Here’s the real talk: sooner or later, you or anyone in recruiting will feel the itch to shake things up, thinking it’ll make the process smoother, sharper, or just better. The old ways failed, usually because you didn’t create them, so you figure a makeover is in order to match today’s standards. The revamped process promises to make hiring managers happy and completely change how talent flows into your organization.
Sounds legit, right?
It does, been there, done that. But here’s the kicker – it won’t work. The ‘new’ process is just the same old one with a fancier look. Sure, it might be somewhat ‘better,’ but that’s not the issue. The real problem is you’re missing something crucial. Why the urge to ‘re-process’? Let’s say it’s about getting “more” out of your recruiting game – more talent, more compliance, happier managers, better retention, just more.
But let’s be real. If your current setup was delivering, you wouldn’t be fixing it.
Wondering why the ‘new’ process won’t be your golden ticket either? It’s not because you don’t want ‘more.’ You’re scared of it. ‘More’ means facing things you could dodge in the old routine.
That’s the real reason your ‘new’ process is set up to fail. Deep down, where water cooler talk doesn’t reach, you don’t actually want it to work.
Having a successful process means opening up to failure. It needs hard numbers, accountability, a clear line in the sand that screams “we own this.” Those things spell out success and shout out failure. Success is cool to show off, but no one wants to flaunt failure. So, you go on this ‘re-processing’ spree, hoping to secure success without risking failure. Newsflash: that’s not happening. Success only matters when you know what failure looks like.
Sure, failing as a team isn’t the end of the world, but on a personal level, it’s terrifying. This fear keeps you from building the process your organization actually needs. A process that calls out the winners and the not-so-great players. A process that pinpoints where things need fixing. A process that calls for clear decisions.
Why is your new recruiting process doomed? Because you’re not willing to build one that shows your failures.
Shoutout to Aerotek for being the pioneers in figuring out how long it takes for someone to realize they’re not cut out for recruiting – usually around 9-14 months in the game. Whether you’ve barely dipped your toes in Talent Acquisition for 13 minutes or have been in the field for a while, you’ve likely come across tons of resumes that tell a familiar story.
Just having some recruiting experience, especially in IT or Technical stuff, can keep you in the game for a good ten years or more, even if you’re not the best at it. As the President of a recruiting firm, and someone who has run corporate TA shops for years, I’ve seen these candidates pop up regularly:
They kick off their recruiting journey fresh out of college, working at a big agency sweatshop for 9-12 months. They leave, citing issues with the management style, but truth is, they couldn’t meet their goals. Cut them some slack – those sweatshops are tough.
Next, they usually move to another agency or a small corporate gig, lasting less than 9 months. Same old story – couldn’t hack it the first time, and it’s not likely to change now!
If they’re playing smart, they jump ship from the second gig to a big corporate role with tons of recruiters, buying them about 24 months before being exposed as a recruiting flop. In these big places, it’s more about posting and praying than actual recruiting, so they can survive a bit longer.
Eventually, the big organizations catch on that they’re not bringing much to the table. But armed with the big corporate name on their resume, they snag a senior recruiter role with another big firm. The big secret is, they have no secrets, and neither did the last big org they worked for. Once the fake secrets run out, it’s time to start scouting for a recruiting manager gig in about 18 months.
They grab the first recruiting manager job they can find at a mid-sized firm, with high expectations because of their big company experience. Spoiler alert – they’re out the door in 9 months.
Back to the agency world they go! Bouncing around, bragging about their ‘contacts’ at big companies, they’ve hit the 8-10 year mark in their recruiting career, and they’re just not cutting it.
If they’re lucky as a mediocre recruiter, they might land a gig with a college or university, or something. These places are like havens for subpar recruiters. No pressure to do anything valuable – just show up, get a paycheck, and follow the process. It’s never their fault, and moving too fast isn’t on the agenda!
The best recruiters don’t move around because they’re so valuable the organizations they work for won’t let them leave! If you’re crappy, people are hoping you leave! Please take your crappy recruiting skills to our competition!
