The Devil Is In the Details Part I

There was a question on the boards back in July last year over on ERE that asked a very perceptive question (and caused a firestorm (36 responses)of argument, some of it challenging my numbers):
“The thing is - if I am able to generate 50 names and profile those and we receive a hire from that great - however if we receive a hire from that and are able to generate relationships with the remaining 49 or so - how do you determine that value in terms of dollars, or can you? Say 6 months down the road one of those relationship benefits another job req and a another hire - how's that determined?”

All I can offer on this subject is my own boots on the ground experience. I have a few customers who use me for ongoing name generation for very large projects. Their needs are constant and pretty consistent and run into the thousands of names per year. Their packages are competitive and their reputations within their respective industries stellar. Their recruiting staffs are aggressively skilled in relationship building and closing candidates. In other words, they represent perfect storms.

What I am told, and what I can relay back to you, is that the pipelines they are building are delivering ever-increasing returns. In other words, if I give them 100 telephone sourced names on a particular project, they’re very likely to make 2-5 hires out of those names immediately, but the equally important component of this conundrum is that they continue to make more hires from those names as time goes on.

For instance, out of their initial investment of $4500, they can usually make three hires pretty quickly, in months 1 and 2. In months 3-6 they may make four more. In months 7-12 they may make a couple more. Let’s say they made 7 - 10 hires in the first year (my hands-on experience tells me they can make more than twice that number, but for sake of argument here and because the sourcing naysayers have such a strong and loud prejudice against these numbers being presented, much less accepted, by the recruiting community, I am offering about a third of what I know is really possible) out of all 100 telephone sourced names pipelined in that space in that year. Even this third makes the numbers rock, which, in turn, makes the Industry rock. So, using that third, there are “potentially” 90-92 hires left in that batch, right, that haven't been hired away, after one year? Remember, these people have the desired skills, carry the desired titles, come from desirable and specifically chosen companies and most are not actively looking, or even thinking about looking, for another job. Many of these people (if not most) have never been proactively contacted by a recruiter.

It should be noted here that I am NOT talking about companies in hiring spaces that are notoriously rock-hard competitive; these being defense, some areas of Big4 consulting and finance, healthcare and pharma/biotech. As I freely admit in Part II of this series, your mileage will vary industry to industry so DO NOT take the numbers I am reporting and slap them onto every industry. Understand your challenges before you make assumptions. To continue...

Where do you think those 90 some persons might go in Year Two? What are the chances that some more of them might switch jobs in Year Two?

Statistics show that a worker between the ages of 18 and 38 changes jobs an average of 10 times. That works out to a job change about every 2 1/3 years. So put a pencil to it, what are the chances that those 90 plus remaining mighty change jobs in Year Two? Pretty good? Do you think that there maybe exists the possibility that another 5-10 out of that remaining bunch might be on-boarded as well in Year Two? My customers do. My customers are doing it. They are developing viable processes internally to develop these potential hires and they are “developing” these people. The fish tanks are growing.

Today, there are 149 million people in our nation's workforce. Every year, approximately 50 million people leave their jobs. And approximately 50 million people find new jobs. That means one-third of our entire workforce turns over each year because of new opportunities. And, remember, the average American worker has had nine jobs by the time he or she is 34 years old because of new opportunities.

Now, there’s something being missed out there in the noun confusion between Telephone sourced names and Internet sourced names. If you “pull down” 100 names off one of the more popular Internet names services, like spoke, zoominfo or alwayson, there’s a good chance that the name is no longer there, the name’s title is misappropriated, the information is just plain faulty or the person is not suited to do what you need them to do. If you receive 100 telephone sourced names, you’re receiving, if you receive them from a names sourcer who knows what he’s doing, names and titles from specific companies, doing specific jobs, working specific verticals, holding specific titles. You just can’t get any more exacting than that. It’s what I am beginning to think of as extreme recruiting.

It takes far longer to hash through (interminably long, in my opinion) 100 names off zoom than it takes to sit down, fresh, at your desk in the morning and begin calling every single name with a guaranteed title, many of them with direct dials, from a “clean” telephone sourced names list that your telephone names sourcer emailed to you the evening before. If you find 25 out of the 100 off a names service like zoom, spoke or alwayson, that are "still there" AND able to do the job you need them to do for you in your own time-frame, you’ll be lucky. Out of those same 25, it’s a good bet, if it’s a challenging space you’re working to fill in, many of them will turn off to your approach because they’ve been approached over and over and over as a result of having found themselves landed in the electronic filing cabinets of those same organizations. In other words, if you can find them, and I’m referring to someone with “ordinary” search skills, don’t you think there’s a good chance they’ve already been “found”? What are the chances they haven’t?

Out of the telephone sourced names, and I’ve iterated this before, you’ll find all 100. Quickly. Easily. Efficiently. Smoothly. One reason for this is because a good names sourcer will assure you that you will find all of them; they will guarantee it. These names are custom sourced for you alone. They’re living inside the mortared walls and shuttered windows of companies and are usually very receptive to your novel approach. They are wildly bountiful.

The big elephant in the room here is this: What’s your time worth as a recruiter and, the even bigger elephant is, do you have the stomach to do the turnover that is required when “ferreting” out names? Few do and Time, my friend is the only thing in this world we can never get more of. It is truly priceless. Names sourcing is an incredibly time consuming process.

Watch for Part II coming soon!
******
Attend the MagicMethod FREE one hour LIVE phone sourcing chat tomorrow on Tuesday, May 13 and again on Thursday, May 15 at noon (EST) here!
******
Like what you just read? MagicMethod is brimming with information like this and will show you the inside tips and techniques of true telephone names sourcers! Subscribe today here.