75% of candidates withdrawing from lengthy recruitment processes…
75% of candidates withdrawing from lengthy recruitment processes…
Is the term “candidate pool” outdated and should it be replaced… Perhaps, Stream, river or even torrent in some circumstances.
With 75% of candidates interviewed in a recent survey admitting to withdrawing from lengthy recruitment processes but only 10% of internal recruitment partners aware that there is even a problem we have a big disconnect in the process of hiring people still. ( link to survey in comments below )
So many of our clients lose great candidates because they are labouring under the impression that they have a lot of time on their side.
Even what we’d call “passive candidates” rarely are 100% passive and when we must tell clients that the candidate they are about to, joyfully, offer the role to has accepted an offer they do tend to get a little upset.
We recently had a client who waited 6 weeks from first interview to final offer. They’d lost the candidate to a more agile company who got busy and moved their process forward at a good speed. When we told them they were furious as US… Yes, Us… “how did we let this happen”.. they said.
领英推荐
Anyway the “pool” is rarely a pool anymore… it’s a fast-moving river mainly.
What I am trying to say here is that time is still of the essence with recruitment.
If you’re working with a good head-hunter ask them how to stream line the process. We always try and get this set up in advance of commencing a new project. Good candidates don’t stay passive for long. They still get snapped up quickly.
Get anyone involved in the process “bought in”. Make sure key decision makers aren’t about to go on a 6-month sabbatical, set a time line that is both reasonably quick and flexible. Make the candidate you are meeting feel wanted. Remember they are interviewing you as well.
Hoping this was helpful ?