What’s the Web good for?

Advertising, best practice, Job Boards, Job Seekers, Marketing 1 Response »
Jan 142009

At the beginning, it was good mainly for Posting. You could plaster and ad, a marketing brochure, etc. All there was left to do was to stick in a link on an email, print ad, etc. this is the ‘canvas’ era.

Then the web enabled Aggregating. For job ads, this meant shoving classifieds in one central point, that would help with exposure/effectiveness; this is the ‘eyeballs’ era.

Subsequently, the web got good at Distributing. (the ‘social’ era – not just 2.0 social web stuff; I mean search, syndication, ad networks, etc. I guess it also includes 2pointoh)

Publishers (say job boards) that leveraged of what the web had to offer during these eras, are finding market players that ultimately challenge them at the highest/current point of the ‘value of the web’ continuum. Example: job search engines competing on the basis of its distribution prowess (if/when available), without offering Posting.

It would be great if you accept that this ‘era’ model can help build a simple strategy framework for organisations that want to succeed in the online recruitment advertising space. If that’s the case, it might be worthwhile sketching a few ideas on the following fronts:

- What’s the next / upcoming web era after distribution? That is, from where is the incremental value to be offered to your market going to come from? If you answer ‘mobile’ or ‘networks’ i think you’re kidding yourself.

- Do you need to redefine who your customer is? Or do you just need to change/increase the markets you serve?

- Do you need to redefine which business you’re in? Do you sell ad distribution or are you in the job seeker/career management services bizo?

I reckon those have a dozen sub-questions. Any takers?

Stay well

Posted by jorge at 3:54 pm

The interactive job seeker – Part 1

best practice, facebook, Job Seekers, linkedin, Marketing, recruitment, Search, Sourcing, Tools No Responses »
Oct 282008

Over the past couple of years I have seen recruiters getting significantly wiser as to how to use web-based products, services, techniques; to source the talent they need to deliver to their clients. The majority of the tier-one players have made serious investments in skills (adoption / training) and products (e.g. subscriptions) in order to create what I call a multi-channel sourcing platform using generalist sites, niche sites, search, search marketing, professional/social networks, referral systems, etc. I’d love to think that LatinOcean had something to do with that.

This multi-pronged approach to candidate engagement – I am also happy to report – hast lost its novelty value and is now imbedded in the recruiters’ workflow, which is where it makes a difference. It is now part of the day to day for a material number of agencies and internal recruitment teams. This is not going away; we’re not going to just post classifieds anymore, is my bet.

Concomitant to this evolution, job seekers need to think now (more than ever) as to how to nurture a multi-channel job hunting platform online. Which employers do you want to be targeted by? Who do you want to meet? What is the first search result you want to appear when someone Googles your name? What is the best platform to research a company or agency or individual recruitment consultant?

What I am pointing to is that we, as job seekers / professionals in constant career flux, need to understand that it is our responsibility to determine/influence our reputation online and to use the channel other than just clicking the ‘apply online’ button to get the job you want. We are empowered and able to do so without the need for technical wizardry or expensive/cumbersome overheads.

Given this, I thought I would start a bit of a list as to what you can/should do/consider when refining your ‘interactive job seeker’ self. Hopefully the list and the points outlined can be enriched with adds / edits from the readers.

1. Reports of the demise of the standard word/text/PDF resume have been greatly exaggerated. This is still the document that recruiters work with when it comes to the crunch. So if you are going to post one of this mothers online, ensure it is a current one and it reflects your agenda/interests pretty much up to the minute.

2. The resume format of choice might be the same but possibly there are smarter ways to manage its distribution/broadcasting. Give emurse a try to keep multiple versions of your resume, and a fairly clear trail of who you’ve sent it to. If you believe a fancier CV format will contribute, register with VisualCV and give it a crack

3. If you want to be seen and approached at an early stage of the recruitment process or as recruiters conduct their sourcing activities, work on your online profile. LinkedIn is still very much the place to go for this (XING is not playing in Australia and has no plans to do so – in any English-speaking nation, for that matter). Beef up your profile with work experience, academic pedigree and associations; all of this gives the system a chance to connect you with (arguably) solid connections.

4. Avoid things that create churn for the recruiter. Serial/batch job applications to classified ads are as counter-productive as multiple postings of the same advertisement. In both cases you as the job seeker are on the receiving end. If your name crops up multiple times for a large variety of roles, you may not be considered as a serious applicant. I know this is a broad generalization and a perception that maybe overridden in case you happen to be a good candidate for any of the roles, but I think it’s a reasonable rule of thumb.

