1 Comment


My last post created quite a reaction and a few comments. For clarity, I want to state my views with regards the post.

1: I still have total belief in Social Recruiting as a method of generating candidates and filling vacancies. Nothing has changed in this respect, and I don’t believe that social recruiting is BS, more the impression that can be created when the talk to those with limited experience or exposure centers on the channels and the technology.

2: In my post, I was not referring to anything you might blog about, tweet or post on Facebook. In the channels themselves you are preaching to the congregation. One of the benefits of a broad network is the number of tools, applications and uses of the channels that others are generous enough to post. When I have tips I pick up I will continue to share them and debate their individual benefits.

3: If my potential customers or others want to talk about tools, applications or anything else related to social recruiting I will continue to do so. Where there is interest that becomes the conversation. New users that want to know or experienced protagonists that want to test an idea will always get a welcome ear and an honest view-point.

4: I write for who I believe will be the audience. I think this is important for any blogger, and try to post things that will engage and challenge. My own blog is largely read by the committed and engaged. They are interested in most things recruiting, social or otherwise. My content will reflect this.
When I’m writing for other publications or sites where social recruiting is not the main focus (unless requested to do otherwise), I will restrict my talk of social recruiting, tools, applications and channels and talk more holistically about results possible and other sources of reference.

5: The situations I was referring to in my last post was when you are either seeking to implement social recruiting in to overall strategy, or when presenting to a non-social audience. In this case the talk of technology, applications and tools can cause the conversation to get bogged down or confuse the objectives you are trying to achieve. Since hearing the talk in Chicago, I identified how many times these conversations got bogged down in the detail of the technology without ever getting on to the objectives.
It was pointed out that all the talk was social recruiting BS, hence the title of the last post.
Since adjusting this, and talking more about objectives and recruiting in general, without reference to channel or technology before reaching agreement, I have had a lot more success.
My advice, if you are having the implementation battle is to think about this and see if this approach won’t work for you. The term “Social Media” can conjure up negative images for those not already active, (Social being the opposite of business in their mind), and a look at the twitter stream or Facebook can be far from convincing when trying to make the business case.

Most decision makers are far more interested in potential results, concentrate your conversation on that, as part of the recruiting mix rather than the whole picture.

Keep being ambassadors for great recruiting.


One comment on “Clarity

  1. Bill – I’ll be honest, I didn’t read the last post but you shouldn’t have to defend or apologize for what you post on your piece of Internet real estate. You do what works for you and talk about it. That’s what it’s all about. ~Karla

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: