Monster claims they have over 25 million resumes, but Monster allows you to post different versions of your resume. So how many are unique and how old are they? CareerBuilder claims they have more page views than any other job board. Is that because more results are returned since they default at a 20 mile radius search vs. Monster's 15 mile default?
Recruitment Process Outsourcers claim they decrease your cost and time to hire. I have heard statistics as absurd as reducing average time to hire to 8 days. Can any RPO free up hiring manager schedules, remove vacations, and get all the decision makers together to decide? All while getting top talent, that is usually employed and busy, free to quickly interview and then decide within days?
Even more absurd: the notion that a RPO's proprietary database produces better results than all the major job boards. Just one major board, Monster.com had revenue of $1.4 billion last year. According to Gartner, the entire RPO industry, including all it's players are only a $1.3 billion market. If any single RPO's had a database more valuable than Monster alone, they would be better served getting in to the job board business.
There is a lot that companies have to filter through when deciding on RPO. Companies ask what resources can a RPO give you that they can't get themselves at some price? And is that price worth the risk?
YourLeap, based in Stamford, CT has a unique approach to RPO. YourLeap gives you whats most valuable to you without all the fluff. They don't claim to be more valuable than the job boards, they feel that if boards were used effectively, many companies wouldn't need to outsource any of the recruiting process. YourLeap industry experts post your position and search daily on all the major boards and hundreds of niche boards. The results are easy to access by logging in to YourLeap.com and viewing the pre-sorted responses from all the major job boards, as well as the hundreds of niche boards they post to. YourLeap provides this to you in an easily scalable and cost effective way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I read post with interest. As a founder of a niche job site, www.sixfigures.com.au and someone with many years in HR and Recruitment I agree with your comment around companies being able to use current sourcing channels more effectively. There are many terrific sourcing channels out there be that job sites, agencies, RPO's, social networking sites, new sourcing specific technologies and so on, however the results are dependant on the sophistication and commitment of user. They are also dependant on the willingness of companies to try new things, which for many there is a reluctance to change their antiquated ways.
As you have mentioned, I don't believe in a lot of cases sourcing tools and channels are being used as effectively as they could be to bring about the best results. The reasons vary from lack of time, money, resources, commitment, no desire to change, laziness and so on. The good news I think is that that companies are slowly starting to change.
Post a Comment