Quality of Hire Blog

arrowBack to Quality of Hire Blog

Recruiter Rights Vs. Candidate Experience

by Joseph Murphy

Rayanne Thorn of Broadbean sets out a call for recruiter rights over candidate experience in her blog post.

Recruiter Rights begin with recruiter responsibilities.  Sourcing that creates unnecessarily high applicant to hire ratios, candidate evaluation methods that rely on subjective word search and resume data review technology, and posting methods that present jobs to geographically distant populations are examples of recruiter self-inflicted wounds.

Resume spam is a function of technology looking for a solution versus recruiters designing a candidate experience that adds two-way value to the information exchange.  Most applicant technology interfaces are incapable of offering an assessment of candidates that differentiates job-fit capabilities in a meaningful and valuable way.  Beginning candidate evaluation with resume data is a GIGO proposition.

Gerry Crispin and I, plus a small, but growing list of people see a more candidate centric process as raising the rights and responsibilities of both parties in the business process called staffing.  Placing a more engaging and meaningful candidate experience into your process can reduce unwanted through a percentage who self-select out, and by providing data that compares candidates in a more useful manner.  Candidates and recruiters who have been through a meaningful experience offer testimonials that document the win-win.

The new Candidate Experience Award is about the entire, balanced approach to staffing process improvement.  Recruiter Experience AND Candidate Experience.

Come visit us in booth at 351 the HR Technology Conference.  Learn about the power of a Candidate Experience that improves the Recruiter Experience.