by Lou Adler…
This article is part of my continuing series on passive candidate recruiting. The key principle underlying all of these articles is that you can’t recruit and hire passive candidates using the same workflow, nor the same recruiters, used for active candidates.
According to a recent survey we conducted with LinkedIn, 83% of fully-employed members on LinkedIn consider themselves passive when it comes to their job-hunting status. While this is a huge and important pool, most companies over-emphasize the 17% of candidates who are active. Then to make matters worse, when they do target passive candidates, they clumsily use their active candidate processes.
To assist talent leaders in understanding the differences between active and passive candidate recruiting, I’ve developed a recruiter competency model addressing the similarities, differences, and overlaps. Contact me directly if you’d like to learn more about this. It’s highlighted in the graphic showing the 12 most important competencies alongside a very rigorous 1-5 ranking system. For example, a 4-5 ranking requires outstanding performance, some type of significant recognition, and continuing accolades from the recruiter’s hiring manager clients.
Here’s a quick summary of each of the competencies and the differences between active and passive recruiting requirements:
- Results-driven: Drive for a recruiter handling passive candidates requires the ability to tenaciously, but subtly, cajole and urge passive prospects through the hiring pipeline while deftly overcoming concerns. For a recruiter handling active candidates, drive is more about numbers and being sure there are enough reasonable candidates in the pool.