PDA

View Full Version : new job boards - any good ?



DaveG
18-07-2007, 10:24 AM
Is anyone having success recruiting through some of the new job boards such as jobsjobsjobs and careersites ?

Louie Jones
18-07-2007, 11:15 AM
Dave,

I think you will find careersites is no more (already!)

Cheers,
Louie

Sonya P
19-07-2007, 03:28 PM
We haven't used any of them.

I've seen jjj's advertising around town - must be costing a fortune!

However, I can't see how it differs that much from the established job boards such as Seek, MyCareer and CareerOne. I'm not sure we really need yet another generalist job board. It's just one more place we as employers will feel obligated to advertise and yet another site for job seekers to keep an eye on.

It would be interesting to hear the views of other HR people (and recruiters) on this topic.

Sonya

mspecht
20-07-2007, 07:08 AM
Hi If you want to get a good run down on the job boards in Australia check out the NowHiring Blog (http://blog.nowhiring.com.au/) where Brett covers lots of the ins and outs of the players.

I agree jjj does not seem to offer anything new and will probably go the way of all the other competitors who have tried to take on the big media backed 3.

kevinh
20-07-2007, 08:51 AM
Michael,

Although I am not a fan of Seek, they have succeeded in spite of the 'big media'.

However, I think some of the newcomers have forgotten that Seek didn't made a profit in their first 4-5 years of operation because they spent so much on marketing. What was different for them however was that they were able to get some reasonable revenue because they were the first viable job board in the Australian market and the only other alternative for advertisers was print media, which was expensive by comparison. This flow or revenue helped fund the growth of their business.

Fast forward 10+ years and Seek is the dominant player in the market with MyCareer and CareerOne also well established. It is now very difficult for a new player to establish a worthwhile revenue stream, because most recruiters want a considerable free trial before they are prepared to start paying. This presents a major challenge for newcomers and requires that they have considerable cash reserves if they are to survive. They probably need enough cash in reserve to survive 1-2 years before they can expect any meaningful revenue.

I hear CareerSites were selling advertising for $1!

jaybee
20-07-2007, 11:32 AM
I think JJJ is great and will give SEEK a run for thier money. Thier job posting from the Rec Agency end is slick and quick. Great candidate site and much better value fro money that SEEK. Good luck to them!

mspecht
20-07-2007, 12:45 PM
Kevin, Seek has had big media support through the PBL investment and the marketing agreement that was then put in place with ninemsn.com.au. They just not have it day one :-)

kevinh
21-07-2007, 12:11 PM
Kevin, Seek has had big media support through the PBL investment and the marketing agreement that was then put in place with ninemsn.com.au. They just not have it day one :-)

Michael, they didn't have it from 'day one' because ninemsn didn't exist back then, which means it was harder for Seek to become the dominant player in the market. They are currently followed by MyCareer and CareerOne, both of whom had a massive advantage due to their newspapers.

So if MC (Fairfax) & CO (NewsCorp) can't surpass Seek, how is a startup generalist job board going to fair, when there are now also many specialist job sites and mail list products chipping away at the market ?

When we started Jobs in HR three years ago we were surprised at the extremely high level of acceptance Seek had in the market. We quickly realised that it has become automatic for most employers and recruiters to advertise on Seek - the only question for advertisers is where else will they advertise? Therefore new employment advertising products are competing for the remainder of the advertising budget, because no one who is serious about recruitment can afford to forgo advertising on Seek in favour of a new job board.

My view is that new employment advertising products need to reach a different audience to the 'big three' if they are to survive, which means not being 'just another job board'!

DaveG
21-07-2007, 12:30 PM
Maybe it's my sheltered lifestyle, but I saw (or noticed) my first JJJ billboard only yesterday on Nepean Hwy in Melbourne. However, unless I already knew what JJJ was, it could have just as easily been a billboard advertising one of the other big job boads, such is the generic nature of their name (it is not a very distinct brand).

cam
23-07-2007, 01:47 PM
It seems like there's a new wave of Internet sites with a web 2.0 feel to them trying to take on the established brands with all the bells and whistles that AJAX provides.

I think that jjj are offering something that adds a bit of value to the user experience but no doubt seek will respond with a vengeance if required. I can't help but wonder if seek was required to overhaul it's site in response would they have the capability to do it effectively? That's if, of course, jjj can get grounded in what is a tough industry to crack.

Nlangford
24-07-2007, 08:32 AM
Yet another job board, I don't know about any of your experiences but everytime I call someone who has applied for a position from on-line and I ask them " what was it about this position that made you apply?" and they say "what position was that?", because they've applied for so many jobs.
The unfortuante thing about on-line job boards is that it has made it too easy for people to apply without putting any real thought into the process. I can't remember the last time I got a cover letter with an on-line application, and one that's actually addressed to me instead of a generic one that's sent with every application. I think that on-line job boards attract quantity whereas newspapers tend to attract quality. Although there is a significant cost difference between on-line and print advertising I think you get what you pay for. I would rather get 2 quality applicants from a newspaper ad than 10 average applicants from on-line. I'm not saying not to use on-line but rather not to rely soley on it to find you quality candidates. The best way to approach the recruitment process is to use a holistic approach. If you want to reach the entire employment market then you need to use all the tools that are available such as newspapers, on-line ,networking, and recruitment databases that way your sure that your getting in front of both the active and passive candidates.

jaybee
25-07-2007, 09:46 AM
I wish I could agree with you about the newspaper. I get a sick feeeling in my stomach when my client passes over $8k for an EGN advert for me to place the candidate from the job boards. I agree with you completely about the sloppiness of net applications however.

HRSense
25-07-2007, 10:23 AM
Like others I have only just become aware of JJJ and after looking through it I went away feeling that it doesn't offer more than Seek for a job hunter, just a variation on a theme. Having not used them as an advertiser I can't say how the interface or cost compares.

At the end of the day the site with the smoothest interface, quality/qantity of roles, and value for money, will win out and Seek have a head start. They have improved in the last 12 months with the ability to file jobs on line for later with notes, but I have found on a personal level (using it at the moment!) that the email advise on jobs doesn't necessarily tie in with an online search, so there is still room for improvement.

Whether we will ever get to the pipe dream of an effective all embracing on-line candidate database where organisations/agencies can find someone in less than 24 hours is another matter!

Elisabeth
01-08-2007, 03:33 PM
jjj certainly wins my vote in terms of customer service - their response time and professionalism put SEEK to shame. It just remains to be seen whether jjj can maintain the momentum, now that they have hit the market with a splash.

Elisabeth
01-08-2007, 03:35 PM
jaybee, do you have greater success in placing candidates from EGN ads?

Sonya P
03-08-2007, 03:32 PM
jjj certainly wins my vote in terms of customer service - their response time and professionalism put SEEK to shame. It just remains to be seen whether jjj can maintain the momentum, now that they have hit the market with a splash.

Elisabeth, have you had much success attracting good applicants through jjj?

and if so what sort of skill sets?

Sonya

PS. You mention customer service - is jjj not self service like Seek, MyCareer etc ?

RogerP
22-08-2007, 09:12 AM
Hi Everyone, If you are interested in truly new job board! Take a look at a new specialist job referral notice board I have recently launched. It allows for Employers to post jobs and offer a realistic referral fee and register recruiter to refer a limited number of suitable candidates against the hiring criteria. Go to www.recruitmentreferrals.com.au to check it out, let me know what you think.

Moz
22-08-2007, 05:27 PM
Interesting concept Roger. It might work in a recession, but in the current climate I would think most recruiters will use as a dumping ground for their candidates they can't place anywhere else, (for a full fee) :)

RogerP
22-08-2007, 07:17 PM
Hi Moz, It is unlikely that recruiters will ' dump' candidates as RR only allows for a limited number of referrals from each recruiter so they need to submit their best available candidates.

In a candidate short market RR is more relevant then ever because it is a dedicated notice board for Employers to post vacancies and broaden the net to source quality candidates. For recruiters, RR will allow access to a much greater number of employer jobs and permit better utilisation of any quality candidate that just sit in their CMS.

To fully appreciate the RR website you need to access the secured areas, I encourage people to register to understand how the site works, it is free for Employers and Recruiters to register.

Moz
22-08-2007, 08:12 PM
Hi Moz, It is unlikely that recruiters will ' dump' candidates as RR only allows for a limited number of referrals from each recruiter so they need to submit their best available candidates.


and why do you think they would do that? (submit their best candidates)

Take the HSE Manager job, paying $125k - the normal agency fee to place a good person in that job would be at least $18,750 (@15%), so why would they refer their 'best' candidate for a fee of $3000 ?

That is assuming that they have great candidates just hanging around in their database.

