I’ve just read LinkedIn’s Recruiting Trends for 2017. As somebody who used to write this sort of stuff in a past life, I tend to regard it as self-serving nonsense. Cos it usually is. They are hardly likely to publish anything that’ll self-harm. I certainly never did.
If you must, you can get access to this report here.
It is quite interesting.
And if that sounds like faint praise – it is.
Averages are useless
Overall they have some interesting statistics, but the trouble is they’ve swept up a load of international averages, and the problem with averages is they never apply to anyone. It’s like having one foot in a bucket of ice cold water, and the other in boiling water. The average should be warm comfort, but try telling your feet that. So, averages are interesting, but broadly irrelevant.
“Most recruiters would spend more on employer branding if money was no object”
It really says that.
I stress, “Most…”
53 percent of recruiters would invest in company branding, and only 30 percent on the candidate experience. If LinkedIn has gathered this data accurately, and let’s assume they have, then this makes the recruitment community look stupid. Why invest in the brand and deliver a crap experience? OK, it doesn’t actually say that, but that’s what it implies by default. The collective recruitment brain isn’t made to look very bright.
Apparently, employer branding is best delivered when marketing and recruitment get together (I’ve worked in both disciplines and even I would disappear down the pub when that meeting started). They can then sell the sizzle – although later in the report, candidates and recruiters agree that the most important element of branding is the company culture – which certainly never comes from marketing or recruiters – it comes from the way the organisation is managed and led. Good or bad.
Do you think some marketeers and recruiters are sometimes trying to polish a turd?.@RSEHeadhunter read the latest LinkedIn Recruiting Trends report and finds it rather 'interesting'. Click To Tweet
It also says that most candidates get their ideas of culture from the company website and social media. So spend more money, or just do what you already do better?
I know what I’d do.
“Automation would increase the speed of screening candidates, minimise human bias, and help assess soft skills more precisely”
Yep. It says that too.
Now let’s say that’s true. Humour me. Just for the moment. Doesn’t that counter the importance of the candidate experience?
Some of this stuff doesn’t add up.
- The collective recruitment brain isn’t very good, or…..
- LinkedIn is putting a spin on this, or…
- I’m reading this wrong
I’ll let you decide.
In case I present myself as some sort of Luddite resisting technology and change…
Technology will continue to change this industry, and overall, mostly for the better. It’s just that I can smell people jumping on bandwagons before they’ve arrived. They’ll be broken teeth on the pavement and blood in the gutter.
To be absolutely fair, LinkedIn have new owners looking to get a return, and if I were in their shoes, I’d do EXACTLY what they’re doing…..
…but that’s EXACTLY the time you should start to fret.
This article first appeared on LinkedIn on December 8th, 2016.
Leave a Reply