It’s my birthday! Let’s make this one for the books – literally! The only thing I want is for you to go pre-order my new book The Talent Fix, Vol. 2. Head over to the pre-order page, secure your copy, and let the countdown to the book release begin!
I’m beyond grateful for your ongoing support and am lucky to continue sharing this incredible journey with you. Cheers to another year of growth, learning, and a leader’s guide to recruiting great talent.
Getting turned down for a job sucks, but how you handle it can impact how people see your company. A while ago, I applied for an executive gig, and 18 months later (emphasis on this), I got a snail mail rejection letter. No communication for 18 months – then a rejection. Now that’s a solid candidate experience, right!?
That experience got me thinking about the dos and don’ts of rejection letters. Here’s the lowdown:
Dos:
Send signed letters to folks you talked to personally – phone calls, meetings, or internal referrals. And don’t wait 18 months.
Write rejection letters that match your company vibe.
If someone’s a definite no, shoot them the rejection letter. For maybes, keep them in the loop.
Use the ATS for mass rejection emails when there’s been zero personal contact.
Don’ts:
Don’t send a letter to everyone who applies. When someone applies, include a message in your recruitment process, letting them know that only those selected for interviews are considered part of the process. This means we’ll communicate directly with those individuals. Others, thanks for applying – please consider other positions that match your experience and background.
Avoid saying someone else was more qualified – you can’t know for sure. Focus on the one who fits your current needs.
Ditch the promise of keeping resumes for the future. Be straight – if they want another shot, tell them to reapply and maybe network a bit.
In the end, rejection letters should leave people thinking, “Okay, I applied once, and I’d do it again. Maybe even support or buy from this company.” It’s not easy, but doable.
For real feedback on your rejection game, give a few rejected candidates a call. They’re usually cool with sharing their thoughts on the process.
Hiring can be a puzzle, and losing good candidates is something that happens more often than we’d like to admit. I once heard that a whopping 95% of hiring managers are curious about why good candidates bail during the hiring process.
Now, the big question is whether talent acquisition isn’t telling hiring managers why candidates bail, or if hiring managers just don’t believe the reasons they’re given.
When asked why a candidate left, most teams usually blame the candidate – they backed out, the job was too far, or they got another offer. But hiring managers often hear a different story from their connections. It could be the TA team dragging their feet on travel expenses or taking too long to schedule an interview. Or a candidate might have been left in the dark for weeks about the status of their application, leading them to accept another offer out of frustration with the lack of communication.
The reality is, many TA leaders shy away from finding out the real reasons because it might make them and their team look bad. It’s not a pleasant thing to deal with, but if you want to improve your hiring process, you’ve got to know why your candidates are actually leaving.
So, what’s the trick? Don’t have your recruiting team ask the question directly. You’ll probably end up with answers that make TA look good and blame others. Instead, get someone neutral or a third party to find out and spill the beans. It might not be pretty, but real leaders want the truth, even if it’s uncomfortable. Facing reality is the first step to making your hiring process better.
If you’re looking for a new job, it feels like every move, every past action, and even future potential is under intense scrutiny. But one of my favorite studies (an oldie but a goodie) from a Harvard professor reveals that when it comes down to it, job seekers are primarily judged on two critical factors. That’s it – just two.
In a study spanning over 15 years, Harvard Business School professor Amy Cuddy revealed what shapes initial impressions. She unveils the core inquiries individuals subconsciously ask upon meeting someone for the first time:
Can I trust this individual?
Can I respect this individual?
Trust and respect. These are the immediate judgments following the lightning-fast assessment of one’s appearance. But once you start talking, they start checking how believable you are and the background that earns their respect. It’s often based more on the person making the judgment than on your actual attributes. Unfair? Absolutely.
So, how can you tip the scales in your favor?
Adapt your energy to match that of your interviewer. Harmonizing your demeanor with theirs can bridge gaps in compatibility. If your energy doesn’t match, they might wonder if you’re a good fit for the team.
Research your interviewer beforehand. Understanding their background and weaving connections during the interview fosters trust and respect.
Be interesting. Share a short, engaging story that connects and grabs attention.
