you - but keep in mind that a typical agency recruiter will interview 25+ candidates per week, but only a handful of them will ultimately be hired.

So how do I connect with a recruiter?

Well, this is a big topic and one we'll revisit in future posts, but the first step is to do some research to find out which recruiting agencies specialize in your profession/field/industry.  Though some larger recruiting agencies recruit for all positions, you'll do better if you hook up with a recruiting agency - or even a recruiter - which specializes in one or two fields/roles, such as IT positions, supply chain positions or clerical positions.

However, just Googling may not be enough here.  For example, if you look at the website of Canadian recruiting company Mandrake Management Consultants, you wouldn't know that they've long had a specialty in recruiting for advertising/marketing jobs - but they do.  So your best bet is to ask around:  Ask friends and colleagues which recruiting agencies they've worked with recently, and which ones specialized in your field.

While you're at it, ask your friends/colleagues for the names (and contact info!) of the recruiter(s) they've worked with.  There's nothing more pointless - and more guaranteed to generate rejection - than randomly calling recruitment agencies and asking to speak to 'anyone'.  Recruiting agencies get hundreds, if not thousands, of unsolicited calls and emails every day - they're very good at screening.  Getting the direct email/phone number of a specific person, and being able to reference someone they've successfully placed, will put you miles ahead.

BONUS TIP:  When you're asking your friends and colleagues for referrals to recruiters, don't specify that you want the names of recruiters they liked; ask for the names of the recruiters who seemed to have jobs.  Because you don't have to like the recruiter, as long as they can actually connect you to great opportunities.

Permalink  Comments (2)

Thursday December 18th, 2008
Flaming Recruiters

Earlier this month, Toronto recruiters were in the spotlight of the finance crisis. I've been trying to process what to say about the article ever since it appeared.

Obviously, the industry needs some flame. We need some viral marketing that will take the edge off the "throw them to the lions" perception and let us be people again.

Permalink  Comments (3)

Wednesday July 16th, 2008
July Recruiter Trend Poll

I just realized that last month's poll is the most-commented on post of the last 30 days on the whole ERE blog network!

I am so flattered that, even though the month is barely half over, I've decided to launch the July poll.

Permalink  Comments (0)

About the Authors

Paul Dodd
Co-founder and President
Head2Head Canada

Paul has one simple goal: To help companies hire great people - and get the most out of every recruiting dollar they spend. That's why he's recognized as one of the best recruitment-industry thinkers in Canada.

Links

Archives

Tags

Tag Cloud

RSS Feed

RSS Feed