To Job Board or Not to Job Board...that is the Question.

There has been a lot of chatter over the years about job boards; their use, quality of candidates, quality of postings, etc. I have always felt that the job board should simply be one of many tools utilized by recruiters to source candidates and that any recruiter who limits the size of their tool box limits the size of their success. So I ask:

To the 3rd party recruiter, do you feel you have not performed the service expected by your client by placing a candidate derived from a job board, even though your client decided the candidate was the best fit and is happy with their performance?

To the hiring managers and corporate recruiters, do you feel a fee is justified to a recruiter who sources your next hire from a job board?

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Christopher L. Poreda on February 3, 2010 at 1:40pm

Well said Steven...Glad they are working for you!

Steven Coyne said:

100% of my placements have come, and will continue to come, from a job board. It is an extremely effective tool if managed properly!

But it's more than the job board at issue here. I have found candidates that some may consider to be "diamonds in the rough." Well, what are the "diamonds" doing on my job board? They are doing exactly what has already been expressed here! They are using every tool available to them, from face to face networking to online job boards. People understand that there are very effective tools available online, and a job board is one of them. They also want to know that you, as their recruiter, care enough to work with them to give them the best chance possible at getting in front of the hiring manager.

If my job boarding experiences bring me "diamonds," then I can only hope for more "rough."

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sandra McCartt on February 3, 2010 at 2:25pm

What i think is funny about all of this is that the very first thing we do when we advise a candidate on how to look for a job is to tell them to get their resumes out there so they can be found. Be it linkedin, facebook, the job boards, professional industry sites, etc. We tell them to watch the boards, check the social networks, join groups that are open to membership to the general public. Then we turn around and say, "oh no, we don't use the job boards, top recruiters do not use the boards or advertise their positions, the best candidates are the ones who are not looking. " "So much for you , you poor unemployed smuck." So what if you were laid off due to a merger and were the highest paid professional in the company. Now that you want or need a job we don't want you because you aren't hiding somewhere working hard and doing a good job. Internal recruiters many times do not get the same candidates even if we post the identical job for as many reasons as there are recruiters and candidates. I have had very few clients ever ask me if i use the boards. If they do my response is absolutely. Part of what you pay us for is to make sure that we cast the widest net possible for candidates for your positions. We write really sexy job ads, that's another part of what you pay us for that you dont' have to do and we weed out all the ones who don't fit so your people don't have to do it.

Believe it or not some top candidates like having a recruiter represent them. We can get feedback when they can't. We can negotiate salaries many times much better than the candidate. We have more company information and can help our candidates interview more effectively.

Would someone please tell me the difference between digging through Linkedin and facebook and digging through the job boards or most of all advertising our expertise or specific positions. Is it because it's free to use social networks, twitter, linkedin? Every recruiter i know used The Ladders when it was free then many dropped it when they started charging recruiters.

We don't buy the database search for the boards because we have discovered that if we post a position we will get most of the ones that have their resumes out there that can be located and many who want notification but not exposure. We get a lot of good candidates who watch the boards for open positions who don't have their resumes out on the net.
Are those passive candidates? They were until they saw my posting. Don't tell me that all of us don't once in a while read the want ads in the paper just out of curiousity. I get top CFO's ,attorneys and scientists everytime i post a position. The cover letter comes in saying, "I am not really looking for a new position but i happened to see your posting and thought it looked interesting." Or, "my brother in law is looking for a job, saw your posting and sent it to me, i'm happy where i am but that sure looks like a great opportunity".

I often tell candidates that i can't place to look for recruiters who are advertising positions in their industry and contact that recruiter. How exactly is a good candidate supposed to find a good recruiter if the recruiter is a secret or only gets candidates from direct recruiting. Should we tell the candidate to go hide and wait for a recruiter to find them for the best jobs. We make 40 cold calls a day asking for referrals and stick our noses in the air saying we would never use a job board. But we will use social networks and we will use twitter and we will pound the phones.

WE all agree that the boards are only one source but why in the name of recruiting we find it necessary to posture as if we are somehow better if we don't use the boards ,that it somehow makes us better recruiters is beyond me. If that plays better in Peoria with your clients, by all means don't use them. I am on the way to the bank with a 38K check i just got by placing a subspecialty trained, almost impossible to find doc who responded to a job board posting.

In my popcorn stand we don't care where they come from unless it's the county jail. I agree with Peter, i am bored with the blah, blah about, "I'm better because i don't use job boards."

And what is really hilarious...Where do recruiters go when they are looking for a job? To the job boards and the job listings on the recruiting sites right after they called all the other recruiters they know who told them to check the boards. yowsa..

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sal Petrara, CPC on February 3, 2010 at 2:35pm

Hi Peter;
I must disagree with some of your points...
1. Job boards are less expensive then they were five years ago, in fact every year they get more competitive in pricing (some may argue that the prices go down in a bear (employment) market, I do not think this is the case...).
Fewer and fewer qualified candidates are posting to job boards given that they are open to all kinds of correspondence from all kinds of people.
Monster has become a haven for consultants to post a plethora of different versions of there resumes often requiring relocation (as stated by geographical search preference) or misleading regarding work authorization status.
I have not utilized any job board for about one year now and my work has been more rewarding. Yes I generate fewer candidates yet have a higher interview-to-submittal. As Kimbul Dunton stated, "Quality tells quality sells".
I do not poo poo any boards and can only speak about my experience(s) having access to job boards since their inception.

Peter Ceccarelli said:

My belief is that job boards had their 15 minutes of fame.

Huh! If that is the case, then why are they so expensive, and why do they still work, and why does most everyone post their resumes to them if they are so "last year????" I'm tired of how a lot of recruiters from all walks of search pooh-pooh job boards when we all use them and will still use them regardless of how sexy we all believe the "new" channels are. Like a lot of you have stated, job boards are just another source, albeit a rather important source. If you compare the overall hiring source codes from job boards against social networking sites, I'd think we'd not be surprised how job boards still dominate our hiring statistics. It's just a fact!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob McIntosh on February 3, 2010 at 2:56pm

The issue is not if job boards work because the do and will continue for some time. As a corporate leader, the question is if I already have an internal corporate recruiting function who should sweep the job boards for talent, how do I mitigate the overlap of engaging an agency who can complement the corporate recruiting team. If I have my house in order then the follow should be true:
1) Do I want my agencies to sweep the job boards when my recruiters already do it...........No
2) Will I get upset with an agency that submits a candidate that we found previously on a job board and we did a poor job of keeping in touch........No (but I might be with the corporate recruiting team)
3) Do I prefer agencies to not use Job boards to find talent that the corporate recruiter cannot (as Jason put's it)..........Yes
4) Am I trying to find the best talent, in the quickest timeframe at the lowest cost.............Absolutely Yes.
5) Can we all live harmoniously together as agency and corporate recruiting function..........Sometimes yes/Sometimes no