Remember, an interview is not an examination; it’s a conversation with strangers. Sometimes the chemistry clicks, and sometimes it doesn’t. If you find yourself disliking the interviewers, chances are the job might not be the right fit either. Trust your instincts.
This holiday season, I’m stepping away from my usual writing to bring you some of the top-read posts from 2023. Enjoy!
What Email Subject Lines are Getting the Best Candidate Response?
Recruiters love to talk email subject lines! I think I could run my response data every month, and it would easily be my most-read post each month. It’s part of the secret sauce of talent acquisition, especially as ultra-low unemployment continues to make it very difficult for recruiters to get responses for candidates.
G*d Dammit, Tim! Just give us the secret magic subject lines so I can use them!
See? It’s like giving out that first hit for free! You give them a little taste, get them addicted, and now they can’t live without it. You start feeling itchy, so I’ve heard, and you can’t focus on anything but those free guaranteed-to-work subject lines!
Calm down. I got you, baby.
Try these on for size:
“We need to talk” – Like any good subject line, this comes from a place of personal psychology. Usually, when you see this in a message, it’s not a positive thing. Most likely, you’re in trouble, or you’re getting broken up with. Which, like any good subject line, is why this is so good. This gets extremely high open rates because it triggers something personal in people.
<Just Your Last Name> – It still works as well as any subject line I’ve tested over the years. I use this one more than any other subject line in my toolbox, and 60% of the time. It works every time! This works because no one does it, so the person does not view it as spam.
<A question that speaks to someone’s expertise> – This works because most of us have this psychology of wanting to help others and show off all at the same time. “Hold my beer. I need to show this person how smart I am, and make myself feel good that I help others…” A good example of this might be something like: “Tim, Can you help me with a recruiting issue I’m having?”
<Salary Data Subject Line, Personalized> – Why does someone change jobs? Nope. You’re mistaken. It has very little to do with their manager. It’s most likely someone else has shown them they can make more money by making this change. At least, that’s what all “the new” data is showing! “Software Engineers are getting 28% salary increases by making this change.” “A Technical Recruiter in the ATL is making $140K.”
<Anything specifically personalized to the receiver> – If you take 13 seconds to look at the resume or profile of a person you’re emailing, you can get something personal from that information to use. School mascots for men work well because you’re gambling that person is a sports fan of the school they graduated from. Or maybe you saw a post they like some certain professional team. “Go Green!” because I’m a Michigan State fan would get me to open that email every time.
Honestly, most of these subject lines work simply because they just don’t suck. 90% of recruiters still use lame subject lines like “I’ve got a great opportunity I would like to discuss with you” <vomit face emoji>! Actually, the vomit-face emoji alone in your subject would be a great subject line to test!
Try these out and let me know how they work.
Also, if you’ve found one that works great, help a brother out and share it in the comments below!
This holiday season, I’m stepping away from my usual writing to bring you some of the top-read posts from 2023. Enjoy!
The Reason You Got Ghosted by a Candidate!
Yesterday I answered a question from a candidate about why an employer ghosted them after their interview. Many readers were upset because they were also getting ghosted by candidates. In fact, like all the time, way more than they would ever ghost a candidate. Oh, two wrongs do make a right!
All ghosting is sh*tty behavior by candidates and by those of us who hire. Period.
The reality is that this is hard to admit, and as a professional, we own a portion of the candidate ghosting. Are candidates awful for doing it in the first place? Yes. I will not let them off the hook. But I also only control what I can control, and that is my process, behaviors, etc.
Why are candidates ghosting us?
1. We are moving too fast. Wait, what?! We are told to move fast because that’s what candidates want!? Yes, but when you move so fast, the candidates don’t know you (your company and you personally), the job, the boss, or the reasons why they should come and interview. It all doesn’t seem real. So, it becomes easy to just not show up. (Que Taylor Swift – We need to slow down!)
