Exacerbated by the continuing labor shortage in the United States, finding quality candidates remains one of biggest challenges for today’s hiring managers. In fact, tons of studies and research routinely have this challenge at the very top of list.
Today’s hiring managers are frustrated with the lack of quality candidates handed to them. And I don’t blame them. I, too, was frustrated when working with agencies to find the company I was working for awesome marketing candidates.
Too many of today’s recruiting agencies are providing the companies that hire them very little, if any, relief or help in this area….one of the very reasons why they were hired in the first place. That was certainly my experience while working in and leading marketing departments over the last 20+ years. Oftentimes, the recruiting agency would screen, interview, and deliver poor to average candidates for us to consider and interview. They didn’t seem too interested in really getting to know our company, the state of our department, the challenges we faced, or our goals. We, as a team, were forced to wonder if they even listened to our ideal candidate’s wants, needs, and preferences and what, exactly, was going on at that agency. These recurring, poor experiences were aggravating, frustrating, and annoying; not to mention a waste of time and money….
So what are some of the biggest aspects behind this major dilemma for today’s hiring managers?
Overwhelmed
Too many of today’s staffing and recruiting agencies are not human-driven agencies at all but, regardless of their size, placement-driven, overwhelmed ‘recruiting machines’ who couldn’t deliver excellent candidates to the companies that hired them even if they wanted to. They are simply swamped due to the company’s volume mission to place as many candidates as possible to as many companies as possible while sacrificing quality…not to mention providing little, if any, real-world experience insights into the role the company hired them to recruit for.
Overwhelmed recruiters make sloppy, rushed, inefficient recruiters. This particular issue is compounded for recruiters that have little, if any, real-world experience in, or passion for, the role they are recruiter recruiting for. See below….
A recent Harris Poll and Indeed study statistic neatly sums up this fact that the vast majority of today’s recruiters are completely overwhelmed: a whopping 70% of the job seekers stated that recruiters should have done more homework before reaching out. Well, what can be expected when today’s placement-driven recruiter is swamped and, potentially, up against an interview quota? They just don’t have the time to properly screen and vet candidates today….
TIP FOR COMPANIES: When vetting recruiting agencies to hire, companies need to ask if there are any interview-quotas at the agency, how many other placements the recruiter is working on, what makes them a quality- and human-driven agency and not a quantity- and placement-driven agency, and similar questions to avoid hiring the wrong agency.
Over Reliance on AI and ATS to Screen Candidates
There’s been a lot of news lately about agencies using AI to screen candidates. The fact is that so many overwhelmed placement-recruiting machines lack the resources or time to conduct thorough candidate screenings….which is why so many agencies are excited about leveraging a bot to screen resumes.
Surely, like so many things, there are winners and losers with using AI to screen candidates. This topic alone requires a whole different article. But the two clear losers are companies and candidates.
Removing human eyes, especially human eyes with real-world experience in the role they are recruiting for, from the equation of screening candidates will not help solve or alleviate for a hiring manager’s dilemma of finding higher quality candidates. Companies should not expect a bot screening resumes to improve the quality of candidates they receive from agencies.
When it comes to screening candidates:
Human Eyes > A Bot
Always.
Candidates also lose. Bias risk; poisonous, flawed algorithms; absence of subjectivity; favoritism of keyword/phrase stuffed resume; overlooking critical soft skills; absence of resume context when AI screens resumes; penalized for an unconventional career path; penalized for writing a human-driven resume instead of bot-ready resume, and the list goes on.
One of the few winners are, you guessed it, overwhelmed, placement-driven recruiting machines of all sizes. They must be very excited about using a new bot (in addition to their previous savior, ATS) to screen their resumes.
TIP FOR COMPANIES: When vetting recruiting agencies to hire, companies need to ask agencies if they use ATS and/or AI to screen resumes and let them know they prefer human eyes to screen resumes.
No Real-World Role Experience
Keeping an eye on the competition, I reviewed the websites and profiles of every recruiter at four staffing and recruiting agencies that branded themselves as specializing in placing only marketing candidates. Not one recruiter from all four agencies combined, from the founder on down, had a single day of real-world marketing experience.
Companies, and candidates, need to be on alert for life-long recruiters that possess little, if any, real-world experience in the role they are being trusted to recruit for. They…
- do not understand the ‘in the trenches’ nuances of the role
- do not understand the dynamics of the role or the unique environment the role works in
- do not speak the same language as the candidate
- are less likely to ask the right questions; follow-up, probing questions; or know what great answers are during the candidate interview
- are less likely to have a deep passion for the role
- are less likely to be current on the latest trends and best practices driving the role’s industry
- simply do not see the same resume the same way as a recruiter with many years of experience in the same role does
The likelihood of a life-long recruiter delivering higher quality candidates to companies than their role-experienced recruiter counterparts is slim. For a deeper dive into this particular aspect, read Not All Recruiters are Create Equal.
TIP FOR COMPANIES: When vetting recruiting agencies to hire, companies need to ask if the recruiter that will be assigned to them has any real-world experience in the role they are recruiting for. And, if so, how many years. Companies need to let agencies know they prefer a recruiter with at least five years of real-world experience in the role they are being tasked to recruit for.
Overly Focused on Hard Skills
This is where being overwhelmed, placement-driven, bot screening-driven, and not have any real-world experience really drives the overemphasis on selecting candidates solely or predominantly based on hard skills. But these types of recruiters are not the only ones at fault on this issue. Sometimes companies over value hard skills and working for well-known brands; and under value critical soft skills, key career accomplishments, relevant certifications, and other qualities that demonstrate a candidate’s deep passion for their career. All are equally important.
The hired agency has a responsibility to ask the right questions and spend quality time with the company to deeply understand, outside of hard skills, what type of person and personality will be highly successful at the company. It is their responsibility to educate the hiring manager what makes an awesome candidate. Not spending time on this (or not enough time on this) will lead to hiring less than the best fit candidates, unhappy new hires, low morale, and probably a short tenure at the company.
TIP FOR COMPANIES: When vetting recruiting agencies to hire, companies need to ask what processes and procedures are in place to select the best candidates based on both their hard and soft skills. They need to ask agencies how they screen for soft skills…and what their definition of a great fit candidate looks like.
This list is not exhaustive. What other troubling aspects are causing agencies to not provide companies better candidates?
Study after study today reveal that one of a hiring manager’s biggest challenges, if not the biggest, is finding quality candidates…especially in today’s very tight job market. Selecting the right agency is absolutely crucial. Knowing what to look for in an agency and the right vetting questions to ask will go a long way into selecting the best recruiting agency…. and getting an awesome list of final candidates to interview.
About Periphery Staffing Solutions
With decades of real-world experience working in and leading marketing and IT departments, we specialize in identifying, screening, and placing better marketing and IT candidates at all levels and areas. In addition, we bring our real-world experience and passion for marketing and IT to consult with hiring managers and marketing and IT heads on their challenges, dynamics, and make-up of their teams based on their goals.
We are truly passionate about marketing, IT, staying current with these dynamic industries, and what we do. We value building and nurturing close, genuine, strategic relationships with our clients and candidates just as much as making a successful placement. As a human-driven agency, we will never use any kind of a bot to screen resumes.
We are very proud that our views, thinking, approach, and philosophy on successful recruiting is on the periphery of all other recruiting agencies in the industry. When a company partners with us on their marketing and IT openings, they can expect better candidates and a better, more rich experience.
cdegobbi@peripherystaffing.com201.446.2217