5. Google yourself, and have a look; which result comes first? If you have a common name (you know what I mean, so don’t take offence) narrow down your search to your profession or company. Are your results showing within the first 10-15 results? Are you happy with the results that point to you as an individual / professional? I spend a bit of time on my LinkedIn profile and it appears that LinkedIn corresponds by investing in SEO on my behalf (and theirs, of course)

6. Search yourself on Zoominfo. This engine crawls the net to work out a profile extracted from the info accessed. You can actually register and ‘claim’ the profile the system works out and update it with current information

7. If LinkedIn appears too slanted to networking as opposed to to-the-point job hunting you can keep an eye for the LinkedIn job ads. Alternatively you can have a look at resume databases like LinkMe, which is more a job-seeker ready environment with some social features. Remember also that you have the option on several job boards to make your profile and CV visible to recruiters

8. Use Google, LinkedIn, Zoominfo and Facebook to research a company of a specific individual recruiter. If you want to check out a company, also check their careers site; further to this, create a Google email alert so you can receive news or blog postings about the company you are interested in (you want to hear from people that have actual experience with the company, not with their PR machine). While you are at it, create an email alert for yourself (e.g. enter your name as a search key)

9. Publish (this is a bit of a big one to elaborate) may tackle on part 2

Just run out of time, I am sure there are good/better ones to add for job hunters to consider; send your comments and adds to keep building this up over the next few days.

Send me an email if you need further help on this, I might be able to tailor a few things for your specific situation as a job seeker (jorge at latinocean.com).

Have a great rest of the week

Posted by jorge at 8:44 pm

SWIFT: a model for web content development

best practice, Marketing, recruitment, reportsandstudies, research No Responses »
Sep 282008

Recently, I had the chance to review a recruitment website. I thought it was appropriate to include in that report some recommendations regarding the nature of the content that needs to be created and published to have a good go at getting people to come back to the site, interact, refer, etc.

So I pulled out a little framework that might make a bit more sense that just saying ‘this content is/is not engaging/appealing’; the acronym for it is SWIFT (self, work, influences, fans, transaction) and is built to be used for all types of websites, but I elaborate a bit on it below thinking about recruiment websites, specifically.

Self

Describe your company, your offering, the value that you intend to provide your candidate and customer base. The majority of websites in the HR and recruitment vertical you will come across, dedicate all their time and pages to this area.

Work

Show case studies that demonstrate how your expertise has helped your customers. This helps materialise the claims made in the Self section to your readers.

Influences

This is a very important section for artists and freelancers (see the MySpace profile for indie bands, because it offers their readers and followers an insight into their craft, whilst also creating a bond founded on compatibility and identification with one another.

For a company website the influences section can translate to Links page showing who the company follows from a business philosophy or operations perspectives, as well as including recommendations to their readers

Fans

This is the testimonials component of your website; this element of content is effectively produced by clients, candidates, suppliers and partners; and it is intended to confirm that the claims made in the Self section are accurate. The unadulterated content from Fans and friends is very powerful when developing online word of mouth. The ‘to-do’ for the publisher/owner is to enable function that enables this interaction.

Transaction

These are the dynamic content sections that will allow publishers to interact with its web audience. The range of services is vast, but the commonality is that they permit the website visitors make an exchange online. Apply online, call for help, self-assess, register are all transactions need to create relationship depth with the website’s constituents.

That’s it! I guess you can also use this approach to evaluate sites and assess if there are any gaps to address. Let me know if you can build further or see glaring omissions, etc.

Have a great week

Posted by jorge at 2:15 pm

Using LinkedIn: from the horse’s mouth

best practice, linkedin, recruitment, Tools No Responses »
Sep 072008

Good Morning

I’ve exchanged a few emails with a LinkedIn connection who – as a senior IT recruiter – uses the platform quite extensively to source candidates

Some interesting stats from this particular individual:

- Claims 75% of assignments are filled from LinkedIn-sourced candidates (this has got to be best practice, right?)

- Goes for quality of connection instead of volume (e.g. looks to connect with candidates that have been in contact via previous jobs applications, emails, etc.)

- Considers ads totally useless (this is somewhat of a surprise to me)

- Is using ‘status updates’ to let the market know of the current job openings

- Does not use introductions at all

- Resorts to InMail only as a last option. This might be why LinkedIn is looking for alternative revenue streams (advertising, corporate services, etc.)

What are your stats?

Have a great week

Posted by jorge at 5:56 pm

Gartner’s Magic Quadrant for erecruitment software

best practice, Companies, recruitment, reportsandstudies, technology 1 Response »
Aug 252008

This is the 2008 snapshot. There are no Australian companies in there but I think they / you can work out where they might be if they were to be included.

Get the full report from Taleo (free registration)

2008quadrant

Posted by jorge at 4:45 pm

visual job search

best practice, Search, technology No Responses »
Jul 232008

I would not mind looking at job ads in this format

Or, has anyone done it already, let me know

Posted by jorge at 5:11 pm

.asia domains – just in case you did not get the memo

best practice, branding, business, Marketing, technology 1 Response »
Mar 292008

In case you are already playing in Asia or are planning to enter the market, you may want to consider having a .asia website for the region. (e.g. talent2.asia, michaelpage.asia, hudson.asia).

You were able to get a .asia top level domain since around mid-march and it’s still early stages. Last time i checked the process is a little more protracted than the registration of other domains (.com et al) and I think it is a more expensive too.