2. We aren’t giving candidates a way to easily tell us they moved on with another offer. Hourly candidates, especially, are moving fast and have multiple offers. You might have scheduled them for an interview later in the week, but they have already decided to go with another offer. While we gave them instructions on where to go and when we could have made it easier for them to opt out. Many organizations are using auto-scheduling tools like Paradox, which sends reminders and lets candidates choose to reschedule or cancel via text. Those organizations get significantly less ghosting!
3. We believe that once a candidate schedules an interview,our job is done. The most powerful human emotion in existence is being wanted by others. Candidates come to you for a number of reasons, all of which they can most likely get from someone else as well. But, showing them more desire than someone else is a key to great talent attraction. You still need to do that with your messaging even after the interview is scheduled.
4. We allow it to happen without any ramifications. (Okay, this might be a bit aggressive!) What if, every time a candidate ghosted you for an interview, you posted their picture and details on social media!? Yikes! Right?! “This is Tim Sackett, a cute redhead. He ghosted us for an interview yesterday at 3 pm. If you see him, tell him we are thinking about him!” Do you think it would get noticed? Heck, yes, it would!
5. We are making it too easy for candidates to interview. This is a catch-22. We need talent, so we reduce every roadblock possible for candidates. It’s so easy. Most don’t care if they burn the bridge or not. That is truly why employee referrals are so valuable for most employers. Referrals are far less likely to burn a bridge. That might be a trick to use. Ask a candidate: Do you know anyone at our company? Begin to tie the personal connection back to them, and they will be far less likely to ghost. Also, make it super hard to get an interview, and people will hold it as a higher value! “Only 1% of people who apply to our company ever get an interview! it’s a rare thing we offer to only the top candidates.” If you knew that was the case, you would show up for that interview!
I think most of the candidate ghosting is truly reflective of the poor morals and values of the people who are doing it. You made a commitment to someone. You keep that commitment, or at the “very” least, you inform that person you will no longer be able to keep that commitment. It’s a pretty basic human condition. Those who ghost probably had crappy parents and mentors in their life who didn’t teach them the basics. I’ve never once spoken to or met an upstanding individual who thought highly of themselves that would ghost. High-quality people don’t ghost. Low-quality people do.
People don’t like to hear that. They want to talk about circumstances and bad employers, etc. The reality is high-quality people will contact someone and let them know they no longer want to be considered, regardless of how crappy the employer may or may not be. Low-quality people just don’t show up. Don’t hate the player. Hate the game. I’m just telling you the truth. You already know.
If you’re an employer and you ghost candidates after interviews – You (not your organization). You, personally, are of low quality, just like the candidates who ghost you. I don’t like to hire low-quality people. But I also want to give every opportunity for a low-quality person to become a high-quality person.
This holiday season, I’m stepping away from my usual writing to bring you some of the top-read posts from 2023. Enjoy!
Inbox Zero as a Measure of Performance for Talent Acquisition!
I have a new #1 question I get asked by Talent Acquisition Leaders! My old number one question was, “Which ATS should we be using?” That stood the test of time for almost a decade! But I now have a new number one.
“How should we be measuring success in Talent Acquisition?”
That question comes in a lot of versions:
What is the best metric in recruiting?
What do you use to measure the productivity of your recruiters?
How do you show your organization that TA is doing its job?
What are the metrics you use to measure TA?
I like using “Measures of Success” terminology primarily because of how I want to live my life. I never want our metrics, analytics, and data to be used as a hammer to obtain performance. I want to hire people who want to be successful in what they decide to do in life. Once they make that decision, I want to treat them like adults and help them obtain that success. I use data to help them track outcomes and measures of success to lead them on this journey.
Does that sound like a load of B.S. hustle culture or what?! LOL!
But, honestly, I genuinely believe in this philosophy, even though it’s sometimes hard to follow.
If a recruiter wants to be successful, I know there is a specific set of measures that will help them be successful if they follow the process, use the technology, and are diligent in their follow-up. They don’t have to work over 40 hours per week. They just have to work the 40 hours they work.
Every company could have a varied set of metrics that will make them successful. Most will have some similarities, but the actual numbers within the measures will be uniquely yours.
Inbox Zero is a measure a few TA Teams are using as a measure of success.
