Can Agencies Really Be Innovative?
Agencies telling me that they are unique and innovative annoys me. Let me qualify that. Most agencies tell me about their innovation and uniqueness. However they fall to water when I ask how? I get the “Yeah, we’re unique. We do things differently” (and I’m thinking, “sure you’re unique… Just like everyone else.” ) And innovation? What an abused term. There are not a lot of agencies that I have seen that seriously show this. I ask every time. I’m yet to be wowed.
Seriously, “Innovation” is, according to Wikipedia “Innovation is the development of new customer value through solutions that meet new needs, unarticulated needs, or old customer and market needs in new ways.”
The Key word to me here is NEW. I’ve seen too many things popping up in the Recruitment sphere as “Innovative” which are seriously just re-hashes or pure rip off’s of things others have done before. You may not think we notice, but we do. Especially Recruitment and Social media junkies such as myself. Seek’s upcoming offering (which I will write about this week), whilst potentially disruptive, is just a rip off version of what LinkedIn is.
I really think it is however really tough for Agencies to be innovative. Why? I hear being shouted. It sounds silly, when I type it out loud, especially when you look at some of the Recruitment blogosphere pundits and how they talk about what they are trying. Here is my reasoning.
Innovation is not an agencies core business. Innovation may help them do their business, but it is not core business. Their core business is talking to clients, finding the candidates, placing the candidates and invoicing. Definitely invoicing. Innovation is all well and good, however if you are not invoicing, no one’s going to care. Innovation is a risk and in today’s market, risks are tough to justify. Because the very nature of a risk, is that it could work or it could fall flat on its face. People are a little too nervous for that at the moment.
I was part of a company that went down that path. I was really excited at where we started, the vision we held, the promise we saw, the people on board, the infrastructure in place. We spent a lot of time gazing into the future. It was a great idea and vision. Sadly, it seemed that only we saw it. We had to switch gears to survive as a business, and get back to the business of helping clients find talent.
So, if agencies, can be really innovative, I’d really love to see it. Prove me wrong.
Related articles
About Dan Nuroo
Dan has been described as a recruiting tragic. Joining our industry straight out of university, he has spent the last two decades working across agency (ran his own too) and in-house roles, predominantly in the IT sector. His career has mainly been in recruiting for the IT industry and he has sold and been sold to, giving him a strong insight about the world we play in, and the challenges both enterprise and vendor face. He has been known to be an early adopter of technology and other “solve the world’s problems” tools and has the scars to prove it. Dan lives to solve those talent problems, innovation with purpose really excites him. Passionate about all things recruiting, Dan has been an active social media participant across many global forums for many years and seems to have been blogging forever (feel free to connect with him on LinkedIn or Twitter or even Recruitingblogs.com) and you will see him active in most social media platforms (apart from Google+ although he has an account or 2). Dan is an advocate for the industry, and genuinely believes that people who participate in this industry get a raw deal from the rest of the world. One of his goals is to uplift the industry and its reputation. He believes that “what we do is important work, companies who don’t see our value and invest in us, will fail.
View more articles by Dan Nuroo
2 Responses to “Can Agencies Really Be Innovative?”
Sign up to our newsletter
Get a weekly digest on the latest in Talent Acquisition.
Deliver this goodness to my inbox!
Thanks for Dan Nuroo’s “Innovate” challenge. Here’s a few concepts. I invite your readers to comment as to which of them are Innovative. Some are not but I reckon some of those are not in common usage.
1. No wasting frenetically busy clients’ time (Hiring Managers, Final Decision Maker’s and as many others as they choose) on relationship building – less than 30 minutes on a website
2. Clients individually assess the ranking, complete with percentages of a set of, say, 40-60 Attributes with little mathematical capability – all they need is job and corporate culture knowledge
3. Clients (not recruiters) use the website, without recruiter guidance, to individually conduct their 30 min max assessments so that Group Think is averted
4. An on-line process that instantly combines and condenses all clients’ assessments for roles and delivers a Selection Grid that precisely defines the top say 15 attributes that focuses recruiters on finding in exemplary candidates
5. Each assignment complemented by a MS Project assignment bar chart that predicts the successful candidate(s)’ start date and delivers on that date way above normal recruiters’ “promises”
6. A fixed assignment fee set at sign-on disavowing percentage of first year total remuneration.
7. Customised forms that provide only prospective candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate how, in their own view, their credentials match those being sought by the client team.
8. Presenting no more than three candidates for client interview for every person placed.
9. Customised Client Interview Forms based on the Clients’ initial assessment as to the Top Attributes the team instructed the recruiter to find in exemplary candidates
10. Total Candidate Care defined by having candidates, even those who did not get a job, become clients.
If readers have more innovative concepts I would be delighted to receive their comments.
BTW
In my view Talent Search using sophisticated Boolean Search techniques is no longer innovative; everybody is doing it.
Referral Recruiting is also going towards no longer being innovative.
Thanks for Dan Nuroo’s “Innovate” challenge. Here’s a few concepts. I invite your readers to comment as to which of them are Innovative. Some are not but I reckon some of those are not in common usage.
1. No wasting frenetically busy clients’ time (Hiring Managers, Final Decision Maker’s and as many others as they choose) on relationship building – less than 30 minutes on a website
2. Clients individually assess the ranking, complete with percentages of a set of, say, 40-60 Attributes with little mathematical capability – all they need is job and corporate culture knowledge
3. Clients (not recruiters) use the website, without recruiter guidance, to individually conduct their 30 min max assessments so that Group Think is averted
4. An on-line process that instantly combines and condenses all clients’ assessments for roles and delivers a Selection Grid that precisely defines the top say 15 attributes that focuses recruiters on finding in exemplary candidates
5. Each assignment complemented by a MS Project assignment bar chart that predicts the successful candidate(s)’ start date and delivers on that date way above normal recruiters’ “promises”
6. A fixed assignment fee set at sign-on disavowing percentage of first year total remuneration.
7. Customised forms that provide only prospective candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate how, in their own view, their credentials match those being sought by the client team.
8. Presenting no more than three candidates for client interview for every person placed.
9. Customised Client Interview Forms based on the Clients’ initial assessment as to the Top Attributes the team instructed the recruiter to find in exemplary candidates
10. Total Candidate Care defined by having candidates, even those who did not get a job, become clients.
If readers have more innovative concepts I would be delighted to receive their comments.
BTW
In my view Talent Search using sophisticated Boolean Search techniques is no longer innovative; everybody is doing it.
Referral Recruiting is also going towards no longer being innovative.