There are many channels at a recruiters disposal to promote new vacancies and attract the best candidates, but as creatures of habit, it seems we follow the same pattern of activity, regardless of whether it is delivering the best results.
In this insight, we look at sourcing workflows for in-house and agency recruiters and the impact of measuring channel success.
How agencies and in-house recruiters differ
The UK Candidate Attraction Survey 2020/21 gave respondents a list of candidate sourcing activities and asked them to identify the actions they regularly perform and sort them into their order of priority. The aim was to identify their sourcing workflow.
This research shows us that, as in previous years, we continue to find significant differences between how agencies and in-house recruiters approach sourcing activities for new jobs. In-house recruiters head straight to their website to advertise jobs on their careers site and only much later look to their existing candidate database, possibly missing out on a wealth of easy to match candidates.
On the other hand, recruitment firms are likely to scour their candidate database first, closely followed by advertising jobs on their website.
In general, in-house recruiters find decent results with most of their sourcing channels...with a few outliers. For the first time since launching the survey five years ago, Employee Referrals are toppled as the #1 source of candidate quality, with Professional Social Networks (LinkedIn) nudging ahead (and doing a better job with quantity too!). Once again, Social Media ranks lowest from candidate quality and quantity, whereas Job Aggregators like Indeed are the clear leader for providing higher numbers candidate applications.
The agency database (CRM / ATS etc.) remains a core sourcing channel for agency recruiters; it is rated highest for both candidate quality and quantity. In general, agencies are finding success with LinkedIn and their CRM. Agencies tend to fare less well with the careers site than their in-house counterparts.
Using fact-based recruitment metrics is key
Not only can we see the sourcing workflow order of priority between the two differ, but it seems that ‘we always do what we have always done’ and continue to lack in measuring channel success to act upon. Not measuring sourcing channel success could mean focussing our efforts on the wrong channels and missing out on the opportunities that others may provide.
We asked how often recruiters measure the effectiveness of the channels they use. In general, we noted a slight improvement over previous years, with around 40% of recruiters regularly measuring and monitoring channel performance. The most measured source of candidates are Agencies / PSL and Specialist Job Boards. At the opposite end of the scale is Social Media which is measured the least. Interestingly Careers Site / Website is also one of the channels least measured.
However, what has always remained consistent is that the results are clear - to maximise your channel effectiveness, recruiters need easy access to data and analytics.
Measurement can drive success. If job boards provide the best quantity of candidates, how do you then measure that through the recruitment funnel to understand if that remains the same for your most successful hires?
You can read more on sourcing channel success by sector, and the difference measurement makes as well as:
Does it pay to advertise your salaries?
Does Social Media improve with regularity?
Does programmatic job advertising improve results?
Which types of content could make the difference to your careers site?
And much more!