If you are a laid-off recruiter looking for a new role, I will give you free access to my Employer Branding for Recruiters video class. I suspect skills in working with a companyâs employer brand will make you a more attractive candidate.
Email me if youâd like access to the course. And feel free to share this offer with a recruiter you know whoâs looking for help.
+++++
So if Mondayâs post made you uncomfortable with all the changes weâre seeing (or actively choosing to not see), where does this lead us?
(I swear this was supposed to be a simple post that just⌠didnât stop)
Jobs
I suspect that 20-40% of all âprofessionalâ office-style jobs will be done by people who donât actually work within the company.
You know how in âOffice Spaceâ Tom is the guy who takes the specs from the customers and hands them to the developers? How many of your jobs have those kinds of tasks in them? Meetings that donât really need you or drive productivity. Committee attendance. Weekly updates. Staff meetings where everyone gets 90 seconds to talk so that the leader can âstay on top of things.â The seven thousand times Slack pings you to discover that the message doesnât directly concern you.
If youâre a writer, how many hours a week are you writing or editing? If youâre a coder, how many hours are spent making and fixing code? 10? 15? And if youâre a recruiter, youâre insanely busy, but how much of that business is actual recruiting?
Jobs are going to get broken down into tasks requiring skills because that will increase productivity.
That meeting is still going to happen, but a bot will record, transcribe and summarize it, highlighting anything you will be responsible for.
The writing will still happen, but it will be informed by what data says readers want to learn more about, and GPT identifies the subtopics you should ignore because everyone talks about them. For example: if you write a post about how to make a stronger resume, you do really need to be the seven trillionth person to suggest that they check their spelling carefully?
The social will still happen, but the bot might suggest people who talk about this subject a lot that you might want to tag. Or re-write an old post for a new audience that you can edit.
What happening is that the âworkâ is getting done faster and easier, thus allowing fewer people to do more work of higher quality. Yes, the bot can âcreateâ more, but it still requires a human to decide which idea is more useful, more valuable, and very much more strategic. Great content might be the result of a back-and-forth between the person and the bot, but in the end, it is the person who makes the final call.
If you think the demand to work at home was a big shift, wait until all of your colleagues are contractors in six different countries, all of whom are using AI to do their job better, to spend more of their time doing smarter work.
Oh, and since companies who share the most about themselves (salary, culture, thinking, etc) will continue to attract the best people, companies will be financially incentivized to share much much more.
Recruiters
Allyn Bailey has already predicted that weâll see our first all-AI TA team in two years (I think it will be in one). But either way, recruiters will be expected to handle a LOT more requisitions because the rote tasks will be taken out of their hands. They wonât write job postings (a tool will walk the HM through that process and post it directly to the ATS where HR will confirm that they can afford to hire it before it gets sent to every job board in the known universe). They wonât source much (again, an AI tool will help HMs take care of that process because theyâll be able to do it while they stream season six of Stranger Things).
Scheduling, screening, and transactional messaging (thanks for applying, weâre excited to learn more about you, thanks but no thanks, etc) have already been taken off a recruiterâs plate.
So whatâs left?
A lot, but a lot of it is semi-abstract. Great recruiters help candidates envision joining the company, and answer questions from a very non-corporate POV. They are people-people. They engage people and cherry-pick great stories to share, they listen to a candidateâs reservations and nudge them in the right direction, and often do the final negotiation.
A great deal of what a recruiter does is be the human buffer between what the candidate and the hiring managers want and what the âstandard recruiting processâ is. They keep candidates warm despite not being chosen (just in case). They suggest other roles to second-place finishers (just in case). They cover the gaps that automation canât fill because automation didnât take this specific instance into account.
This means recruiters will be handling more reqs, but the skills need will shift. They wonât process paperwork, they will focus on connecting the reason people would want to work there (yes, the employer brand) to the person who they suspect is ready to hear it.
The skill recruiters bring to the table wonât be the ability to morph into what the company is or does. It will be the ability to stand out in a crowd, to be seen by their target audience and have the credibility to engage them.
We might even get to the point where candidates have been âpre-hiredâ by the company in the same way you might be pre-approved for a credit card: Hereâs the salary, hereâs the title, hereâs the team and your boss, and all this is yours if you just have two interviews where we confirm what we know about you.
Impossible? We have to accept that more and more of our âpersonalâ data is available online. How long before LinkedIn buys access to credit firms and makes an agreement with Facebook and Google for web activity data to create âmore completeâ pictures of who we are as âindividuals?â That Facebook personality test didnât just tell us what Taylor Swift song we were, but was mapped to a DiSC assessment, and after taking four tests, it becomes clear to the bot that you are a strong âIâ with some âC.â The number of times we go out suggests how extroverted we are. The number of times we watched Parks and Rec suggests a personality type.
That approach puts the recruiter in a VERY different position, rather than being the salesperson, they become a kind of producer (like a movie or music producer), the person who is tasked with inventing a process, looking at what exists, evaluating what everyone wants, and making solutions happen.
Imagine HR saying you need a new head of nursing. The Producer-Recruiter checks in with the HM, three people that the role would report to, comp&ben, and defines identifiers of potential great hires (previous experience, what past connections said (or didnât say) about them in LI reviews, what they talk about online professionally, organizations they are in (and if they are leaders or volunteers, etc). They ask the bot to scrape anything the targets have written and analyze writing style and personality types. They ask the bot to identify âdifferencesâ between top candidates. This leads them to pick two people who, based on signals far more subtle than what they say in a resume, are great potential hires. The producer âpitchesâ the prospect to the hiring manager, who agrees to pre-offer the candidate a new role.
A brave new world of recruiting.
Interviewing and Job Search (two sides of the same coin)
Iâve joked that it feels like weâre soon reaching the stage were the companyâs bot will interview my bot and someone will email me when I get the job. Okay, so maybe itâs not a âha ha!â joke so much as an indication of how the interviewing arms race is going to proceed.
With all the data available publicly on both sides of the table, we have to assume interviews are less âletâs discover more about each other!â and more âletâs confirm what we found and talk about how that fitsâ which is a far more effective use of everyoneâs time. Candidates will walk in knowing what we say about our culture and have a sense of how much of that is real and how much is spin.
Thereâs a spectrum between ânewbieâ and âexpert/connoisseur.â When you first looked for a job, you were a newbie. You had a limited frame of reference. You may have liked that the company told everyone that they were âpeople-forwardâ but not had a concrete sense of what that meant.
Three jobs later, youâre an expert. You can read nuances between the lines of a career site or Glassdoor review. You ask better questions. You are able to appreciate subtlety.
Thatâs going to be every candidate. They will look askance at âbigâ splashy claims and ads and look for more of the âno really, what it is like when the wheels start to fall off the wagon on a project on Friday afternoon? Does everyone go home and come back Monday refreshed? Or does everyone just plan on eating delivery pizza for the next day or so while they hunker down and hash things out?â
Employer Brand
You are either going to love or hate this one.
As the bots take over more of the day-to-day âworkâ of recruiting, the value of a proper and well-executed talent strategy increases.
And employer branding will be the driver of that strategy.
The first thing to consider is that while EB will still own the âpretty pictures/pretty wordsâ portion of recruiting, 90% of that work will be bot-driven. That allows more time for EB to focus on the companyâs talent position, to define how it is different from competitors, to embrace more messaging around âthis is why weâre a good relative to other companiesâ and less about âweâre pretty great!â
Right now, recruiters can do and say what they want to candidates (not always, but letâs be fair: how often has anyone audited what recruiters are sending prospects?). They are individual actors with very loose boundaries and guidelines on what they can or should say to a candidate. We entrust them with the expectation that they will focus on useful messaging, but as single actors, they donât have the benefit of a wider perspective. They threw something against a wall, saw what stuck, and are going to go with that, no matter how old that message is.
EB will own more of the role of defining what position the company takes, defining better ways recruiters can communicate it (well, that the bots will communicate it for the recruiters), seeing patterns, identifying opportunities, and working with HR to shape the /kind/ of person should be brought into the company.
If recruiters become salespeople, EB will take stronger hold on what marketing is: less âpretty pictures/pretty wordsâ and more of the why.
If recruiters become producers, EB will become studios, feeding resources, tools and content to help recruiters to help them achieve their goal.
Whatâs the bottom line?
One year ago, the idea that a âmachineâ could research material and write a serviceable 10th grade paper on The Great Gatsby would have sounded insane. Today, there are free tools doing exactly that who are decimating testing and evaluation companyâs stock price. It went from âsci-fiâ to âoh wowâ to âugh really?â to âyikes now what?â in between Marvel movies.
And thereâs no slowing down.
You and I know that âthe usualâ process of recruiting hasnât been satisfying to anyone in decades and probably deserves to be reinvented as an AI-driven app. The more companies see recruiting as a cost center, the more they will look to automate it down to someoneâs part-time job. But this isnât the nightmare it might appear at first glance.
This is our chance to show our value, to think more strategically, and more creatively, to solve problems far better than we ever have before rather than maintain a process no one likes.
The change is going to be tough, but I am excited for what we get to do on the other side.
+++++
What would immediately more effective social media that defines, supports, proves, and illustrate your employer brand be worth to you?
If you answered more than $25, you kinda have to register for my newest class on better social media for employer brand. This is the discounted price. The number goes up after the class goes on-demand after May 16.
***While I talk a lot about it, this newsletter contains no ChatGPT***
-James Ellis [LinkedIn] [Website]
###