You asked for feedback and my view is that concept is fundamentally flawed given the current market conditions.

tinman
22-08-2007, 10:39 PM
Being a recruiter I see the value in this site as we all know there are candidates who we would love to place but don't have the vacancy on hand. This allows you to gain incremental income that otherwise may go to another recruiter but more importantly to place your candidate who will then become an advocate of yours and result in future potential new referrals.

If as you suggest Moz you would only send poor quality candidates then they are not going to be placed so effort for nothing. As this is a new initiative mentioned by Roger I think his clients will soon realise they need to post realistic fees.
Tinman

Moz
23-08-2007, 08:41 PM
Being a recruiter I see the value in this site as we all know there are candidates who we would love to place but don't have the vacancy on hand.

Assuming we're talking about good calibre, placeable candidates here, then there's an easy solution. A quick search of the job boards will reveal companies looking for similar people - just phone em up and let em know you have a candidate who might be suitable - some, if not all will accept your referral (assuming of course the candidate is willing). But if you're a specialist recruiter you will know where to market your good candidates anyway.

I suppose if you were a specialist and you ended up doing an assignment off on a tangent to your normal line of business, as a favour for one of your good clients, then you might use RR, but really it's last resort stuff.

Even a fee split with another recruiter will get you a much higher fee than RR!


If as you suggest Moz you would only send poor quality candidates then they are not going to be placed so effort for nothing. As this is a new initiative mentioned by Roger I think his clients will soon realise they need to post realistic fees.
Tinman

I was talking hypothetically. Personally I wouldn't participate in RR, because it seeks to commoditises recruitment and it devalues the role of agency recruiters. My guess is, that any self respecting recruiter will feel the same way.

The more I think about RR, the more fundamental flaws I see. The assumptions behind the product just are all wrong!

Moz
23-08-2007, 08:50 PM
To fully appreciate the RR website you need to access the secured areas, I encourage people to register to understand how the site works, it is free for Employers and Recruiters to register.

If that's the case Roger, why does your FAQ say this ?

"from 6th August 2007 a nominal Annual Subscription of $465.00 + GST per agency site will apply"

Really though, the backend functionality of the site is irrelevant if the economic model for the product is wrong!

RogerP
24-08-2007, 12:15 AM
Hi Moz,

It appears you are speaking from a recruiter's perspective, which is fine, and some points you raise are valid.

A couple of my main objectives in creating the site was to open the door for recruiter with businesses who do not have the budget to consider traditional agency fees, businesses that also are unlikely to have the internal hiring expertise who would genuinely benefit from RR, and most people agree this hidden job market is considerable.

Your biggest concern appears to be low referral fees; I agree we will always have some employers posting low fees however market rates will prevail if Employers are serious about finding good people. We will always encourage realistic referral fees, we did in fact consider setting specific rules to guide Employers but decide against this. I would welcome anyone thoughts for Employers and Recruiters on this point.

The other significant point to note this is a dedicated job site for employers only, agency advertising overwhelmingly drives most job boards and Employer ads are lost within minutes. Many Recruiters and Employers are highly critical of the current job board offerings. RR attempts to address some of these issues

You suggest we "seek to commodities recruitment" I hate to surprise you but the recruitment industry has done this to itself years ago with the advent of certain outsource models; short listing services, modular recruitment etc.

I would really welcome some more feedback from others, and yes Mos your comment are helpful and will improve our model.

Can I ask one question about this blog site and others, why are people so hung up on identify themselves. I mean " Tinman". What's that all about?

PS Moz thanks for pointing out the error! Keep the comments coming

kevinh
24-08-2007, 07:09 PM
Can I ask one question about this blog site and others, why are people so hung up on identify themselves. I mean " Tinman". What's that all about?


Roger, it's the norm with on-line forums, blogs etc. People may have a variety of valid reasons to use a nick-name or pseudonym and I can't say I blame them. Voicing one's opinions on the web can sometimes be career damaging, or at the very least a hindrance. A prospective employer may 'google' you, find a few rash comments you made on a forum or blog and form an opinion about you before even meeting you. There's a thread on the topic here (http://hrbuzz.com.au/vb/showthread.php?t=43)

At least with forums like this you can edit your comments, but with a blog that's it - no chance to edit (unless you can get the blog owner to edit your entry).

Besides, how are Moz and Tinman to know if you are really whom your profile says you are? That's just life on-line.

BWT, I'm not for a minute suggesting you are not who you say you are - just making a point :)

Geoff Jennings
15-09-2007, 11:37 AM
Using your real name if you have something useful to say can also work to your benefit. An employer can see that you are active and passionate about your current or potential industry sector.

