Blanket bombing of job boards must stop
Share
Recruitment companies need to stop the “blanket bombing” of job boards when sourcing candidates, according to a senior figure from a website design company.
James Saunders, managing director of 4mat, which has designed websites for Eden Brown and Badenoch and Clark among others, told Recruiter that inefficient sourcing by recruiters is a waste of money.
“The cost of finding a candidate, on average, when you combine the cost of advertising and time spent, is £150 per candidate.
“We believe that, if recruitment agencies are more selective, that cost can be as low as £5.
“If recruiters invested in their own websites rather than trawling the job boards, it would be much more cost-effective. Intelligent client branding on their own sites, for example, is a much better way of doing things,” said Saunders.
Related images
Most popular
Most commented
Job of the Week
Latest Recruitment Jobs
Recruitment Job Search
Readers' comments (6)
Tim Booth | Fri, 8 Dec 2006 12:15 pm
This sounds like a sales pitch from a website designer!
How does a recruitment company get as many hits to their website as a global job board (e.g Monster) who have television adverts and a team of branding experts with huge budgets?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
M Walker | Fri, 8 Dec 2006 12:21 pm
Responsible job boards such as all of ours www.hospitalityrecruitment.co.uk, www.chefjobs.co.uk, www.hoteljobs.co.uk do not allow recruiters to blanket bomb sites. We police our sites very strictly including the layout of the jobs - this is our duty of care to our recruiters and our jobseekers and it is proving to be a very successful strategy coupled with one or two others - contributing to our growing excellent reputation.
I beleive the job boards you maybe referring to have always done that as they beleive the more jobs the more successful it looks - whereas in actual fact the opposite is more accurate. Most responsible ones do not allow it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Adam Nicoll | Fri, 8 Dec 2006 3:56 pm
James' team built a very effective site for us (Badenoch & Clark) which has helped more than double our traffic in the last year for which we are grateful, however the nature of our markets is such that there is always value in posting to some of the more relevant and targeted sites which are genuine leaders in their fields, such as totallyfinancial and totallylegal, as well as gaapweb. If you want a perfect recipe sometimes you need ingredients from both Harrods and Selfridges.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
M Walker | Fri, 8 Dec 2006 4:56 pm
We don't have the resources of Monster but we do have very well put together tehnical site that has enabled us to be placed on page one of all the serach engines - its not rocket science.
I agree it does sound like a sales pitch from a web designer - rather than a well defined, market reserach about job boards.
Also I doubt you would find any bona fide chef or cook looking for the perfect recipe ingredients in Harrods, Selfridges, or Fortnum and Mason come to that!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
James Saunders | Wed, 13 Dec 2006 9:14 am
Firstly, thanks for the feedback guys.
Tim's point is an interesting one. It's true that I am in the business of selling web sites, but I firmly believe that it is not in the interests of many specialist recruitment consultancies to receive as many visits as Monster (a very, very generic job site).
A well targeted search engine optimisation campaign for a specialist consultancy's web site should deliver far more value in terms of visits and applications by quality candidates than posting jobs to Monster. I have lots of examples of small consultancies punching well about their weight for relevant search terms on Google who would not consider advertising on the big boards.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rob | Mon, 3 Nov 2008 9:17 am
Rubbish. Our website is not as well known now or would I ever expect it be, given the promotion thrown at sites designed to be job boards vs sites designed to be recruiters' brochures.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment