Why telephone source?

The Edge has noticed some of the popular blogs carrying stories the last few days about how to find names inside companies and an interesting read written by Jim Durbin that addresses that popular argument about passives and actives. One semi-dissenter (Rob McIntosh) wrote that the segment of the working populace he himself was most interested in was the 30% of the candidate base that he terms “selective” – those that could also be referred to as “Prospects”. He states:

“It is the 30% that I am interested in. It’s the 30% that gives me a little more insight of potential willingness to be approached. They do have a public presence (CV on personal web page, executive summary on a social networking tool, bio on a blog, etc). They are also deliberately throwing their details out there for the world to see and majority are aware exactly what one of the bi-products of that actually means……Headhunter calls!...And they are the ones that you refer to that are selectively networking and keep their ears/eyes out. Not because they hate their job but because they like options (not as in Stock ;-)).”

The Edge agrees that in this 30% that "have a public presence" there will be found folks who are savvy to what their worldwide exposure can deliver in terms of “options”. But the Edge finds fault with the thinking in limiting a search’s parameters to what is found on the internet. (Yes, of course, the Edge acknowledges that occasionally a hidden gold nugget will be offered by someone found on the internet in the “networking process”.)

But for the most part, relying on internet results for your search is going to impact the overall quality of your results and it’s going to impede your efforts. Believe it or not, calling on the telephone is far faster and far more productive than surfing the internet for folks. Don’t believe it? Here:

If we use that number Rob tags as a good one (30%) for what he calls “selective” candidates (the Edge believes both the number and the terminology are good) the Edge believes the overall results will follow:

30% of that 30% you won’t be able to find because they’ve moved on – some as a result of being “found” before you found them.

Half of the remaining 70% understand how you found them (you’re #3 that week to call them) and think they’re ahead of the curve in thinking ahead of the pack (maybe they are) but as a result may have unrealistic expectations and be difficult to deal with.

About 10% of that 70% are new arrivals on the worldwide marquee called the Internet and don’t quite “get” what their exposure is about to garner them. They’re still “innocent” as of yet and they may be easier to deal with. Their expectations haven’t been pumped by ten calls a week, yet – get them while they’re HOT.

40% of that same remaining 70% are sick and tired of being called (they landed on the web inadvertently and wish they could recall their name off it) and are extremely displeased at being interrupted again. These folks are extremely difficult to communicate with.

Do the math and it quickly becomes apparent what small percentage of this subset that has “a public presence”, are really approachable. And of those that are, how few are likely to have reasonable expectations.

Now, let’s do the math on telephone-produced results. The greater majority of folks you source in this way are going to be inside a company, heads down, walkin’ the walk that needs to be walked, too busy to think about another job. Until you come along.

Out of ten you contact in this fashion, one will tell you he’s “not interested” and hang up the phone.

One – two will tell you they’re actively looking and might even say “Hey, I’d LOVE to work for your company – whatd’ya got?

Two to four will tell you, “I’m not really looking but – but, yeah, I might be interested... whatd’ya got?”

Three to five folks will tell you, “I’m not really looking but you never know what the future holds – whatd’ya got?”

The Edge would like those odds in Las Vegas.