The majority of cost savings achieved through e-recruitment have come from the automation of the process and associated reduction of administrative effort. For example, online testing saves time in the interview process and narrows down the number of candidates for interview. As well as online interview scheduling helping both candidates and the business save time, it also allows candidates a choice of dates.
Automated CV screening and pre-selection based on certain criteria and keywords does weed out a lot of unsuitable candidates and saves HR an enormous amount of time. This feature is often seen as particularly useful in areas where candidates tend to use the 'scatter gun' approach to apply for jobs instead of only applying for jobs they are qualified for and are able to perform.
By using e-recruitment, HR can therefore redirect time to focus on more value add activities, such as designing job ads, interviewing candidates, refining selection criteria and coaching the business in interview techniques.
But the question is, are we missing a trick here? By seemingly removing human judgement from the screening and pre-selection process, are we losing out on the ideal candidates?
The answer is YES, in some cases we do. However good the screening criteria and keywords are, 'non-compliant' but suitable applications will not be picked up by the screening engine or (depending on how these selection keywords are set up, positively or negatively) these applications will be deselected. Thus great candidates will receive rejections.
There is a real risk that organisations recruit only one type of person based on automated selection keywords and automated CV templates - the ones that fit the mould. Candidates with experience outside the template or who use different words and phrases to describe themselves, might be filtered out during screening. However, these candidates might just be the right fit for the job as they would bring fresh ideas and innovation, even though their qualifications may be outside the screening engine template. Candidates usually caught in the screening trap are people who studied abroad, have chosen a different educational path or who just 'dare' to use screening 'non-compliant' language. And of course there are clever candidates who have worked out the rules behind the screening and pre-selection, and provide spot on applications, only to be rejected in the interview process.
So what can we do to minimise the risk of losing great candidates without losing efficiency in the recruitment process?
Although there is a risk of missing out on great future employees through e-recruitment, this does mean that it should be discontinued or discarded as an option to improve the recruitment process. But as with every tool, it must applied selectively.
The key is to identify the roles where human intervention is required and the danger of losing a suitable candidate through automated selection is higher than the cost of extra work. For example, filling junior roles with a narrow scope or which require specific trade or degree qualifications would benefit from pre-selection to screen out candidates who merely apply as a punt so as to identify the real applicants.
However for more loosely defined roles such as managerial, professional services, marketing and sales roles or roles which require innovative thinking or flexible working and influencing styles, human selection may be of appropriate. As these attributes are often implied in the candidates achievements and description of experience rather then spelt out in keywords, human selection can ensure no suitable candidates are lost through pre-selection.
Even for roles which are deemed to be suitable for the full e-recruitment process, HR together with the business must consider the usage and application of e-recruitment carefully and ensure that the job ad, tests, applications templates and screening/selection criteria are designed such that undesirable candidates are screened out and suitable candidates are identified.
The challenge that has always existed, but is now greater is to decide what the ideal candidate(s) profiles and CVs might look like and what in their application would signal that suitability and desirability the organisation. As this is often different for each organisation and even department depending on culture, organisation strategy and budget, there are no standard templates available and recruiters should not let themselves be seduced by the promise of a fully automated recruitment process without human intervention up to the pre-selection phase.
E-recruitment checklist:
- Suitability of e-channel – for senior recruitment, the e-channel is often not the best approach. There the traditional head hunter approach will most likely remain the most effective channel to source the right candidates.
- Clarity of role description – does the job ads or role description give candidates enough information to self screen? Often ads or role descriptions are rather vague albeit long which invites the “scatter gun” candidates
- Impact of the website, the applications templates and tests on the candidate – would these draw in or actually put off potentially desirable candidates. When candidates are unable to reflect their experience within the template, high flyers are usually put off as they feel there is no fit between them and the potential employer
- Suitability of current screening and pre-selection keywords and criteria – would these exclude desirable candidates? For example a lot of organisations make a 2:1 degree a requirement, however candidates with a lesser grade might do a much better job or have much better experience
