RecruitingBlogscom

Follow Us:

In our business, we hear constant commentary about the value and quality of job boards from both job seekers and employers. I thought it would make for a good discussion topic to ask people what are the top 5 worst attributes of bad job boards- any thoughts? That is, if you think of a job board you've used (or decided NOT to use), what are the top 5 reasons why it was so bad?

Here's mine:

1. Too many irrelevant jobs appearing in job searches
2. Not enough information about the employer (or none!)
3. Requirement of job seekers to register in order to apply
4. Too much non-job search related content
5. Not enough UNIQUE postings (such as aggregator sites that scrape jobs that are posted elsewhere, or, more importantly, ONLY have the postings that are already posted somewhere else.)

Okay, there's my 5... and here's my "6th man":
6. Inability to sort resumes adequately.

jb

Views: 234

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I do not even bother posting on job boards anymore. The internet has made the ease of applying for positions a detriment to recruiting. From a candidate's perspective, I agree with jb that the lack of employer information makes it difficult on applicants.....perhaps that is because recruiters are posting positions blindly.

I think industry specific job boards might be the answer.....but then you run the risk of too many boards.
Overload. It's overload on the people unless they are truly savvy at the job search process and it's overload on the corporations attempting to respond to the largely unqualified and non specific results. All forced on both parties by simply making something too "lowest common denominator" in application and forgetting that placement and finding talent is a

HIGH TOUCH, SKILLED event and process which is nearly impossible to automate.

Our firm has posted no ads within the last 5 years and our entire candidate base is hand cultivated. While that may seem harder...and it is...it is faster, more efficient and less wasteful for everyone.
I'd be interested to know if you think that these negative attributes are most common among the huge, mass market job boards. We tell employers and candidates that our niche job board is about quality, not quantity. When the job boards get huge, it would seem that irrelevant jobs appear in searches, for example.

Kathryn Sollmann
Co-Founder & Managing Partner
Women@Work Network, LLC
www.womenatworknetwork.com
ksollmann@womenatworknetwork.com
From a hiring co's perspective, the generic sites do not provide the desired concentration in specific industries. I tend not to post on the generic/non=industry specific sites as there is minimal ROI. I have much more success with industry specific sites as they target their marketing to both candidates and employers.
In my world, hospitality-there are only about 2-3 boards that produce--I am sure there are others out there, but I only look at 2 with any regularity.

Trip Young said:
I do not even bother posting on job boards anymore. The internet has made the ease of applying for positions a detriment to recruiting. From a candidate's perspective, I agree with jb that the lack of employer information makes it difficult on applicants.....perhaps that is because recruiters are posting positions blindly.

I think industry specific job boards might be the answer.....but then you run the risk of too many boards.
The job boards are extremely saturated and there is the lack of ability to navigate to relevant information on top of the fact that there is no uniform language. I hate using them as they add very little value when looking for high quality leads compared to the time necessary to find them. If I was tech savvy, I'd create my own! One company that is trying to change this is www.myperfectgig.com. They have only mastered the tech verticle so far but they plan to develop sales next and then expand further.
I may be biased a little, Kathryn, but like with many things, I think that when a job board is controlled by share price/earnings per share, it taints their view on what to allow on the job board. That's not an indictment of the size of the service, but rather of the goals. If the goal is to provide job seekers with access to only real local jobs, then you have to make a decision to turn away money from time to time.
Thanks Paula. I have to agree that industry specific services serve to focus efforts and energy. I'm curious if people feel like certain niche/industry sites do enough to attract the volume of candidates necessary. I've seen some excellent services that didn't promote themselves at all, and suffered as a result.

Paula said:
From a hiring co's perspective, the generic sites do not provide the desired concentration in specific industries. I tend not to post on the generic/non=industry specific sites as there is minimal ROI. I have much more success with industry specific sites as they target their marketing to both candidates and employers.
On the sites that I use, I know I get a majority of industry experienced candidates, or at least those who are going to school for the profession/industry. I have posted key positions on the national generic boards, with detial of what we are looking for, experience type---and receive people who have none of our key experiences. They say they have people in my business on the site, but it is the opposite in quantity as compared to the industry specific--where 90% at industry specific have what I want, on the generic, 10% at most have what I want--we get the volume from both, but the quality is higher on the industry specific.

We have had some luck with regional association boards that are centered on the industry--targeting mostly the local candidate base rather than national. That is important as for most of our positoins, as a small company, we are not able to assist with relocation costs. So, keeping things local, within our industry (even though it is one of the largest in the world) works best for us--more bang for our buck. I've tried the others, but it is more a waste of my time.

Jason C. Blais said:
Thanks Paula. I have to agree that industry specific services serve to focus efforts and energy. I'm curious if people feel like certain niche/industry sites do enough to attract the volume of candidates necessary. I've seen some excellent services that didn't promote themselves at all, and suffered as a result.

Paula said:
From a hiring co's perspective, the generic sites do not provide the desired concentration in specific industries. I tend not to post on the generic/non=industry specific sites as there is minimal ROI. I have much more success with industry specific sites as they target their marketing to both candidates and employers.
No Job Title search function. Just a keyword function that they then run through an algorith that somehow decides what is relevant or similar enough to make a match.

Search Talent Acuisition
Search Recruiting or Recruitment
Search Staffing

But all pull up much different results. Talent Acquisition somehow gets lumped into HR so you end up getting a bunch of HR results...
7. Not all the jobs have the rate/salary info.
I have to agree with this one, for sure. I can't tell you how much oxygen I've wasted trying to explain to businesses how important it is to post this info! If company's really don't care about the quality, there's no issue. But when you're trying to attract those A level candidates that are already employed, you'd better post a salary!!!

Thanks Kaphieel!

Kaphieel said:
7. Not all the jobs have the rate/salary info.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Marketing Partners

© 2014   Created by RecruitingBlogs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

scroll to the top