This sign is usually parked near the intersection of River and Shirley roads in Crows Nest; during peak traffic hours, the area is a nightmare to drive through, if you can drive through. I live half a mile down from where this ad is.
I am not sure when you last time paid attention to a You-Haul advertisement pushing a jobs website, let alone remembering to check it out once you got home. Seriously, I am just glad to get out of the bumper-to-bumper nightmare without getting too stuck.
Pretty dumb to spend money on this, huh?
Well, the ad is parked in a spot that is pretty much equidistant to The Royal North Shore and Mater Hospitals; surruounding them there is an entire ecosystem of labs, surgeries, private practices, physio centers, you name it.
My neighbour is a nurse. At the small primary school my kids go to, there are at least 1/2 dozen midwives who live in the area. They surely drive around River Rd all-the-time.
I’ve a had look at the advertised website. It is a bit of a substandard online experience, compared to best/better practice. It does what it needs to do as a jobs site, however.
Question is: What would you say is the candidate response due to the ad by the side of the road? I am not expecting huge flows of CV’s, but possibly high relevance levels and material volumes of applicants, given their geo hyper-targeting.
I will aim to get in touch with the agency guys and see if I can complete the picture. Just remember: you can have a niche campaign on wheels if you want to, outside Uni’s (graduates), coming out of Pyrmont (digital, IT), etc.
Have a good evening.
I am always a bit sceptical about news of studies regarding perceptions and attitudes about the mature workforce like the one that got published recently.
Don’t get me wrong; if the findings indicate a true change of practice regarding older workers, that’s great.
I mean it’s in everyone’s best interest, right? Sooner or later – if we’re lucky – we’re moving up the age bracket whilst staying functional.
Whether we’re bosses or employees, we’re always selling our professionalism, experience and potential. Fact remains, the perception of our effectiveness as salespeople is impacted by how wrinkled we look.
How do we change these perceptions? How do we become grey hair impervious?
All of us have a to-do. Owners, managers and workers young and old need to nremain ‘responsible’.
1. employees, ensure you’re not mis-cast. There will be a temptation to take on a job that may not be a strength to you, but your potential employer is going to say ‘come on mate, you’re experienced, you can do this job’. if you know that is not the case, don’t accept it. It will come back to haunt you.
2. employers, just because some people have been on the workforce for thirty years, it guarantees you nothin’. There are people who are shit workers in their 20′s and they don’t learn, skill up or gain insights, and in their 50′s they remain shit workers. Leave the affirmative action stuff, don’t hire off the back of the wise-older worker preconception, and interview and test as if you want the job done the best possible way.
3. employees stay hungry. No-one wants lazy fat cats in their teams, however young or old. Show that you want the job, that you want to do well, that you want to become a linchpin of the organisation (here goes Seth Godin again). Stamina changes should not impact on your attitude.
4. employers, situational leadership won’t go astray across all your teams.There are certainly different motivators per staff member; don’t manage generational groups. Manage individuals.
Bye
12-10-2010 Update: Good stats and thoughts from Ross Clennett
Recruitment agencies are receiving less assignments from their clients
Recruiters – like all or most of us – need to stay busy or else. They start chasing ads
If they chase ads, they might as well have a candidates that can fill the role
In lieu of/addition to looking at their own databases, recruiters chasing ads opt to create their own sourcing/trawling posts
The incremental cost of posting the trawling job ads is negligible; recruiters may have already paid for them as part of their monthly contracts
Applications per ad are already up given our context
Candidates won’t get much attention, because the recruiter’s interest in them is contingent on the ad-chasing success ratio (which I would say is low)
Hiring companies are getting peeved with cold-calling consultants, which leads them to (if possible) write more and more generic ads so that they are not identified by ad-chasers
What’s in the horizon?
As contracts with job boards get renewed maybe there will be less ads (both good and bad, but proportionally less bad ones)
Reduced confidence on recruiters will lead job seekers to going back to job seeking via people you can trust, which can also include hand-picked recruiters, but also colleagues, friends, family.
Referrals based on trawling ads will not produce results.
Niche sites that have the inclination and capacity to monitor the quality of job ads could also get the thumbs up. Issue here is: what’s quality? An ad for a work-from-home scheme? The fifth version of the same ad? A suspicious looking/fake one? The more judgment you apply the more labor-intensive / costly the exercise.
Hiring organisations have an opportunity to work on their employer brand during this time, A ‘grey’ recruitment practice does not necessarily imply low candidate quality.
Thank you @jobadder for your comments re. niche sites
Hope your week finishes very well
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
Belated happy new ’09. Nice to be back
A bit of a rant and/or speculations re. the news on job ads
a) The 50% + decline in newspaper ads includes the economic slow down factor and the migration to online factor which, if you have seen the Seek investor presentations, is BIG
b) The almost 30% decline in online ads includes the slow down factor, the ‘less-reposting’ factor and to a still small extent, to a ‘migration off classifieds’ factor.
c) If you take a) and b), then the corollary is that the decline in the actual job openings is less dramatic that the ad statistics.
d) There will be more applicants per job ad, but possibly less applications overall (due to lesser volumes of ads). But if you accepted a) and b) then it will not be 50 or even 30% harder to get a job, ceteris paribus
John Sumser wrote about how the media loves the bad news. I encourage everyone not to make our own gloom.
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
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?
The notes to the latest Seek Employment Index report that on a year-to-year basis job applications are 5.5% higher compared to a corresponding 35.8% increase in news job ads posted to their site. I assume that the numbers for the other two biggest job boards show similar trends (set me straight if I am wrong please)
If I were to stick to the Seek numbers, the stats are saying that a typical/average advertiser is getting @ 22% less applications per ad; which implies less candidate processing work, less job-application-related exchanges, etc; so this is in itself not a bad thing from a processing cost and churn side of the equation.
The problem arises when with the available candidate pool (constantly fed by your applications flow) you cannot fill the role. What this means in turn is that the candidates that make up the 22% that are NOT applying to the roles you advertise happen to be the ones you needs to make a placement or fill a vacancy. So you could be receiving 22% less applications but in fact you may be losing up to 100% of your quality applications (placeable candidates).
What do you do if you are an advertiser?
What advertising advice do you have to give if you are a job board?
If you find flaws in my reasoning, pls give me a shout… and kudos to Seek for their transparency with the trends.
A few months back I reported Checkster going on alpha testing. It is now open for access before release.
Checkster has a retail offering for individuals (candidates) and an offering to recruiters/hirers. Having seen products like those marketed by Insala, I did not find the tools used ‘brand new’; having said that, people might find some of the insights extracted from the reports useful to focus career or job seeking efforts.
On the b2b side, the twist is that these tools are being used in the recruitment process as an incremental source of reference checks, as opposed to when a professional is out-placed, undertaking company-sponsored career development, etc. I expect the value of having these assessments will be directly proportional to how they contribute to get the right individual for the job (measured in terms of tenure, performance on the role, etc.).