A couple of people I have spoken to think this is a rip off. Although I don’t have a major problem with the conspiracy theory, my view is that for a few hundred dollars it’s worthwhile going through the process and see if the new domain takes off. To me that’s a better option than losing a web address that I would have liked to own because it goes with my regional presence, branding, etc.

If you need a hand with this drop me an email jorgeatlatinocean.com, though it is pretty easy

cheers.

referred site: The DotAsia Organisation

Posted by jorge at 12:44 pm

recruitment portals in ’08

best practice, business, Companies, recruitment, sitewatch, Sourcing, technology, Tools 1 Response »
Jan 162008

Hope you all had a fab beginning of 2008 – personally, I had a ‘fat’ beginning to the year, after all the holiday food that I am still trying to work off..

Just to bring to your attention what might be the type of online operation we’ll see more of in the coming months if it works for their stakeholders, Recruitment portals or markets are intended to aggregate employers and recruiters and take the friction out of a what is still very convoluted, and therefore costly, exchange. A couple of players coming up with soft and hard launch dates soon:

- VacancyBid, you can catch Danny Nerezov, the 24-year old CEO, on Facebook any day of the week. From their site:

VacancyBid is a Sydney based company which exists to lower the cost hire for employers, and create maximum revenue opportunities for recruiters.

- NeedRM; I met CEO Michael Rhodes many moons ago about this initiative, so I guess the business model has been reasonably worked. The tag line for the company from their homepage:

NEED Recruitment Market is a recruitment revolution that has the capacity to change global business dynamics. As an efficient recruitment marketplace that sits between employers and recruiters, NEED delivers real value to traders by harnessing the speed and global reach of the Internet.

I will be watching with interest to understand how they go to market and how well received they are specially in the context of:

- the continued growth of the BPO/Managed services deals between employers and one agency which brings its own exchange platform, thus locking out unauthorised delivery by other agencies

- the continued scarcity of talent, e.g. recruiters wondering “why do I need to go and bid for work which may not be overly profitable if I still have job orders I cannot fill?”

- the fact that these markets may rely on externally sourced data to reveal its effectiveness, that is employers/recruiters have to go back to the system and flag an engagement as closed (person placed)

In some ways, recruiters are already bidding for work using the classifieds model: if the see company abc publishing an ad for an accountant on a job board, I won’t be surprised if they receive a few calls from agencies canvassing the demand on an ongoing basis.

As I said, the marketplace is still partially intermediated. There’s a few challenges, I certainly don’t have the solution. My bet is technology alone will not diminish friction.

have a great year

Posted by jorge at 4:08 pm

Taleo on Facebook: process-driven recruitment on social networks

best practice, business, Companies, facebook, recruitment, technology, Tools No Responses »
Sep 032007

Taleo has new plans to join Facebook as a way to give small- and medium-sized business customers the ability to network and source passive candidates.

Slowly but surely, we’re moving towards a multi-channel sourcing platform.

Posted by jorge at 2:58 am

Lay-by recruiting

best practice, Job Seekers, Marketing, recruitment, Sourcing No Responses »
Jul 092007

Last week I went to the shops because there was a toy sale. It was the first day, so there was a toy overflow on the shop floor.. lots of people, parents with strollers filled with screaming kids, and me.The main attraction: the prices and supply were both good.

I went there mainly to lay-by toys for Christmas. Now, don’t get the idea that I am a fab planner and the ultimate smart buyer; the thing is if I don’t put these toys away now, I will never see them for the rest of the year, let alone closer to the Christmas season. The lay-by area of the shop was packed. You have to make an approx. 10% deposit of the total price, and few a couple more payments before picking the goods up.

I thought that maybe the store was leaving money on the table, that the discounts were too good for toys which people were effectively buying for the holidays. But, what is the shop gaining?

For starters the toys had to be picked up in November, until then they were not available. In reality the layby numbers were giving this people great marketing intelligence, which also impacts logistics, floor space utilisation, triggers other campaigns, etc.

How would lay-by work for recruitment?

- Employers would let agencies or their internal recruitment teams know the professionals they need 6-8 months in advance of actually needing the person
- External recruiters would charge 10% of the agreed fees; internal one would get an inter-department journal crediting their expenses.
- I am not sure if it would be necessary to discount fees significantly but if you take the cost of money, the upfront ‘deposit’ could enable an agency to reduce fees in accordance to their average financing costs
- Recruiters would work with significantly larger lead times to fill roles, with better understanding of the clients’ talent demands, and therefore with a more focused approach to talent sourcing

Do you think this would improve the timely supply of talent?

Is it realistic to know people requirements six months in advance, other than sudden departures, etc.?

What are the real-life show-stoppers to recruitment lay-by that you can foresee
* lack of trust that the recruiter will actually find the right person?
* hiring managers changing their minds?

Posted by jorge at 7:43 pm
Older Entries Newer Entries
© 2012 LatinOcean - Digital Marketing Consulting Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Switch to our mobile site