« Why employer brands should listen to online conversations - Guardian OBO vs. British Gas | Main | From the Classifieds to the Personal Ads »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Peter Gold

My god John, did you get on a tall soap box for that one?

John Whitehurst

it is not mine ... a copy and paste from a very big soap box (check the link)

but i did want to to get a bit of discussion going -but like the brands

people just don't want to talk to me


it is probably a wise decision


Agree with all of that, but as long as we all appreciate that finding and choosing the right job / career is (for the vast majority of us) a bigger decision than any consumption focused one. So a dialogue with the employer and one-on-one engagement with the brand is, or rather can be, absolutely critical in that decision process.

We all know Recruitment Consultants to be in the main (am I being too controversial here?) simply salesmen/women by any other name, but if their gain means a bit of communication to make you, the candidate, believe they care about helping you make the right career decision then so be it. But at least they’re communicating with you directly. At least they ‘pretend’ to care. Perhaps that’s a big part of why candidates like to use their services (that and the fact that in a very British way we probably prefer someone else to do our self-promotion and negotiation).

The human state is one where communication is part of the reason that we’ve prospered as much as we have (that and opposable thumbs) – yet recruiting companies, or their pay-rolled recruiters, all too often see it as a “hassle” or “distraction” to likewise engage with candidates.

If the marketing world is starting to understand the trialogue then great – maybe they can add that together with getting an appreciation of the fact that a recruitment experience is as personal a brand engagement as they are likely to get, and then come to realise that if you add this all together then what you get is a flippin compelling reason to get your potential candidate engagement right, both on initial contact and on an ongoing basis.

There is every reason for a candidate to want to engage with you in a dialogue – the question is whether you are wiling and able to allow them to do that as well as listening and learning from what they’re saying? I know first hand some of the most successful companies in the world are treating potential or indeed existing customers of their products and or services in a manner that is little short of contempt when it comes to their recruiting experience – and all because the recruitment team is too under-resourced, over-stretched and / or with little real appreciation of the real marketing value they wield and the brand influence they leverage (for the good or, unfortunately all too often, the bad).

Quit blowing your dosh on trying to give a persil tablet a personality and ensure that if I ever come into contact with Unliver I at the very least stay brand neutral whether you employ me or not, but with a little love and care I might even become a brand champion on your behalf – and that, from any one’s long term consideration, makes me, and therefore your recruitment engagement, a very valuable asset and a very worthwhile, nay critical, investment for you UK plc.


Lets not forget that a true Trialogue also includes candidates / employees / ex employees talking to each other in "public" about their recruitment and working experiences in a company. Just look at the ex employee groups of companies springing up on Facebook and elsewhere....the discussions aren't always very positive! This was also quite interesting http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/06/n118106.xml

I think the last line of it is the most telling "So far all those unmasked are former employees"

The comments to this entry are closed.