Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Internal recruiter or external/third party?

Internal Corporate

Why does it take MONTHS to get to the second round and NEVER to respond when you’re not interested?

"There is no reason to use Times Roman Font." Mind blown. Recruiter: What are we supposed to be using?

Anonymous wrote:I’m hoping this doesn’t devolve into ‘why did you ghost me’ rants. I’d rather give you tips and tricks to get hired. But go for it DCUM…

What kind of positions are you hiring for right now?

Are you actually looking at resumes yourself or letting AI weed through them?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excluding CEO/President level (think VP, senior manager, manager types) at what point does a candidate's age start working against them?

Good question. It depends on the role and the company to be honest. I’ve been in old school industries (think commercial and retail banking) where people stay a looonnng time and someone who is say 45 is about the midpoint of the workforce distribution. I’ve also worked in digital marketing where the average age was like 30. And then in F500 the average age might be in the middle say 38, but by 50 the company is packaging people out.

I will say this
There is no reason to ever put more than 15 years of experience on your resume
There is no reason to put your college graduation date. (1982??!)
There is no reason to still be using Yahoo email. SMH
There is no reason to use Times Roman Font
— when I see a combination of these things on a resume I start thinking ‘This PERSON Has Aged Himself/Herself With This Resume - they are demonstrating by this document that they are not adaptable, will not change.

Guilty. At least it’s not Hotmail?!

I applied for a job that I think I’m a perfect fit for. I haven’t heard back yet. If this was a position you were hiring for, would you want to hear from me, just to alert you to my application (which may be in a pile of 1000s) and to reiterate my strong interest in the job? Is there anything I could do at this point that you’d like to see, or is it better to just wait?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many average applications do you get for posted positions?

I’ve posted 4 roles in the last 8 business days. We are getting 100-110 applications a day.

So if you keep it open for 14 days you're talking 1,400 candidates. Jesus even if half of them are spam AI shit thats a ton of candidates for one job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excluding CEO/President level (think VP, senior manager, manager types) at what point does a candidate's age start working against them?

Good question. It depends on the role and the company to be honest. I’ve been in old school industries (think commercial and retail banking) where people stay a looonnng time and someone who is say 45 is about the midpoint of the workforce distribution. I’ve also worked in digital marketing where the average age was like 30. And then in F500 the average age might be in the middle say 38, but by 50 the company is packaging people out.

I will say this
There is no reason to ever put more than 15 years of experience on your resume
There is no reason to put your college graduation date. (1982??!)
There is no reason to still be using Yahoo email. SMH
There is no reason to use Times Roman Font
— when I see a combination of these things on a resume I start thinking ‘This PERSON Has Aged Himself/Herself With This Resume - they are demonstrating by this document that they are not adaptable, will not change.

Obs not TNR… but what font should we use?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m hoping this doesn’t devolve into ‘why did you ghost me’ rants. I’d rather give you tips and tricks to get hired. But go for it DCUM…

How bad is it, really, out there, for senior-level professionals?

It’s tough. I have a very senior level role posted right now - it reports to the CEO- we’ve had a flood of applications. I get a feeling that many are in desperation mode and are applying to anything and everything. If I think about the ‘middle- maybe - applicants’ meaning they weren’t a strong yes and they weren’t a strong no (‘I’ve only worked at golf courses but I’m a VP!) - these are the ones I haven’t “decisioned” - these are the resumes where the person COULD be a match but they did zero work in tailoring to my job so now they are in a holding pattern. I’ll go to them if the ‘yes’ candidates don’t work out where I need a second batch of candidates, but equally I’ll drop them tomorrow if ten ‘stronger’ ‘better matched’ applicants come in.

Anonymous wrote:Excluding CEO/President level (think VP, senior manager, manager types) at what point does a candidate's age start working against them?

