Something new in the recruitment space
It’s been said for a while that “recruitment is broken”. I have at least heard it for the last years. Is it really? Why is it that finding a job, or finding great candidates for the job takes so much time? Obviously you’re dealing with people and not goods, so it needs to be a delicate process. But with all new cool tools we have out there, AI (well doesn’t actually exist yet), machine learning, algorithms…how come we are not better at doing this. What do I mean with “not better”? And why doesn’t companies take more care about their candidates? (They could be their next customers…)
Let’s examine a standard recruitment process, from a candidate/applicants perspective:
- Go to a job board online
- Find a job
- Read the job description
- Click Apply
- Use the auto import feature to copy things from your LinkedIn or CV (this usually fails so you have to add it manually)
- Write a motivation letter (this could take hours).
- After a few weeks you get the automated reply saying “Thanks for your interest, but…”.
That’s it. It’s how it works. Of course 2% will get an invite for an interview, but it’s like a bad lottery. And why is this? Is it because you wildly apply to a job that didn’t fit you in the first place? Or is it because you didn’t do a good application? Not really, not only, if at all.
Let’s look at the standard recruitment process from a company point of view:
- Get the OK to do the hire (a process in itself)
- Work on the job description (here is were most fails actually, let me get back to that some other day)
- Post the job ad on the company job career webpage connected to the company recruitment tool (if any)
- Receive A LOT of CVs and motivation letters.
- Spend A LOT of time reading these. (In the best case)
- “Short list” a few of the most promising and interesting
- Invite for an interview
- Take references
- Make an offer
Now, you can clearly see that this process takes a lot of time. At least 2 months. You could maybe go faster if you really had the great candidate, but HR departments would stress that you should have more applicants as alternatives and you should keep at least 2-3 on the short short-list.
Ok, so thank you for the lesson in recruitment. How do we go about doing something about it?
Let’s make some assumptions about a few pain points with the above processes that I would like to emphasize:
- Candidates are applying for multiple jobs and company recruiters are interviewing multiple candidates. That’s a multi-multi relationship with infinite connections. Usually it’s controlled via an end date.
- Understanding the candidates motivation is based on how good they write the letter, how they express themselves in the interview and a judging of their career path using prejudice or believed experience understanding this.
- If any personality tests are done, it’s usually weird ones that’s shows one side of the story, but doesn’t take the person in to consideration.
- When candidates gets rejected, they are not positive to the company.
- Rejected candidates sometimes get a “do you want to stay in the database” but this is more or less a “bury me in the basement” which is never used.
- As the candidate can never ever expect to know fully what the company is looking for, the entire application process is an enormous waste of time, which sadly needs to be repeated for every job search.
- Hiring companies are notoriously bad at keeping candidates informed about the process. This goes against new laws in EU for example (GDPR) where the candidate must be informed about what and how, and when their data is used. They must consent.
- Candidates having to fill out their CVs in multiple formats just to be better searchable, is also a waste. There are no standard formats. Not even a try to follow the same unity. LinkedIn my try with their profile pages, but the format is not portable.
- Booking or scheduling interviews between the candidates and the hiring companies is done via a lot of back and forth via email. Usually via an assistant with access to the HR managers calendar. It’s a tedious work to get that done.
- If all of the above wasn’t enough, on top of all this – it’s actually hard to find good candidates anyway. Where are they?
So, will I now say that I have built a solution for all of the above and that it will magically disrupt the entire recruitment market? No, of course not.
But we have built something that at least is a try to make something better. It’s called Hyro.
This is how the recruitment process is different with Hyro:
- Candidates answers questions about their experience, skills, future wants, their personality and wanted office culture (Wait what no one is doing that!)
- Companies answers, hold on now, the same questions (Yay)
- These two sides are matched (with the help of an algorithm)
It’s really as simple as that. I could go on about all the other features of Hyro but actually many other competitors have them too.
And what about the CV? Yes, you do include it, or actually link either your profile from LinkedIn or whatever, or the file for your CV. No need to paste it all in again. And the biggest benefit for the candidates are – if the job doesn’t match you – you can be matched with another. All candidates are shared with all companies using Hyro. So no waste please.
Thanks for reading!
If you are curious about Hyro – more info here: