Fast Track Recruitment

Is LinkedIn contributing to the retardation of the recruitment sector?

Posted by Mitch on 20th June 2018

image

Today I saw this doing the rounds on LinkedIn. It’s an article on how to attract candidates to your job postings, written by one of LinkedIn’s staff writers.

Judging by some of the responses, some people were getting giddy with excitement – presumably about how they’re now going to be able to write better job ads.

And to be fair, they will. But only marginally better. In fact, so marginal that it will make very little practical difference for anything other than those job ads where it’s likely there are are lots of available candidates.

The one positive take-away from the article is to not waste your time writing about the hiring company and how brilliant you/they think they are – because as the article rightly says, candidates don’t need to learn that in a job ad. There are plenty of other places they can find that out.

But, it makes the classic mistake almost every single article on job advertising I’ve ever read makes. It conflates job advertisements with job descriptions.

The job advert (or job description as they more accurately call it) they’ve used in the LinkedIn article is awful.

It’s awful because it pretty much only talks about what the hiring company wants.

Content that only talks about what the hiring company wants (aka job descriptions) should only be shown to potential candidates after they’ve established that it’s a job they’re interested in.

Therefore, the only people who are going to read a job description pretending to be a job advertisement will be people who need another job – as opposed to people who want a better job.

Which is a shame because around 60% of people who look at job ads are people who don’t need another job – but are interested in jobs that might improve their situation in some way.

Recruitment advertising has very few advantages over other forms of direct response marketing – especially when it comes to creativity. However the one glaring advantage it does have is that a job ad only needs to find one customer.

Usually, the best candidates are those that are a little more discerning about the type of jobs they apply for. In other words, they’re generally not desperate.

People who aren’t desperate don’t look at job ads that read like ransom notes.

Unfortunately, the writer of the LinkedIn article only has a surface knowledge of recruitment or recruitment advertising.

Getting people to change jobs is very different to getting them to buy discount bedroom furniture.

Comments

By Darren Ledger on Friday, 29 June 2018

As always Mitch Sullivan hits the back of the net, with startling brevity and unbounded accuracy.


Want to comment on this blog?

Some HTML is allowed. Inappropriate or spam comments may be edited or deleted without warning or notification.

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:



Previously…

When are the clients going to start taking some blame? »

England, my England… »

Is LinkedIn contributing to the retardation of the recruitment sector? »

The Marionette Madness March »

I’ve got your SEO right here.. »

What can agencies learn from inhouse recruiters? »

The problem with KPIs »

Recruiter. Jobs. London. »

Recruiting Monogamy »

How to deal with clients who try to lowball you. »

You’re cheap for a reason. »

Talentspotting »

Me, Me, Me.. »

“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain…” »

Do passive candidates read job adverts? »

See more »

RSS Feed

Subscribe to my Newsletter

Tweets by @mitchsullivan