As Friday was my last day with my current employer, i wanted to arrange a meeting for the majority of the team to get together and discuss social media, and it's place in recruitment. It was great as everyone in the room had an opinion, insight and was willing to contribute, and as we had a mix of art directors, job-board experts and client-facers, everybody had a unique point-of-view.
Generally, it was agreed that social media was a growing force within recruitment advertising, but that as yet it was not fully understood, and those embracing it fully are few and far between. Present Twitter innovators like
Sodexo are enjoying a period of grace whilst others are still struggling to overcome the legal and brand related problems that come with such free-flowing information. This of course, isn't something that can be ignored, especially when dealing with large brands. Smaller employers can move quickly with online developments, and issues can be identified and dealt with painlessly, but when an employer is based across several continents, with several thousand staff, the logistics are much more complicated. One argument to persevere is that people will say good or bad things regardless, and so burying one's head in the sand isn't a sensible option; a far more pragmatic approach would be to identify niche areas (e.g specific skill sets, key demographics such as graduates), and introduce Twitter feeds, Facebook Groups or Ning networks to gauge interest, build momentum and engage with smaller crowds before ramping up efforts on a larger scale.
Following on from this, the discussion moved to a question of authenticity; should the information shared via social media be conversational, loose, and potentially contentious or revealing, or should a party-line be decided and the output sanitised/grammatised by copywriters and signed off by a higher power. The former approach creates a compelling, human voice, critical on social media as it's all about conversations, but obviously throws up several scary questions from a brand perspective as clients or suppliers could see more than they need to via a channel designed for candidates. The latter approach though, whilst more easily digestible for those in legal and brand, would create more mindless corporate chatter, the kind of which the internet is already awash with, and would not engage with individuals or give any real sense of employer brand. The answer then is surely to tread a fine line between the two; by empowering those within an employer willing to contribute to social media, and arming them with the tools necessary to do so, but also building a process by where an open-minded but brand/legal conscious individual can vet all content before it goes live.
Without getting side-tracked with the ins and outs of process and how best to actually execute a social media strategy, the biggest subject of discussion was discussion; how to approach the very first stage of actually deciding which social media a client should be utilising, and whether in fact it's suitable at all. I've long held the view that LinkedIn, MySpace etc should not be treated as products, and as such shouldn't be sold that way; social media is more about approach, and by the time a client has gained momentum on one platform, a newer, shinier platform may be gaining prominence, and so it is the thought process behind the scenes that will drive success and ensure that new toys are quickly mastered.
The first step in the journey to getting an employer 'socialised' should be a meeting with key stakeholders; brand, marketing, HR, legal, and critically those responsible for content and actually driving information. Once these teams have been assembled, non-exciting but critical decisions can be made to cover the concerns above, but also, wider discussions can be had on what the employer actually wants to get from social media; is it that they want to build profile generally and increase opinion online, or to generate actual candidates within a specific skill sector. Are there existing resources that can be used to drive content, and does the employer already have influential bloggers or community leaders as employees? Whatever the answers are, the end-goal and facilitators will determine the scale of work required, the kinds of platforms suitable, and the commercial elements like budget and time required.
So, before I ramble on for another few paragraphs, I think that we came to a few conclusions:
1. Social media is a potentially awesome platform for recruitment
2. Nobody has truly cracked it yet
3. Employers need to decide what they want to achieve
4. Key stakeholders need to be included from an early stage
5. Individuals need to be empowered
6. A degree of control is sensible
7. It should be fun; mistakes may be made, but they'll serve as learning points
(Photo taken from
Flickr)