However, the net does enable people to be more expressive under an alias but can lead to an ugly post if they get carried away.

RogerP
17-09-2007, 06:33 PM
Geoff & Kevin,

The point I was actually trying to make is why do people who participate in blogs let readers know from which position are they coming from on any discussion. In this case are they an agency recruiter, employer or blogger etc. so others can be mindful of their professional situation or any potential individual agendas.

I have another questions regarding http://www.recruitmentreferrals.com.au/. Is there any internal employer recruiters who have had a look at the website, and do they have any comments and observations?

Geoff Jennings
17-09-2007, 07:59 PM
I have registered on your site and will give you some feedback. I come from a recruiters perspective but have also had many years on the other side of the fence.

Geoff Jennings
18-09-2007, 09:34 AM
My problem with your service RogerP is that it is difficult for us to know if we are competing with ourselves on these roles. As an example we have many web firms that we are presenting candidates to for similar roles. Is there a way to know who they are? As we would not refer otherwise.

RogerP
18-09-2007, 10:31 AM
Employers can post vacancies under their company or anonymously, and the Employer is identified on the Job Posting if they choose.

In my experience most good recruiters should be able to deduce who the employer is by a number of factors i.e. job title, location, position description, salary and general conditions.

If the Recruiter were unsure about the employer's identity for any reason, we would recommend the recruiter should not submit any candidates against a specific job.

Any marketing by the Recruiter directly to the Employer as a result of viewing the job on RR is strictly not permitted.

Geoff Jennings
19-09-2007, 05:30 PM
I must not be a "Good Recruiter" then.

Moz
19-09-2007, 06:26 PM
In my experience most good recruiters should be able to deduce who the employer is by a number of factors i.e. job title, location, position description, salary and general conditions.

You are kidding aren't you Roger ?

I have to wonder how much you know about the recruitment industry. A "good" recruiter will not put a candidate forward for a job without the candidate's permission.

Do you really think a recruiter would say to a candidate "there's this job on this web site, I think it's with XYZ company, but I'm not sure, can I put you forward?"

ROFL!


Any marketing by the Recruiter directly to the Employer as a result of viewing the job on RR is strictly not permitted.

Thanks, but we can read your T&C's on your site.

If it helps any, I have 17 years exp in the recruitment industry, including senior management roles. Although I'm not working in the industry right now.

Gail
15-10-2007, 06:56 PM
Hi,
Hi,

Would be interested to know if you have used any of the goverment sites to post your vacant positions such as:

www.jobsearch.gov.au

From what I understand this website provides free advertising to employers although I am yet to utilise it myself.

Other websites that I have recently come across are

http://www.positionsvacant.com.au/

RogerP
15-10-2007, 09:35 PM
Hi Geoff, Moz & Gail,

Sorry I have not replied earlier, but I am not receiving regular prompts from HR Buzz to say that people have made a comment directed to me.

To Geoff,
There was no suggestion that you are not a competent recruiter, please except my apology. We really need to be careful about our choice of words on these blogs!

On your point about the Employers identity, we hope the majority of employers will make themselves known. Recruiter will be able to view the employer names on the Job Detail page for each position advertised.

Moz,
'I have to wonder how much you know about the recruitment industry'. Why so personal! It's very unprofessional to use this kind of language in any forum, especially from an ill informed position. It appears you are drawing your entire conclusions from viewing just the Recruitment Referrals public pages.

Firstly, Recruiters are asked the to verify if they have gained the candidates approval before referring any details, just to protect everyone.

Secondly, on posted jobs the Recruiter can ask any questions they wish to assist in understanding the job requirements. All Q&As are then displayed against the job for all recruiters to view giving everyone precisely this same information. In addition to this our Job Posting tools guides employers to build a complete position description which recruiters will find helpful.

Gail, I am not sure what you mean when you say that RR should consider posting our jobs on other job boards. Can you give me some more details?
By the way Job Postings are free only to the 26th October, so if you are an Employer get in quick.

Gail
16-10-2007, 08:39 AM
My posting was not in reference to RR

My posting was with regards to job boards in general of which I thought this post was about, and in particular what readers viewpoints were of the goverment websites such as jobsearch.

From what I understand these are websites wereby companies can post vacanies at no cost to themselves. I am still trying to ascertain who it would attract from a candidate perspective

Moz
16-10-2007, 10:56 AM
Hi Geoff, Moz & Gail,
Moz,
'I have to wonder how much you know about the recruitment industry'. Why so personal! It's very unprofessional to use this kind of language in any forum, especially from an ill informed position. It appears you are drawing your entire conclusions from viewing just the Recruitment Referrals public pages.

