Recruitment Reset

(Nope not another "bashing of recruiters")..

Recruitment is, at it's heart, about people, specifically about attracting the right person to your company. Recruitment is sometimes branded as Talent Acquisition, or as some of us remember, Human Resources. The latter quite simply means "people".

It is surprising therefore that in this very personal space, job applicants are filtered through at least one, sometimes 3 passes of an Automated Talent System which is programmed to search candidate application forms and CVs for specific words to determine suitability. 70% of all job applications are not even reviewed by a human being but automatically binned by the ATS which could quite possibly have been programmed incorrectly, or more likely will skip over the truly awesome candidate because they used different wording in their application and not one of the predefined strings.

I have spoken to several recruiters, many agree that this automated approach is a poor substitute for a real person reviewing the applications but likewise frequently cite "lack of time" as a reason why they still use such software. Having been on both sides of the recruitment process, I can honestly say that I empathise with how time consuming it can be to review the applications, compare and contrast, ascertain transferable skills, read past the words on a CV / Application / LinkedIn profile to build up a picture of the person beneath it all as THAT is the person you are assessing. The above image is very powerful and illustrates clearly why the automated process does not work. Allow me to add some perspective:-

Consideration 1:

Recruitment advice to candidate = Personalise your CV for every role you apply for.

Candidate spends perhaps a couple of hours tailoring their CV for the role.

Application is discarded in seconds because of (for example) a spelling mistake; no forethought taken about whether the candidate may have dyslexia. Albert Einstein was dyslexic, same for Richard Branson, Tom Cruise, and Steven Spielberg. Yet this ever growing "automated, impersonal and robotic" approach to recruitment would discard them instantly. There is no consideration as to how time consuming applying for roles actually is, how many revisions the candidate is making in order to tick the boxes on a job description that often bears little relevance to the role actually on offer.

Consideration 2:

Nobody in the industry can agree on the "right" format for your CV, what it should contain, in what order, whether you should or should not include a picture, how detailed, number of pages, whether you include the last all positions or only the last 3 or 4 or 5, whether to stand out with an unusual CV (can be seen as a gimmick therefore unprofessional) or stick to a professional text based version (can be determined as boring and too "vanilla"). Every company and recruiter even within that same company will have different opinions on what is the "right" way to write a CV. In short, if the industry experts can't agree what chance do candidates have? The answer is akin to the same percentage of successfully plucking a tiny splinter from your pinky toe using needlepoint tweezers whilst standing in a rowing boat in the middle of a tropical storm at sea without injuring yourself or falling overboard.

Consideration 3:

Experience vs Certification. I wrote an article on this previously and it received some great feedback and initiated many interesting conversations and direct messages (Link Here). The article explains why more value should be placed on experience rather than certifications and stimulates awareness as to the possible pitfalls.

Example:-

Role = Director of IT (requirement listed as "must have a masters degree")

Candidate A has 15+ years experience specialising in technology applications and hardware, has management experience and incredible references citing focus and dedication but they don't have a masters degree.

Candidate B has little to no experience but has a masters degree (in English Literature).

Candidate A is the logical choice as they have a proven track record and practical experience yet Candidate B has the masters degree (even though it is unrelated and even if it was related has only practical knowledge) so they will likely get the interview over and above Candidate A at least.

Remember , many of the greatest inventors of the last 100 years had no formal qualification in a related field yet still positively changed our lives.

Consideration 4:

Job Descriptions are not law. They are not rigid. In fact, usually they are not even close to being accurate reflections of the role a candidate will be actually doing. Some are just copy and pasted from other companies in the hope it will be ok, others are a hastily compiled jumble of buzzwords and "popular" jargon, others are simply desperate hopes to attract that magical candidate that just left university, has 8 degrees, 20 years experience, knows everything about programming, finance, marketing, sales, management, digital and AI, and wants to work for ￡30k or less..... Sorry to break it to you folks, but even in fantasy land no such person exists. As a result of this, some candidates may stretch their CVs so far that it barely resembles any measure of truth just to be considered. Others, outright lie, others are honest and as a reward for their honest are passed over due to omitting a few buzzwords from their application.

I would urge companies, recruiters, and also candidates to take a step back and look at both sides.

1. Be honest and act with integrity.
2. Be human and respectful.
3. Take a moment to consider that your decision can change someone's life for the better.
4. Pick up the phone and talk, not from a script, but naturally.

(Candidates - speak clearly, be yourself, take a breath before answering - also read the job description and if you know who the company is learn a little about them).

(Recruiters - actually read the candidate's CV / LinkedIn before you call them. Understand the role first and what is essential. Use the call to get a better understanding of the person beneath the CV).

(Companies - invest in good people, maybe they don't tick all your boxes, but you then have an opportunity to guide that person to do things YOUR way and grow a loyal trusted employee. The benefits are huge!).

1. Remember that if a person matches 80% or more of the job description they are unlikely to stay long (so your costs to train, replace them skyrocket); ideally a candidate should match around 70% of the given job description (CORE essentials only).
2. Sometimes you just have to trust, the rewards are often positively amazing!

Our success as humans, throughout history, is to support each other. Grow, develop and evolve together cohesively. To partner with each other, to draw strength from and embrace our differences. Together we stand shoulder to shoulder, strong in our differences, successful in our diversity.

Thank you.