However technology is changing and smart firms look to the automated process in the areas of filtering to eliminate the multitude of unqualified applicants that reply to posts. From using job filters from firms like Monster, Careerbuilder, a company with a large expense account can get a basic filter product ( usually $400 per 15 applicants tested). Although these basic filters offer a certain removal of unsuitable candidates, they are limited in their ability.
Just imagine, a job post on Careerbuilder can have thousands of replies and even when you get rid of the percentage which really do not fit, you are still left with so many more who look good on paper but are just not what your client is looking for. Others who have more money then turn to products like Proveit, Brainbench etc to offer more job specific skills, to reduce the filter even further. However at an average $50 per applicant test, how viable is it. For many, not so as there are many other competitors out there who are also trying to place the same job.
Everybody knows in this industry that getting that candidate to the employer is the key to earning revenue! So how do some firms stay on top of the game while others struggle to keep up with the pace. There are many factors but my experience leads me to believe that charisma alone cannot carry you in the recruitment industry. Connections obviously make up the main asset but what happens when the candidate that you send really does not match the criteria needed. I am sure that this has happened many times! What happens to your credibility? Some firms claim years in the industry and sure you do pick up certain experiences that make you more viable then others in selection. However in the lucrative markets like I.T , Pharmaceuticals, Scientific and even admin, the world is always changing so what may be an experience yesterday is not necessarily going to keep you on top today!
Clearly there are arguments against automated filters, some justified as most of the filters do not allow you to integrate your own questions, limit flexibility to use other technologies that could explode the accuracy of your selection, such as video based questions (where "what happens next" scenarios could really identify qualified candidates to client needs) and are exceeding expensive for a mid to small size agency.
More and more agencies are turning to the web to place jobs as it brings in a plethora of possible applicants in an automated fashion. Others still use the traditional approach of searching their database of resumes to pool through those that seem to match.
Troublemaker. Pop culture specialist. Social media buff. Bacon advocate. Professional twitter maven. Organizer. Tv geek. Internet fan. Zombie nerd. Beer lover.