Candidate Experience Awards 2012 UK research paper

The Candidate Experience Awards | The Candidate Experience 2012, United Kingdom 1

[email protected]

Candidate

Experience

2012

Contributing Authors

Gerry Crispin, Ed Newman, Elaine Orler,

Bill Boorman, Leigh Carpenter, Jillyan French-Vitet

and Joseph P.Murphy

Sponsored By

Talent Collective, Monster,

KellyOCG, ChangeBoard, Peer Group, and

HireRight

United Kingdom


[email protected]

Foreword Dear Reader,

The Candidate Experience Awards are the brainchild of the Talent Board, a not for profit

group of recruitment industry experts who wanted to ensure candidate experience was a

priority on the talent acquisition agenda.

We are proud to be sharing the main findings from the inaugural U.K. Candidate Experience

Awards (known as “the CandE Awards”) with you. When the Talent Collective agreed to help

get the awards up and running in the U.K., having been inspired by the first awards held in

North America in 2011, we weren’t too sure if our enthusiasm for the topic would be shared by

others in the U.K. recruitment market. We need not have worried; the U.K. CandE Awards got

off to a flying start.

The CandE Awards are designed to highlight the innovative practises, technologies and

standards that some of the most forward-thinking employers are implementing to enhance all

aspects of their talent acquisition process. The winners are raising the bar to let candidates

know their investment, time and interest in the company are valued, and the CandE Awards

offers industry recognition to those employers.

The CandE Awards, while an awards programme, are also designed to provide confidential

and specific feedback to help every participating organisation improve its candidate

experience efforts. All companies that participate have the opportunity to 1) benchmark their

candidate experience against peers’ provided experiences, and 2) participate in the CandE

Awards survey of their employment candidates.

This report, “Candidate Experience 2012, United Kingdom” is based on the data collected

during the employer application and candidate survey rounds of the 2012 U.K. Candidate

Experience Awards.

Please consider this report as an open source document. It’s written for everyone in the

industry who cares about the candidate experience. It’s intended to engage talent

acquisition leaders, recruiters, vendors, consultants, analysts and candidates in a two-way

dialogue about the standards, technologies and expectations that affect us all at some point

in our careers.

Everyone who cares about the candidate experience should feel free to participate by

reading it, using the data to inform decisions about their recruitment process, and share it with

others.

Our hope is that this report sparks and elevates the candidate experience conversation, and

inspires you, whatever your role in the talent acquisition process, to create the strategies that

will continue to advance it in the future.

Regards,

Jeremy Tipper

Talent Board member and managing partner at the Talent Collective


[email protected]

Table of Contents

2012 CANDIDATE EXPERIENCE AWARD WINNERS, UNITED KINGDOM ................................................................ 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 5

PHASE I – CANDIDATE ATTRACTION ....................................................................................................................... 6

THE INITIAL RELATIONSHIP ................................................................................................................................................... 6 ONLINE AND TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION METHODS ..................................................................................................... 7 EMPLOYER COMMUNICATED CONTENT OF WHICH CANDIDATES ARE AWARE ....................................................................11 ADDITIONAL EMPLOYER ATTRACTION INITIATIVES EARLY IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN .....................................................................13 COLLECTING CANDIDATE FEEDBACK DURING THE ATTRACTION PHASE ...............................................................................13

PHASE II – EXPRESSION OF INTEREST ..................................................................................................................... 15

THE APPLICATION PROCESS .............................................................................................................................................15 SCREENING AND KNOCK OUT QUESTIONS ........................................................................................................................16 COLLECTING CANDIDATE FEEDBACK DURING THE EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PHASE ..............................................................17 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST – AN OVERALL VIEW ..................................................................................................................20

PHASE III – CANDIDATE DISPOSITIONING BEFORE THE FINALIST STAGE............................................................. 22

THE EVOLUTION OF THE “BLACK HOLE” ............................................................................................................................22 ACTIVE LISTENING BEFORE THE FINALIST STAGE...................................................................................................................25 CANDIDATE DISPOSITIONING BEFORE THE FINALIST STAGE – AN OVERALL VIEW ..................................................................25

PHASE IV – CANDIDATE EVALUATION & SELECTION ........................................................................................... 27

PRELIMINARY SCREENING RESOURCES ..............................................................................................................................27 THE JOB INTERVIEW..........................................................................................................................................................28 CANDIDATES ACKNOWLEDGE USE OF ASSESSMENTS .........................................................................................................32 EMPLOYER COMMUNICATION FOLLOW THROUGH ............................................................................................................32 CANDIDATE AS DECISION MAKER ....................................................................................................................................33 CANDIDATE SELECTION ...................................................................................................................................................34 THE GOLD STANDARD – WOULD CANDIDATES APPLY AGAIN? .........................................................................................35 SHARING FEEDBACK ........................................................................................................................................................35

FINAL WORDS ......................................................................................................................................................... 36

THE CANDIDATE EXPERIENCE AWARDS 2013 ....................................................................................................... 37

THE CANDE AWARD PROCESS DESIGN ................................................................................................................ 38

ABOUT THE RESPONDING EMPLOYERS AND CANDIDATES ................................................................................. 40

ABOUT THE EMPLOYERS ...................................................................................................................................................40 ABOUT THE CANDIDATES .................................................................................................................................................41

ABOUT THE TALENT BOARD AND THE CANDIDATE EXPERIENCE AWARDS ......................................................... 42

ABOUT THE SPONSORS ........................................................................................................................................... 44

ABOUT THE JUDGES ................................................................................................................................................ 45

ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS ................................................................................................................ 45

2012 CANDIDATE EXPERIENCE AWARD WINNERS, NORTH AMERICA ................................................................ 46


[email protected]

2012 Candidate Experience Award Winners, United Kingdom

2012 With Distinction Winner


[email protected]

Executive Summary Having completed the U.K. inaugural year, the Candidate Experience Awards (known as the

CandE Awards) started in North America in 2011. This year’s programme attracted a range of

participating employers, job candidates and sponsors. The programme is supported by many

sponsors, and the research data was based on 857U.K.- based candidates and 17,500 in North

America. The benchmark results and participation emphasise that candidate experience and

its impacts are valuable to both employers and candidates. Employers are taking notice and

working to improve candidate experience as they seek, evaluate and hire the talent that they

need to build successful workforces.

The landscape in the war for talent is shifting. Candidates are gaining equal footing with

organisations regarding perception, communication and the ability to choose whether or not

to maintain engagement. As the talent playing field levels, organisations which recognise this

evolution in candidate-employer partnership will have an edge when it comes to employment

and overall brand, candidate interest to re-engage and even refer future talent regardless of

whether or not they have been dispositioned or withdrew from the hiring process.

Some key findings from this year’s awards and benchmarking programme follow:

49.3 per cent of the candidates claim some positive relationship with the company prior to applying.

This includes just over one fifth citing they were existing customers and 11.5 per cent having friends

and family working at the company.

Referred candidates are four times more likely than non-referred candidates to receive an offer.

Prospect and candidate engagement through Connections on LinkedIn (73.7 per cent), Facebook

(41.4 per cent), Google+ (23.5 per cent) and Glassdoor (11.4 per cent) are significant and growing.

On a positive note, the theoretical ’black hole,’ where no status or notification is ever forthcoming,

seems to be a decreasing practice among the firms that competed for the 2012 Candidate

Experience Awards. While more employers are providing notification to candidates and are willing

to provide feedback to dispositioned candidates when asked, few have made it a standard

practice to do so. As per candidate responses, the majority received standard non-specific

feedback, and more than one-third received no feedback at all.

Nearly half (47.1 per cent) said that they asked candidates – whether or not they were qualified –

for feedback if they were not advanced to the Finalist evaluation phase. Nearly 53 per cent of

employers are missing a meaningful opportunity to better understand their processes and the

impact that they have on candidate experience. The vast majority (76.3 per cent) of candidates

said they were not asked to provide any feedback once they were notified they were no longer

being considered.

Candidates responded (66.7 per cent) “no” when asked if employers were interested in learning

about their experience in applying for a job despite the fact they withdrew from the position.

According to 2012 employer application results, the majority (70.7 per cent) have practises that

require qualified candidates (not among the Finalists) be informed with a standard script or with

feedback – much higher than the 50 per cent of employers that have those same requirements for

unqualified candidates.

Shouting Out: The majority of candidates are ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ to tell their ‘Inner Circle of Friends’

(~5) about their experiences whether it is positive (72.7 per cent) or negative (61.7 per cent). A

growing and significant number are willing to go further and share their positive (27.6 per cent) and

negative (16.7 per cent) experiences with EVERYONE via blogs, Facebook and sites like Glassdoor.

Ultimate test of your employment brand: In the end, fewer than half (45.9 per cent) of candidates

surveyed were likely or highly likely to refer others to the employers they were surveyed about. More

than half (53.8 per cent) were neutral and nearly 1 out of 10 (10.3 per cent) would not.


[email protected]

Phase I – Candidate Attraction

The Candidate Attraction phase of the recruiting process examines the period of time when

the individual actively investigates a firm to decide whether or not they will apply. In its simplest

form, this represents the conversion of an employment prospect to a candidate.

To better understand how employers treat their prospects during this phase of hiring – and

learn which factors have the greatest impact in their decision to become candidates – the first

series of 2012 U.K. Candidate Experience survey questions probe employers on their

communication tactics, employment messaging, and the level of transparency as it relates to

those messages in this early stage.

It is increasingly challenging for organisations to differentiate themselves and establish how

their values, culture, products and people represent a unique opportunity for top candidates.

The 2012 U.K. Candidate Experience survey also sought to understand how aware

employment prospects are with respect to the company’s products, services, people, culture

and opportunities before becoming candidates.

As communication trends continue to evolve and intensify due to social media, and more

social recruiting tools and tactics develop; the initial attraction phase gains yet another facet

for delivering and receiving employment branding messages. Both challenges and

opportunities surface as a result. To better understand employers’ and candidates’ tactics and

awareness, respectively, the 2012 survey also queried participants on social media usage

during this early Attraction stage.

Overall, and not surprisingly, employers competing in the U.K. CandE Awards viewed their

practises related to Attraction as positively skewed. The majority (61.2 per cent) said the

experiences they provide are Advanced, 22.2 per cent reported Neutral, and few (16.8 per

cent) said it was Lagging. Generally, candidates agreed with 60.3 per cent reporting an

Advanced experience, 20.5 per cent Neutral, and 19.2 per cent Lagging.

The Initial Relationship

The question below was posed early in the candidate survey and offers telling insight into

Attraction. A significant number of the 857+ candidates who applied to the companies in the

CandE Awards initiative (49 per cent) claim some

relationship at the outset. There is a clear, initial,

positive pre-disposition toward the employer,

which suggests that positive

association is ultimately the

employers’ to lose, and echoes

the importance of effective

candidate relationship

management (CRM).

What was your relationship with the

company when you began

researching them? Candidate Viewpoint Question 5

(n=728)

50.7 % I had no

relationship with

the company

20.9 % I was/am a

customer of the company

11.5 % I have Friends/ Family w/the

Company

10.9 % I follow the company

6.0 % I am an advocate for the company


[email protected]

While just less than half the surveyed candidates report a positive pre-disposition, a significant

portion (50.7 per cent) is left to be ‘engaged’ with content relevant to the prospect’s decision

to become a candidate. It is these neutral prospects that employers might want to

concentrate on influencing through branding messages, marketing tactics, choice of media,

etc.

Online and Traditional Communication Methods

From social media and blogs, to mobile career apps and company career sites, it is no surprise

that the number of online recruiting media is growing as rapidly as everyday communication

trends. To better understand how widely employers are including these venues in their

attraction and recruiting strategies, the 2012 U.K. CandE Awards survey asked employers to

detail to what extent (on a range from “We Do Not Use” to “Extensive”) they leverage online

communication methods.

How do employers communicate ‘online’ with prospects BEFORE they apply?

Employer Application Question 21

Top Five Methods

88.9% Career Site (primary)

76.5% LinkedIn Company Pages

76.5% Career Site (Notifications)

72.2% LinkedIn Groups

47.1% Twitter Feeds

Do Not Use

66.7% Chat Room

64.7% Webinars/Podcasts

52.9% Talent Community Memberships

47.1% Polls/Surveys

44.4% Career Blogs

For prospect attraction, employers consistently rely on web and social networking base media

to communicate with candidates. Top cited media included their Career Sites (88.9 per cent,

Routine and Extensive), LinkedIn Company Pages (76.5 per cent) and Twitter Feeds (47.1 per

cent Routine and Extensive Use, with 29.4 per cent in the experimental stages). Twitter is, not

surprisingly, gaining ground although, given the almost universal penetration of mobile devices

in the general population, employers, disappointingly confirm here what many already know –

that many firms are far behind on the curve to enable their content and communications with

mobile devices.

In a world where companies seek to leverage their brand and use multiple channels to cast a wider

recruiting net, Candidate Attraction provides an opportunity to gain competitive advantage by

attracting the right talent vs. all talent. Employers benefit most when they know their talent audiences

and focus on messaging candidates deem important to determine fit. Better honed content regarding

an organisation’s culture, business unit or department, or where an opportunity is located, for

example, serves to invite talent to explore who the company is. Leveraging channels which align to

how talent communicates enhances messaging. Brand leverage is important, however, it is not

necessarily the determining factor of a candidate’s choice in electing to apply to an organisation.


[email protected]

While employers are flocking to certain online recruiting

methods, they have not yet abandoned some of the more

traditional venues during the Attraction stage. For example,

responding companies reported that they’re most heavily

invested in Employee Referral Programs (88 per cent) and

Direct Calls [Cold Calling] (82 per cent). These

communication methods rely on one-on-one personal

interactions with the companies’ employment prospects.

Employers are also heavily invested in traditional outreach

methods particularly for reaching new graduates. Internship

Programs (70 per cent) and Career Fairs (71 per cent) are

listed as some among the most used traditional

communication methods for attracting prospects before

they apply for full-time opportunities.

How do employers communicate

‘traditionally’ with prospects BEFORE

they apply?


To understand the impact of employers’

online and traditional communication

efforts, the 2012 U.K. CandE Awards

queried candidates on the ways in

which they accessed information about

the company prior to applying for a position. The good news is that companies are investing in

a number of venues that candidates regularly access. Among those marked Aware and Used

by candidates were the Company’s Career Site (65 per cent), Career Site Agents (47 per

cent) and LinkedIn Company Pages (26.5 per cent).

Unexpectedly, only 17.5 per cent of candidate respondents indicated that they were aware

of and used employees within a company to become their “referral.”

“Other” Online

Communication

Methods Reported by

Employers in the

Attraction Phase

- YouTube content

- Links with colleges

- Visioning boards

- SEO strategies and

solutions

- Alumni networks

- HR awards

programmes

- RMS job boards

- Niche job sites

- Job alert technology


[email protected]

While employers report that they experiment with more social and mobile Online

communication methods (such as Facebook Career Pages), the 2012 U.K. CandE Awards

survey data suggests that candidates are aware of these venues, but do not weigh the

information provided there in their decision to apply to an open position with the employer. It

will be interesting to watch how these trends evolve over the next few years as social media

offers both employers and job seekers more features and the world continues to adopt a more

mobile-enabled lifestyle.

Candidates are clearly using a few sites quite

extensively in their job search activities.

Prospect and candidate engagement through

Connections on LinkedIn (73.7 per cent),

Facebook (41.4 per cent), Google+ (23.5 per

cent) and Glassdoor (11.4 per cent) are

significant and growing.

Recruiting activities are becoming increasingly

social. Select the social networks you actively

engage with for your job search efforts.

Candidate Viewpoint Question 12 (n=464)

2012 U.K. CandE Awards Winner Spotlight: Avanade Walks in the Candidates’ Shoes

Avanade, a business technology solutions provider, understands the needs of candidates and

regularly tests their own systems and recruitment processes, walking in the candidates’ shoes.

Based on feedback from candidates about their application process, they adopted a three

click rule and shortened the process.

It shouldn’t be difficult for employers to review their own recruitment processes. Doing so may

include searching for one of the company’s jobs on the web and following all the steps

required to apply. Like 2012 U.K. winner, Avanade, companies can capture the number of

page changes, brand changes and number of times the candidate has to create an account

to log in. Employers should also consider how long it takes to apply to the position. Would they

be willing to do all of those tasks all of the time? Organisations can then create a list of

changes that would simplify and enhance the process for candidates, positively impacting the

impression they make on potential hires.

Avanade also focuses on open communication with candidates. The company provides

contact details of recruiters in automated emails, generated via the applicant tracking system

(ATS) and encourages candidates to contact them. Two years of CandE research confirms

that two-way communication is key to any successful relationship, but a high volume of

response will significantly reduce the time available and opportunity for recruiters to do this. Full

transparency in public channels reduces applications, because people choose to opt out or

identify themselves as unqualified to apply. This creates the time needed to give a great

candidate experience to those who remain in the process.

73.7%

23.5%

41.4%

11.4%

21.3%


[email protected]

Despite heavy use of social media

in the job search, the information

provided has little impact on their

decision to apply for a job. This

may be a reflection of the lack of

mobile compatibility, (when job

seekers are browsing the web in

down time), and the redirect from

social media to career site to ATS,

with little opportunity to complete

the whole application process

within the channel.

Unsurprisingly, LinkedIn dominates

in the areas of candidate

engagement and prospecting.

This reflects the growing trend

amongst direct employers to

move to a direct sourcing model

via LinkedIn, as reflected in the

CandE winners interviews, with

direct sourcing being cited as a

big factor in improving the

candidate experience. With the

launch of a dedicated U.K. site by

Glassdoor during 2013, we can

expect this destination to grow in

importance.

What is your experience with the online recruiting

methods of the company?

Candidate Viewpoint Question 8 (n= 506)

Aware,

USED

Aware,

NOT

USED

Not

Aware

Career Blogs 16.2% 25.9% 57.9%

Career Site (Primary) 65.1% 19% 16%

Career Site Notifications 47.2% 26.5% 26.3%

Chat Rooms 6% 22.1% 71.9%

Facebook Company

Career Pages 14.6% 31.1% 54.2%

LinkedIn Company

Pages 26.5% 35.5% 38%

LinkedIn Groups 15.8% 34.1% 50.1%

Mobile Job Apps 10.3% 24.3% 65.4%

Mobile Text-Messaging

Campaigns 5.2% 19.3% 75.6%

Polls/Surveys 11% 21.7% 67.3%

Twitter Feeds/

Notifications 8.3% 26.9% 64.8%

Talent Community

Memberships 6.5% 20.3% 73.3%

Webinars/Podcasts 9.8% 20.8% 69.5%

2012 U.K. CandE Awards Winner Spotlight: General Electric (GE) Capital Ensures Hiring Manager are Accountable Too

GE Capital recognises the importance of hiring manger involvement in all stages of the

recruitment process. Internally, the organisation awards a Candidate Experience Award to two

hiring managers each year based on candidate feedback. The company has found that the

more hiring managers are involved in the process in all areas, including feedback and

communication, the better the experience for the candidate.

Without abdicating all responsibility, hiring managers are required to sometimes provide

specific feedback, and in some cases to facilitate communication with candidates directly, or

to be available for follow up.


[email protected]

Employer Communicated Content of

Which Candidates are Aware

The content an employer makes

available to candidates is a function of

their transparency, a term that is often

used but seldom defined.

The 2012 U.K. CandE Awards sought out

to better understand what content was

routinely made available in the

recruiting process and at what stages it

became available. The survey was

designed to help uncover whether that

information was easily found online at

an early stage, or if it was not shared

until much later in the hiring supply

chain when recruiter and candidate

are directly engaged and

communicating. The survey queried

employers and candidates about Marketing and Job Specific content. Job Specific content

includes more detailed demographics about the employees involved in hiring and managing

the position.

What marketing CONTENT do you make available (or that a job seeker might want to ask about)

BEFORE they apply?


Available through Website

100% Product Information

88.9% Values: i.e. Fit

83.3% Financial Information

76.5% Community/Sustainability Initiatives

72.2% Diversity - Culture

Not Available

50% Diversity by Level (Affirmative Action)

50% Diversity (Job Specialty)

47.1% Awards for Employee Experience

38.9% Diversity (Contact Info)

11.1% Financial Information

What Job/Position CONTENT do you make available (or that a job seeker might want to ask about)

BEFORE they apply?


