Information Literacy is the Key to Online Recruiting Effectiveness

Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguist at Stanford University, is conducting research that focuses on the differences between computer literacy and information literacy on the Internet. Both are important, of course, but his work suggests that the latter—the ability to identify the best information online—is the secret to effective use of the medium. For students, information literacy means being able to differentiate between fact, fiction and wild speculation at potential sources for a term paper; for recruiters, it’s the challenge of determining which recruiting Web-sites have the kind of information that will attract the best prospects for a specific opening.

Lots of recruiters know how to find and use a job board these days. That makes them computer literate, according to Nunberg. The goal, however, is not only to reach the sites and use their functionality, but to achieve the greatest possible benefit from that activity. There are more than 40,000 job boards in operation, so each recruiter must be able to evaluate the alternatives and identify those sites that will maximize the return on their investment of time, effort and organizational money. And, the key to making that determination, Nunberg’s research indicates, is the caliber of information provided at the site.

Many recruiters, however, use a different criterion. They select a job board based on its brand. In essence, they select a site because it is well known or is among the first to come to mind. We all know the sites that have established such strong brands, and they deserve the visibility and recognition they receive. In fact, the best known sites are among those that are the best performing, at least according to the most recent WEDDLE’s User’s Choice Awards that were announced in my last newsletter.

Brand-building and marketing prowess, however, do not necessarily equate to recruiting value. That’s why we use job boards: to gain the sites’ access to the kinds of candidates that maximize our recruiting effectiveness. And, the caliber of candidates on a job board is not determined by its brand. Oh sure, advertising and promotional campaigns may bring them to certain sites once, but recruiting value depends upon the best candidates (for your requirements) coming back to those same sites over and over again. What makes that happen? The value of the information the job board provides for the job seeker.

But how do we measure that value? How do we know if the information on a site is of a caliber to attract the kinds of candidates we most want to recruit?

• Some say that the best measure of merit is a site’s traffic, the number of people who visit the site in a given period. All of the dueling press releases about which job board is #1 in visitors is a direct response to this view. While traffic can be generated by good content, however, it can also be the product of good marketing. More importantly, traffic defines recruiting value in quantitative, not qualitative terms. While candidate flow is definitely important to good recruiting, “largest” or “busiest” does not necessarily equate to “best.” Why? Because undifferentiated candidate flow is not the same as useful candidate flow—the flow of truly superior candidates in the specific career field for which you are recruiting.

• Another common criteria used to evaluate a job board, at least implicitly, is an employer’s own brand. Here, of course, the job board to which I’m referring is the one in the career area on your corporate Web-site. If you’re lucky enough to be recruiting for a company with a world class consumer brand, then there’s no better source of recruiting value than your company’s own Web-site. At least, that’s the mantra these days, and it is certainly a possibility. All but a very small handful of company career sites, however, never make that possibility a reality. Why? Because the information that’s typically provided at corporate career sites—all those job postings and benefits descriptions—has value to only one kind of prospect—active job seekers. And, according to at least one recent study, they account for just 16% of the workforce. The other 84% of the population that isn’t looking for a job—the prospects we call passive job seekers and “A” level performers—is not only uninterested in such information but often goes out of their way to avoid it.

The best recruiting value is not achieved by sites that fashion themselves as the electronic equivalent of either the classified ad section in newspapers or the old fashioned employment application. The sites that will give you consistent access to qualitatively superior prospects in the career fields for which you recruit use different information differently. In the process, they provide an entirely different (i.e., more rewarding) experience for their visitors and, as a result, generate a better yield for the recruiter.

• Different information. The site provides information that is helpful to prospects when they aren’t looking for a job as well as when they are. It enables them to change jobs and manage their careers. Sure, they can check out the job postings, but they can also expand their knowledge in their field, get exposed to new developments and issues in their industry, learn about the work of their peers, and even share the results of their own work.

• Used differently. The site offers information in more than one format. It engages prospects by giving them the opportunity to read and to write. In other words, the site provides great content and great interactive, information-based activities (e.g., listservs, blogs). These activities enable prospects to meet their peers online and develop relationships with them. They can read about the state-of-the-art in their field, and they can converse with others to find a mentor, to get advice on a thorny issue with their boss, and even to point out a great opportunity that has just opened up with their employer.

The different experience that occurs at sites that use different information differently is a sensibility, an aura that emerges among visitors. Such sites have recruiting value because they create a place where non-job seekers feel welcomed and valued. They attract the passive job seeker and the “A” level performer because they build a bond—a “unitness”—between them and the site and between them and all of the others who visit the site. In a world that seems increasingly fragmented and disjointed, these sites create a virtual community or village—over-used words for a seldom realized creation: A Web-site that encourages anyone, but especially the most reluctant and most accomplished prospects among us, to feel at home and special.

Sadly, such an experience is not the stock-in-trade at many employment-related sites today. There is absolutely no reason why that has to be the case, however. All that’s required is a change in the information that such sites provide, a change in the way they provide that information, and a change in the information literacy of recruiters. If we can accomplish our change, the other two will follow shortly.