As a traditional Executive Search Consultant with over 20 years' experience of successfully partnering my clients to recruit outstanding talent in the UK and internationally, I have been sitting and observing the changes in the way companies are using 'technology' to recruit and this article provides a great summary of how they are failing.
No matter how great technology is, there will always be a human element to recruiting and I really do fear for companies that invest more in the technology than in the human expertise it needs to ensure a successful appointment is made.
I also fear that the lack of human engagement in a recruitment process and the reliance on great web content, funny videos etc.. to create a story, a great perception of the business and a "feel good" candidate engagement will all fall apart when they join the business. Furthermore, web content can't look into a candidate's eyes to see what they are thinking, nor can it respond to any concerns or misperceptions they may have about the company they are interested in.
I have met many companies who have moved away from investing in recruitment partners and have instead based their whole strategy on mining LinkedIn for candidates. In time, they have all "u-turned" their strategy as they have realised that LinkedIn does have some great candidates but there are far more who are not active on it that need to be identified and engaged with, in a different way. Sadly, the internal recruiters they appoint to drive the LinkedIn strategy don't know what to do if it fails and so it results in vacancies being open for months and months and the company suffering as a result.
I know there are other technologies outside of LinkedIn, but the same constraints apply. If you are looking for active candidates then fill your boots, but if your business really needs the best, then you really need to think about a human strategy to identify and entice passive candidates who are performing exceptionally well where they are but who may be interested if someone puts an exciting story in front of them.
It doesn't take much insight to recognize that most hiring processes are designed with a left to right "weed out the weak" focus. This starts with a job description listing a bunch of skills and experiences a candidate must have in order to meet some threshold of ability. These are then matched to a candidate's resume listing his/her skills and experiences. If the person passes this filter some recruiter calls and discusses the job based on what the person gets on the day he/she starts. If both agree that the title, location, compensation and company are a reasonable fit a formal interview is arranged. However, rarely do the people hired have a great understanding of what they'll be doing or could become if successful. That's why employee dissatisfaction has hovered around 70% according to the Gallup group for 20+ years.