Available through Website

100% Jobs - ALL

77.8% Job Descriptions

52.3% Frequently Asked Questions

47.1% Career Path Examples

44.4% Details of Application/Next Steps

Not Available

83.3% Simulations of Core Jobs

82.4% Contests and Games

77.8% Practice Tests Related to the Job

66.7% Number of Hires in Typical Year

66.7% Soon to be Posted Jobs

“It is encouraging to see employers experimenting with

a wide range of methods to communicate pre-hire.

The career site is unsurprisingly the primary source of

communication. Mobile apps and text messaging

received the second and third highest ‘do not use’

response. Given the significant growth in Smartphone

usage for web access, I would have expected greater

experimentation in this area. This will become critical in

candidate experience, as an increasing number of

potential employees move from desktop access to

mobile device, Traditional methods like career fairs

and career sites dominate communication. This might

make sense for active job seekers, but ignores the

passive browsers. Employer communication is still

largely broadcast, rather than engaging, with little or

no use of features like live chat.”

– Bill Boorman, U .K. CandE Awards judge


[email protected]

From the reported data, overall employers indicate that the more general the content, the

more willing they are to offer it at an earlier stage in the talent acquisition process. More

content, such as recruiter contact information, cultural content, how much the position pays,

how frequently a position becomes open, what happened to the previous incumbent, and

more, is less likely to be shared at the very start of the recruiting process. This data is more often

shared by employers with fewer candidates who advance and have direct contact with the

recruiter or hiring manager in the stages the follow.

In contrast to the employers’ description of their transparency, candidates report that they

decide whether or not to apply to an open position based on their awareness and use of the

Marketing and Job Specific content that is available to them during Attraction.

For the most part, candidates report that they are ‘not aware’ of much of the Content –

Marketing or Job Specific – that companies are curating and offering at the Attraction stage.

A job candidate’s interest is likely influenced by why they might want to work at the company

and why they would stay at the firm they are considering if offered a position. Just as a firm

seeks to assess the fit of a candidate, candidates are interested in the culture of that firm and

how the job (as it is presented by the employer) is aligned to the success of the firm.

Heightened participation in sites like Glassdoor and on social media align with this observation

as well. As Candidate Experience research continues, it is expected that focus on fit for

candidates is likely to differ by job level and type.

What is your experience with the company’s

marketing content available BEFORE you

applied?


Aware

(and used)

Not

Aware

Awards Received for Employee

Experience 18.6% 56.1%

Community and Sustainability

Initiatives 16.6% 56.6%

Financial Information 29.6% 43.8%

Product Information 40.1% 34.9%

Values: i.e. 'Fit' 32.6% 45.1%

Work Culture or Environment 42.7% 34.7%

Answers to 'Why' People Want to

Work Here 41.1% 35.9%

Answers to 'Why' People Stay Here 35.7% 39.9%

Diversity- Culture 34.4% 41.5%

Diversity- Contact Info for Affinity

Group Leaders 15% 59.1%

Diversity- Statistics for Company

(Affirmative Action) 16.9% 59%

Diversity- Statistics by Job Specialty 19.1% 56.9%

What is your experience with the company’s

making specific job related content available

BEFORE you applied?

Candidate Viewpoint Question 11 (n=494) Aware

(and

used)

Not Aware

Job Descriptions 63.7% 21.1%

Jobs- ALL (currently open) 55% 25.9%

Details of Application and

Next Steps 48% 32.2%

Benefits Details 38.5% 38.9%

Frequently Asked Questions 29% 45.7%

Assessment Focused on

Cultural Fit 31.1% 51.7%

Salary Ranges 30.5% 51.9%

Jobs- Open in the Recent

Past But Not Open Now 21.9% 52%

Career Path Examples 30% 48.9%

Overview of Recruiting

Process 36.1% 44.2%

Employee Testimonials 26.7% 52.1%

Recruiter Contact Information

by Job 31.9% 48.4%


[email protected]

Additional Employer Attraction Initiatives Early in the Supply Chain

Beyond internship and work experience programmes, many companies have substantial

career education initiatives at grad school, high school, vocational school, and special

education community programmes. Additional attraction methods in the education space

include special programmes at the university levels to help prepare students for their careers.

These initiatives can be an integral part of employers’ successful strategies; the 2012 U.K.

CandE Awards found that about 44 per cent of respondents participate in these programmes.

What’s more, the majority of those that do also participate in the development and

management of the programmes to enhance their employment brands within the developing

workforce.

Collecting Candidate Feedback during the Attraction Phase

Actively listening to prospects and candidates during each phase of the talent acquisition

supply chain is essential to optimising the candidate experience. Based on employers’ U.K.

Candidate Experience Awards applications, fewer than 1 in 5 (16.7 per cent) survey prospects

and candidates on their experiences before the individuals have applied for positions at their

companies.

Of those that do, employers report that they often rely on Online Surveys (66.7 per cent) and

Focus Groups (33.3 per cent) to gather prospect feedback. Additional methods include

standard discussions with the recruiter; phone- and email-based application walk-throughs

with candidates; requests at conferences, association events and job training sessions;

requests for feedback over social media channels such as LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and

Google+; and direct follow up requests with all potential candidates during the phone

screening process. All (100 per cent) of the responding employers who say they collect

candidate feedback at this stage believe this practice is a standard part of their audit

process, the rest indicate that they do so whenever possible.

Employers’ Long-Term Attraction Strategies

Employers are invested in schools and college students, encouraging them to learn more about potential career

paths and resources, as well as their companies. Examples include:

Industry-specific career fairs for high-school students;

Working with public schools to offer industry-specific curriculums and programmes;

Encouraging executives to share their expertise with the college community as adjunct professors;

Resume-building and interviewing strategy workshops for vocational and community college students;

Consulting and mentoring programmes

Business simulation competitions for high school students;

Providing students, parents, counselors, teachers and administrators with comprehensive online products to

help manage high school-to-college-to-career planning processes; and

Summer jobs and internship programmes for high school and college students.


[email protected]

Active listening definitions emphasise that it is the person you are speaking with who

determines in the end whether you have listened. When posing a similar set of questions to the

employers’ random candidate-base, fewer than 10 per cent of the respondents realised that

the employers were interested and willing to listen (which is about half of what employers

reported).

Were you informed via the career site or a recruiter

that you would be surveyed about your job seeking

experience BEFORE you actually applied to a

position?


Talent Collective is a resourcing consultancy that, over two decades, has

helped companies to build and run internal talent acquisition and RPO

functions.

Talent Collective advises on recruitment strategy, helps organisations to

understand and navigate the recruitment technology market, and provides

implementation and training services that are delivered with both an eye for

innovation, but also a deep understanding of what really works.

Yes

15.2%

No

64.3%


[email protected]

Phase II – Expression of Interest This aspect of the survey explores candidate experience at the moment when prospects

discover that they in fact are candidates. To the serious candidate, the expression of interest is

a big decision, and the point at which they are going through the conscious phase of

potentially leaving their current employer and joining another, or committing their future to a

hiring company. This does not imply that those candidates have any clear perception as to

how they have been evaluated and qualified, and if they are considered an applicant –

someone who is properly qualified, considered, and clearly interested in a specific position.

The Application Process

For the candidate, that defining moment

essentially occurs when they commit to sharing

their background with the employer. The ease

at which a candidate can provide this

information – through screening and testing,

the promise of privacy, feedback,

acknowledgement and setting expectations –

are critical challenges for the employer, and

are facilitated through its talent acquisition

technology, hiring protocols and professional

recruiters.

Most employers that applied to the 2012 U.K.

CandE Awards programme consider certain

aspects of the application that offer

convenience and acknowledgement – such

as an automated “Thank you” (100 per cent)

and the ability to upload and parse a resume

(100 per cent) – as standard. Matters of

compliance, such as offering a reason for why

gender and race questions were present on

an opt-in basis (72.2 per cent), automatic

“next steps” information (76.5 per cent) and

sharing a privacy policy (94.1 per cent) were

also common for most organisations.

However, still some aspects about the

application that candidates find important are

not yet common practice, even among those

employers that are at the leading edge of

candidate experience. These areas include

making the U.K. application available in

varying languages (50 per cent), sharing

details on how long it should take to complete

the application (16.7 per cent) – a feature that

is relatively common for applicant tracking

system technologies – and indicating how long the candidate’s background would be held

before being deleted (47.1 per cent).

Which of the following do you include in

your application process?


100% Submitting an application triggers an

automatic “thank you.”

100% The ability to upload a prepared résumé

or standard pre-populated profile to be

parsed for application fields is an

option. 94.1% An explanation of privacy commitments

– specifically with regard to the staffing

process – is explained in layman’s terms.

76.5% Submitting an application triggers a

reminder about “next steps.”

72.2% The reason for requesting race, gender,

veteran status, etc. is explained in

layman’s terms as part of the

application.

64.7% Contact information for concerns about

data privacy is included in the

application’s data privacy statement.

50% The application (in the U.K.) is available

in other language(s).

47.1% Privacy commitments include a specific

time frame when the data collected will

be deleted from the system.

44.4% As the job seeker finishes each section

there is an indication of the percent

completed or some other means to

determine how far along the candidate

is within the process.

29.4% Accommodation information for people

with disabilities is prominently displayed

at the beginning of the application.

16.7% The average/expected time to

complete the application is indicated

at the beginning of the application.


[email protected]

Screening and Knock Out Questions

Candidate experience from the candidate’s view point is impacted by how well they are

briefed and prepared for what is going to happen in the hiring process, and what they are

going to be asked to do, from questionnaires to detailed behavioural assessments. While it’s

not possible to generally conclude that the candidate experience is impacted by the level of

questioning, it is clear that candidates are subjected to an array of questions during the

application process, ranging from the general to the very specific. Considering human nature,

it’s likely that there is greater risk of application abandonment as questions become less

relevant and more tedious. Passive candidates are more likely to abandon overly burdensome

application processes. A lack of

clarity, as it relates to

expectations, and why questions

are asked can contribute to this

risk.

As more employers include

screening, knockout and testing

questions in their application

processes, candidates also grow

increasingly aware of these

elements. There are a number of

measures that employers can

take to ensure that candidates’

time is spent wisely while

completing the application.

When you applied, did you note any of the following?


68.5% Submitting the application presented an immediate “Thank you.”

59.7% Ability to upload or parse a prepared résumé or standard pre-populated profile for application was

an option.

56.9% The company’s privacy commitments with regard to the hiring process were explained in layman’s

terms.

49.2% The reason for requesting race, gender, veteran status, etc. is explained.

48.8% Submitting the application presented a reminder about “next steps.”

45.1% Contact info for concerns about data privacy was included in the application’s data privacy

statement.

43.1% Indication of the percent completed or some other means to determine how far along I was in the

process.

40.1% The average/expected time to complete the application was included.

39.6% Privacy commitments included a specific time frame when collected data would be deleted.

38.1% Information for people with disabilities was displayed at the beginning of the application.

33.6% Ability to use information from professional/social networking profile to apply.

When a candidate applies to an opportunity, they have begun

to invest their time with an organisation. For all of us, time is

precious and we seek to optimise it (through process

automation and ease of use of technology for example) and set

expectations for deliverables. Organisations that understand

and respect the time investment of candidates, even at early

stages of a recruitment process, may enhance the overall

perception of their talent audience. Inform candidates on

length and duration of an application process, privacy and data

retention timeframes, and confidentiality to deliver immediate

impact on how talent begins to frame its experience with the

organisation.


[email protected]

What kind of screening,

knockout or testing

questions are asked?

Employer Application

Question 33

Notably, many employers report that they ask general screening questions that allow non-

qualified job seekers to complete the application and reject them later (61.1 per cent). Just

16.7 per cent advance the job seeker to an exit with explanation that they do not qualify for

the position immediately. The results are mirrored for specific screening questions.

What Assessment and Testing

questions were you presented?

Candidate Survey Question 19

(n=363)

Collecting Candidate

Feedback during the

Expression of Interest Phase

The single best way for

employers to better

understand how well

candidate expectations are

set (and whether

assumptions about how

recruiting technology

performs as experienced by

the candidates) is to ask. According to the 2012 U.K. CandE Employer Application results,

nearly half of employers (45 per cent) do ask their candidates.


[email protected]

Do you ask Candidates to give you feedback about the

application process?


Unfortunately, only 44 per cent of the responding

employers ask candidates about their application

experiences. Of these, 75 per cent don’t do so until

much later in the process, and (by then) to a much

smaller pool of candidates. This is essentially confirmed

by the candidates who responded “no” (52 per cent)

when asked if employers were interested in learning

about their experience in applying for a job.

Today’s leading companies recognise that an emphasis on candidate experience is critical to

success in competing for talent in a demanding market. The CandE Report provides valuable

insight on what it takes to drive positive candidate experience and, most importantly, where

organisations have an opportunity to improve. The CandE Awards support commitment to

benchmarking and improving candidate experience. This commitment is about much more

than recruiting — candidate experience is an important component of a company’s brand

and, ultimately, its ability to grow and succeed.

Feedback needs to be collected in a consistent way, and in real time at every stage of the

process to bring about improvement in candidate experience. Without meaningful feedback

and data, companies can only work on gut feel and guess work.

2012 U.K. CandE Awards Winner Spotlight: Risk Management Solutions (RMS) Provides High Touch Candidate Experience

RMS, a risk management company, understands that its business and the jobs for which it

recruits are not for everyone. As a result, RMS seeks to find and engage with a targeted group

of individuals that really fit what it is seeking.

Once RMS connects with these candidates, it’s important for them to make sure it remains

engaged in the recruiting process with a high touch recruiting process. RMS recruiters listen and

provide a two-hour daily chatter facility for all potential candidates to speak with a recruiter.

Fifty per cent of candidates using the chatter tool make it to the pre-screen interview with the

hiring manager or recruiter. In addition, sponsoring social games that fit the skills and interests

they are looking for in candidates, RMS strives to ensure that once the right candidates find the

organisation, there should be few reasons for these candidates to fall off in the recruiting

process.

RMS also focuses on candidate referral processes, and receives referrals from external

candidates including those who were not successful in their application. For RMS, this is a true

sign of how well the company manages its candidate relationships. This is an excellent

example of how candidates leaving the process with a positive experience and still play an

important role in an employer’s attraction strategies and recruiting results.

No

55.6%

Yes

44.4%


[email protected]

How do you collect feedback from the

Candidate as they apply?


Were you invited to provide feedback on the

APPLICATION process after you applied?


Innovation in the Application Process

Many organisations are making strides to provide candidates with an easy, direct and transparent

application process. Following are some of the ways that employers can enhance the process:

Provide company or recruiter contact support details (email and phone), so that candidates

can contact someone directly regarding their application and working at the company.

Deliver (automated) thank you emails that not only acknowledge receipt, but provide details

on next steps and contact information for the recruiting communications specialist that can

assist them moving forward.

Online candidate helpdesks, live chat and social media offer direct and real-time support

candidates while they complete the application process.

Send personal email notifications when the status of a candidate’s application changes.

Commit to feedback timelines.

Allow candidates to save and complete applications at a later time.

Keep resumes on file for multiple job listings.

Use video technology to share more about your company culture and the position.

Offer a quick apply option that allows candidates to complete an application from their social

media (LinkedIn) profiles.

Invite candidates to connect over social media after they’ve submitted their applications.

Designate an internal resource to maintain communication and follow up with applicants

throughout the entire hiring process – start to finish.

Implement a seven-click application process, making the process short and sweet for

candidates.


[email protected]

Expression of Interest – An Overall View

Despite the challenges associated with the general application phase, the vast majority of

employers and candidates report a positive or neutral experience during this phase of the

recruiting process. Employers said they deliver a Positive (65.5 per cent) or Neutral (17.6 per

cent) candidate experience during the application. 16.9 per cent offer that their candidate

experiences are lagging while candidates apply for an open position. Candidates offer

feedback in a similar vein.

Overall Candidate Experience

Rating during the Application

Process

Employer Application Question 37 &

Candidate Viewpoint Question 21

(n=369)

Active Listening: Asking Candidates for Feedback

Just like candidates who value feedback during a recruitment process, organisations have an

opportunity to seek feedback from their candidates on their experience before/during/final stages of

the hiring process. Individuals have a tendency to appreciate ‘being heard’; assume large

organisations do not listen and value the exceptional companies which do. When candidates invest

their time and energy to engage with an organisation, they expect an investment in return. The

ability to give feedback, in a timely fashion, directly impacts a candidate’s perception of an

organisation, both now and in the future.

How an organisation attracts talent is a constant evolution; asking candidates, and receiving their

input benefits an over-arching talent acquisition strategy and can foster a deeper relationship with an

employers’ targeted talent audience.


[email protected]

Monster Worldwide, Inc. is the parent company of Monster.com, the premier global online

employment solution for people seeking jobs and the employers who need great people.

We've been doing this for over 10 years, and have expanded from our roots as a "job board"

to a global provider of a full array of job seeking, career management, recruitment and talent

management products and services. At the heart of our success and our future is innovation:

we are changing the way people think about work, and we're helping them actively improve

their lives and their workforce performance with new technology, tools and practises.

Monster's Promise

At Monster, we don't just sell better jobs, we help promote better lives.

Because, in the end, a better job is much more than just that. A better job is a better

experience; an experience that leads to better possibilities, better opportunities, better

relationships, better perspectives – all working together to improve life along the way.

So, simply put, our mission is to inspire people to improve their lives.

Learn more about how Monster’s innovative suite of products are helping employers improve

workers lives by improving the candidate experience.

http://hiring.monster.com/


[email protected]

Phase III – Candidate Dispositioning before the Finalist Stage

Candidates who have applied and are identified as unqualified, not considered or just not

competitive enough to be further evaluated are dispositioned by employers in any number of

ways. At the front end, the job application itself may have provided sufficient evidence for the

employer to determine not to go forward. However, at the back-end, some individuals are

ruled out as finalists after a considerable investment in virtual as well as face-to-face

evaluation. This is often the result of a direct comparison of the similarities and differences in

job-fit among the finalists.

As it relates to assessing candidate experience, it’s important to understand how and what a

firm is prepared to do to inform candidates about their status, as well as seek feedback from

them. The challenge organisations face in collecting meaningful feedback is that it is often

viewed as inversely proportional to the size of their operation, combined with compliance

requirements and company expectations. The greater the number of applications, particularly

unqualified applications, the harder it is (according to employers) to ask for and receive

feedback.

The Evolution of the “Black Hole”

Recruiters must deal with managing increasingly larger numbers of applicants that must be

dispositioned. A weighted average suggests that, in 2012, employers received on average 65

applications for every job opening and estimate that about 60 per cent of all candidates that

apply are unqualified, making it challenging to communicate personally with all unqualified

candidates unless there are clear incentives and tools to accomplish that task. Transparency

of minimum requirement pre-application can help eliminate this challenge, making it easier for

candidates to opt out if they are unqualified, and in turn reducing volumes and improving

efficiency.

How many applications do you receive for a

typical position? Employer Application Question 38

What percentage are typically NOT qualified for

the position? Employer Application Question 39

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

fewer than 10

26 - 50

76 - 100

201 - 250

“We provide contact details for candidates to call if they need support”

“Our recruiters partner with candidates to guide them through the process, they provide interview information and are in constant contact”

“We provide feedback to all candidates who submit their CV”

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

More than 90%

51%- 75%

11% - 25%


[email protected]

Only 11.1 per cent of the responding employers indicated they do not as a matter of course

tell unqualified candidates that they are no longer being considered. However, 39 per cent

either don’t require communication or reach out via automated message. Half of the

respondents are required to directly reach out to candidates, either with a standard script or

through recruiters who are trained to offer feedback. This “black hole” experienced by many

candidates can be avoided by setting clear expectations for recruiters, and line managers at

every stage in the process, as well as making progress visible on-line, so that a candidate can

check in and monitor their progress at any time.

How do you communicate with candidates who

are UNQUALIFIED?


How do you inform the QUALIFIED candidates

that don’t go on as Finalists?


With the remaining (qualified) candidate pool, next steps take each individual through further

evaluation. Typically additional screening takes place using computer-based assessments,

phone screening and other testing to reduce the number of candidates to a group of Finalists.

Half of all employer respondents will, at a minimum, phone screen qualified candidates to

create their shortlist; half also report they phone screen all qualified candidates sourced via

employee referral.

