Is recruiting.com still adding value? While recruiting.com has basically been running itself for the past year (with Jason Davis prodding it along), I've recently been putting some though as to where we should take the recruiting.com site next. Sometimes I look at what's going on over there and think to myself: Does anyone besides the small number of regular participants really care about this? (OK, now I thought it out loud, not just to myself). Would love to get your input.
23
the future of recruiting.com
Found 67 weeks, 5 days ago at http://jobster.blogs.com by jason goldberg.
Wed, 03/21/2007 - 5:49am
-The Digg style voting was worth trying but I do not like it.
-I miss the old days of Jason Davis and others leading the daily conversation. There needs to be a teacher looking after the kids in the sandbox to challenge them, help them grow, point out the good information from bloggers who do not get or ask for the attention, and give time outs when needed.
-Personality has taken over content.
-Who are the users? Is this site only geared towards recruiters and bloggers? I can understand why but I think those looking for actual career advice who make their way here from a search engine could be served in some way.
-I do still come here daily to see what has been written in other places but I prefer the blogroll page with the most recent first. I also use thedayinrecruiting.com from Jim Stroud for this.
-Give me something that makes me a better recruiter. I am a recruiter first, blogger second. I would rather learn something here than pimp my most recent blog post.
-Does it provide value? For me yes but in a different way and less than before.
OK, so I just reread the previous comments and realize I am reiterating. Posting it anyway…
MN Headhunter
Paul DeBettignies
Managing Partner, Nerd Search
www.mnheadhunter.com
paul@mnheadhunter.com
Wed, 03/21/2007 - 4:52am
Jason, in reply to your "This is truly amazing" comment above:
1. If you had articulated your purpose here as eloquently as you do on your blog, and referenced Jason Davis in the same nice tone here as you do there, you would not have drawn what you characterize as "a couple of attacks at me regarding my intent."
2. I can only say that if what you wrote here was "designed purposely to evoke some emotion" it is silly to then complain when that's what you get.
To your question regarding value, I suggest a different take to contrast the comments here and on your blog. Can you tell us how you would answer your own questions:
1. Is recruiting.com still adding value?
2. Does anyone besides the small number of regular participants really care about this?
Wed, 03/21/2007 - 3:02am
How could I not join this thread when the whole crew is here?
Is it even slightly surprising that all the comments are perfectly in brand with the people who wrote them?
Animal is contrary and direct.
Amitai is analytic and positive
Jermemy is web 2.0
Farce is unhinged (and lovable)
Craig is focused on the bottom line
Sumser needs to know what’s in it for him
Ragan is nostalgic
Karen frets that she is not actually in the club
Snyder spins like a born framer:
The value of the site is directly in front of you Jason, right here in these comments. Our little group, plus the few dozen others here in spirit, are the people who care about this part of the business, about blogging, and from time to time, about each other.
How does that translate to dollars / value? Who knows? It translates to ideas, to cooperation, to a good offensive and defensive game with the outside world, should one ever be needed.
It may translate to a future business, or a future combination, or some value in a future transaction tangential to any of us or our respective networks. The site delivers good ideas often. Compared to the actual cost of running the place, which appears to be minor, the value seems like a pretty good deal for end-users.
The connection between the site and jobster has been very subtle, so the value to jobster may be a little too subtle, as some have suggested that your post indicates.
As the proprietor, perhaps you should take the Sumser approach and make sure that it works for you- maybe that means more aggressive branding for jobster on the site, or more focus on nuts and bolts marketing to your buying audience. That’s not for any current end-user to decide.
I don’t think you should get a bad rap for asking, and I directly thank you for providing this outlet.
Sumser has some good points on better value for end-users, but Farce is also right that if you change nothing, it’s still a winner.
This comes down to you and your (jobster’s) goals. My only input on those terms is to suggest that the property is still young; that growth and influence accrues slowly then suddenly in many cases.
My spin is in.
Wed, 03/21/2007 - 12:29am
Okay, my name was mentioned, and wasn't planning to get caught up in this conversation, but.. I'm here..
There was something my mamma always told me, if you hear something more than once, there must be some truth to it.
A few mths back I got a Roasting for saying Hey, there is a problem here, lot of hot air, but no content. Yet, here we 4 mths later, and the same question is being asked, but interestingly some of the similar concerns I brought up re the same ole, same ole much of Nothing (is this a sienfeld rerun) being addressed.
Okay, yes, I accept, I don't have the credibility of John Sumser, Craig Silverman, or Ragan, and a few others here.. so maybe I will quote them to maybe bring some substance to the table..
J.L – i used to go to recruiting.com daily, but now i go about .sic .. few.. times a month …….. but i'm sure i'd find time if i had a compelling enough reason *shrug*
Craig Silverman - I would personally like to see more training, tools, and resources for recruiters vs. funny stories and links to other blogs
Kudos to Jason Davis has been a true driving force!
Sumser – *** I'd be tempted to think that the users of recruiting.com *ought* to be recruiters but are really a range of bloggers who occasionally recruit***
If I must be subjected to endless reams of self-promotion, pay me for having to digest it. I'm serious.
The bloggers who work the current system the hardest are completely self-absorbed and rob me of time and bandwidth
Organize the tagging structure so that it is useful and used.
Right now, it seems like the purpose of Recruiting.com is to give people the opportunity to make their own value.
Ragan I love the personalities of our blog, but I remember in the good ol'days of RDC when we actually shared knowledge with one another rather than just talking about the blog or pointed links to other people's blog
So, we look at the title of recruiting.com, and emphasize Sumser’s comment with a bit of flair – so where oh where have all the recruiters gone, oh where oh where can they be.
Forgive me, sarcasm is not my forte.. but if this blog is for Recruiters, should it not be about recruiters, and focused on recruiting.
Ami, you asked me once why I didn’t have a blog.. well to go with your words --- Of course there's value here, Jason, and huge potential too. – but outside of a few blogs in this recruiting hemisphere that I really do respect which bring value to the recruiting community, (several which were mentioned in Animal's post) I really haven't found the desire to – and anyways, don’t think I have hit the status of being part of the good ole boys club yet!
Okay, I have my armour on.. hopefully this may considered constructive rather than personal..
Karen Mattonen C.A.C, C.S.P
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 11:50pm
Cheez, maybe it's no coincidence that this posting appeared now? Craig, you're right. When you included a link to Recruiting.com in our mailers we would get a bunch of hits the next day which disappeared the day after that. We didn't seem to have what your readers wanted. At the same time, we had this argument about relevance before when Karen Mattonen and some guy named Shawn complained that they don't like nicknames and that the blogs contained no useful information. That's a really bogus claim. And I indicated as much here. http://tinyurl.com/yqfqxx If you want to become a telephone sourcer read Maureen Sharib. Online sourcing? Shally, Gutmacher and Stroud. If you want to learn how to create a modern career site, read Shannon Seery, Peter Gold or Gutmacher again. Want to learn how to increase your network? Mendoza will tell you. For free. Interested in the latest online recruiting software? That Jay-Dee's specialty. A quick pointer to career issues, super recruiter, Anthony J Meaney is your man. How to handle offers? Hiring Revolution used to write about it every week. Want me to go on? I can. The problem, I think, is perhaps that many people are not used to accessing their information in an ongoing blog-style way. Not that the info isn't there.
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 8:08pm
As most of you know, I love to play devil's advocate, so here I go. My question is, why does it seem that we tend to talk more about Recruiting.com on the blog than actual recruiting? I love the personalities of our blog, but I remember in the good ol'days of RDC when we actually shared knowledge with one another rather than just talking about the blog or pointed links to other people's blog. I sometimes feel that Recruiting.com has become more of an aggregator to other blogs than one that provides original content and sparks intellectual conversations on the methods behind our madness. Just my two cents...
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 8:05pm
I guess I'm as much a user as anyone.
(I don't think I ought to be representative but fear that I am...I'd be tempted to think that the users of recruiting.com *ought* to be recruiters but are really a range of bloggers who occasionally recruit).
So, instead of telling you what I'd do differently If I ran the zoo, I'm going to tell you how to make it easier for me to use.
1. I want to find stuff in the same place when I come back. The location (some silly business about ranking on a time scale that has nothing to do with me) of everything always changes. That makes it difficult to use.
2. I want to hear a clear editorial voice making content decisions. I do not have time to play games in order to learn something. Have someone weed out the crap so I don't have to.
3. If I must be subjected to endless reams of self-promotion, pay me for having to digest it. I'm serious. The bloggers who work the current system the hardest are completely self-absorbed and rob me of time and bandwidth. I get chased away every time I try to wade through the river of stuff.
4. Don't get rid of the river of stuff, just don't reward it...move it to a separate, less trafficked place. Time will take care of the rest.
