I first interviewed Gerry Crispin about the candidate experience at ERE in 2010. He asserted the candidate experience should be defined, and then measured. The 2013 Candidate Experience Award Survey has taken great strides in that direction. Click PLAY below to hear what Gerry has to say about what we learned from conducting this year’s survey, then scroll down to read more.
I had the privilege to lead a creative group of seasoned recruiting and talent management professionals in the refinement of the Candidate Experience Award Survey for 2013. Our team included:
Bryan Wempen of DrivethruHR
We reflected on the 2011 and 2012 experience and looked to the future. Thanks to the committed collaboration of the Survey Team, a strong, focused, candidate experience evaluation tool was created.
With expanded awareness and stronger market presence, the Talent Board was able to attract a larger number of participating organizations and a significantly larger number of candidates. Survey data was abundant, as was the opportunity to consider, compare, learn, and discern. The Content Team is working hard and furiously to summarize key observations and outcomes from the survey.
The Candidate Experience Survey, at its core, is about bringing evidence-based practices to staffing process improvement. The intention is to help organizations raise their quality of hire and improve the quality of their hiring process.
As an example, one thing we now know is that a poor candidate experience can drive away a customer. A meaningful percentage of candidates clearly stated that their experience turned them away from the brand and that they would take their money elsewhere. That’s unfortunate, but a powerful wake-up call to examine the candidate experience.
We are compiling and organizing the final report. But I wanted to share a few tidbits along the way.
Applicant to Hire Ratio
Half of the surveyed companies report applicant to hire ratios of 200: 1 for entry-level hourly and professional jobs. And, about 40% of companies also report a similar level of applicants for experienced professional, mid-management and senior management jobs. The magnitude and professional/ethical demands of making decisions to disqualify 199 candidates to make one hiring decision are daunting. This reinforces that recruiting is the business of rejecting candidates. And the process by which that rejection occurs can have a dramatic impact on a company’s brand image, consumer perception, and applicant behaviors. And a great deal of hope and high expectations rest on the job-fit and performance impact of the one individual who gets hired.