Then how are the qualified candidates who do not become

Finalists eventually dispositioned? According to 2012 U.K. employer

survey results, the majority (70.7 per cent) have practises that

require candidates be informed with a standard script or with

feedback – much higher than the 50 per cent of employers that

have those requirements for unqualified candidates.

In this case, employers also typically react to requests for feedback

by reverting to a ‘standard’ notification of status. Only 53 per cent

of the responding employers have established practises where the

recruiter or the RPO provider is (or is expected to be) accessible

and provide direct feedback.

“We communicate the

outcome of applications

throughout the process to

ensure candidates are aware

of the process.”


[email protected]

And if the qualified

candidates who aren’t

finalists ask for

feedback?

Employer Application

Question 43

While candidates may

not be happy with

learning bad news,

best practises for

employers include

sharing a status

update. Given the

time and effort that

candidates commit to

submitting applications

for consideration, they

deserve to be

acknowledged and,

when possible,

provided specific

feedback. Still, less

than one-third of surveyed candidates (30.1 per cent) reported that they received an

anonymous email indicating that they would no longer be considered. Some (35.4 per cent)

noted phone calls from recruiters and hiring managers. Nearly 13 per cent did not receive a

message on the status of their applications at all.

How did you learn you were not being considered for the position?


30.1% I received an email from a “do not reply” address notifying me I was not being considered.

24.7% I received a phone call from a recruiter notifying me I was not being considered.

19.4% I received an email from a recruiter notifying me I was no longer being considered.

12.9% I did not receive any communication prior to calling the recruiter to request my status.

7.5% I received an email from the hiring manager notifying me I was not being considered.

5.4% I was provided a link where I could check the status of my application independently.

3.2% I received a phone call from the hiring manager notifying me I was not being considered.

As more hiring companies move from transactional recruiting based on one job towards continuing

relationships with candidates through talent networks and talent communities (as operated by all of

the With Distinction winners), extra attention will need to be paid to how the rejection message is

delivered. The message should be “Not ‘not right,’ just ‘not right now.”

– Bill Boorman, U.K. CandE Awards judge


[email protected]

While employers are providing some form of notification to candidates and are willing to

provide feedback to dispositioned candidates when asked, few have made it a standard

practice to do so. As per candidate responses, the majority received standard non-specific

feedback, and nearly one-third received no feedback at all.

How did the company provide specific feedback to you? [Check the BEST answer]


31.2% No feedback was provided.

30.1% Standard template email was received without any specific details.

17.2% Phone call received from the recruiter/hiring manager, providing specific feedback and

answering my questions.

8.6% Phone call received from the recruiter/hiring manager providing general feedback.

7.5% Phone call received from the recruiter/hiring manager, but little feedback was provided.

5.4% Other

Active Listening before the Finalist Stage

Perhaps the biggest miss for employers is reflected in the data that follows. Just 47.1 per cent

said that they asked candidates – whether or not they were qualified – for feedback if they

were not advanced to the Finalist evaluation phase. More than fifty per cent of employers are

missing a meaningful opportunity to better understand their processes and the impact that

they have on candidate experience. By engaging individuals in this phase, employers can tap

the vast majority of their candidates – those that will walk away with a new impression of their

company based on the experience and rejection.

If this seems to be an embarrassing oversight, the responses from candidates are even more

critical. The vast majority (76.3 per cent) said they were not asked to provide any feedback

once they were notified they were no longer being considered.

As companies look to maintain relationships with candidates beyond the job stage, revisiting

their skills, experience and qualifications for future opportunities, then managing rejection in a

positive way will be critical for on-going relationships. Without feedback and data, this critical

stage is left to chance, with no real opportunity to evaluate and improve on candidate

experience.

Candidate Dispositioning before the Finalist Stage –

An Overall View

At this stage, in an overall rating, the results for responding

employers and candidates differ drastically. While the majority

(66.5 per cent) of employers report that they are able to

communicate effectively with both qualified and unqualified

candidates, just 25.3 per cent of candidates say they were treated

well when not selected. In fact, a large number (35.8 per cent)

reported a negative experience, followed by 38.9 per cent who

reported a neutral experience. While it is possible that negative

ratings are partially due to the overall sting of rejection, it is clear that there are steps that

employers and candidates can take to close the gap.

“We provide real feedback

that can help them with future

interviews or give detail on

what technical skills did not

make them a fit.”


[email protected]

Candidates’ expectations of better feedback at this stage do not appear to be met. If

employers do not collect feedback at this stage, they risk losing an opportunity to understand

those expectations, and the reasoning behind them, as well as the chance to meet them in

the future. Companies’ ability to communicate with qualified and unqualified candidates &

Candidates’ ratings on how they were treated when not selected.

Employer Application Questions 46 & 47 & Candidate Viewpoint Question 38 (n=95)

From workforce consulting and outsourcing through to talent supply chain

management, we partner with the world’s leading companies to innovate the

talent solutions of tomorrow.

0%

Negative 22.2%

Positive

77.7%

Neutral

0%

Negative 44.4%

Positive

55.5%

Neutral

35.8%

Negative 25.3%

Positive

38.9%

Neutral

Quality of the communication

provided after NOT being selected.

The company’s ability to communicate

with QUALIFIED candidates that have not

been selected for an interview.

The company’s ability to communicate

with UNQUALIFIED candidates.


[email protected]

Phase IV – Candidate Evaluation & Selection

Employers take a generally organised approach with Candidate Evaluation. Candidate

Evaluation begins with data collected via the applicant tracking system and continues

through the use of traditional and emerging technology. A high volume of candidates per

requisition place a greater need for objective and fair evaluation methods. Companies are

challenged to dedicate resources to personally screen and/or evaluate each qualified

candidate.

More than 11 per cent of participating employers stated they receive more than 76

candidates per opening or requisition. Nearly six (5.6) per cent stated they receive more than

100 candidates per opening. While volume alone can cause a challenge, the situation is

exacerbated by the percentage of candidates who are determined to be unqualified for the

position. As a result, technology is often used to aid in determining which candidates are best

qualified for the position. However, too heavy a reliance on the ATS for selection means may

lead to only sharing automated notifications or rejections from “do not reply” mails rather than

personalised feedback. While the ATS is critical to effective hiring and providing a positive

experience, hiring companies should also collect on-going feedback from applying

candidates to ensure that the application process is user friendly, intuitive, relevant and as

short as possible, with clear instructions and on-line help.

Preliminary Screening Resources

Employers often turn to the applicant tracking

system (ATS) as the workhorse for facilitating job

applications. The ATS provides an interactive

database-structure to solicit, capture, sort and in

some cases rank or rate some degree of job fit for each candidate that applies. Of

participating CandE employers, the majority (83.3 per cent) indicate having one ATS in place.

ATS technology, in general, enables employers to

present candidates with questions that explore

basic or minimum qualifications. These questions

are typically presented to the candidate through

“Yes/No” or multiple-choice options. A recruiter

can quickly sort a population of candidates into

Qualified and Not Qualified categories based on

candidates’ responses.

Nearly three quarters (72 per cent) of candidates

who participated in the 2012 U.K. CandE Awards

survey stated they were asked basic qualification

questions during the application process. This

indicates the vast majority of companies are using

basic features of this technology to help identify

which candidates may be advanced for additional

evaluation, and which may be removed from

further consideration.

83.3% of employers use an ATS

Third Party Solutions Employers

Implement to Enhance Recruiting

Efforts


83% Applicant Tracking Systems

83% Job Distribution Services

83% Background Verifications

78% Employer Branding Services

72% Sourcing/Mining Solutions

67% Social Media Services

62% Candidate Relationship

Management

61% Reference Checking Provider

39% Onboarding Solution

39% Recruitment Process Outsourcing

17% Video Interviewing


[email protected]

Examples of best practises from the 2012 U.K. survey results include limiting the application

process to seven clicks, C.V. or résumé parsing for speed and convenience, issuing clear and

simple instructions at every stage and the opportunity to engage with recruiters throughout

the process. Hiring companies may reduce the volume of applications through greater

transparency and access to information at the pre-application stage, encouraging opt-out

from those who are unqualified or a poor culture match. In demand candidates will likely

have a lower tolerance for a lengthy, complicated or confusing application process, which

may lead to application abandonment.

Candidates were presented with…


72.1% general screening questions. i.e. Are you eligible to work in the U.K.?

49.2% a detailed questionnaire about their work history and preferences.

40.9% job specific questions. i.e. Are you able to lift 50 lbs.?

The screening questions typically presented by an ATS help eliminate the most unqualified

candidates. Factors such as eligibility, previous experience and physical requirements do not

identify differences that have a meaningful impact on job performance. That is, these

variables – while essential – do not define or isolate characteristics that contribute most to the

ability to achieve superior performance. Evaluation methods that examine performance

capabilities are required.

The Job Interview

The single largest evaluation method remains the interview. Each interview is a touch point

that presents an opportunity to select candidates and create a positive impression. By the

same token, each interview presents a risk for creating a poor impression by poor delivery. This

year’s U.K. CandE Award winners all indicated they provide comprehensive interview training

for recruiters and hiring managers. The organisations with the most comprehensive interview

skills development provide training for all those involved in candidate evaluation for each job

category from entry-level to executive. How employers use interviews for candidate screening

varies significantly. Some organisations (33.3 per cent) phone interview all qualified

candidates, no matter how many there are.

“The quality of interviews was high - comprising testing, but fair, questions in a supportive environment.”

“I was interviewed by three people in total, two were very good and one was average, but overall the process of face-to-face interviews were very good.”

“The job was different than the one advertised. There was no point attending the interview as I was too experienced. They should clearly decide what level they wish to recruit at before conducting interviews.”


[email protected]

Employers reported that they or their RPO provider…

72.3% phone screen qualified candidates to a finalist shortlist

(fewer than 10) and advance them for in-person interviews.

55.5% screen qualified candidates down to a finalist shortlist

(fewer than 10) and advance them for in-person interviews.

44.4% phone screen ALL qualified employee referrals.

38.9% phone screen ALL qualified candidates.

16.7% interview ALL qualified candidates, no matter how many.

The phone interview establishes personal contact with candidates and may set candidates’

expectations for further consideration. As the phone screen determines those not advancing,

employers should consider sending disposition communications after this step in their screening

processes. As noted in Phase III, various methods of communicating with those eliminated from

consideration are used, the most common approach being standardised emails that share

status updates with candidates.

