technology

All posts tagged technology

Are Companies Truly Ready for AI

Posted by Steve on June 17, 2025
Posted in: Recruiting. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a comment

I just read Kyndryl‘s People Readiness Report 2025, a well designed survey and methodology that investigated company AI adoption.

Some interesting findings and thoughts to ponder:

AI Is Ubiquitous but Workforce Readiness Is Lagging. While 95% of organizations are using AI, 71% of leaders say their workforce is not ready to leverage it. AI adoption might be high – via “executive fiat” but workforce capabilities and culture inculcation lag behind, creating major obstacles to success.

Workforce Resistance to AI Is Significant. 45% of CEOs report that employees are resistant or hostile to AI. Cultural adoption of AI is a major challenge requiring more progressive change management strategies. But at a significant cost.

Misalignment Between CEOs and Tech Leaders. 73% of CTOs/CIOs believe employees are embracing AI but only 45% of CEOs agree. If not aligned, differing perspectives within leadership teams can stall progress. Read into this as you wish.

Only a Small Group of “AI Pacesetters” Have Fully Integrated AI. Just 14% of organizations (Pacesetters) have fully aligned their workforce, technology, and growth goals for AI. Few organizations have a holistic approach to AI and workforce integration – the obvious key for success. Wait – what do you think “fully aligned” means in human speak?

Skills Gaps and Uncertainty Are Major Challenges. 68% of CEOs vs. 45% of CTOs/CIOs see a lack of skilled talent as a significant barrier. Upskilling and reskilling are essential, but organizations are still unclear on how to address these gaps – while still retaining any semblance of “the human touch.”

AI Pacesetters Are Transforming Talent Management. 74% of AI pacesetters report having fully transformed their talent management processes (vs. only 25% of others). Emphasizing talent transformation is a differentiator for top performers. Of course, moving from “presentation mode” to actual “performance mode” at the organizational level is the challenge.

Trust Building and Change Management Are Critical. Only 42% of leaders are actively working to build trust in AI among employees. Lack of trust can stall adoption; organizations must involve employees, set clear ethical guidelines, and be transparent as to how performance will be measured to succeed.

If you’re in TA, TM, or HR, what might be the implications?

AI Readiness Lag. Companies that fail to upskill and enable their workforce for AI might struggle to attract top-shelf people who expect modern, AI-integrated workflows.

⚠️ Retention Risk: Employees will seek out employers who invest in their skills and keep them relevant in a fast-changing environment.

Workforce Resistance to AI. Perceived hostility towards or skepticism about AI within the workforce can tarnish a company’s employer brand.

⚠️ Retention Risk: Resistance can lead to frustration or disengagement, causing top talent to seek more forward-thinking, innovative environments.

Leadership Misalignment. The people you covet might perceive leadership dissonance as instability that can erode confidence in the company’s vision and create hesitance to join.

⚠️ Retention Risk: If employees sense mixed messages about AI, it can breed confusion and churn.

Small Number of AI Pacesetters. Companies not among the 14% of “Pacesetters” risk lagging in competitiveness both for AI-savvy talent and in business results.

⚠️ Retention Risk: Ambitious employees will migrate to organizations that prioritize and deliver on AI transformation.

Skills Gaps & Uncertainty. People are already wary of companies that can’t articulate how they’re bridging skills gaps and how these are tied to career development and total rewards. They’ll favor those with clear, transparent development paths.

⚠️ Retention Risk: Without continuous upskilling and clarity on AI’s impact, existing employees may leave for more future-ready workplaces.

Talent Management Transformation Among Pacesetters. Companies that aren’t transforming talent management risk being overshadowed by those who do especially since 74% of Pacesetters are already there. Of course, there’s a slippery slope here: An over-emphasis on “AI all the time.”

⚠️ Retention Risk: A static approach to talent management can erode engagement and career growth, pushing people out the door.

Lack of Trust-Building. With only 42% of leaders working on AI trust-building, most organizations are vulnerable to talent skepticism. Those being targeted as potential employees today ethical AI and transparency.

⚠️ Retention Risk: Employees who don’t trust the company’s AI use or feel it’s used against them will disengage and may exit quickly.

Well, what does this mean to us in the people business?

We need to move into full-on advisory and advocacy mode.

AI ignorance isn’t a strategy for success – but being a true People Advisor in the AI Era means you must be more educated about the SWOTs of the technology and how these are viewed by those you have in your organization and those you want. Take a course. Follow the leaders. Demand answers from vendors.

Don’t see a plan that includes how AI technologies will impact both internally-facing and externally-facing HR, TA, or TM in both the short and longer term?

Create one. Poll employees, job seekers, and customers and incorporate their POVs into it. Take a look at Edelman‘s fantastic Trust Barometer work and work these findings into your plan. Listen to both people’s excitement and trepidation and address these in all you people activities.

Advisory and Advocacy aren’t easy – they can potentially put you at odds with company executives who might have, at best, a cursory sense of how strategies impact people. Blustering aside, for most this isn’t one of their strengths…

But if not you then who?

Talent Acquisition Metrics That Actually Make Sense

Posted by Steve on June 17, 2025
Posted in: Recruiting. Tagged: , , , , , , . Leave a comment

What if the metrics we held near and dear to our Talent Acquisition hearts weren’t the best ways to measure the health and wellness of our hiring initiatives?

What if, as a Talent Advisor, you’ve been tasked with identifying new metrics to offer better insights into your workflows and performances?

Not metrics rolled up into a big mass that is devoid of true actionable insight but metrics that candidate experience, recruiter effectiveness, hiring manager partnership, and executive expectations.

Legend:
🟠 Candidate-Centric Metrics
🟡 Recruiter-Centric Metrics
🔴 Hiring Manager-Centric Metrics
🔵 C-Level / Strategic Metrics

The Metrics…

Time in Status Variance (TISV) 🟠 🟡 🔴
Measures how long people stay in each stage of the hiring process (e.g., sourcing, engagement/application review, interview scheduling), and highlights outliers.
+ People: Reduces ghosting and bottlenecks.
+ Recruiter: Helps identify where they’re slowed down.
+ Hiring Manager: Pinpoints where feedback or decisions lag.
+ C-Level: Reveals process inefficiency and its downstream impact on time to hire.

Net Hiring Experience Score (NHX) 🟠 🟡 🔴 🔵
NPS-style score that blends person, recruiter, and hiring manager feedback after each hiring cycle.
+ All: Holistically reflects satisfaction across all user groups.
+ All: Helps build a culture of accountability and partnership in hiring.

Feedback Loop Closure Rate 🟠 🟡 🔴
Measures the percentage of people (especially post-interview) who receive meaningful feedback, and how fast it’s delivered.
+ People: Directly improves experience and employer brand.
+ Recruiter: Encourages ownership of people journey.
+ Hiring Manager: Reflects commitment to communication.
+ C-Level: Brand equity and values

Interview-to-Decision Velocity 🔴
Tracks time from final interview to offer decision.
+ People: Reduces anxiety, keeps engagement high.
+ Recruiter: Identifies slowdowns in decision-making.
+ Hiring Manager: Encourages prompt evaluation.
+ C-Level: Prevents offer declines due to delays.

Internal Mobility Friction Index 🔴
Measures how often internal employees apply, progress, and are selected versus dropping out early.
+ People: Encourages growth within.
+ Recruiter: Promotes fair, internal-first hiring.
+ Hiring Manager: Highlights openness to internal talent.
+ C-Level: Signals talent retention and cost avoidance.

Recruiter Role Complexity Load (RRCL) 🟡
Weights recruiter requisitions not by volume but by complexity (seniority, scarcity, location, niche skill).
+ People: Reduces burnout, improves communication.
+ Recruiter: Encourages equitable req distribution.
+ Hiring Manager: Helps manage expectations on timelines.
+ C-Level: Aligns headcount strategy with capacity.

Hiring Forecast Accuracy (HFA) 🔵
Compares predicted versus actual hiring outcomes (timing, volume, quality).
+ People: Reduces last-minute changes and cancellations.
+ Recruiter: Promotes proactive planning.
+ Hiring Manager: Builds trust in TA predictability.
+ C-Level: Links hiring plans to business planning reliability.

Requisition Approval to Launch Lag 🟡
Measures time between when a req is approved and when it’s posted.
+ People: Shortens access to opportunities.
+ Recruiter: Highlights systemic delays or bottlenecks.
+ Hiring Manager: Drives urgency and alignment.
+ C-Level: Impacts “revenue or science”-critical headcount plans.

Candidate Sentiment Delta (CSD) 🟠
Compares people sentiment before and after interviews (via short pulse surveys).
+ People: Ensures the process improves perception.
+ Recruiter: Reveals breakdowns in communication or tone.
+ Hiring Manager: Correlates interview quality with engagement.
+ C-Level: Leading indicator of reputation and employer brand.

Offer Drop-Off Signal Index 🟠
Uses signals (delays, counteroffers, communication gaps) to predict risk of offer rejection or ghosting.
+ People: Enables preemptive re-engagement.
+ Recruiter: Improves offer-to-accept ratio.
+ Hiring Manager: Protects time investment.
+ C-Level: Reduces recruiting efficiency ratio and churn.

Hiring Manager Touchpoint Index 🔴
Measures how often and how meaningfully hiring managers engage in the hiring process (intake/discovery, engagement strategy, screening, feedback, interview participation).
+ People: Improves perception of manager involvement.
+ Recruiter: Reduces process drag.
+ Hiring Manager: Encourages ownership of talent outcomes.
+ C-Level: Culture of accountability and leadership quality.

AI Augmentation Ratio 🟡 🔵
Proportion of sourcing, screening, and scheduling tasks automated or AI-assisted versus human effort.
+ People: Faster responses, less delay.
+ Recruiter: Improves strategic focus.
+ Hiring Manager: Shorter time to slate.
+ C-Level: Talent cost efficiency and innovation maturity.

Talent Scarcity Exposure Score 🔵
An index that combines role criticality, geographic constraints, compensation competitiveness, and talent market saturation.
+ People: Better-informed expectations.
+ Recruiter: Supports smarter sourcing prioritization.
+ Hiring Manager: Sets realistic expectations.
+ C-Level: Talent planning for business risk mitigation.

First-Year Success Alignment 🔵
Tracks if new hires meet performance goals aligned to hiring criteria within their first year (no, this is not QoH; it’s objective rather than subjective).
+ People: Encourages onboarding and integration.
+ Recruiter: Links selection quality to outcome.
+ Hiring Manager: Measures hiring fit beyond “time to fill.”
+ C-Level: Business impact of hiring decisions.

Experience Consistency Index 🟠 🔵
Measures variation in experience scores across different locations, functions, and demographic groups.
+ People: Ensures equitable process design.
+ Recruiter: Standardizes best practices.
+ Hiring Manager: Flags inconsistent behavior or support.
+ C-Level: Equity, inclusion, and brand consistency.

Are any of these good? Bad? Meh?

I’m really interested in what you think.

~Steve

The Talent Acquisition Ethicist

Posted by Steve on June 17, 2025
Posted in: Recruiting. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a comment

This Talent Acquisition post was inspired by Adam Gordon‘s post in Hung Lee‘s Recruiting Brainfood group on FB about The Adecco Group‘s announcement of a new company to integrate human and digital talent.

Yes, it was very odd typing “digital talent” – yet here we are in the light of the AI Era of Talent.

As we were bantering back and forth on the topic, it dawned on me: In the world of talent, we don’t have any formal role containing the word, “Ethicist.”

  • Medical & Bioethics has Medical Ethicist, Clinical Ethicist, Bioethicist, Hospital Ethicist
  • Technology & AI has AI Ethicist, Data Ethics Officer, Responsible AI Lead, Algorithmic Fairness Researcher
  • Government & Policy has Ethics Officer, Government Ethicist, Policy Ethicist
  • Scientific Research & Academia has Research Ethicist, Academic Ethicist, Institutional Review Board Member
  • Corporate has Corporate Ethicist, Chief Ethics Officer, Ethics and Compliance Officer
  • Environmental & Global Justice has Environmental Ethicist, Humanitarian Ethicist, Climate Justice Consultant
  • Journalism, Media, & Communications has Media Ethicist, Journalism Ethics Advisor

With the assistance of ChatGPT and reading a bit more about Medical Ethics, AI Ethics, and Talent Enablement, here is a proposed Job Description for a Talent Acquisition Ethicist, along with the roles scorecard and assessment rubric. I’m sure you can easily see how this role can be expanded into a much larger “Talent Ethicist” focus.

Yes, it needs work but I’m very interested in what you think about it.

Comments please!

Talent Acquisition Ethicist

Reports to: Head of Talent Acquisition

✳️ Role Summary

As our company scales the use of AI and data-driven decision-making across the hiring lifecycle, we are establishing a new and essential role – Talent Acquisition Ethicist. This role is responsible for ensuring that while our TA function evolves technologically, it never loses its human core. Drawing from principles in AI and medical ethics, the TA Ethicist will act as both a strategic enabler and moral compass, shaping how our tools, systems, and people work together to hire inclusively, transparently, and responsibly. 

You will lead initiatives that embed ethical thinking into our talent systems, design operational frameworks for equitable AI use, and ensure that every candidate experience – human or machine-mediated – honors fairness, dignity, and psychological safety. This role blends deep thinking, often new thinking, with real-world application and is ideal for someone passionate about shaping the future of hiring in a way that is both high-tech and high-touch.

✳️ The Core

⛛ Ethical Risk Governance & Framework Design

  • Lead ethical audits of all AI-driven and automated talent acquisition platforms, including sourcing algorithms, résumé parsers, and candidate scoring tools.
  • Develop TA-specific ethical frameworks and risk mitigation protocols in alignment with corporate values, international labor standards, and local regulations (e.g., EU AI Act, NYC AEDT Law, GDPR).
  • Evaluate third-party vendors and internal tools for ethical integrity, focusing on bias detection, transparency, candidate agency, and data protection.
  • Partner with Legal, DEI, and People Analytics to build an ethical governance roadmap for TA operations.

⛛ Human-Centered Technology Deployment

  • Act as a decision-making partner in the adoption, customization, and rollout of new AI-powered TA tools – ensuring enhancements empower, rather than displace, recruiter judgment and human connection.
  • Define “human-in-the-loop” criteria for systems that automate screening, ranking, or rejection workflows.
  • Lead the creation of ethical use policies for tools such as automated interviews, generative AI assistants, and chatbots.

⛛ Candidate Experience & Psychological Safety

  • Design safeguards to ensure informed consent, transparency, and fairness when candidates interact with AI or automated decision-making systems.
  • Monitor and enhance candidate sentiment metrics related to fairness, empathy, and perceived agency.
  • Collaborate with Employer Branding to ensure public-facing narratives about hiring tech align with ethical practices. 

⛛ Enablement, Training & Cultural Integration

  • Develop ethical literacy training programs for recruiters, sourcers, branders, coordinators, and TA leadership – covering bias mitigation, responsible prompt design, inclusive automation, and ethical AI use.
  • Contribute ethical guidance to recruiter onboarding and continuous learning programs.
  • Serve as an internal advisor to the TA Enablement team in designing scalable, values-aligned hiring processes.

⛛ Metrics, Policy & Compliance

  • Define and track key ethical performance indicators (e.g., fairness audit scores, candidate opt-out rates, bias remediation cycles).
  • Maintain documentation and policy standards for the responsible use of AI in hiring.
  • Respond to and prepare for emerging AI regulations and industry-wide ethical hiring benchmarks.

⛛ Thought Leadership & Stakeholder Influence

  • Represent Talent Acquisition in cross-functional ethics councils, responsible AI working groups, and executive-level conversations on digital transformation.
  • Develop internal guidance papers and best practice documentation for ethical recruiting.
  • Stay abreast of trends and research across AI ethics, labor market equity, digital privacy, and the future of work.

✳️ Core Success Metrics

  • % of tools or vendors that pass ethical review and audit process.
  • Completion and sentiment scores from recruiter ethics training.
  • Candidate NPS and fairness sentiment post-AI interaction.
  • Resolution rate and speed for flagged ethical concerns or system escalations.
  • TA process changes implemented based on ethical findings.
  • Compliance readiness for external audits or new legislation. 

✳️ Core Qualifications

  • 12+ years of experience in Talent Acquisition, TA Operations, People Analytics, HR Tech, or related fields.
  • 5+ years of experience in a high-level leadership capacity in any Talent function.
  • Demonstrated understanding of AI/ML applications in hiring workflows.
  • Strong grasp of ethical theory (e.g., fairness, transparency, autonomy, beneficence) and practical application.
  • Experience conducting impact assessments or governance projects.
  • Exceptional written and verbal communication skills, particularly when translating complex ideas across technical and non-technical stakeholders.

✳️ Preferred Qualifications

  • Graduate-level education in Ethics, Philosophy, Organizational Psychology, HR Technology, or Data Science.
  • Background in AI ethics, medical ethics, or compliance frameworks.
  • Familiarity with ethical sourcing and inclusive design.
  • Certifications in Responsible AI, DEI strategy, and/or HR data privacy.
  • Experience working with global, multi-jurisdictional teams spanning “mail room” to “Board room”.

✳️ The Ideal Person Is…

  • A principled systems thinker with the operational savvy and emotional intelligence to drive change.
  • Committed to designing fair and inclusive hiring experiences at scale.
  • Skilled at pushing back against over-automation and caustic people strategies, policies, and processes, while enabling innovation.
  • Comfortable navigating ambiguity in a fast-paced, tech-enabled environment.
  • Equal parts philosopher, policymaker, and talent operations strategist.
  • Adept at embracing the “Tow ears, one mouth” Proportionality Rule. 

✳️ Talent Acquisition Ethicist – Role Scorecard

Mission: Ensure that our AI-enabled talent acquisition systems are ethically sound, transparent, and human-centered.

Outcomes: Operational ethical frameworks in place, measurable bias reduction in AI-assisted tools, high candidate satisfaction with transparency.

Competencies: Ethical risk assessment, TA tech enablement, cross-functional collaboration, regulatory alignment, change leadership.

Culture Fit: Empathetic, integrity-driven, systems thinker, educator, challenger of status quo.

✳️ Performance Rubric – Talent Acquisition Ethicist 

⛛ Ethical Governance & Risk Assessment

Minimal: Fails to identify or assess ethical risks in tools or processes.

Basic: Recognizes major risks but lacks proactive assessments or remediation planning.

Strong: Conducts thorough impact assessments and integrates ethical checkpoints into vendor/tech reviews.

Superb: Proactively leads organizational AI ethics governance; anticipates ethical dilemmas before they arise.

⛛ Human-Centered Design of TA Workflows

Minimal: Automates without consideration of candidate experience or psychological safety.

Basic: Makes some efforts to preserve human touchpoints, but inconsistently.

Strong: Builds intentional workflows balancing tech efficiency and human judgment.

Superb: Designs model TA experiences where empathy and automation coexist seamlessly.

⛛ Training & Ethical Literacy

Minimal: Provides no ethical guidance or enablement.

Basic: Conducts occasional ad hoc training sessions.

Strong: Implements consistent training with relevant case studies and adoption metrics.

Superb: Creates a learning culture where ethical hiring is core to TA identity.

⛛ Stakeholder Influence & Leadership

Minimal: Rarely consulted on tech or policy decisions; lacks influence.

Basic: Participates in discussions but struggles to drive outcomes.

Strong: Respected advisor and frequent contributor to strategic decisions.

Superb: Trusted ethics leader shaping policy, product direction, and cultural norms across TA.

Recruiting is Broken

Posted by Steve on April 10, 2014
Posted in: Recruiting. Tagged: , , , . 1 Comment

[What follows is an account of a successful early careerist having a career discussion with an influential mentor]

Recruiting Technology

Recruiting Technology

After I graduated from Harvard and took my first job as an investment banker earning $150K, upon returning home for Thanksgiving my Mom cornered me in the kitchen and in an exasperating tone asked (or rather, demanded), “You’re 26 years old – [raising her voice] WHY AREN’T YOU A CEO ALREADY LIKE YOUR FRIEND JIMMY? I AM SO FREAKING TIRED OF LISTENING TO HIS MOM LINDA BRAG ABOUT, ‘JIMMY’S A CEO, HE HAS ANGEL INVESTORS, HE’S GOING TO BE A BILLIONAIRE’ – WHEN THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO PAY ME BACK FOR ALL THE YEARS I BATHED YOU, FED YOU, CHANGED YOUR GOD-DAMNED DIAPERS? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO START YOUR OWN COMPANY AND BE A CEO? WHEN, WHEN, WHEN?!?!”

[In a calm soothing voice] “But Mom…”

[Mom’s really pissed off now] “SCREW ‘BUT MOM!’ WILL YOU JUST START UP A DAMN COMPANY THAT FIXES RECRUITING?!?!”

Oh, if it only were this easy.

And yes, it is the reason why “new” recruiting technology is exploding globally – because entrepreneurs truly believe that technology, any technology, will cure the ills of recruiting.

In The Future of Recruiting and Hiring Technology, Sharlyn Lauby of HR Bartender fame says, “When you automate the right tasks, then it frees up time to do the in-person ones better.”

