Digital Recruiting

Research - or not

Having worked in the industry for a number of years now, I lik to think that I know when someone is talking sense, or when someone/something is just a little bit 'wide of the mark'

Normally, I keep my opinions to msyelf (!!) and very rarely have cause to rant - but having just received a news alert, the need to vent some frustration once again arises...

And the subject?  Onrec's impending latest edition of the apparently 'can't live without' research document 'Top 100 UK online recruitment sites' - now in its 6th year.

Six years?  Oh my god.  Back in the day, when we were all a little naive/confused/scared, this report appeared and, based on the fabulous sales pitch, seemed like a great idea.  And it is, don't get me wrong, a great idea.  It's just that it's not worth the paper it's printed on.  It's not worth the disk space the pdf version takes up.  And it's certainly not worth the £60 Mr Hurst and his chums charge.

I get wound up quite easily by a few topics relating to the online recruitment industry in the UK - but nothing seems to make my blood boil so quickly as the mention of the dreaded Onrec 'Top 100 Online Recruitment Sites' report.

Research, in my opinion, is based on a clear and level playing field - one that is stated up-front, and one that incorporates all of the facts, and provides insight and conclusions that have been drawn based on the facts realised by the research that has been conducted.  So, when a recruiter decides to part with their sixty quid, they are enlightened slightly. Surprised somewhat.  They feel that they have had their opinion changed/altered by the facts that are presented to them.

The Onrec Top 100 report continually fails to achieve any of this. 

Yesterday, I thought they'd launched another version - the 2007 report - but then I realised it was just the questionnaire that they release and ask job boards to complete.

Once again, the questions have not altered.  Based on this, I assume the resultant report will be the same un-informative pap that has been produced in the past.  I defy Onrec to provide me with one 'satisfied customer' from this report.  I constantly bump into people - clients and colleagues in the industry - who express their total disbelief that this product is still being produced, and that anyone with an inkling of insight into the online recruitment industry find this in any way useful - other than as a directory of phone numbers for 100 job boards in the UK.

Why can David and his team not put in some thought to this years' document?  Why can't they make inspried, intelligent comments on the information they are receiving?  Other than a comment on the first page of the report which seems to repeatedly admonish OnRec of any responsibility relating to the information provided in the document, the report is of little value.

It does not mean anything. Who cares how many employees a site has - worldwide or in the UK?  How can that be a 'Top 10/Top 20' statistic?  No discrepect intended here, but how can eFinancialcareers be top of the 'Top 15 turnover' table?  I know the answer - Monster possibly did not provide this information, Totaljobs appear to have dissappeared.  And what about Jobsite, Jobserve, Hotjobs etc.  Oh, I know, these sites possibly didn't respond.  Not OnRec's fault, obviously - and no doubt this point is made in the document somewhere - once you've paid your £60.

But, by not inlcuding consistent measurables across all categories highlighted, the document is, in effect, totally useless.  My favourite one of these ridiculous features was the year when the website 'TopJobswithDogs' was featured in the Top 10 number of staff worldwide - with something like 5 staff.  What a joke.

So, I'll stop there.  But what is the point of my rant?  Well, isn't it about time that someone like an OnRec actually published some REAL research - some valuable insight into the industry - with some real expert commentary.  Are they afraid of what it will highlight?

There are people out there desperate to make this industry better - not only within the leading rec ad agencies, but also from a client perspective.  OnRec has positioned itself as the voice of the industry - why not put your money where your mouth is an publish some real research - carried out by experts - and start to put something back into the industry.  Certainly offering more than just publishing press releases and inspiring the industry with 'Hurst's Law'.

Come on chaps - isn't it time you stopped hiding behind the 'pay for it and you'll see' approach to this non-sensical 'research'  document (and I use the word 'research' in its loosest possible way) and show us all that you can do it properly.  You have the connections.  You have the profile.  Please provide us with some research that actually adds value, and isn't just a revenue generator for OnRec.

Rant over.  For now...

:-)

Imagine....

Just saw the the Imagine programme “www.herecomeseverybody.co.uk” on BBC 1 (a rare quiet night in!) and it’s stirred me to post.

The speed at which the Internet has evolved even in just the 10 months I’ve been at Barkers is incredible. It’s not even that things like Wikipedia, Youtube, Myspace and Second Life or concepts like the Long Tail are brand new, they aren’t. However the way their growth has accelerated and the fact that their names seems to now be ubiquitous is extraordinary. Seeing them all name checked on BBC1 on a Tuesday night just proves the point.

It also brought it home to me that this is only just the beginning and the web as we know is going to change beyond all recognition. In some ways this hardly seems fair on a lot of companies who are still trying to come to terms with the fact the Internet changed everything in first place!

Wikipedia, Youtube, Myspace and Second Life aren’t the real Web 2.0, this is just the overture. These brands in some ways are like the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Signalling the start of the second coming and the end of the “old” Internet as we’ve know it!

This brings me onto my rant. I’m somewhat disappointed by the UK online recruitment industry’s reaction thus far to this phenomenon. Don’t get me wrong, the great and the good have all heard of it and you’ll struggle to go to a presentation these days where LinkedIn and My Space aren’t mentioned and mentioned enthusiastically.

However it’s very rare that you hear what the true implications for recruiting are going to be and how these emerging trends should be put to use in an appropriate way. I’m going to bold and say that is because most of the people talking about them just don’t understand how they work. Putting banner advertising in My Space, rushing to put “clever” videos on Youtube and developing recruitment pod casts no one wants to download is kind of missing the point.

I don’t claim to have all the answers but I do know one thing. We’ve always been told that word of mouth and referrals are the most popular way of finding jobs. Word of mouth and referrals are fuelling this phenomenon and that has already rewritten the rules for companies who make (or should that be made!) money out of music and journalism. Recruitment is next and unless we get our act together to stop just talking and start working out ways of doing, it’s just going to sweep on by past us. If we’re not careful our industry in the UK is going to be floundering in the technological version of the dark ages and we’re all going to be clinging tightly to our banners and job postings wondering where all the job seekers went!

So lets have some proper debate and some genuinely new ideas, they’re doing in the States we need to be doing the same here

Enter the Dragons?

Found these clips from the Canadian version of Dragon’s Den on Joel Cheesman’s blog. The last video is very entertaining viewing.

If I decide to become an entrepreneur I’m definitely going to the Canadian dragons rather than their more hardcore British counterparts. I’ve known job boards asked more probing questions just to see if someone should spend £350 with them, let alone invest two hundred thousand dollars!