How many interviews did you participate

in related to the position you applied to?


Candidates are able to observe

differences in interviewing and

evaluation methods. Candidates

described encountering a wide

range of behaviours from their

interview experience. Candidate

survey feedback addresses the range

of skilfulness of the interviewer and

the overall interview process.

The degree to which a company

comes across as professional and

prepared for an interview makes

a difference to the candidate

experience. Understanding the

potential impacts, several of the

U.K. CandE Awards finalists train

all recruiters and all hiring

managers on interviewing and

have behavioural interview

content available for all job levels.

Candidates said that about half of companies use prepared interview questions and take

notes on a structured form during the interview – both of which are recognised best practises

for improving the quality of the candidate evaluation.

How many interviews (on separate days) is it typical for you to

conduct with finalists? (Count virtual as well as face-to-face

but count several interviews during a day as 1.)


0 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or more

Hourly/Non-Exempt 23.5% 76.5% 0% 0%

Intern/College 0% 62.5% 25% 12.5%

Experienced Professional 0% 29.4% 64.7% 5.9%

Executive 0% 23.5% 52.9% 23.5%

45.3%

37.4%

12.2%

2.9%

2.2%

1 -

2

3 -

4

5 -

7

8 -

10

>

10

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00%


[email protected]

Forty-four (44) per cent of companies were recognised for taking the time to describe the use

of behavioural interview questions. This form of candidate education can contribute to a

thoughtful and thorough exchange.


Temp/

Contract

Intern/

Grad

Experienced

Professional

Executive

Panel interviews: multiple people interview the finalist 31.3% 62.5% 87.5% 87.5%

Varied interview approaches: hiring manager and

recruiter develop, plan and execute interview schedule.

37.5% 75% 93.8% 100%

Varied interview approaches: hiring manager and RPO

recruiter develop, plan and execute interview schedule.

33.3% 55.6% 55.6% 44.4%

Sequential interviews: recruiter then hiring manager,

etc., then selection is made.

33.3% 53.3% 73.3% 73.3%

Behavioural-based interviews are routine. 56.3% 75% 93.8% 81.3%

Testing/simulation/assessment are included 20% 80% 66.7% 46.7%

Recruiters must attend training or demonstrate

competency in interviewing skills.

53.3% 60% 73.3% 66.7%

Hiring managers must attend training or demonstrate

competency in interviewing skills.

50% 71.4% 78.6% 71.4%

Recruiters have specific training in accommodating

people with disabilities in the hiring process.

10% 20% 20% 20%

Recruiters are periodically observed/audited by

recruiting leaders during interviews.

36.4% 63.6% 72.7% 81.8%

Hiring managers are periodically audited by recruiting

leaders during interviews.

40% 50% 60% 60%

RPO recruiters are periodically audited by recruiting

leaders during interviews.

14.3% 14.3% 28.6% 14.3%

Company has mystery shopped the recruiting process

by applying and interviewing.

11.1% 11.1% 11.1% 11.1%

Employers also regularly use panel

interviews and group interviews.

However, the 2012 U.K. survey found that

employers generally fail to communicate

that expectation with candidates.

Candidates indicated that they felt

unprepared when faced with panel or

group interviews due to inaccurate or incomplete

information. Understandably, this miscommunication can

negatively impact candidate experience.

What are some of the typical interview selection methods? (Check all that apply)

“Feedback was poor, it was far too generic and not

helpful. There were too many interviews scheduled

for one afternoon – even though the overall

process took longer than expected, the interview

process was rushed.”


[email protected]

Interview structure and format should not come as a surprise to the candidate. Giving

candidates the opportunity to prepare is essential for a positive experience. More than half

(51.1 per cent) of candidates reported being required to attend a panel interview as part of

the selection process. This experience can be nerve-racking enough for a candidate looking

to make a positive impression, but the pressure is intensified when the panel comes as a

surprise. The survey results indicate that few candidates were advised that a panel interview

was going to take place.

Before the interview, candidates…


63.5% received interviewer names and background information prior to the interview event.

54.7% were provided a discussion of next steps for processes, expenses, etc. and a promise of

follow-up.

29.9% received a detailed agenda in advance of the interview.

23.4% were debriefed at the end of the day.

18.2% received a campus / facility tour during the interview event.

16.1% received interview transition support between each interview event.

16.1% reported that travel was fully coordinated by the employer.

13.9% received none of these items.

10.2% received an updated, printed agenda at the interview event.

4.4% received video information, tools and instructions prior to the interview.

Fifty-four (54) per cent of candidates were advised on the next step, timescales and

expectations, which means that 46 per cent were left in the dark. Coordinating candidates in

a timely and informed way should is also important for providing a positive experience. Care

and attention paid to the candidate at the critical selection stages may suggest the level of

Which interview methods did you experience during the interview cycle with the

company? (Check all that apply)


83.9% The interviewer(s) had a copy of their application or résumé with them.

59.1% The interviewer(s) used a set of prepared questions during the interview.

58.4% In-person sequential interviews were conducted (one interviewer at a time).

52.6% The interviewer(s) took notes on a structured form during the interview.

51.1% In-person panel interviews were conducted (Multiple interviewers at a time).

50.4% Phone sequential interviews were conducted.

34.3% Tests, demonstration or role play, and / or assessment exercises were incorporated to

interview schedule.

29.2% Behavioural-based interview questions were explained and used by each

interviewer.

19% The interviewer(s) refer to or incorporated information /results from an assessment /

test completed in a previous step.

8.8% Virtual (video) sequential interviews were conducted.

5.1% Phone panel interviews were conducted.

1.5% Virtual (video) panel interviews were conducted.


[email protected]

care and attention the candidate can expect to be paid if they become employees, and

can impact their decision-making as the recruiting and screening process moves forward.

Video-based interviewing, an emerging service, has been adopted by 17 per cent of

participating CandE Award employers. A small number of candidates (fewer than 11 per

cent) indicate they have participated in a video interview. This may indicate the technology is

reserved for select job postings or jobs with fewer candidates.

Candidates Acknowledge Use of Assessments

The availability of assessment and testing resources – including skills and aptitude tests,

situational assessments, and behavioural, personality and job-fit assessments – was also

indicated by a significant amount of employers. Thirty-nine per cent stated they have one

resource and 27 per cent stated the use of multiple providers.

Candidates indicated that more than 29 per cent of companies openly

acknowledge and integrate assessment results during the interview.

These organisations may use assessment results to guide the interview to

verify or further explore insight obtained from an objective candidate

evaluation resource. The act of completing an assessment may create

interest on the part of the candidate to learn about the results and

possibly gain self-awareness from the

experience. The organisations that close

the loop with the candidate by discussing the result, or by

mentioning the interview will be guided by results, bring a

candidate-centric mind-set to the evaluation process.

Employer Communication Follow Through

The majority of participating employers (87 per cent) reported

that they follow up with finalists no longer being considered,

and that they communicate this next step with candidates. A

number of organisations (22 per cent) train their staff on how to

share updates on the candidate’s status – if they have not

been selected – demonstrating true care for these individuals.

Feedback is a critical part of a positive candidate

experience, and should be an area for serious consideration

in the selection process. The 2012 U.K. With Distinction winners

set key performance indicators (KPIs) for feedback on

progress, and the reasons candidates were not selected. A

best practises approach and fairness to candidates suggest

that timely and efficient feedback, especially that which has

future value to the candidate (even if they are unsuccessful),

can positively impact experience and employment brand.


[email protected]

Select the answers that best represent the level of information you were provided when notified that

you were not selected.

Candidate Viewpoint Question 35 (n= 93)

30.1% I received an email from a "do not reply" address notifying me I was not being considered.

24.7% I received a phone call from a recruiter notifying me I was not being considered.

19.4% I received an email from a recruiter notifying me I was no longer being considered.

12.9% I did not receive any communication prior to calling the recruiter to request my status.

7.5% I received an email from the hiring manager notifying me I was not being considered

5.4% I was provided a link where I could check the status of my application independently.

3.2% I received a phone call from the hiring manager notifying me I was not being considered.

Candidate as Decision Maker

A small percentage of candidates stated they self-selected out of the process after being

further considered (through a phone or in-person interview). The top three reasons included

salary (42.9 per cent), personal relationships with the recruiter/sourcers (28.6 per cent), and

feeling unqualified to fulfil the requirements of the position (28.6 per cent). These three

elements remind us that the candidate is a decision-maker too. The recruiting process

provides the candidate with a wide variety of data points to weigh and consider in their own

discernment regarding job-fit, culture-fit from their point of view.

Why did you withdraw?


42.9% The salary did not meet expectations.

28.6% Did not feel qualified to fulfil the duties of the position.

28.6% Did not have a good rapport with the sourcer, recruiter or other staffing personnel.

14.3% Didn't like or communicate well with the Hiring Manager.

14.3% The job was not as described.

14.3% No flexible work options such as remote worker, job sharing or telecommuting.

14.3% Relocation required - no assistance provided.

The communication process with candidates who withdraw was also seen as largely negative.

Of those that withdrew, nearly half (28 per cent) reported a Negative candidate experience.

What is of particular interest in this case is that it indicates a qualified candidate, one under

active consideration received some form of communication that detracted from their view of

the organisation. While not every candidate that withdraws might have been the best-fit, it is

important to leave those with a positive impression for future openings and to limit impact to

the organisation’s overall brand.


[email protected]

On the scale below (1-10), how do you rate the quality of

communication after decision to withdraw from

consideration with [Company]?


Candidate Selection

Making a hiring decision, while an act of judgment, is

complicated by a number of qualifying steps. As such,

finalist candidates must still advance through a series

of additional steps after they have been identified as

the candidate of choice. These sometimes include:

drug testing, background or security screening and

credit report review. Also impacting candidate

experience during Selection is the negotiation toward

a mutually acceptable total package for

employment by both the employer and candidate.

Background checking, while not typically an indicator or evaluation of job-fit or performance

potential, is undertaken as a form of verification of credentials, and employment and criminal

records. This is a form of risk management to minimize extending job offers to those falsifying

their accomplishments or with a track record of behaviours that may be counterproductive in

the work environment.

Which of the following statements were part of your experience in communicating with the

company through the offer and hire processes? (Check all)


61.3% The recruiter extended a verbal offer prior to sending a written offer.

54.8% Background verifications were conducted prior to or after the offer was extended.

