I love working for a company where I am allowed to express my views and challenge the people that I work for and with. We encourage healthy debate at Chiumento. My boss and I both recently wrote blogs with opposing views and I think each make valid points (mine more so obviously!). My initial offering focused on the increasing need to make your application processes mobile friendly. This is something that I had not previously considered until I went to the CIPD event up in Manchester. Our Chief Exec, Ian Gooden, responded in his article, saying that he disagreed with me. His view is that the candidate application process should not be made too easy and should serve to help weed out those candidates who are serious about a role, from those who are not. He makes a fair point.
Last week Ian and I had a conversation about acquiring a new applicant tracking system for our recruitment practice. This reignited our discussion about the candidate application process and for the first time I think I understood why we have a fundamental difference of opinion.
Ian is a former FTSE 100 Head of Recruitment and a good one at that. I myself have never worked as an in-house recruiter. I have always seen recruitment from an agency perspective and this colours my view of what an application process should look like. Many of our articles are seen by readers with an in-house view, so I should add a caveat to my blogs that highlights they are written by someone with recruitment agency tinted glasses on. I am not sure what colour they would be, but you get my point.
Ultimately I want a high volume of applicants to apply to the jobs that I advertise. There is a good chance that a portion of these candidates will be applying to a number of roles, many that they are not suitable for. In the end, only one candidate will get the job, meaning the majority won’t. I am still interested in those unsuccessful candidates. While they may not have been suitable for that particular role, they could be suitable for something else in the future. I don’t want to discourage them from applying to us again. For example, we have had a long application questionnaire in the past that captures lots of useful information but the number of applications that we received was far lower. Simply put, the application process put people off applying.
Ian used to work for a great brand. I would say that they are considered an employer of choice in the location where their headquarters are based. Every candidate who applied to them directly knew the organisation so there was already a degree of buy-in on the candidate’s part. Because of this it was easier to get candidates to jump through a few hoops when applying. If they are excited by the brand they won’t mind going the extra mile but as an agency recruiter I don’t have that luxury. I have to get candidates excited about a role with an advert that does not say who the employer is. I think we do this pretty well but knowing who the client is before applying can significantly affect desire to apply. We want to attract passive jobseekers as well as those actively hunting for new roles but passive candidates need more coaxing. Often the best candidates are the ones window shopping. Nobody goes into a shop if you have to fill out all of your details before walking through the door.
When we post a new role on our jobs page, we are never certain how many people will apply. We can have a pretty good guess but responses vary. This is why we try to make the process as easy as possible. I understand the point Ian makes, but I am still of the view that we should ‘keep it simple.’ Having said that, I want the volume, but I also want the quality and I think there are some things that I can learn from Ian’s in-house view of things. He suggested adding some simple yes/no killer questions to the application for each role and this sounds like something well worth trying.
Our candidate management process can always be improved and we should continuously be looking for ways in which to do so. It will never be perfect but we want as many people as possible to enjoy the process. We recently started offering CareerGift to any candidates who are declined for a role. This is a fantastic online career toolkit that we hope will really help people with their job searches both with and without Chiumento’s help. I think it adds real value and has vastly improved our candidate experience.
We are not done yet and while this healthy debate between Ian and I continue we both ultimately want the same outcome – our passion and difference of opinion both come from pushing for a better candidate experience. Changes will not happen without serious consideration first, which is why these discussions are so important. We would love to hear your input. Why not leave a comment below…
