This article is fantastic at highlighting one worrying, but crucial element that seems to have universally disappeared from recruitment, a human touch.
Whilst companies strive to cut hiring costs through the investment of recruitment, technology and automation I passionately believe that far too many have got rid of a human element.
Any recruitment process should be about humans engaging in a conversation and by replacing this with online robots taking care of our recruitment processes, our lack of human interaction is leaving candidates disappointed and unloved.
The author, Derek Zeller, describes a story of candidates thanking him for being open and honest and providing feedback about a role he was recruiting for a company. He talks about shedding a tear when he received feedback from candidates that it was nice to hear from a recruiter for a change.
Whilst it sounds like a nice story, is it not disgraceful at the same time that we treat candidates with so little respect?
So, if you are making financial savings on your recruitment budget through less human interaction, just think what this strategy could be doing to your employer brand and future chances of recruiting outstanding candidates when they start telling everyone about the experience they have had with you!
Furthermore, if you are a recruiter that treats candidates in the same way, you could be dying out whilst the rest of us flourish.
They want to know that we actually care that they took the time to apply to our jobs. Recently we had a position that was closed because the team felt it would be better to fill next year. There weren’t a ton of resumes collected, and no one had been interviewed, though I had done some screening and gotten some people into the pipeline. I called the few people in the pipeline to let them know that the position had closed. The others, the ones I had not gotten to, got an email from me explaining the circumstance and to the reasoning. Then it happened: they emailed me back thanking me for not being a black hole. It was not one or two responses, it was man.