53.8% Upon offer acceptance, additional services were provided to on-board you into the company.

49.5% The recruiter provided a written offer and followed up to ensure it was received.

44.1% The recruiter called to 'test' a potential offer with you i.e. "If we were to make an offer...."

35.5% The hiring manager extended a verbal offer prior to a written offer.

36.6% The company provided multiple options to communicate goals, meet key team members, answer

questions, prior to the start date.

26.9% The hiring manager provided a written offer and followed up to ensure it was received.

20.4% A recruiter follow-up took place several weeks after start date.

17.2% Additional drug testing, credit reports, and/or security verification were conducted.

15.1% A recruiting experience focus group/debrief took place in first few days of start date.

15.1% A recruiting experience survey was completed prior to start date.

11.8% If relocation was included, help with relocation services were provided.

The 2012 U.K. winning companies interviewed reported that they were operating either a talent network or

talent community where on-going relationships with candidates are maintained regardless of the

outcome. Some employers are adopting candidate relationship management (CRM) technology for

maintaining relationships, as well as methodologies of sourcing from previous candidates for all new, open

positions.

– Bill Boorman, 2012 U.K. CandE Awards judge

Negative

(0 – 3)

27.8%

Positive

(7 – 10)

38.9%

Neutral

(4 - 6)

33.3%


[email protected]

The Gold Standard – Would Candidates Apply Again?

A company’s NetPromoter score indicates the likelihood that a customer will refer others to

that company. It is considered the gold standard for evaluating overall experience with that

company. To better understand the gold standard for candidate experience, the 2012 U.K.

CandE Awards asked job candidates whether or not they would apply at the company again,

and whether they would refer others to apply at that company. While the response rate is

skewed to the favourable end, it also documents that many candidates are left with a neutral

(25 per cent) or negative impression(15.6 per cent) for future personal interest and a neutral

willingness (53.8 per cent) to enhance a company’s sourcing though their referral actions.

Likelihood of Applying in Future


Likelihood of referring others to apply


Sharing Feedback

The majority of surveyed candidates are Likely or Very Likely to tell their Inner Circle of Friends

(~5) about their experiences finding, researching, interviewing, etc. for a job whether it is

positive (72.7 per cent) or negative (61.7 per cent). A significant number are willing to go

further and share their positive (27.6 per cent) and negative (16.7 per cent) experiences with

EVERYONE via blogs, Facebook and sites like Glassdoor. The effects of an employer’s

candidate experience have the potential to echo loudly, often and over time – impacting

their potential to recruit the talent that they need as well as the company’s overall brand.

How likely are you to vocalise

your recruiting experience

with your inner circle?


(n=417)

How likely are you to vocalise

your recruiting experience on

social media sites?


(n=415)

49.5%

45.9% (Likely – Highly Likely)

72.7%

61.7%

16.7%

27.6%

Inner Circle

Social Media


[email protected]

Final Words

The U.K. CandE Awards are designed to capture how companies produce their candidate

experience, with the goal of determining where employers can improve and highlighting

those organisations that are paving the way for an advanced experience. Candidates and

employers both play a crucial role in ensuring a positive experience. More individuals and

companies recognise this and are committed to optimising the talent acquisition process.

The Candidate Experience research not only assessed the employers’ practises during

screening and how they impact experience, but delved deep into the candidate’s role in the

process. A candidate that has a positive relationship with the employer prior to applying is

more likely to be hired. A candidate that is referred to the company is more likely to be hired.

Candidates are willing to share their experiences, and impact others’ relationships with the

company whether those experiences are positive or negative. Armed with this insight,

employers can work to foster open lines of communication with candidates from start to finish

– before they even apply and after they’ve been considered, regardless of the outcome.

As part of its primary mission, The Candidate Experience Awards recognise those companies

that understand how important experience is, and how deeply invested candidates become

as they advance in the screening and evaluation processes. By acknowledging the firms

whose practises are on the cutting-edge of the candidate experience, the employer

community can increase awareness of the choices they make and the concerns that are

growing within their future talent pools.

The Candidate Experience Awards continue to review and analyse the employer application

and candidate survey contributions. We look forward to sharing the results of the 2013 awards

and benchmarking programme.


[email protected]

The Candidate Experience Awards 2013

Employers who participate in The Candidate

Experience Awards enjoy the following benefits:

1) A confidential benchmark report that

compares their practises against the

aggregate of all respondents

2) A confidential candidate survey

administered by the Talent Board

3) Access to industry peers and experts on

the candidate experience

4) If applicable, industry recognition as a

leader in candidate experience

5) Participation in the Candidate Experience

Awards process is FREE

6) A RISK-FREE tool for improvement - the

identity of companies that do not win the

award are not disclosed

The 2013 Candidate Experience Awards are

open to all U.K.-based and North American

recruiting operations. Participation is

CONFIDENTIAL and FREE.

The 2013 survey will be available on The Talent

Board and Candidate Experience Awards (U.K.)

websites: http://uk.thecandes.org/ and

http://www.thecandes.org in Spring 2013.

http://uk.thecandes.org/

http://www.thecandes.org/


[email protected]

The CandE Award Process Design

The 2012 CandE Awards programme was designed to evaluate how employers engage with

candidates during the employment application process. The CandE Award process involved

three rounds of evaluation that were designed to capture how the organisation produces its

candidate experience. The goal of the survey process was to enable companies to

confidentially benchmark themselves. The CandE Award process was risk-free for companies

in that their identities would only be disclosed if the company won an award. The process

particularly encouraged companies that feel their candidate experience was not “award

worthy.” Any company that participated received confidential and constructive feedback on

how to improve.

The CandE Award process was a survey open to any U.K.-based company recruiting

operation that was interested in benchmarking themselves. Round 1 required completing a

multi-dimensional survey that addressed:

Candidate Experience Phase Description

Candidate Attraction Refers to the content and actions candidates are researching in order to determine their interest in applying for employment with the company.

Expression of Interest Refers to the content and actions candidates are completing when applying to a specific position with the company.

Candidate Dispositioning Refers to the content and actions employers leverage to address candidates who they deem as not qualified for the position.

Candidate Evaluation Refers to the content and actions employers use when engaging with candidates through the evaluation and selection process.

Selected Candidate Refers to the content and actions when candidates are selected for an offer and processed as a new hire.

Each section of the Round 1 survey was designed to discern how organisations produce their

candidate experience. The questions examined the organisation’s processes, procedures and

priorities around candidate experience. Twenty-four companies initiated the process.

Round 2 consisted of a confidential candidate survey administered by the Talent Board on

behalf of the participating companies. The survey consisted of 50 questions, many of which

involved multi-select tables.

The Talent Board empowered 18 companies to provide their 2012 employment candidates

access to the Talent Board candidate experience survey. All organisations were required to

survey 2012 employment candidates in order to be considered in Round 2.


[email protected]

Companies administered their survey through a

combination of email campaigns and by providing the

survey link on their career portals. Companies were

encouraged to survey a broad spectrum of candidates,

and were specifically encouraged to present the survey

to rejected candidates at all phases of the recruitment

cycle. Each company was required to submit its survey

distribution methodology to the Talent Board for

consideration when evaluating their results.

Round 3 of the survey process focused on identifying

organisations that practised exceptional and exemplary

recruiting and hiring methods. Round 3 is called the “With

Distinction” round because it highlights specific practises,

and the Talent Board believes reporting them can have a

positive impact on employers’ methodologies and the

market. In Round 3, companies that distinguished

themselves in Rounds 1 and 2 were interviewed by an independent panel of industry judges

using HireVue’s digital interviewing solutions to determine areas of distinction. Seven

companies were recognised “With Distinction.”

Each organisation that participated in the 2012 awards received a benchmark report that

compares their responses to the aggregate group. Organisations receive reports for both their

employer and candidate surveys.


[email protected]

About the Responding Employers and Candidates

About the Employers

The 2012 U.K. CandE Awards attracted 24 employers that subjected themselves to two to

three hours of work to fully complete their applications. The participant profile data points to

the universal relevance of candidate experience.

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Under 10 11-25 26-50 51-100

Approximate Number of Resources that are Involved in Recruiting Efforts

Under £10M 19%

£11M-£50M 12%

£101M-£500M

19%

£1.1B-£3B 6%

Unknown/ Decline to state

44%

Company Revenues

38.9%

Up to 500

22.2%

501-2,500

2,501-10,000

27.8%

10,001-25,000

11.1%

Employee Population


[email protected]

About the Candidates

Round 2 required candidate feedback and yielded more than 857 surveys across 18

participating companies. Six hundred and ninety-eight (698) candidates provided write-in

comments about their experiences. The response to the survey validates the conclusion:

employment candidates care a great deal about their candidate experience.

Candidates by gender: Candidates by job-level:

Candidates by generation:

We Applied to:

34.7% An experienced salaried position (3+ yrs. experience)

20.4% A management salaried position

14.3% An internship

12.6% An entry-level salaried position (0-2 yrs. experience)

5.4% A contract position

4.6% An hourly wage position

4.5% A director salaried position

1.9% A senior leadership/executive salaried position

1.3% Other

69%

31%

1.2% Silent

Generation <1945

13.8% Baby

Boomer 38.7% Generation

X

40.8% Millennial

1.6% Generation

Z


[email protected]

About The Talent Board and The Candidate Experience Awards The Talent Board was formed in January of 2011 by recruiting industry veterans, Gerry Crispin

(CareerXroads), Ed Newman (iMomentous) and Elaine Orler (Talent Function Group). The

original spark behind the CandE Awards was a conversation in November 2010 between Chris

Forman, the CEO of StartWire, and Elaine Orler of Talent Function. Forman is credited with the

original idea to produce an industry award on candidate experience that operates

transparently. The spark turned to flame, and Orler rallied a consortium of like-minded industry

figures to form The Talent Board. In 2012 the Talent Board was led by volunteer Board

Members, Gerry Crispin, Ed Newman, Elaine Orler, Mark Stelzner, Jeremy Tipper and Sarah

White.

The Talent Board members are motivated to improve the experience of employment

candidates. Everyone engaged in the vocation of recruiting attracts candidate experience

stories from family, friends and even friends-of-friends. Often the stories do not reflect well on

our profession and a lot of the negative experiences seem avoidable. While there is an

inherent dissatisfaction that comes with rejecting employment candidates, the Talent Board

believes that it is possible to:

- Treat all employment candidates with professionalism and respect.

