In Recruiting, Do You "Focus on Quality, Not Quantity?"

I recently read this LinkedIn post about recruiting metrics and transactional recruiting and it inspired me to write this article. The general idea behind the post, which is heavily supported in the comments, is that a focus on recruiting metrics (activities specifically, such as calls, candidate submittals, etc.) is a transactional approach to recruiting.

In recruiting, metrics matter

While activities are undeniably required for recruiting results (you can't have output without input), you don't have to measure them (metrics).?

However, the quality and quantity of recruiting activities do matter whether someone chooses to pay attention to them or not. Leading indicators (e.g., outreach, candidate submittals, etc.) convert to lagging indicators (e.g., interviews, offers, hires) at different ratios depending on *many* variables.

When I was recruiting full time, I set my own daily activity targets for how many people I would find and contact and they were engineered to produce the leading indicators I was looking to achieve - a minimum of 3 (high quality!) client submittals per day. This was above the general guideline. I was very disciplined in my daily planning and activities and I always met or exceeded my own goals. I did this for myself, and it allowed me to cover and fill more jobs than anyone else in my company.?

In reality, the only thing you have *direct and full* control over as a recruiter is your activities.?

While you can do many things to influence them, you do not have direct control over interview requests, offers, or hires. However, you do have direct and full control over the quantity and quality of the candidates you find, engage, and submit. All other things being equal, the higher the quality of your candidate to job match, the higher the probability of getting an interview, offer, and hire, and the higher the quantity of those candidate submittals, the more interviews, offers, and hires you will achieve.

You may have noticed that I mentioned that I had goals for my leading indicators (sourcing activity and candidate submittals). I didn't have goals for interviews and hires because I learned very quickly that if I submit a high quantity of high-quality candidates, the interviews and hires take care of themselves automatically.??By solely focusing on a high quantity of high-quality recruiting activities, I was able to achieve more hires than any other recruiter in my company without even setting a goal to do so.

I'm not the only person who thinks it's more important to focus on the process rather than the outcome...I'll share more on this in future articles.

Does a focus on recruiting metrics = transactional recruiting?

Being thoughtful when it comes to activities and metrics does not make someone a "transactional" recruiter. I certainly wasn't, and I never trained anyone to be one either - but I did teach the importance of activities, both quality and quantity and the impact it can have. Someone can be a transactional recruiter without paying attention to their metrics - no recruiter should ever send a candidate to a client unless they are the right person for the role, and certainly never to simply hit a metric target. In other words...

Metrics don't make someone a "transactional" recruiter - mindset does.?

I believe that recruiting without paying attention to metrics is like exercising without paying attention to heart rate, time, reps, weight, etc., or being a professional athlete without paying attention to your stats. I believe all professionals should care about every aspect of their work, including their activities, ratios, and results.

Quality AND Quantity

I've been in staffing 20+ years and I can't tell you how many times I've heard, "I focus on quality, not quantity." I never cease to be confused when I hear it because it's not about quality over quantity - you can have both if you want.?

Quite simply, quality X quantity = results. [although some people I've trained will remember I improved this to quality X quantity X quickness = results because I have found that time often matters]

It's not an either/or equation. If two people have the same quality level and one performs more daily activities than the other (and all other things being equal), the one with more activities will have greater results. This is true for any recruiter - staffing, RPO, corporate, executive search, etc.?

If I can have unwaveringly high quality and while also operating at a high quantity, I can help more teams hire the people they need and help more people take the next best step in their career.

For me, it was always about maximum impact, and I would personally much rather be a 10 in quality and a 10 in quantity vs. 10 in quality and 5 in quantity, especially if I am capable of 10 quantity in a normal work day/week (no need to work excessive hours).

What are your thoughts on this matter?