Skip to main content

Talent Acquisition VPs share their secrets of choosing and operating AI Sourcing Bots

You’re ready to evolve to recruiting 3.0 with AI technology, but how will you choose and operate your sourcing solutions? Savvy executives are looking to move into the future by using technology to streamline their team’s sourcing process, but there is a lot of “noise” in the marketplace. Parsing through false promises and clunky software is a process as important as recruiting the most coveted employee on your team. After all, the right AI technology will unleash the talent of your star recruiters to do what they do best: build connections with candidates and make right decisions. So, the question begs, how should a VP evaluate and implement an AI sourcing strategy? We spoke with over 100 successful VPs responsible for Talent Acquisitions to compile the following best practice methodology:
  1. Keep testing: AI has gained some bad rep as a result of false promises from companies with 1st generation AI logic. Don’t get discouraged. AI has improved significantly in recent years. Enter trials which are quick, cheap and require zero integration. Attend product demos, ask the right questions, and test performance.
  2. But… Test performance correctly: Define clear KPIs and measure performance accurately. You may be surprised. Many companies do not, and then have a hard time identifying success. These KPIs should be agreed upon prior to the launch of the trial and MUST be compared to the existing sourcing and recruiting channels currently in use. Know what success would look like. Evaluate measurable KPIs such as talent reach, speed to identify relevant talent and talent quality -  for a variety of roles.
  3. But… Choose the right roles: Never just test one role. Insist on testing several roles in order to get a definitive result.  Do not choose a role that you could not fill because of a limited talent pool. Use a role for which you are likely to get a decent pool and can easily use to compare between two solutions. Choose roles for which you have data or can obtain such data. Without data, you’ll have nothing to compare. Only a true A/B test will give you accurate results upon which you can rely and present to your colleagues. For a true A/B test, choose at least one competing solution (e.g. LinkedIn Recruiter) and the same recruiter.
  4. But… Test with the right recruiter: Don’t choose “Change Blockers”. Blockers will subtly derail the process and ruin the results. It will waste everyone's time. Choose winners, champions, agents of change. They will bring the best out of new technologies and help you get on the road to automation and digital transformation.
  5. But… Reward champions: Incentivize the recruiter to try his or her best and make this work. If it works there is an ROI for everyone.
  6. Then… Measure ROI and compare to what you have today: At the end of the test, review KPIs, run the ROI and compare to your existing channels and methods. Run the business case, apply this at scale, and acknowledge any true value this technology could provide. But don’t expect MAGIC. Bots are not magicians, they cannot create talent that does not exist. BUT they should be able to provide additional value when compared to existing solutions. Be sure to measure the incremental value they deliver against their price tag.
  7. Then… Start immediately: If you yield a positive business case - start now. Don’t wait. If zero integration is required, you’re ready. There is therefore no need to wait for IT who can delay a project by 6 months. Green light the contract and go,go,go.
  8. Then… Sign 3-12 months contracts only: 3 months is the minimum you will need to test a talent sourcing bot. Give yourself an out, but ensure you will have enough time to experience and measure the impact of bots across the full recruiting funnel.
  9. Then... Make the bots work for you and the team: Continue to measure, continue to incentivize and continue to run the bots to their max. It is essential to take the time required to set up and master the service you choose; it will save you hundreds of hours in the long run!  Bot’s don’t get sick and they don’t take days off. They are tools, weapons for success.
  10. Finally... Roll out and scale Up: Scale according to performance, budget and departmental goals.

With so many products on the market, fancy buzzwords and feature-rich platforms are abundant. But none of that matters, results matter. What matters is that you see results with your own eyes. Please be sure in your next engagement with Talenya to inquire about a head-to-head test: your existing TA sourcing system vs. Talenya. This way, you will have the real concrete data you need to make a performance-based decision.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why companies can't hire Data Scientists?

There are about 2,500 Data Scientists in Boston. Indeed.com displays 1,643 job listings for Data Scientists in Boston. That means that there are around 1.5 Data Scientist jobs per candidate. But not all Data Scientists in Boston are looking to switch jobs. According to data analyzed by my company, Talenya, only 227 of the 2,500 are likely to be open to new opportunities. That’s more than 7 jobs per candidate! This is what the “the war for talent” looks like and it gets worse.
Assuming you’re a small, growing company looking to hire Data Scientists in Boston, you will be competing for talent against giants like Amazon (123 openings), Pfizer (42 openings) and Biogen (35 openings).
While the small companies are willing to pay around $120,000 for a Data Scientist with a few years of experience, the big guys are willing to pay $160,000 - $230,000.  If you’re a Data Scientist, which job are you going to take?
What can the small companies do to attract Data Scientists? To start with, they must …

Are there good candidates in the market?

Are there good candidates in the market?
A recent study published by CB Insight indicates a number of common reasons that startups fail. The
 first and second are not surprising: 42% of startups close because they found no market for their products and 29% because they ran out of money. But the most solvable reason is the third: 23% of startups fail because of an inadequate team. Obviously, these companies didn’t put the right people in place to do the job that needed doing
Entrepreneurs set up a company, develop an amazing product which the market is waiting for, raise funding and yet, one out of four startups close because the team was not suited for the tremendous challenges entrepreneurs and startups face. So even while the 3rd most common reason startups fail can be attributed to not having the right team in place, the first two reasons can also be partially attributed to having the wrong people executing those tasks. It’s sort of obvious to me. Not having the right team is arguably …

Why Men Still Get An Unfair Advantage Finding New Jobs

A large scale research of 10 million candidate profiles conducted by Talenya reveals why men still get an unfair advantage finding new job opportunities.  
It’s 2020, and women are still being paid 79 cents to the dollar as compared to men, with women making up only 40% of managers. Deep structural problems exist, starting with the hiring process. The problem is twofold - arising both from the way candidates are recruited as well as the presence of implicit bias when viewing candidates.

It isn’t that there aren’t qualified women in the pipeline, it’s that recruiters find and accept candidates who write resumes and professional networking profiles in a certain way -- the male way. Discrimination based on how people write their resumes is apparent in both human recruitment and improperly trained AI-powered recruitment systems. Amazon scrapped their recruiting AI after finding that there was gender bias, specifically related to certain language used by male candidates as opposed to female…