- Shrink the recruiting “black hole” effect on candidates.

The Talent Board was established to assist recruiting organisations in understanding and

evaluating their candidate experience. The surveys and reports are intended to support

business cases that help secure enabling investment. In our professional experiences, we have

never encountered a recruiter that wants to treat a candidate poorly. Our goal is to help

corporate recruiting organisations improve through information sharing and positive

reinforcement.

The Talent Board is thrilled with the results of the first annual U.K. and second annual North

American award processes and competitions. The Talent Board is humbled, grateful and

excited to build on the success of 2012.

There will be a CandE Awards programme in 2013 that will follow a similar calendar to the 2012

process. Companies will be able to apply and enrol in the award programme by completing a

benchmark survey to be available in the spring of 2013. Candidate surveys will be

administered following completion of the employer applications.

Gerry Crispin is a principal and co-founder of CareerXroads, launched in 1996 as a consultancy

analysing the impact of emerging technology on the recruiting function. Crispin is committed to writing,

researching and sharing his adventures, opinions and data about evolving staffing models with the HR

profession, clients and friends. Together with his business partner, Mark Mehler, Crispin facilitates

conversations about recruiting practises with staffing leaders from some of the world’s most competitive

companies. He is passionate about how firms design and build staffing processes, the technology to

enhance them and the systems to manage them. Gerry wants to know more about the ‘playing fields’

where candidates and employers meet and he’s more than a little curious about how they treat one

another: how Job Seekers ‘game’ their next career move while Employers tout their latest opportunities.


[email protected]

Ed Newman is the vice president of strategy for iMomentous. A well-known thought leader in the HR

field, he previously launched Inside Talent Management Technology, a community web portal for the

talent management technology industry. Earlier in his career, Newman founded The Newman Group, a

consulting firm specialising in the delivery of talent management solutions, and served as president from

1999 through 2010. During his tenure, The Newman Group was recognised as the preferred provider of

services to more than 25 accounts in the Fortune 100, and Newman developed several unique and

proprietary consulting methodologies, and established implementation service delivery partnerships

with some of the industry’s leading talent management technology providers.

Elaine Orler is president and founder of Talent Function Group. Orler has been implementing recruitment

software for large organisations since 1993. Her introduction to recruitment technology started as an

employee of Qualcomm. She implemented an early version of Resumix and became the head of the

regional user group for Resumix customers. She then joined Gateway Computers to define and lead a

vendor selection process. She started her consulting career in 1999 for Watson Wyatt Consulting and has

been instrumental at building recruitment software consulting practises for Talent Market Group, The

Newman Group, and Knowledge Infusion. Orler has taken an active role in over 75 recruitment software

implementations across 15 different vendor platforms. In her years in the industry she has worked with

both practitioners and solution providers to shape the way Talent Acquisition solutions are delivered. A

dyed-in-the-wool “early adopter,” Orler has guided her clients through the evolutionary shifts in the

market. Orler is respected as a recruitment functionality expert and she takes an active role in industry

events and associations.

Mark Stelzner is the founder and principal of Inflexion Advisors, bringing more than 18 years of

experience in the implementation of internal and external HR transformational initiatives for public and

private sector clientele worldwide. Over his career, Stelzner has created more than $3.5 billion worth of

measurable value to his clients and employers. A respected and active thought leader in the HR

community, Stelzner has spoken at well over 100 industry conferences, events, user groups, forums and

professional organisations. A highly sought after voice in the industry, he has also been featured by Wall

Street Journal, The New York Times, Forbes, CNN, and NPR. Stelzner is also the founder of JobAngels, a

grassroots non-profit dedicated to helping people get back to work one person at a time.

Jeremy Tipper spent eight years in agency recruitment before becoming the interim head of Resourcing

for Vodafone. He established Capital Consulting, a pioneer of the Recruitment Process Outsourcing

sector, in 2001, creating a £30m revenue business with operations serving clients across Europe and the

Asia Pacific region. Tipper has created and run recruitment solutions for a wide variety of companies on

a global basis and has been at the forefront of innovation in the industry over the last 15 years. He

founded the Talent Collective, a U.K.-based Talent Acquisition advisory firm in 2010. Tipper holds a

bachelor’s degree in Banking & Finance from Loughborough University.

Sarah White is the principal & CEO of Sarah White & Associates, LLC, a Market Strategy Firm focused on

integration of technology and human capital. Initially founded in 2006 then re-launched after leaving

Bersin & Associates in 2011, White identified the real need for improved technology and its integration

into business processes within the Human Capital marketplace. Since then, the firm has partnered with

some of the world’s largest ERP solutions looking to redesign their offering and some of Silicon Valley’s

most innovative start-ups, trying to understand how to really fit into the HR Technology landscape and

vendors of all sizes in between. They have also conducted surveys, produced industry reports and

supported clients at numerous events around the globe.


[email protected]

About the Sponsors

ChangeBoard is the leading global careers site for senior HR professionals with an

active community of over 85,000 people. Our unrivalled focus on the global HR

market, talent management, leadership, technology and wellbeing provide our

readers with up-to-date, timely information required in today’s fast moving economy

For many job candidates, undergoing a background check can be an uncertain

process: what is the employer searching? How long will it take? Will I know if they find

something negative? To help alleviate these worries, many employers turn to

HireRight, an award-winning provider of employment background screening, drug

screening and employment eligibility solutions. We have developed a number of

unique tools and resources to help candidates better understand the background screening process,

like an online portal that provides valuable status updates and a dedicated customer service team just

for them. For more information on how you can enhance the candidate experience and protect your

employment brand, download a copy of our complimentary white paper, “The Importance of the

Applicant Experience in Talent Acquisition” by clicking here or going to

http://go.hireright.com/ApplicantExperienceWP.

From workforce consulting and outsourcing through to talent supply chain

management, we partner with the world’s leading companies to innovate the talent

solutions of tomorrow.

Monster Worldwide, Inc. is the parent company of Monster.com, the premier global

online employment solution for people seeking jobs and the employers who need

great people. We've been doing this for over 10 years, and have expanded from our roots as a "job

board" to a global provider of a full array of job seeking, career management, recruitment and talent

management products and services. At the heart of our success and our future is innovation: we are

changing the way people think about work, and we're helping them actively improve their lives and

their workforce performance with new technology, tools and practises

Maximising the impact and effectiveness of your employer brand requires precise

definition, compelling articulation, targeted communication and on-going evolution.

With candidates increasingly spreading the word about their recruitment experiences

(both good and bad) via social media, it has never been more important for every

aspect of the recruitment process to be handled consistently and professionally. Which

is why we are delighted to be a sponsor of the inaugural U.K. CandE Awards which recognise and

encourage best practice in this area. Peer Group specialises in employer brand management, research

and communications. We help organisations across the globe to identify, articulate, develop,

communicate and measure the many and varied attributes that define and differentiate them as

employers. Find out how Peer Group can help you provide potential and existing employees with a

lasting impression that is both appealing and authentic.

Talent Collective is a resourcing consultancy that, over two decades, has helped

companies to build and run internal talent acquisition and RPO functions. Talent

Collective advises on recruitment strategy, helps organisations to understand and

navigate the recruitment technology market, and provides implementation and training services that

are delivered with both an eye for innovation, but also a deep understanding of what really works.

http://go.hireright.com/ApplicantExperienceWP

http://www.changeboard.com/

http://www.peergroupcomms.com/

http://hireright.com/

http://www.kellyocg.com/


[email protected]

About the Judges

Gerry Crispin

An international speaker, author and consultant, Gerry Crispin’s views on employment

strategy, hiring processes and staffing technology are widely sought after by many of the

world’s most competitive corporations. He has nearly four decades of experience in the

human resources field, serving as director of Human Resources of Johnson & Johnson and the

general manager of Shaker Recruitment Advertising. Crispin is currently principal and co-

founder of CareerXroads, an international consulting practice. He holds an ABD in

Organisational Behaviour from the Stevens Institute of Technology.

Bill Boorman

Bill Boorman has spent more than 30 years in the field of recruiting, serving as a recruiter,

trainer, operations director, consultant and coach. Over the last five years, he has served as a

consultant for a number of growing recruiting firms across Europe. Described as the “King of

Social Recruiting,” Boorman helps companies integrate social recruiting into their organisations

and consults on a number of recruitment applications. He is also the founder and host of #Tru

Events held around the globe.

Keith Robinson

Keith Robinson, widely considered a thought leader in the HR industry, leverages an almost

three-decade career in recruitment. Having experience in managing recruitment for

Computer Weekly, he founded HR magazine Personnel Today and was part of the

management team that took Totaljobs.com to U.K. market leadership. In leading two of the

U.K.’s largest recruitment advertising agencies, he knows full well the value of a positive

candidate experience. Robinson is currently founder and director of ECOM Digital, a content

marketing agency specialising in the HR and recruiting sector.

Additional Contributing Authors

Leigh Carpenter is programme director of the U.K. CandE Awards. He has been involved in

developing and implementing RPO solutions since 2005 and consulting clients on talent

acquisition strategies and operational implementations, all aimed at improving internal

processes and the candidate experience

Jillyan French-Vitet is a Director for the Talent Acquisition Advisory Services team within Kelly

Outsourcing and Consulting Group. Her background in international recruitment spans nearly

15 years, including retained search, in-house corporate recruitment and recruitment process

outsourcing. In both Europe and the USA, French-Vitet has designed, built and executed

programs, from entry to executive-level hiring, with varying team sizes and geographies. In

2011, French-Vitet self-selected to ‘walk in the shoes’ of a candidate to understand the

experience from the front-line with organisations looking to hire. As a result, she has been

researching and writing about Candidate Experience since 2012.

http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=972107&id=2457148&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.careerxroads.com%2f

http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=972107&id=2457145&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.recruitingunblog.com%2ftru-diary-tru-places-and-tru-tickets%2f

http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=972107&id=2457145&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.recruitingunblog.com%2ftru-diary-tru-places-and-tru-tickets%2f

http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=972107&id=2457151&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ecomdigital.co.uk%2f


[email protected]

2012 Candidate Experience Award Winners, North America

2012 With Distinction Winner

Date post:	13-Sep-2014
Category:	Business
View:	9 times
Download:	0 times