Sorry Roger, just thinking aloud. My conclusions are based on what appear to be the fundamental concepts of your product.

BTW, I believe this thread is about job boards in general, what's out there and what people find good, bad or indifferent. I don't think it is appropriate for you to continue to use it to promote your own product.

Perhaps you should consider starting your own thread about your specific job board.

Moz
20-10-2007, 12:33 PM
Hi,

Would be interested to know if you have used any of the goverment sites to post your vacant positions such as:

www.jobsearch.gov.au

From what I understand this website provides free advertising to employers although I am yet to utilise it myself.

Other websites that I have recently come across are

http://www.positionsvacant.com.au/

Gail, rarely does one find anything that is free or even really cheap, that is actually any good. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for.

These Government and also-ran job boards often ‘look’ okay but you don’t realize how bad they are until you start using them to look for specific jobs.

Take jobsearch.gov.au, the first time I visited today after seeing you mention it, I received the following error in my web browser (Microsoft IE7);

“There is a problem with this website's security certificate.”

That’s not a good start!

I did a search for HR jobs (using ‘hr’ in the Occupation field) and almost all the jobs displayed were not HR jobs - the first job on the list was “2nd or 3rd Year Boilermaker Apprentice” ! In fact just ONE of the first 20 jobs displayed was actually an HR job.

On positionsvacant.com.au I searched for HR jobs in Victoria. It came up with only 10 jobs, 3 of which were not even related to HR, another 3 were recruitment consultant jobs to work for recruitment agencies. Due to duplicate listing there were actually only 3 different genuine HR jobs.

Why would people looking for a job put up with this when there other sites that will give them just what they are looking for ?

This is the question you need to ask yourself.

As for State Government sites, they typically only have State Government jobs on them, so they are only going to attract people who are specifically looking for Government jobs – at a time when Government Departments are desperately wanting to attract people from the private sector.

The bottom line when assessing a recruitment advertising product has to be “will this product reach any candidates that the mainstream sites such as Seek or MyCareer will not reach?”

Tell tale signs will be;


where does the site rank in the natural Google search results (not the sponsored links) for the type of job you are recruiting for?

How many relevant jobs the site has listed (check jobs aren’t listed multiple times to inflate the numbers), and what percentage of the jobs returned in search results are irrelevant?

Do recruiters who specialise in that discipline advertise on the site? (you can be sure they won’t waste their time advertising for very long on sites that don’t work).

zephram
05-12-2007, 06:02 AM
Dave,

If this is not the appropriate place for this please delete or tell me where to go...be nice :-)

What is the best way to get employers and recruiters to post their jobs on a new site?

I am not an hr pro, but would like to get advice from some. We are launching a high profile site for creative professionals (artists, photos, graphics, etc...). We already have thousands of members from over 50 countries prior to our launch and this will be the leading resource for creative pros in the next year. My partners are leaders with major Madison Ave and tech companies like Microsoft.

Our community wants to see jobs specific to their industry. We have created a Craigs list style job board.

1. It's free to members and job posters

2. We are launching in January.

3. Our members are world-class quality who work for major companies all the way to students.



TIA,

z

Henry
06-12-2007, 09:46 PM
What is the best way to get employers and recruiters to post their jobs on a new site?


Zephram,

As an operator of some successful niche job boards, I'm not about to share all our trade secrets but I can tell you that we spend tens of thousands of dollars a year on marketing (passive advertising) and many thousands more on direct marketing. It has also taken several years of hard work to become a serious player in our target sectors.

The days of "build it and they will come" are over. Job boards that don't have both a decent marketing budget AND and smart marketing plan are destined for the RIP list.

The good news is it sounds like you already have the access to candidates, who are much harder to identify and reach than advertisers. All you need now is get the advertisers on board, which is quite straightforward for any marketer who understands recruitment, but it will take planning, and resources (human and financial) to execute the marketing plan.

A January launch might be a bit premature :)

H

PS. Let us know what the site is called when you are ready to launch.

HRsmart
19-12-2007, 04:40 PM
At the end of the day, I think you just have to take a punt on which job board is going to give you the best quality applicant that you are looking for. When you find one who delivers the type of applicants you want, then I'd stick with them for that particular job description. Not all job boards are created equal.