Poachers Versus Gamekeepers - the hunt for passive candidates

Are you a poacher or a gamekeeper? Do you actively go out there to find potentially suitable candidates (for now or in the future) or do you process applicants as and when they deem fit to send you their CV?

The difference is that poachers are more likely to find passive candidates then the gamekeepers are, but… so what?!

To begin with, it’s important to differentiate passive versus active candidates. There are various definitions around, but unlike an active candidate who is actively searching for jobs (either through email alerts or regular searches), passive candidates aren’t actively/frequently searching for a job, but would happily consider switching jobs if the right opportunity came around – they’re “ready to switch”. But in both cases, they may well be registered with a job board from a time previously when they were looking, so if you look far enough back you may be able to find their CV out there.

Estimates vary, but it’s generally assumed that around 60-70% of the workforce could be considered passive candidates. That doesn’t mean they’re all looking out for jobs like yours, but it does mean that if a handful of basic criteria are met (nearby location, convenient work pattern, suitable skills match etc) and the money is right, they might consider it.

But passive candidates are your goldmine. Thanks to Linkedin, you can see if they’ve worked for competitors (or similar companies you’d like to recruit from) and have skills or experience that would be of value to you.

The problem is:

• They’re already in work, so arranging interviews without their employers noticing isn’t going to be easy.
• They’re in a much stronger position to negotiate on salary and other employment terms than candidates who are out of work – and they know it!
• They may come with prejudices and preconceptions which can be difficult to re-align with your way of doing things

This last point is worth emphasising. They may well be great at their job, but if the culture fit isn't right and they’re just going to rub everyone else up the wrong way, they can cause longer term problems which could outweigh the value they add.

The problem is, there’s a war on talent out there. According to the ONS the overall number of vacancies in the UK has been increasing since 2012 whereas the number of people out of work is going down. So, if the pool of suitable candidates who are out of work is shrinking, you’re going to have to start looking at the candidates who are in work instead (which include both active and passive candidates).

Now, to be clear, not every passive candidate is a suitable candidate. Just because a candidate is in work it doesn’t mean that they’re necessarily right for you; but there’s a chance they’ll have a more ‘quantifiable’ work history that's worth exploring.

A good passive candidate will be too busy, or too focused, in their work to have time for job hunting so you’re going to have to put some effort into reaching out to them, meeting where they meet (online and offline) and getting their commitment to meet up for an interview. You’ll need to meet at a time and place that might suit them better than it suits you – they may feel more comfortable meeting at a neutral location like a coffee shop (even if it is more public) rather than risk being seen going into your company’s office. In times of economic uncertainty passive candidates get 'super-passive' bunkering down in their current job, too nervous to move to a company they're less familiar with.

This all sounds good in theory, but how do you do it in practice? Obviously Linkedin is a great place to begin hunting for passive candidates – run searches for people who work for companies you compete with or who are members of groups related to the skills you’re looking for; but also run proactive CV searches on job boards for candidates who registered 2-3 years ago - if they found work 2-3 years ago they may be ready to move on now, and most job boards allow you to specify criteria for an email alert of relevant CVs in much the same way as candidates set up job alerts.

But a key piece of the puzzle is candidate attraction. I’ve written previously about the overlap between marketing and recruitment, but if you can get it right, you’ll have candidates begging you to hire them. Building your employer brand allows you to build talentpools of candidates gagging to work for you.

Any head-hunter will tell you, the definition of a passive candidate isn’t always as black and white as I've said. Many people who are in good jobs still check job boards to see what else is out there (just like most visitors to house-buying sites are perfectly happy where they are, and a significant proportion of visitors to dating sites are married), and many of the people who should be actively looking for work can’t be bothered; but there’s no getting round the fact that many of the best candidates out there perhaps don’t even know that they are candidates. And the fact that they're too busy working hard for their current employer (who may be your competitor) and don't have the time to job hunt shouldn't be seen as a bad thing.

As I’ve said, it’s a bit ambitious to presume that your potential pool of passive candidates extends to the entire UK workforce, but the chances are it’s broader than you think, and the difference between an active candidate and a worker isn’t always clear cut. So, if you are struggling to find the right person, remember there’s always more fish in the sea – or whatever the poaching metaphor is.