Direct Sourcing: How Companies Can Recruit The Candidates They Really Want

I read a very interesting piece from the WSJ recently describing a sea change taking place within the corporate hiring world, where in-house teams were now being asked to adopt proper headhunting techniques, rather than sourcing candidates from the response to online adverts.  Clearly the sheer volume of response currently from job boards et al is proving difficult to handle. But is this the only good reason to change tack? As and when the employment market tightens, then recruiters will surely be using every avenue including job boards to source new candidates, as they did 3/4 years ago when the economy was far more buoyant than now.

No, the real issue here is how companies can change their strategic approach to the recruitment of top-quality, X Factor candidates (see blog of Jan 20th, below).

I gave a presentation a couple of years ago at the job board for which I then worked saying that although the bulk of our income came from the recruitment agencies, increasingly our business would be direct with corporate recruiters.  The reason that I gave was that corporates would do their own recruiting simply because they now could.  The networks which had for so long been the private preserves of the headhunting community were now open to all.

So, in the light of this, I have been a little surprised by the way in which many corporates have looked to manage their recruitment process.  Many large corporates still opt to outsource through a rigorously-managed network of preferred suppliers where cost and speed of response are the critical criteria.  Others mix outsourcing with some direct hiring. Where the recruitment is done direct in-house, the processes are very passive, i.e. relying on the internet to provide the answers, filtering CVs from online adverts etc, which is pretty much the same process as many of the agencies use.

But, ignoring the fluctuations in the employment market, does this activity reach the candidates that companies are really looking to recruit? And if companies are going to commit resources to developing an in-house capability, shouldn't it provide a level of service that the market isn't?

There will always be a certain number of top quality candidates looking to move at any given time, but for the most part they will not be looking for a new job and will need to be identified and actively encouraged to consider a change.  This is the essential principle of headhunting.

So is it easy to change the focus for the in-house team?  Short answer: no.  Headhunting requires a different mindset and approach. The internet is a fantastic tool for recruiters, but like every tool you need to know how to use it properly before it works well.

So what may in-house recruiters need to do differently?

• A thorough understanding of the role. Not just a JD, but a close relationship with the hiring manager which should encompass: knowing what the background to the role is; is it new; what happened to the previous incumbent; why recruit now; how does the role fit in to the current corporate game plan; who are the personalities involved; what is success going to look like; what are the potential barriers to success. Understand the competences and the skills the successful individual will need, not just the experience.
• Prepare a target list. Good recruiters can analyse the mechanics of the role and use their judgement to suggest avenues of search outside the recruiting company's core businesses, where appropriate.  Target companies and relevant individuals in those companies.  This is where the internet is so powerful - there is a huge amount of raw information to tap into.
• Develop sources.  This is a key skill.  It should be possible to get information on a candidate before you approach them by talking to someone who has previously worked with them.  Again, the internet can provide the information, there are countless numbers of professional networks/groups/associations out there. Also use internal networks, recently hired individuals etc. Talk to people you rate about people they rate.
• Cold calling.  At some stage, you are going to have to pick up the phone and call someone out of the blue.  You need to have the skill to develop a professional conversation on the phone with someone you have never met.  This is why you must be properly briefed and prepared.  You must be able to start making an assessment of both the experience and character of the potential candidate while you speak.  It helps if you have some prior knowledge of the candidate from your sourcing calls.
• Sell the role.  A huge difference from CV filtering.  Top quality candidates in jobs will need to be persuaded that a change is right for them.  They are not applying to you, you are interested in them, and this changes the whole balance of the process.  It is a two-way street! You need to have very cogent reasons why the candidate should be interested, including a very firm grasp of the employer brand values.
• Management of the Candidate Experience. You have set the process in motion and it is up to you to drive it. Provide any information that you say you will; call when you say you will call (even if it's to say that you can't give any further information currently); manage expectations through the process (especially the timescale); explain the interview/assessment process; try not to change arrangements which have been made.  Remember that, initially, you are trying to attract the candidate. They may not want or need another job, so your behaviour will make a considerable impact on how attractive the candidate sees the company and the role. Keep in regular contact with the candidate.  Be as honest as you can and explain at the soonest possible moment if the discussions will not lead any further.  Always leave the door open to future contact, and this will be easy if you have made a good impression.

This is a very simplified overview of the process, but hopefully it shows that good headhunting starts with a good underlying process which can make the most effective use the internet's reach.

Against the current model, headhunting does have some drawbacks.  It is inevitably a longer process.  Posting a job online will always generate pretty much instant response, headhunting will not. For this reason headhunting doesn't lend itself to the specific requirements of interim/contract recruitment. Although the increased visibility of and accessibility to candidates on the internet at all levels of seniority has meant it is possible to headhunt for a broader range of roles, headhunting is not a suitable process for all the recruitment a company is likely to do, particularly at lower levels. Companies will also need to be fully committed to creating an in-house headhunting resource, and may need to review the suitability of any recruitment software that is used.

By its nature, much recruitment is transactional, an immediate response to an immediate requirement.  But with a proactive mindset it is possible to extend the process 'at either end'.  By which I mean it is always easier to recruit well if you know in advance what you might be recruiting for, and it is always easier to recruit when you already know the right candidate. It makes sense to keep close to the business you serve to understand what the succession plan looks like, where the skills gaps may be, which skills/roles are most in demand, what upcoming initiatives may need resourcing and to better understand the dynamics of the business.

At the other end, the development of talent pools will need a proactive, marketing-led approach.  If the height of your ambition is to create a careers page and hope that candidates apply, be prepared to be disappointed.  The internet will not do it for you on its own.  The internet offers many platforms to support whatever efforts you make to develop a pool of pre-qualified candidates, but, as with the headhunt, recruiters will need to go out to attract candidates into the talent pool with professionalism, a good story to tell, active informed discussion and regular engagement.

The objective of all this is to provide top quality hires.  Surprisingly enough, this means adopting top quality processes. I think the WSJ is on to something....