Liz Ryan, The Human Workplace founder: The Horrible Truth About Passive Job Seekers (hiring, best)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bingo. I work for a state agency, and our HR people have no clue about many of the qualifications that they are screening for. They qualify people who aren't, and screen out people who are.
On the flip side, there are many times HR is putting through qualified applicants using the actual criteria based on laws and regulations that must be considered. It's the hiring managers that have the wrong idea about who is and isn't qualified because they are biased and want to choose people based on What they believe is "best qualified". Competent HR professionals are a check on nepotism and cronyism. Managers don't like to hear that because they want to do whatever they please as "boss". At the end of the day, you don't know how an applicant will fare until they're actually in the job.
I don't believe this "passive" job candidate thing exists.
It most definitely exists. Seen it happen too many times for it to "not exist".
Because of the "passive candidate" being hyped into the stratosphere, there is discrimination against people who are out of work. They are falsely stereotyped as "not good talent" because "good talent already has jobs."
It most definitely exists. Seen it happen too many times for it to "not exist".
I know nothing about your industry, the job market in your area or your skill level. This forum skews heavily toward management and there are a lot of Boomers here. Those people will have more years of experience and likely earn higher wages than someone with only a decade or two (maybe less) of experience. You can't paint a broad brush when there are so many unknown variables. I'm sure If we dug into the details of your network we'd find the people you know have similar profiles. Is the Wal-Mart worker a "passive candidate" for Target? Probably not. Recruitment costs money. Companies are not going to waste a lot of money "looking" for candidates when there are cheaper ways to get talent.
Companies are not going to waste a lot of money "looking" for candidates when there are cheaper ways to get talent.
I agree, the obsession about "passive candidates" does not make good business sense. They'll pay more for them. The passive candidates tend to bring an entitlement mentality and will jump ship when someone else poaches them for more money. Then here goes more money out the door for more recruitment expenses to get the replacement.
It makes more business sense to hire someone who is out of work than someone who is currently employed. One can hire someone cheaper than the passive candidate and will get someone who is grateful for the opportunity with less entitlement mentality.
That's why we have emoticons. They're used to indicate sarcasm.
And "Ooh! Ooh!" is used to indicate the pending delivery of only the gravest facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They're used to indicate sarcasm.