Good question. It depends on the role and the company to be honest. I’ve been in old school industries (think commercial and retail banking) where people stay a looonnng time and someone who is say 45 is about the midpoint of the workforce distribution. I’ve also worked in digital marketing where the average age was like 30. And then in F500 the average age might be in the middle say 38, but by 50 the company is packaging people out.

I will say this
There is no reason to ever put more than 15 years of experience on your resume
There is no reason to put your college graduation date. (1982??!)
There is no reason to still be using Yahoo email. SMH
There is no reason to use Times Roman Font
— when I see a combination of these things on a resume I start thinking ‘This PERSON Has Aged Himself/Herself With This Resume - they are demonstrating by this document that they are not adaptable, will not change.

Anonymous wrote:Do you advice hiring committees to stop making people do projects for an interview? Asking candidates to create plans or campaigns for free is off-putting. It's especially insulting to people with decades of experience.

Our company does not ask candidates to create a project. I agree that’s lousy. However we do use case studies / sales scenarios / data analysis situations as part of our process. We are not asking a candidate to generate IP (which I think is what you’re getting at). We are evaluating the candidate in a simulated environment that mimics the real job. The candidates who reach this penultimate phase are like the Top 3 for the role - so they’ve progressed far into the interview process. In total time these situations take about 30-45 minutes of a panel / finalist interview and it really helps us get a feel for fit.

Anonymous wrote:Why are you constantly contacting people with jobs well below what they're looking for? Emailing or texting over and over again to people well over qualified for the position? Do you even bother to read their resumes first?

I personally don’t do that - At All. I want a candidate who WANTS my role, meaning they have taken the trouble to apply to it, and isn’t going to skip out in 12 months when they see something better. Quite frankly, in this market there are plenty of qualified candidates job seeking right now.

Anonymous wrote:Recruiter posts AMA then dips out barely answering any questions....thats about on brand.

You’re cool. I’m in a different time zone so still my Workkkk Dayyyt

Anonymous wrote:How many average applications do you get for posted positions?

I’ve posted 4 roles in the last 8 business days. We are getting 100-110 applications a day.

Anonymous wrote:To what extent is AI changing the hiring landscape? To what extent are employers using it to screen? To what extent can candidates maximize chances given that?

Good question. Let’s take it from the candidate perspective first. Most recruiting platforms - we call them ATS’s Applicant Tracking Systems - do have an AI function that can screen out candidates if they don’t have the right experience education or target skills. (Hence it is really important now more than ever to customize your resume for the postings you apply to!). Even with AI though I scan any resume I want to put in front of a hiring manager. There is still a human on the other side of the application. Now, if you didn’t customize, aren’t the right skills match, and you’re stretching for a role? Yep you will likely fall out of the process either by AI or by me screening with a filter. If I say I want Salesforce background, your resume better have Salesforce (not just CRM Systems) on it.

Now let’s take it from AI generated applications - as a recruiter they are horrible and a total time suck. Because the resume will pass the filters and I’m looking at the resume and it’s Too Good. Like too much of a match. My hiring managers are also onto this. Obviously we reject the resume but it has wasted our time. Here’s the catch though - if your resume is poorly formatted (because most AI generated resumes don’t have the XTRAAAA formatting that many professionals use) I think - this is AI, or I’m not sure if this is AI or a person, guess what - I’m rejecting your resume.

Anonymous wrote:Are you seeing a prolonged more complicated interview process? There was another thread about 13 interviews and my own experience recently has also been way more rounds than expected. And companies that seem to interview but have no idea what the role will be but do 8 rounds. Are they bored? Is AI changing landscape so much they don't know what they want? It seems crazy and a huge waste of time for all involved.

For companies that follow best practices, interview processes are condensed to 4 maybe 5 touch points, HR Hiring Manager Stakeholders which could be a Panel and Skip Level Boss. For companies that haven’t matured yet - meaning, they don’t trust their talent assessment skills (either their predictive assessments or their own ability to discern a talent fit during interviews) the process can indeed be long. I’ve worked in both environments. The latter is painful for the recruitment team too.