<ul><li>Next Generation Recruiting </li></ul>
Fast Facts <ul><li>World’s leading provider of “Passive Candidate” search, delivering fewer better qualified candidates fa...
Clients / Partners                                                                                                        ...
<ul><li>Wasted Time </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For every single job posting to conventional job boards, hiring managers often r...
Common Practice <ul><li>Company Identifies a hiring need </li></ul><ul><li>Company chooses  easiest path & cheapest  broad...
SEM (search engine marketing <ul><li>Targeted hiring technology that sources “Passive” candidates where the live, interact...
Keyword Database
Keyword Bid Management
Visitor Tracking
Resume Sourcing
Resume Sourcing
Profile Sourcing
End Result <ul><li>Easiest & Cheapest path is rarely Easy or Cheap. </li></ul><ul><li>Recruiters are often paid 25% or mor...
CMS Market Position Cost Quality Hires *Usage Percentage = number of corporate customers who utilize said vehicle for hiri...
Landscape Cost Quality Hires $250-$500 per job “ Post & Pray” Reactive Retained or Contingency “ 15-25% of FY Salary” “ Pa...
CMS Summary <ul><li>Imperatives to Success </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Teams with the best talent win” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul>...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Sharkstrike.com & CareerMetaSearch.com Next Gen Recruiting

1,576 views

Published on

This is a overview of our products and services to reach passive candidates on the web. Our search engine marketing (push) as well as our open web sourcing (pull) will give you fewer better qualified candidates.

Published in: Business, Career, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,576
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
50
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sharkstrike.com & CareerMetaSearch.com Next Gen Recruiting

  1. 1. <ul><li>Next Generation Recruiting </li></ul>
  2. 2. Fast Facts <ul><li>World’s leading provider of “Passive Candidate” search, delivering fewer better qualified candidates faster and cheaper than conventional job boards. </li></ul><ul><li>Overview </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Founded in 2003 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clients include: Microsoft, Home Depot, The GAP, Eclipsys & Freescale </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fewer, deeper strategic relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Global Reach and Capability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patent Pending Technology </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Solutions include </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recruitment SEM & Open Web Resume & Profile Sourcing </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Clients / Partners                                                                                                                                                                                 
  4. 4. <ul><li>Wasted Time </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For every single job posting to conventional job boards, hiring managers often receive thousands of unqualified or mismatched candidates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employers in turn, begin to utilize numerous job-boards to find better qualified candidates which compounds the problem </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time to identify, qualify and evaluate a candidate has tripled </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Wasted Money </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Saturation of online job -boards have actually driven cost per post and costs per hire up for employers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cheaper posting fees do not deliver fewer better candidates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Monster, Careerbuilder & Hot Jobs filled only 28.4% of actual 188,062 mid level openings in 2005* </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Wasted Efforts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Conventional Job Boards do not deliver the industries best talent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Only 30% of 136 million employed online users utilize job boards. </li></ul></ul>Industry Trends *Careerxroads 2005 study
  5. 5. Common Practice <ul><li>Company Identifies a hiring need </li></ul><ul><li>Company chooses easiest path & cheapest broadcast resource to generate interest (Monster, Hot Jobs, Careerbuilder) </li></ul><ul><li>Company deluged with hundreds if not thousands of mismatched / wrong candidates. </li></ul><ul><li>HR reviews all resumes and forwards appropriate fits to hiring manager OR just blindly forwards responses. </li></ul><ul><li>Hiring Manager invests heavily in identifying appropriate candidates gets frustrated & determines there are no talented people available & hires what “will do” OR turns entire process over to the eager recruiter in hope they will deliver fewer but better candidates - willing to pay 25% contingency fee. </li></ul><ul><li>Recruiter searches internal database and resorts to posting and searching very same online databases (Monster, Careerbuilder, Hot Jobs) for candidates and attempts to conduct thorough screening and qualifying to quantify fee. </li></ul><ul><li>Recruiter now faces same issues as hiring manager – Lots of effort and time invested unable to source the best fit for the job. </li></ul>
  6. 6. SEM (search engine marketing <ul><li>Targeted hiring technology that sources “Passive” candidates where the live, interact and do research online </li></ul><ul><li>Delivers fewer but more qualified candidates </li></ul>
  7. 7. Keyword Database
  8. 8. Keyword Bid Management
  9. 9. Visitor Tracking
  10. 10. Resume Sourcing
  11. 11. Resume Sourcing
  12. 12. Profile Sourcing
  13. 13. End Result <ul><li>Easiest & Cheapest path is rarely Easy or Cheap. </li></ul><ul><li>Recruiters are often paid 25% or more to do administrative discovery and qualification of the same talent pool. </li></ul><ul><li>Companies are rarely presented with absolute best candidate – instead they see AND hire what has become convenient. </li></ul><ul><li>Online Job Boards have become little more than Clearinghouses for job seekers & hiring managers as there is nominal risk to apply and a lottery type methodology that candidates will be found. </li></ul>
  14. 14. CMS Market Position Cost Quality Hires *Usage Percentage = number of corporate customers who utilize said vehicle for hiring in 2005 Online Boards 29% Usage <ul><li>Pros </li></ul><ul><li>Cheap </li></ul><ul><li>Easy to Setup </li></ul><ul><li>Lots of Traffic </li></ul><ul><li>Cons </li></ul><ul><li>Clearing Houses </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Intense backend </li></ul><ul><li>Lots of wrong fits </li></ul><ul><li>Longer hiring cycle </li></ul><ul><li>Active Job Seekers </li></ul>Recruiters 16% usage <ul><li>Pros </li></ul><ul><li>High on Strategic </li></ul><ul><li>Fewer, better qualified </li></ul><ul><li>Outsourced </li></ul><ul><li>Cons </li></ul><ul><li>Expensive </li></ul><ul><li>Long hiring cycle </li></ul><ul><li>Must be engaged </li></ul><ul><li>Must be knowledgeable </li></ul><ul><li>Hard to dispute quality </li></ul>CMS <ul><li>Pros </li></ul><ul><li>Source By Competitors </li></ul><ul><li>Fewer, better qualified </li></ul><ul><li>Faster Hires </li></ul><ul><li>Pay for Performance </li></ul><ul><li>Additional Pros </li></ul><ul><li>Intimately involved </li></ul><ul><li>Detailed reporting </li></ul><ul><li>Strategic Partner </li></ul>
  15. 15. Landscape Cost Quality Hires $250-$500 per job “ Post & Pray” Reactive Retained or Contingency “ 15-25% of FY Salary” “ Pay for Performance” Best Exposure Lowest Risk
  16. 16. CMS Summary <ul><li>Imperatives to Success </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Teams with the best talent win” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conventional job boards do little more than drive traffic to a posting, creating a deluge of work and expense to manage </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Only CareerMetasearch & Sharstrike </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Delivers fewer, better qualified candidates directly to you </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provides high touch / weekly reporting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integral part of your hiring strategy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A Pay for Performance ½ to ⅓ the cost of recruiting firms </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Makes it EASY to setup and manage your candidate pool </li></ul></ul>

×