When it comes to matching professionals with job opportunities, using a recruiter is often the go-to option for companies and employees alike. However, as with everything, there are pros and cons to this approach. In my experience, and that of my network, there are a number of challenges that candidates and clients can face, particularly when they are engaged on a contingent basis with a recruiter.
From a candidate perspective, recruiters have historically been used to take some of the leg work out of job seeking, actively looking on their behalf so that professionals aren’t tied to constantly scouring adverts and submitting a series of CVs. However, in reality, when a candidate is doing the searching themselves, it’s easier for them to discard the jobs that don’t meet their needs, whereas many of us who have used recruiters have been contacted about irrelevant jobs. The problem here stems from some recruiters failing to understand their candidates’ needs well enough. Here at AnyGood?, we are using a more innovative approach: the people putting candidates forward are their own peers who already know them well in a professional capacity, meaning we remove the element of inappropriate recommendations.
Another issue which many candidates are likely to face is that instead of them having direct contact with the potential employer to ask questions or discuss the role in person, this communication is filtered through an intermediary. It’s hard to get an authentic feel for a business and its culture if you aren’t engaging directly with its hiring managers. Similarly, dealing with an intermediary can lead to delays in communication, which can be frustrating when it comes to getting updates on the status of an application.
When we look at the issue from a client perspective, it’s clear that being presented with filtered shortlists is deemed time-saving for them and a useful way to eliminate entirely unsuitable applicants. However, in reality, employers have no way of knowing if professionals are being filtered out who might actually be suited to the role. Clients have to trust that there’s no unconscious bias taking place during the process and that the recruiters truly understand their business culture and the hiring manger’s needs.
And, in the same way that candidates want to be able to contact employers, clients also wish that they could have direct access to the professionals applying for positions at their businesses before the offer stage is reached.
A new approach
Knowing – and indeed experiencing – these pain points was what started me thinking that hiring needed to evolve. The best solution seemed to be to harness all of the useful things that come with a recruitment agency service, such as pre-approved shortlists and access to a wider network of skilled professionals, but with the benefit of employers and candidates being able to communicate directly. In this modern world, professionals are more widely networked than ever, meaning there are great opportunities to be had from tapping into them. The AnyGood? platform is designed to maximise and amplify these networks so that professionals can recommend other professionals for roles. And, because there are no middle men, it reconnects employers with candidates in a way which increases direct engagement and is utterly transparent.
What are your thoughts on the concept of peer-to-peer recruitment? We’d love to hear your views by taking part our survey. It’s a short survey and will only take a few moments of your time, but your responses will certainly be valuable!