The saying “Stay true to the game” pops up all the time. It’s been around in sports and pop culture for ages. Basketball especially! (Side note: who do you have winning tonight?) Anyway, I feel like I keep hearing it more and more.
“The game” stands for your thing, whether it’s sales, accounting, basketball, you name it. For me, it’s recruiting. Whether third-party, corporate, or RPO, we’re all in the same boat.
Being true to recruiting is kind of subjective. What does it even mean?
If you zoom out from recruiting and think about staying true to something you’re passionate about, how do you do it? How do you make sure it’s a priority? What do you do to show you’re committed?
This way of thinking sets the stage for understanding what it means to stay true to recruiting.
Recruiting is my thing. To keep it real, I stick to a few key things:
I soak up as much recruitment info as I can.
I connect with top-notch recruiters.
I swap stories and tips with fellow recruiters.
I’m always looking for ways to improve my skills.
I know that staying loyal to recruiting is a choice I make.
Staying true to recruiting means always aiming higher, personally and professionally.
Sure, it’s not always easy, but it’s about staying true to the game.
So, here’s the deal this Monday. Share what your thing is in the comments below. Then, let us know how you’re staying true to it this week. Go for it.
Every hiring manager wants passive candidates – to stumble on those hidden talents just waiting to be discovered. But what exactly defines a passive candidate today? Let’s break it down without the frilly stuff.
Traditionally, passive candidates were those who were not actively seeking jobs. But what does “actively searching” really mean? It used to include only the unemployed, those in irrelevant jobs, or on the verge of being fired. But that’s too narrow in today’s reality.
Recruiters often boast about finding “passive” candidates like they’ve hit the jackpot. But let’s be real. Take Timmy, for example. He seems passive, but he’s quietly applying for jobs while stuck in a dead-end job. Anyone with an online profile is fair game – they may not hunt for jobs daily, but they’re definitely open to offers.
So, here’s an updated definition:
“A Passive Candidate is someone found through various channels, not actively seeking your job.”
A passive candidate isn’t someone you found who hasn’t happened to think about applying to your job, yet. They actually might be the most active candidate on the planet, who you just happen to run into. Think of candidates buried in your database or referrals from employees.
We know a truly passive candidate when we speak to one. They’re a bit nervous. A bit surprised. A bit flattered. You can tell they’re not used to talking to recruiters and feel guilty talking to you. This is the person you’re hiring managers are asking for when they say they want a passive candidate.
This isn’t to say passive candidates are better. That’s an entire other post, but let’s not act like we are providing passive candidates when we aren’t.
What is the worst buying experience you’ve ever had? For many, it’s buying a car.
Whether it’s brand-new or a used one, the process often sucks. It kicks off with the salesperson, who accompanies you on a test drive, bombarding you with small talk because (duh) they can’t trust you to drive alone, when all you want is to assess the car in peace. Then comes the excruciating negotiation dance between you, the salesperson, and their “sales manager,” dragging on for what feels like an eternity. And either way you feel like you’re getting a raw deal. It’s all set up to benefit the dealerships, not the buyers.
Recruiting can feel the same way for companies and job seekers. It’s uncomfortable, with both sides holding back information, or not asking certain questions. In the end, one side usually feels like they’ve won, while the other feels like they’ve missed out.
So, how can we change this?
It’s a tough question. If there were an easy answer, the car industry would’ve figured it out already. The problem is a lack of trust. Companies assume buyers don’t understand their need to turn a profit, so they play games with pricing. Similarly, recruiting tends to focus too much on skills and not enough on cultural fit. This leaves both parties unsatisfied in the long run.
Recruiting should transition from a one-sided sales pitch to a matchmaking service. Contrary to popular belief, I’m not just seeking the best talent—I’m after the best talent that aligns with our culture and can seamlessly integrate into our existing team. These may not always be one and the same. Yet, traditional recruiting focuses predominantly on skill matches. The hiring manager needs a Java Developer, so recruiting delivers one—but if there’s no cultural fit, both parties end up unhappy. The issue lies in the time-consuming and subjective nature of this approach, which gives HR departments palpitations.
While I don’t have a solution, I can’t wonder how recruiting might evolve if it took notes from Match.com rather than traditional job boards. Imagine a world where compatibility and cultural fit are most valued, where recruiting isn’t just about filling a position but forging meaningful connections between individuals and organizations. Give me Tinder For Recruiting, I don’t ask for much!
Sometimes we get so far into the weeds in recruiting that we forget what is actually important.
We have to have a brand!
We have to have an ATS!
And now, a new ATS!
We have to have a CRM! What the hell is a CRM!
Our job descriptions need a refresh, and let’s face it, our career site could use some work too.
And don’t get me started on the employee referral program.
There’s always a million things to do in recruitment, and it’s hard to keep up.
But here’s the thing: recruiting isn’t rocket science. It’s just about finding people to join your team. There are plenty of potential candidates out there; you just need to let them know you’re hiring.
That’s the golden rule of recruitment: Spread the word that you’re looking for new team members.
It’s pretty straightforward, yet so many good candidates slip through the cracks because they didn’t know there was an opportunity.
Recruitment is all about getting the word out. Sure, you might get some applicants who aren’t quite the right fit, but that’s part of the process.
To find the right people, you need to cast a wide net and let everyone know you’re hiring. Cast that net people!
It’s not just about posting on job boards or your career site; it’s about creating a culture where everyone in your organization understands the importance of spreading the word about job openings.
Unfortunately, many companies miss the mark on this. Whether it’s because they’re too proud or they think it makes them look desperate, they don’t make enough effort to let people know they’re hiring.
This is a big mistake that can sink your recruitment efforts.
Recruitment isn’t about showing off; it’s about being humble and inviting talented individuals to join your team.
When I started in Talent Acquisition and HR, I was sold on the idea that checking references was the key to snagging top-notch hires. The whole “past performance predicts future performance” spiel is practically carved in stone tablets right?
But around 100 reference checks into my HR career, I stopped believing it. Either I was a hiring genius (mostly true), or the reference check thing was a massive hoax.
Reference checks are the perfect scam. And not just any scam, but a scam that everyone is in on. Everyone knows the set up: The candidate wants the job, so they want to make sure they provide good references. The candidate provides three references that will tell HR the candidate walks on water. HR accepts them and actually goes through the process of calling these three perfect references.
Let’s face it: When was the last time a company passed on a hire based on a reference check? Most draw a blank; we hire based on references every single time. Is that a solid system? If you’re struggling for an answer or it’s always ‘never,’ maybe it’s time to rethink the whole reference check circus.
Get Your Own References: Ditch the usual references candidates throw at you. In interviews, get the names of their old bosses. Give them a call – you might get some real talk even if official references are a no-go.
Go Automated: Use fancy tech for reference checks that doesn’t make references feel forced into singing praises. It spills the beans on a candidate’s work style without giving away the game.
Fact-Check with Tech: Google, Facebook, LinkedIn – they’re not just for stalking. Use them to fact-check a candidate’s story. With over half of people stretching the truth on their resumes, tech is your truth serum.
Smart HR folks should question a system that gives the green light to almost everyone. Catching less than 0.1% of fakers isn’t a sign of quality; it’s just lazy.
Break the mold, try new things, and maybe your company will see you as the one who can pull off walking on water.
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.
For the last decade, you could find content on how to hire on Twitter/X. it was mostly crap. No one was really hiring anyone on Twitter in any real numbers. It was like fishing for one certain minnow in an ocean. But, boy, did they like to talk like Twitter was a “real” source of hire. It wasn’t.
Elon bought Twitter, and changed the name to X, and decided, wait, we have this giant community why shouldn’t people be able to post jobs and hire on here? So, they made some changes. Will it be the next big great source of talent? Probably not, but it’s worth checking out because it’s definitely easier now to at least test it and see.
Hiring (beta) is now available to all Premium users in the US.
Add up to 3 jobs and feature them on your profile.
Some folks love to dump on X because of Elon. What I find is that recruiters are fairly agnostic politically when it comes to finding new sources of hire! It really doesn’t matter if you love or hate Elon. The job is about getting the best talent for your organization.
I’m a big advocate of Recruitment marketing and advertising, in that you get your jobs in front of everyone. If you can, you post your jobs everywhere. Your career site, Indeed, LinkedIn, ZipRecruiter, Instagram, Facebook, X, TikTok, CareerBuilder, lawn signs on the corner, the bulletin board at church. EVERYWHERE!
Your job is to fill the req.
What does the X Talent pool look like?
500 million month users
The largest user group – males under 35 years (58%) – is more tech-savvy than average.
87% of X users also use Instagram (cross-promote)
Average users are on X for roughly 34 minutes per day.
Facebook is still the largest social media site, followed by Facebook-owned Instagram and TikTok – all have audiences in the billions.
Social media recruiting, in general, is tough. Those who do it best tend to be great content producers and build big audiences. Those who do it awful tend to just post jobs and ignore it. iIt’s very labor-intensive to do great social media recruiting. The average TA shop will not see social media in their top 10 sources of hire normally, so you must weigh the cost/benefit of this.
Now that I’ve told you how worthless social media recruiting is, I still like what X has done and is doing around hiring. There is a converted effort by X to cater to employers and make it easier to leverage their audience and your audience to make hires. X seems to be the only large social media company who is paying attention to recruiters!
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.
With Christmas approaching and New Year’s following shortly, it often seems like everyone’s just gliding through these final days. You know what tends to happen at year-end, right? People start assessing their lives and careers. It’s the classic: “2023 was rough. What am I doing with my life? 2024 is my year! I need a job I love!”
I run a recruiting agency, but my focus isn’t on “love”; it’s on clinching victories and having success. It’s a battleground of winners and losers. Tracking down the top-notch talent usually means they’re already working elsewhere when you spot them. You’ve got to win them over.
When you snag remarkable talent, it’s a win for one organization and a loss for another. It’s a straightforward win-lose situation.
Being an outstanding recruiter is all about a drive to win. Sure, loving this game (and I’m one of those who does) is great, but it’s not the make-or-break factor for success. What matters is the hunger for victory.
The best recruitment firms are consistently on the winning side. They rack up wins at a rate that overshadows their losses, like Stephen Curry hitting threes. Losing should sting, and winning should feel like that unforgettable first kiss.
Love isn’t what decides winning or losing. Some of the toughest rivals I’ve encountered weren’t crazy about what they were doing well; they were just determined to win.
Too often as recruiting leaders we feel we need to find people who love recruiting. All leaders fall into this trap, trying to get their teams to fall in love with the work they do. The belief that ‘love’ will drive great performance. Which might work, but getting someone to ‘love’ work, is really hard, and rare.
Getting someone who only wants to win, that’s much easier to find and feed.
I’m not in the love business; it’s messy and emotional. I’m in the business of winning. It’s clear-cut – it’s either a win or a loss.
