4 ms·

I'm building up the database of candidates at the same time as the database of startups. There are two sign up paths on the form, "Get Hired" and "Hire". The b

by jacektu 12y ago

I'm building up the database of candidates at the same time as the database of startups. There are two sign up paths on the form, "Get Hired" and "Hire". The benefit to the startup is convenience. Startups get a regular e-mail with engineers including their contact information. No app or service to log in to. They also don't need to deal with anonymous introductions to candidates who aren't seriously looking. Requiring startups to specify which companies to hire from may be limiting or like you said not productive. If I see many startups selecting many or all companies I will simply make it a requirement that candidates have worked at a top tech company and not specific ones.

lscore720 12y ago
Got it, thanks for explaining. Here's my two cents and I'm sorry if it's not what you want to hear: The foundation of recruiting is sales - you are competing again internal, external recruiters and many other avenues pursued by an employer to hire THE best candidate for a given role. They don't care about anything but you delivering the best in the most efficient way possible. I regular give advice to people testing new tech recruiting approaches - because the system is broken in many ways. The worst attempts at fixing are generally made by engineers with limited understanding of what it takes to actually be.a.recruiter. They assume that their technical proficiency will give them the edge - wrong. This is the mistake made by most technical people who believe they'll also succeed in sales - it ends up being a handicap. For the most part, actuaries make terrible insurances salespeople, mechanics fail in car sales, and so on. Human first, salesperson second, technician a distant third. At this point, all you have is a visually appealing tool that may add a tiny fraction to the employer's hiring productivity. But that means nothing unless you have the best candidates for them, yesterday. If you are starting from scratch, you'll either need to partner with a recruiter with a huge rolodex or spend about years building up your own. You cannot just enter this game without a huge database ready for your hiring campaign. It's a numbers game, it takes massive outreach before you can even offer a simple tool like this to differentiate yourself. Until then, an employer could care less unless you've proven you can deliver the best candidate, now. Hope this helps!
- jacektu 12y ago
  Thanks for your insightful feedback. I appreciate it.
- jacektu 12y ago
  Based on your experience in the tech recruiting industry, what aspect of recruiting is broken and is the biggest pain point?
  - lscore720 12y ago
    IMO trust in recruiters. Like any commission-sales role, there is a low barrier to entry and too many bad professionals give it a bad name, lead to skepticism, therefore creating challenges and inefficiencies for the minority that can make it a valuable experience for both candidates & hiring managers.

by jacektu 12y ago

lscore720 12y ago

Got it, thanks for explaining. Here's my two cents and I'm sorry if it's not what you want to hear: The foundation of recruiting is sales - you are competing again internal, external recruiters and many other avenues pursued by an employer to hire THE best candidate for a given role. They don't care about anything but you delivering the best in the most efficient way possible. I regular give advice to people testing new tech recruiting approaches - because the system is broken in many ways. The worst attempts at fixing are generally made by engineers with limited understanding of what it takes to actually be.a.recruiter. They assume that their technical proficiency will give them the edge - wrong. This is the mistake made by most technical people who believe they'll also succeed in sales - it ends up being a handicap. For the most part, actuaries make terrible insurances salespeople, mechanics fail in car sales, and so on. Human first, salesperson second, technician a distant third. At this point, all you have is a visually appealing tool that may add a tiny fraction to the employer's hiring productivity. But that means nothing unless you have the best candidates for them, yesterday. If you are starting from scratch, you'll either need to partner with a recruiter with a huge rolodex or spend about years building up your own. You cannot just enter this game without a huge database ready for your hiring campaign. It's a numbers game, it takes massive outreach before you can even offer a simple tool like this to differentiate yourself. Until then, an employer could care less unless you've proven you can deliver the best candidate, now. Hope this helps!

jacektu 12y ago
Thanks for your insightful feedback. I appreciate it.
jacektu 12y ago
Based on your experience in the tech recruiting industry, what aspect of recruiting is broken and is the biggest pain point?
- lscore720 12y ago
  IMO trust in recruiters. Like any commission-sales role, there is a low barrier to entry and too many bad professionals give it a bad name, lead to skepticism, therefore creating challenges and inefficiencies for the minority that can make it a valuable experience for both candidates & hiring managers.