Does anyone have an idea how companies even managed to recruit and hire people twenty years ago? I mean recruiting without ATS software, Skype, chatbots and the assistance of machine learning & matching algorithms? That time around 1997 when Steven Hankin of McKinsey & Company declared the war of talent (in a book). I was 12 years old back then and my greatest talent was driving my sister crazy so I wouldn’t necessarily know. I can just imagine it must have been almost unbearable for hiring managers and HR when it’s already so difficult to recruit these days, right?
Now we look at fundamental workforce changes over the last two decades so I’m not going to compare apple and oranges. As people and technology evolved, a lot of change happened and the employment & recruitment landscape has clearly made a shift due to technological advancements in most industries and companies and their ways to recruit needed to adapt, too.
You often hear that term “skills shortage” and while I’m not the biggest fan of it, I’d agree that a larger number of good candidates can’t be found everywhere. Depending on the job requirements, education, experience, location etc., your candidate pool may be limited and filling an open position can definitely be challenging.
Nevertheless I often think, should we just blame the difficulties in finding and hiring good employees on today’s “skills shortage” and the “war of talent” or are we making recruitment just too difficult sometimes?
Now you would assume that with all the technological advancements and tools we have these days, recruitment should be much easier but many companies still struggle in finding talent. As every company is looking for talent to hire, they are often willing to make big investments but to justify the cost of hiring, employers often have unneccessary complicated and long recruitment processes — to make sure they don’t hire anyone but the absolute best and not make any hiring mistakes.
Employers don’t always know what they want
The need to find the right candidate and major concerns over cost often lead to companies producing job descriptions that are too broad for the actual position or job descriptions that include pretty much everything but the ability to walk on water. In some cases organizations aren’t sure on what a new candidate actually needs to bring to the table which then leads to issues in defining a position and can definitely lead to unfilled positions. When a job description isn’t accurate, you may not be able to attract a reasonable number of suitable applicants or the other way around, you may attract too many unsuitable ones. Wishful thinking is another problem, with hiring managers sometimes including a long list of skills they would like candidates to have, even if those skills aren’t needed to be successful in the position.
Long & complicated recruiting practices put candidates off
Recruiting candidates takes money, time and effort. Knowing that, some organizations take way too long to hire people and jobseekers (at least the very good ones) are likely to be turned off by the prospect of wading through your bureaucratic morass just to apply. Online application, Skype interviews, assessment center, 3 more personal interviews over a span of a couple of months? That does actually happen. On the other side, having an efficient recruitment process can eventually serve as a competitive advantage hence a company should apply the simplest process possible to assess a persons character and competency.
Unfortunately some companies don’t seem to have a clear sense of how much a long recruitment process and a potential drop-out of candidates cost them at the end.
“You can’t attract top talent if the first impression looks like their worst stereotype of how your company may work.”
Technology is not always the holy grail
People who know me, may be surprised by that comment but technology is not always the holy grail ;) I consider myself as an early adopter of new technologies and get generally excited about new tools, platforms and apps in HR. Today’s technology is extremely capable, the cost is often quite reasonable and most of today’s workforce is tech-literate. There is also a wave of HR startups already waiting to interrupt recruitment and the way we hire today. Nevertheless adoption to new platforms and apps is often very slow and we’re still not making effective use of tech in the HR space. For instance, most large companies, and by now many SMEs, use applicant tracking systems to find qualified candidates — although you will most likely not find many applicants who haven’t had at least one frustrating experience in applying for a job through them. While ATS and automated matching software solutions are designed to help companies manage overwhelming volumes of applications, there are often not clever enough (yet) as they can’t determine all the different ways that a candidate might be qualified for a position.
Hence recruitment still needs human interaction at an early stage. You may eventually find and talk to a candidate who might be a fit for another open position, or a good fit for a position you plan to open in three months. You never know.
There is often just a training gap, not a skills ga
I’m often surprised why some companies insist on years and years of experience and rather wait until they come across that “perfect” candidate instead of hiring someone with less experience but someone who is smart and willing to give 110% if given the opportunity. Getting people into shoes that are slightly too big at the beginning but they can grow into can ultimately be rewarding for a organization as these people are often dedicated workers and produce higher quality work, which can also result in a significant cost savings for you. Despite these potential benefits, employers like to play with somebody who ticks all the boxes. So filling a position could often be done quicker and better if employers put more effort in promoting internal training for either current employees or future hires.
In conclusion: Even under the best circumstances, it can be difficult to find the right person for a job. Keeping recruitment simple and lean makes it easier for both candidates and employers to find together. Streamlining your hiring process and being clear on job requirements can minimise your hiring time, the number of resources invested and generally improve your employer brand and the candidate selection for higher retention rates. Technology can play its part in improving your recruitment process but still needs early human interaction between candidates and employer. Companies should invest more time in training internal staff and future hires to put ease in their recruitment.
What are your thoughts?