First off, I don’t necessarily believe that “Inbox Zero” has a high correlation to TA Team or Individual success, but herein lies the problem with measuring the success of TA teams today. The measures most of us use, suck! Time to fill = awful, zero correlation, you should be fired as a leader. (Editor’s note: Okay, Tim, breathe in, we know you’ll die on this hill.)
I find about 90% of TA Leaders work to build measures of success that look good without really having any real impact on actual recruiting success in their organization. That hurts, I know, but it’s true. Inbox Zero is just another sexy attempt at measuring sh*t with little accountability to success, but you can actually measure it, so it must be important. (sarcasm alert)
Just because you “can” measure it, doesn’t mean you “should” measure it.
Okay, what the hell is “Inbox Zero”?
It’s basically what it sounds like.
As a recruiting measure, some brilliant TA lead believes if every recruiter ended their day with zero emails in their inbox, they must be more successful than someone who didn’t end their day with email in their inbox.
There is some science behind inbox zero, although not a measure of recruiting success, just life success. It was developed in 2006, and here are the tenets of this email management strategy:
Some messages are more equal than others. On any given day, only a handful of emails are important and timely. Stop treating every email “like a Christmas present that must be savored.”
Your time is priceless and wildly limited. Few people have time to respond to every email they receive or even read them in detail. Accept that your workload exceeds your resources and slavishly guard your time.
Less can be so much more. Quit thinking that one-line email responses are rude — you’re not helping anyone by sending wordy responses. When it comes to email, economy is key, at least for most messages.
Lose the guilt. Out-of-control email is bad enough. Don’t make it worse by beating yourself up because of your overflowing inbox. Forget the guilt and just get busy cleaning up the mess.
Lying to yourself doesn’t empty an inbox. Learn to be honest and realistic about your true priorities and time expectations, while developing a “baseline gut check on what you really intend to do about any given message.”
The reality is we are addicted to data that we can measure that is clean. We love “time to fill” because we can accurately measure it. We like things like Inbox Zero because we can accurately measure it. We can show the business the black-and-white numbers we are confident in. No matter if they actually matter or not!
Inbox Zero is a time management strategy. The hope is if you can manage your inbox well, you’ll be a better recruiter. It’s a hope. That is all it is. It’s not a measure of success for talent acquisition. That being said, I need to manage my inbox better!
Referral hires often stand out as the cream of the crop in any company’s recruitment efforts. It’s a simple equation:
Good Employee + wanting to stay a good employee + employee’s reputation = usually good people they recommend to HR/Recruiting to go after and hire
I’m like Einstein when it comes to HR math! However, here’s the challenge: despite this equation, many companies struggle to receive enough referrals. We’ve analyzed our referral process, fine-tuned collateral materials, and even leveraged technology to automate referrals. Yet, the numbers remain short of our expectations and needs.
There’s a straightforward but often overlooked aspect: giving employees explicit permission to share job openings within their personal and professional networks every time a referral is needed for a specific position.
HR excels in roll-outs—we’re masters at initiating programs. However, where we often stumble is in the continuity of these programs post-roll-out. Brutal truth, but true.
So, how can you ramp up your referral game?
Establish a program (surprisingly, not all companies have one).
When in need of a referral, ask for it every single time. Assuming that employees will naturally share openings isn’t always effective.
Specifically “give permission” to employees to share job openings on their social networks—Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok you name it!
BEST PRACTICE TIP: Create departmental email groups. When a relevant position opens up, send an email to the group with standard referral language and an easily shareable hyperlink along with clear instructions.
Granting “permission” triggers action—it’s a psychological thing, and it works wonders. Think about it, like you were a 5 year old. Your parents tell you, you can’t ride your Green Machine in the street. Then, one day, Mom is out getting her nails done and your Dad sees you doing circles in the driveway on that Green Machine and he goes “Hey, why don’t you take that into the street?!” What do you do? You immediately take that bad boy for a ride in the street! Dad “gave you permission” and you ran with it!
Referrals aren’t quite the same, but it’s surprising how some employees question whether they’re allowed to share job postings with friends and family. Don’t assume—they might surprise you.
