When times are hard, and lots of people are seeking employment, companies have an easy time of hiring (for those companies that are even hiring). When times are good, more people are employed and fewer people seek employment. Companies wishing to hire folks have a more difficult time, since there are fewer people "in the market". The "market" of available people swings from a "buyer's market" to a "seller's market" as people are more and less available.
The traditional method of finding people is through staffing agencies and recruiting firms. I suspect that the internet and the web will change this. Companies and candidates can use new means of advertising and broadcasting to make information available, either about open positions or available talent. From Facebook and LinkedIn to contributions to open source projects, candidates make a wealth of information available.
Group A companies will use the web to identify candidates and reach out to them. They will use the web as a means of finding the right people. Group A companies use the web-enabled information.
Group B companies will use the web in a passive role. They will post their open positions and wait for candidates to apply. (And they will probably demand that the candidate submit their resume in Word format only. They won't accept a PDF or ODT file.) They may use web sites to check on candidates, probably looking for pictures of the person dressed as a pirate. I expect that they will do little to review contributions to open source projects.
When it comes to finding talent, the group A companies have the advantage. They can evaluate candidates early on and make offers to the people who have the skills that they seek. The group B companies have a harder time, as they have to filter through the applications and review candidates.
I suspect that, between the two strategies, the group A companies will be more effective and have the smaller effort. It's more work for each candidate, but less work overall. The group B companies will spend less time on each applicant, but more time overall. (And by spending less time on each candidate, they make less effective decisions.)
I also suspect that both groups will think that their strategy is the lesser effort and more effective.
So which company do you want to be? And which company would you rather work with?
No comments:
Post a Comment