Research firm Datapeople shares data debunking two talent acquisition myths: that candidate sourcing is an equitable approach to DEI and that inbound recruiting isn't efficient.
2 Myths About Candidate Sourcing
and DEI
A couple of myths are floating around the talent acquisition industry these days, according to
research firm Datapeople. One is that candidate sourcing is an equitable approach to diversity,
equity, and inclusion (DEI). The other is that inbound recruiting is inefficient.
Neither is the case, according to Datapeople.
There’s no need to manufacture diversity through candidate
sourcing if the top of the applicant funnel is already diverse.
And inbound recruiting is very efficient, if done correctly.
Datapeople says that hiring teams
turn to candidate sourcing because
they offer proactive approaches to
DEI.
Yet candidate sourcing limits the number of job seekers
encouraged to apply for a given role and also invites
unconscious biases to influence the candidates chosen.
It's an attempt to manufacture diversity. But a qualified,
diverse top of the funnel yields a qualified, diverse bottom
of the funnel.
A lot of hiring teams are doing diversity sourcing these days, says Datapeople, despite the question of
how it looks when a recruiter reaches out to a candidate from an underrepresented group and mentions
DEI. Often, candidates are left to wonder exactly why a recruiter is contacting them.
Referrals are also inherently inequitable,
according to Datapeople. Not only do
employee referral programs tend to favor
referred candidates, they also tend to
perpetuate whatever lack of diversity already
exists.
As a whole, referral programs can exclude large
swaths of qualified job seekers who don’t know
anyone at the company. Also, when an employee
refers someone, the hiring team may favor that
candidate without even realizing it.
In a recent analysis of jobs data from 10,000 U.S.-based employers, Datapeople found that
referred applicants are, on average, 9 times more likely to get an offer than applicants from inbound
recruiting efforts, despite inbound recruiting channels bringing in the majority of applicants.
According to Datapeople, over 80% of all applicants
come from inbound recruiting channels like company
career pages, Indeed, LinkedIn, and other online job
boards. Yet these applicants are only half of all hires.
Meaning hiring teams are favoring referred applicants
disproportionately.
The second myth is that inbound recruiting is inefficient.
But, according to Datapeople, the inbound recruiting
channel isn’t the issue ─ it’s the job description. Simply
put, a job post is still the most important tool in the recruiter
toolbox, which means it can make or break a recruiting
effort.
Contact Us At:
https://datapeople.io/
and DEI
A couple of myths are floating around the talent acquisition industry these days, according to
research firm Datapeople. One is that candidate sourcing is an equitable approach to diversity,
equity, and inclusion (DEI). The other is that inbound recruiting is inefficient.
Neither is the case, according to Datapeople.
There’s no need to manufacture diversity through candidate
sourcing if the top of the applicant funnel is already diverse.
And inbound recruiting is very efficient, if done correctly.
Datapeople says that hiring teams
turn to candidate sourcing because
they offer proactive approaches to
DEI.
Yet candidate sourcing limits the number of job seekers
encouraged to apply for a given role and also invites
unconscious biases to influence the candidates chosen.
It's an attempt to manufacture diversity. But a qualified,
diverse top of the funnel yields a qualified, diverse bottom
of the funnel.
A lot of hiring teams are doing diversity sourcing these days, says Datapeople, despite the question of
how it looks when a recruiter reaches out to a candidate from an underrepresented group and mentions
DEI. Often, candidates are left to wonder exactly why a recruiter is contacting them.
Referrals are also inherently inequitable,
according to Datapeople. Not only do
employee referral programs tend to favor
referred candidates, they also tend to
perpetuate whatever lack of diversity already
exists.
As a whole, referral programs can exclude large
swaths of qualified job seekers who don’t know
anyone at the company. Also, when an employee
refers someone, the hiring team may favor that
candidate without even realizing it.
In a recent analysis of jobs data from 10,000 U.S.-based employers, Datapeople found that
referred applicants are, on average, 9 times more likely to get an offer than applicants from inbound
recruiting efforts, despite inbound recruiting channels bringing in the majority of applicants.
According to Datapeople, over 80% of all applicants
come from inbound recruiting channels like company
career pages, Indeed, LinkedIn, and other online job
boards. Yet these applicants are only half of all hires.
Meaning hiring teams are favoring referred applicants
disproportionately.
The second myth is that inbound recruiting is inefficient.
But, according to Datapeople, the inbound recruiting
channel isn’t the issue ─ it’s the job description. Simply
put, a job post is still the most important tool in the recruiter
toolbox, which means it can make or break a recruiting
effort.
Contact Us At:
https://datapeople.io/