How LinkedIn Is Changing Recruiting

(Photo: Sheila Scarborough)

Sarah Halzack, writing for The Washington Post, explores how LinkedIn is changing job-searching and recruiting:

As LinkedIn has exploded — perhaps because it has exploded — there has been a major shift in the way employers find new workers. Gone are the days of “post and pray,” a recruiter’s adage for the practice of advertising a job opening and then idly hoping that good candidates swim up to the bait.

Now the process of talent acquisition is something of a hunt.

“We’re really at a point now where all of your employees are vulnerable to being poached. Every single one,” said Josh Bersin, principal and founder of talent consulting firm Bersin by Deloitte.

The change is happening rapidly: A 2013 study by the Society for Human Resource Management found that 77 percent of employers are using social networks to recruit, a sharp increase from the 56 percent who reported doing so in 2011. And among the recruiters using social tools, 94 percent said they are using LinkedIn.

Recruiter Chris Scalia told Halzack that the type of candidates he sees on LinkedIn is also changing. “LinkedIn was always known for where you would go to find that really critical, challenging hire,” Scalia said. “It was never really where you would go for a PC technician or something at the lower end of the career mobility scale. Now I see both. It is completely flooded.”

(HT: The Big Picture)

linked out

I signed up for that. It looks like a bunch of people merely trying to sell themselves. Nothing real genuine about it. So I did not pursue it further.

linked `out'

I should add that I do have one friend from grad school who found me on there. Her energy was an inspiration to me back then and still is now so there is some benefit to being part of such a group. I re-connected with a friend and we both have grown and not apart.


Linkedin has its creepy side:

trick artist

Well, if you mean that it is hard to change i.e., some changes are difficult for some to grasp and hard to make (especially for us older folk), I am in full agreement.


FWIW, a bit of anecdotal evidence; I was chatting with a friend in recruitment just last month, and he said exactly the same thing; LinkedIn has radically changed the way he does his job, in just the last year or two. He basically said, if you want a new/different job, get on. Even if you don't now, get on anyway. Disclosure; after he said that, I got on, but otherwise I have no connection with them.


Linkedin has become the lastest venue for recruiters to vacuum up resumes now that savvy jobhunters have figured out that the likes of Monster and Careerbuilder are career wastelands. Recruiters do not get paid for actual hires, they get paid for generating the largest possible pile of resumes. I receive several recruiter solicitations per month on Linkedin, and I tell them all the same thing: I would be happy to communicate with the hiring manager, but I do not give my resume to recruiters. I have never heard back from a single one.


Maybe it's different in the US, but when my wife worked as a recruiter she got paid when the candidate started, and not a day before. Part of the value proposition they offered was that the recruiter went through all the resumes, did the initial screening, reference checks etc. and presented the employer with a short list of vetted, interviewed, suitable candidates - people who matched up not only in terms of qualifications & experience but (more importantly) in terms of personality & corporate culture. Giving a recruiter your resume meant that when a job came up that matched you, they could call & see if you were interested. If you don't want to go in their database, well, that's your choice, but most likely it hurts you much more than it hurts them.

And if they did make a placement, and the candidate left within three months, the fee was refunded. Get paid to provide a pile of resumes? Maybe, but I doubt it.



Clearly Ross has no idea how the recruitment process works. Obtaining someones CV is only setp 2 in a mulitple-stage process. Also you do not get paid on number of resumes (or CVs as we prefer in the UK), in recruitment you get paid on results. I would only invoice a client once the candidate has been identified, CV submitted, interviews completed, offer made & then accepted, contracts signed, resignations made and then the person having started in the new role. Quality is of utmost importance, not quantity and I can imagine why the recruiters are not contacting him again.


Maybe college grads should be on LinkedIn and not Monster.

Leland maniloff

Linked-in has changed the employment process, especially for professions with higher than average turnover. I've also seen it enable smaller companies to cease outsourcing the recruitment process.
Keep in mind that being contacted by the internal recruiter of a company is not the same as being contacted by an outsourced recruiter.