5. Help me do my job. Find a way to spot great content and celebrate it. Reward the people who bring value to the game, not those who only take it.
6. Organize the tagging structure so that it is useful and used. If I want to find stuff on Recruiting techniques, where do I go?
7. Have an archive of daily pages.
8. Help me sift. Provide a range of feeds (like the jobster news feed on your blog) organized by subject.
9. In other words, make giving *me* value a primary concern rather than an accidental outcome. Oh, and if you want to reach recruiters and not recruiting bloggers, make giving them value your primary concern.
Right now, it seems like the purpose of Recruiting.com is to give people the opportunity to make their own value. That's great, if you have the time.
John
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 6:53pm
JG: I think you raise an excellent question. I helped to drive many visitors to recruiting.com in the early days when we mentioned the blog and listed links on our monthly newsletter (example: See Recruiter News Here).
Now a few years later what I see is a great group of excellent bloggers who are creative and interesting but I'm not sure of what that does to help the average recruiter out there to be more successful on a daily basis. Most recruiters tell me they visit the site only once and a while as Jer commented since everyone is so busy.
Kudos to Jason Davis has been a true driving force!
I would personally like to see more training, tools, and resources for recruiters vs. funny stories and links to other blogs. For me it is not about the blogging it is about he we can provide better service and results for our clients. Also to generate more candidate flow and revenue
Craig Silverman
HireAbility - The Recruiting Network
http://www.hireability.com
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 5:12pm
Jason
Let me provide some blatant answers-
1. Is recruiting.com providing Value? Hell Yes.
2. Is there anything that can be done to make the site better? -Not to my knowledge
3. Has Jason Davis been prodding it along? No the users have been prodding him...making him evolve...making the site take on new and interesting channeles...allowing more "characters" of the industry to emerge and so forth...
4. Should you TAKE recruiting.com anywhere? Nope---ghive them more money---provide recruiting.com sponsored blogger and HR events...use it for the poews of Good. It could be doing MORE...allowing more voices to be heard...even if they are slobbering retards like myself.
I love you,
WorkFarce
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 4:37pm
i used to go to recruiting.com daily, but now i go about 1 or 2 times a month ... most likely 'cuz i'm swamped busy, but i'm sure i'd find time if i had a compelling enough reason *shrug*
~jer
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 3:06pm
This is truly amazing.
I ask a simple question designed purposely to evoke some emotion from recruiting.com users.
Is the site providing value? to you?
So far the silence is deafening. Hardly a single response to the question. Instead, a couple of attacks at me regarding my intent.
My intent is genuine. We would like to know if the users of recruiting.com are benefiting from it, how, and what more can be done to make the site even better.
Tue, 03/20/2007 - 11:12am
Hmmm..."Is recruiting.com still adding value?" That rhetorical quip raises more questions than answers...
I guess some might wonder how it could be that Jason Goldberg would not already have answer to his question to Recruiting.com's value. Perhaps JGo should ask the same question of the investors in Jobster who ultimately acquired Recruiting.com -- with no clear business plan -- they might know.
On the other hand, if JGo means "value" as a measure of readers' emotional connection and/or participation in the site -- Recruiting.com's brand equity -- again it is pretty sad that he appears not to know.
It seems odd to ask the lunatics if the shrink is doing a good job. Is this how JGo handles performance management in the Jobster camp or is this a repeat performance of his last softening us up for an "announcement" [almost a year after the purchase].
Before Jobster's retooling the site from center of gravity for recruiting bloggers to a recruiters' content black hole, JGo didn't need to come to us asking if there was value here. What gives? Wasn't it some innocuous passing comment that was the catalyst for the brouhaha that preceded Jobster's recent reduction in workforce? Have we learned nothing from the PR people about how to break "bad news."
C'mon JGo, don't take us all for idiots. Could you not afford JD the same gracious exit you afforded Dave Lefkow?
And to answer your question: Of course there's value here, Jason, and huge potential too. We hope Jobster will be a better steward next year than last for something many of us feel we still have a stake in.
Mon, 03/19/2007 - 2:04pm
Don JGo? What does "prodding it along" mean? Sounds negative to me. But I remember, last summer, Amitai Givertz challenged you, personally, to invest more resources in Rdc and you brushed him off. Sorry, I think I'm speaking as a friend but I found your wording a bit odd and, to be frank, unfair.
Post new comment