Battle Scorecard

view Cases

  • na Won
  • na Lost
  • £na Saved
  • £na Cost

Hello again!

Tuesday, June 24, 2014   

Workload has meant it's been a while since the last post and, as it's seven years since the site first started, I found myself wondering what's changed in terms of attitudes in the world of talent since the Daily Telegraph ran its front page business lead on the launch of For The Want Of A Nail in 2007?

Well, the business environment back at launch was dominated by huge skills shortages impacting on company performance and, ultimately, the national GDP.  We've since had a financial meltdown coupled with an extended recession, recruitment freezes and redundancies.  And now we're back at the brink of huge skills shortages impacting on company performance and GDP.

So what HAS changed?  Surely employers are not all mad enough to demonstrate the definition of insanity by doing exactly as they tried and failed with in 2007, but expect a different result this time around?

Cue one of those stares to camera Oliver Hardy used to great effect.

As will be revealed over the coming articles, it's a mixed bag with some great innovation and some employers with their heads still stuck in the same patch of sand as they were the last time they complained that they had difficulty recruiting.

But some things are definitely different.  We're nearly all on LinkedIn now for a start and, according to one of my clients at a Global Talent Strategy meeting I attended in some remote part of the European community, employers no longer need to rely on recruitment agencies, providing they have LinkedIn Corporate licenses.

linked in and recruitment.png 

Just to digress slightly, I've established a 300-strong recruitment agency supply chain since this website first launched, so I most certainly do understand the value in these £6,000 per person per annum licenses.  In the hands of people with the right skills and the independence to apply them in the most effective manner.

Upon hearing about the TWENTY licenses that this company had 'invested' in, I asked who would be using them;  who would be using this rich source of talent information to seek out people with the right skills and aspirations and then PROACTIVELY communicate with them and have a confidential AND neutral discussion with them about a potential career move?

As I suspected, the answer was 'nobody' and reality is that they'd be just posting passive adverts on LinkedIn and hoping somebody applies. 

I feel an Oliver Hardy moment coming again. (Check out the archive feature of passive / proactive recruitment if that doesn't make sense).

You see, much as many employers still resent having to pay fees to recruiters, the reality is that when employers collectively stopped training people to save money back in the 1970s, they effectively bought themselves a skills shortage. Coordination of supply and demand today, therefore, is a necessity and it doesn't come for free.

Let's get talking again

There has been some really interesting developments and innovation in the world of talent that I'm looking forward to sharing with the community again, now that everyone is back on the proverbial front foot and in the mood to progress. 

In a change of format, we're also going to be featuring guest contributors, so look out for those - and do get in touch if you have something you want to share with the community yourself.   If between us we can spread the word on some best practices and organisations are more productive as a result, then that's good news, right?  What goes around comes around.

I look forward to picking up the debate which, for the foreeseable future - until we all get so fed up with being badgered by recruiters that we stop using it - will be within LinkedIn :-)


Skip to Comments

Comments so far