The problem here is in how the entrepreneur (a) comes to their conclusion that recruiting is broken; and, (b) comes up and develops a solution that will undoubtedly make them an Angel’s or VC’s pet. In other words, Sharlyn would be spot-on if the underlying recruiting processes were optimal and the recruiters tasked with implementing the processes were optimal as well. Neither is.

Automating the “right” tasks is what stumps most recruiting technology entrepreneurs; are they automating the right task or a part of a process that is broken, aging, or downright useless?

Here’s a typical comment about a better way to recruit (this one is pasted from the above article – all I’ve done is turn on italics):

The fundamental assumption that recruiters need to do more outreach, be it automated is wrong.

Recruiting should and will become more inbound. Should companies always reach out to potential talent (be it on the form of automatic mails)? Shouldn’t technology actually make engagement and data driven hiring more efficient. The problem with many technologies being developed today is that recruiting is still seen upon as a filling up a job and not in terms of making a career. Take the very successful companies like Google, Netflix. Apart from posting jobs (if they post i.e.), do they do direct selling of their position.

The future of recruiting is in inbound marketing. If one tries to understand the relationship between marketing, sales and recruiting you would see a pattern. Marketers are early adoptors, Sales adopt technologies and practices if they seem to be successful in marketing. Recruiters are generally late adopters.

The likes of Amazon, Apple etc (I consider them as Sales and Marketing Companies, these companies buy and sell stuff and keep a margin) etc are focussing on more inbound tactics. They do marketing and not sales. These companies don’t buy email databases and send mass mails. They put the right ad in front of the right customer and gets their sales done.

I see recruiting too moving in that direction. If a company is able to post the right job in front of the right candidate, the sale is going to happen. How can this happen?

1. Replace job description with tasks : Job Description are dead, no candidate has the time to read them. Just like a recruiter looks at keywords in resumes, the talent looks for keywords. Product companies are already doing task based sourcing and hiring
2. Focus on inbound : The really successful companies focus on inbound recruiting. This is about a.identifying those right nodes and playing them in front of the candidate b.keeping your employees happy who in turn will lead you to more talent.
3. Push careers : Imagine you are a highly talented candidate. One company offers you a job and a really good package. There is another company which is offering you a job, a well defined career progression cycle (Things like google’s OKR based promotion cycles) and a decent salary. Which one would you chose?

The future of recruitment technology is not about outbound tools, it is about creating tools that would lead to inbound recruiting.

PS : This is a sales pitch. if you believe in what we do, check out HuntShire.

A sales pitch. Ah, I hadn’t noticed. Anyone want to guess how many years of recruiting experience the team of three co-Founders has between them?

Is there anything in this fellow’s sales pitch that makes you confident that he understands the ins and outs of recruiting – the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly? What I do see is a rehashing of the same phrases we’ve been hearing for decades – like “Job descriptions are dead, no candidate has the time to read them” – and a pitch for a “better way.” Ho-hum, wake me up before you go-go…

If it’s not replacement for job descriptions, it’s gamification; if it’s not gamification, it’s mobile; if it’s not mobile, it’s how to recruit software developers. It’s a new ATS, a new assessment tool based upon the teachings of Carl Jung (yes, I’m being sarcastic), a new social job board that no one has thought of before.

My point here is not to denigrate entrepreneurism or recruiting technology but do you see what’s missing from all this new recruiting technology?

The recruiters…

The company leaders and how they view the importance of recruiting…

The hiring managers (notice how much recruiting technology takes recruiting away from recruiters and places it back into the hands of the hiring managers)…

The jobseekers…

How often do recruiting technology entrepreneurs with a better way conduct focus meetings with not just someone from each category but with someone from each category who is good, bad and even ugly? How often do these focus meetings result in a re-engineering of a “flawed” process? Or is this new recruiting technology designed to make easier a flawed process?

I’m asked to review more recruiting technology than I’d like but as part of my personal belief in stewarding the recruiting profession, I rarely decline the chance to see if the reality meets the hype. I listen to the person’s background, where they went to school. I breathe in all the words of the pitch, the reason why recruiting is broken.

Finally, I’m given a business card with a phone number and email to call later to discuss.

And the title reads, “CEO”…

 

[Cross-posted on RecruitingDaily.com. Don’t receive it? Sign up for RecruitingBlogs – it’s free – and get it. Great place for recruiters, hiring managers, career services professionals AND jobseekers]