NotsoFreerecruitment and why recruitment consultancies need to develop their own candidate attraction strategies

Picked up a post by Dom from OME today directing the reader to Louise's UK recruiter forum which is currently hosting an impassioned debate following the news that Reed's Freecruitment is, um, now not going to be totally free. (The first 500 jobs will be free, but after that you pay.)

My own view is that I am surprised it's taken so long for Reed to start charging. They're still offering 500 free jobs, and an unlimited posting restriction is going to help stop the multi-post phishing still undertaken by some agencies...

But whatever your standpoint, I urge you to put 20 mins aside to listen to the sound of communal recruitment consultancies wailing. You will not believe some of the comments on the site from certain rec cons, who seem to think that a free Reed is some kind of God-given right.

My favourite post is this nugget from 'Simon' ( no agency given - I wonder why?) with his somewhat impenetrable ( 'scuse the pun ) "wall" metaphor:

My company has also received the email..........
REED has allowed many small start ups to be succesful, but at the same time they have cleverly used those posting on their site to BUILD the REED website.

Its a bit like giving away free bricks so you can build a wall to keep the wind off, but you must take my bricks which are coloured yellow. People take the FREE bricks and benefit but then all the walls eventuallly meet and those who have been taking FREE bricks now find that they have closed themselves in and the only way out is to pay. The wall is owned by REED and has been built by those taking FREE bricks.

Many small agencies will go to the WALL. There will be many fuming and Angry recruitment consultants out there.

They have built up business and supported livelihoods now they are beginning to destroy and damage livlihoods

REED have given promises thast they WILL always be FREE,
I have a letter to prove it dated 1999.

Is betrayal a word that exists in business? perhaps not?

(Spellings are author's own)

Simon, if you're reading this please make yourself known?

Talking to Louise, interestingly Reed have so far decided not to comment ( at least, in their company name. ) I presume they're aware that this debate is happening?

Meanwhile, despite Simon's melodrama, the folly of not developing their own candidate engagement strategies could hit some of these agencies hard...  I am pretty confident in saying that the consultancies we have the privilege to work will be mostly unaffected by this because they have invested to ensure they're not held hostage to Reed  - or anyone else  - by developing a range of traffic driving measures and candidate focussed websites. Will Reed-gate force Simon and his tribe to do the same?

Paul Harrison, Carve Consulting

 
 

Comments

[Andy Headworth]

I think the only bricks that Simon should worry about are on the Yellow Brick Road to Oz! Does he believe that agencies, small or large have based their whole business model on using Reed? Of course they don't, it is simply another channel that they will use. What a twat - he is obviously doing his clients a diservice, as he has let them believe he knows about recruitment....he obviously doesn't!!!

[Paul Harrison, Carve Consulting]

Andy, thanks for the comment. Terrifyingly though, I think a lot of consultancies *have* built their enire model on Reed... Or is that doing them a diservice?

[Dom Sumners]

The thing that most stuns me is the absolute refusal of some of the posters from the UKRecruiter Forum to accept that Reed.co.uk is part of a normal commercial organisation that seeks to make a profit. They believe that they as customers should be allowed in perpetuity to massively spam a very successful job board which it has cost ££millions to build develop and promote. Their main argument can be condensed into "but...but....but...its so unfair"

[Jamie Leonard]

While at Monster and the Fish the rec con pirates would ALWAYS use the Reed argument to beat down the price and generally make life hell. Can I say as an open and not so subtle disliker of anything rec con.....ha ha.

[John Whitehurst]

Reed has a 2.9% reach of the total internet universe and and a 8% reach of total internet users using job search.

Not really got anything else to say that has not already been said. Except that good business are built of great service and quality work - not free advertising.

[John Whitehurst]

I also noticed i missed the point on the comment on reach - only targeting 8% of the total audience is not a great bit of media planning.

[Sam Michel]

Having run a free board for 6 years - Chinwag Jobs (http://jobs.chinwag.com) started charging in Jan 2006, I can understand why they'd start charging. Whilst the technical costs may not be astronomical, the staff costs of running a jobs board are high, especially if there's diligent checking of the vacancies being posted. For us, it as all about keeping them relevant for the audience.

My favourite comment from a recruiter annoyed that we'd started charging was, "Well, I'm certainly not using your service now. It's just not as good value as it used to be."

Sadly, that wasn't followed up with an offer to pay our rent, salaries or overheads!

I agree with what John's saying, it's naive to think that purely using 'free' services is unlikely to generate enough reach on its own, but in sectors where there are enough qualified candidates, maybe you could get away with it.

We focus on recruiting in the digital sector, and there shortage of candidates is so acute, you'd never be able to get away with focusing solely on free services.