What Makes Them Better Any Way?
One of the common myths of the search industry is that the passive job applicant is, in some way, superior to the active one. The logic is that the passive applicant is too busy being successful in their job to look at job ads and answer them. Passive applicants are superior to the out of work job hunter because the out of work person is “someone else’s dead wood” or someone else’s “reject” or just being “mercenary.”
Are any of these criticisms of active job seekers true?
Sometimes.
The job market is set up in ways that discourage loyalty. A person who remains with their employer for a few years may expect a 3-5% increase; one who changes jobs may receive a 10% – 20%. So, for the $100000 worker, they may receive a raise to $105000 by remain loyal and $115000 for changing. Over 5 years given the same 3-5% increase at their new employer, the difference in earnings will be about $55000 by changing jobs once. If they do it a second time after three years, their earnings will be more than $75000 more.
Does this make them mercenary? Does it mean they are taking care of their family and personal responsibilities, rather be “taken advantage” by a system that creates disincentives for loyalty? Can you afford to “forget” about $75000? Most people can’t.
Are you interviewing someone else’s “dead wood” or “rejects”?
Possibly, but, unlikely. Most layoffs or firings occur because of adverse business conditions, rather than incompetence. Hence the person has been caught in a budget squeeze that has occurred because the company isn’t selling products or services like it once did. Should an accountant be punished for that? Should an engineer with less seniority be criticized as being a retread or loser?
Most people change jobs because they are underpaid to market and want to catch up, are having a conflict with their manager, want to improve their work, work conditions or work environment or perceive that career advancement possibilities are being limited and want to expand them again.
When reaching out to the passive job, you are approaching them with more money (making them mercenary and underpaid to the market), talking with them about better work, perhaps closer to home with a manager that they can respect and with better career conditions—all the same criteria that you criticize the active job seeker.
Now, if you say you want to widen the pool of talent to insure that you are evaluating as broad a pool as possible, I understand that.
But what happens when that “passive applicant” sees that he or she has interviewed well and decides to explore other choices. Do they stop being a passive candidate (good) and become an active one (bad)?
And where do these passive candidates come from?
Referrals
Data mining companies
Social networks
Forums where they may have posted messages
Mining your own data
Search engines
This makes them superior?
Jeff Altman
The Big Game Hunter
Concepts in Staffing
jeffaltman@cisny.com
© 2006 all rights reserved.
Jeff Altman, The Big Game Hunter, is Managing Director with Concepts in Staffing, a New York search firm, He has successfully assisted many corporations identify management leaders and staff in technology, accounting, finance, sales, marketing and other disciplines since 1971. He is a certified leader of the ManKind Project, a not for profit organization that assists men with life issues, and a practicing psychotherapist.
To subscribe to Jeff’s free job search ezine, Head Hunt Your Next Job, or receive a daily digest of positions emailed to you, go to http://www.jeffaltman.com
If you would like Jeff and his firm to assist you with hiring staff, or if you would like help with a strategic job change, send an email to him at jeffaltman@cisny.com (If you’re looking for a new position, include your resume).
If you would like to link your company’s career page to Job Search Universe, Jeff’s Google-powered free job lead tool (www.jobsearchuniverse.com), email to the url for your company’s career page to him at jobsearchuniverse@gmail.com (no employment agencies, please).
