Almost always, if you do not receive responses to job postings on LinkedIn, something is wrong, such as the vacancy content, when it was shared, with whom, and in what way: advice from Passport-Photo. Online.
For many companies from the most disparate sectors, social recruiting is already a reality: what are, however, the mistakes to avoid in recruiting candidates on LinkedIn and what slips future employees can’t forgive departments and HR employees who use the digital tools to speed up and make the selection processes more efficient? From Passport-Photo.
ALSO READ: Twitter Has Proposed A To The Gamescom Video Game Fair
They tried to answer online with a study involving a sample of a thousand professionals. The first result is that most professionals (79% of the sample) have a ” positive or very positive ” sentiment towards companies, human resources departments, and employers who contact them directly on LinkedIn to offer them new job opportunities. Or collaboration.
From how the message is written to how the selection process is organized, passing through the timing of the entire process, many things can go wrong, however, when trying to recruit candidates on LinkedIn, despite the initial enthusiasm.
Selecting Competitors On Linkedin: The Missteps To Stay Away From
Those looking for work or those who do not exclude a priori to evaluate new professional opportunities despite being busy at the moment seem to dislike, first of all, to a general standard. Discounted messages (this is the case for 58% of the Passport-Photo sample. Online) or that the job offer received is not in line with one’s professional profile and, worse, with one’s previous experience and level of expertise (57%).
Even being contacted by a company that does not have a good presence on LinkedIn would not seem particularly welcome to some workers (55% of those who participated in the research) because, in this case, it is more difficult to find information on the company reality, the type of products or services it offers, what is its working culture. Naturally, those contacted by companies on LinkedIn cannot help but notice how the message received is written: to be evaluated would be the presence of grammatical errors (annoying for 51% of respondents) or excessively technical jargon and not very understandable expressions outside the company slang (52%), but also more purely content aspects.
How to Write The Perfect Linkedin Job Posting According To Passport Photo.Online
In the vacancy shared on LinkedIn, mainly if transmitted via private message and directly from the company or the person in charge of the selection, the possible candidates expect to find:
- Job title and job description, i.e., the vacant position for which you can apply and a brief description (this is the case for 69% and 61% of the sample, respectively);
- The place of work and the type of employment, including whether an on-site presence is required or whether it is possible to work remotely or with a hybrid formula (this is essential information for 62% and 58% of respondents, respectively).
- The benefits that can be enjoyed (58%).
- What job will you have and what tasks will you have to carry out mainly (54%).
- What essential skills and experiences are required (53%) and if any additional ones may affect the selection process (42%).
- a brief mention of organizational values and culture (28%).
- A detailed description of the selection process (13%).
Another critical piece of information companies trying to recruit candidates on LinkedIn should immediately share the salary level: 95% of those who participated in the search for Passport-Photo. Online customers are satisfied, and almost 70% of the respondents even say they are ” inclined or very inclined ” to ignore messages and announcements from which it is impossible to trace the type of expected pay. No wonder you take into account that the average time dedicated to online job advertisements would be under fifty seconds when the possible candidate tries to steal essential information about the job opportunity and the company from which he comes.
This doesn’t mean there aren’t any details to watch out for when trying to recruit candidates on LinkedIn. More than one in four professionals in the sample, for example, would not be particularly happy to receive job offers from a company that, in doing so, does not address him with his name, di lei, or worse, still manages him with the wrong word.
Attention should also be paid to using inclusive language that is not even unintentionally sexist or connected: over 60% of respondents have a ” negative or very negative ” sentiment towards advertisements that seem to be aimed only at male candidates or candidates only young people, and there would be 69% who ” probably or most likely ” will avoid responding to job advertisements targeting a gender or age.
On the other hand, the sentiment seems to be more favorable towards those companies that try to recruit candidates on LinkedIn using original and lively headlines for their ads: it is, above all, the young millennials and generation z who appreciate (with a percentage of those who are expressed positively or very positively which reaches 68% between 24-28-year-olds) job title in which terms such as “Jedi,” “superstar,” “rockstar,” etc. appear. Instead of the more traditional tasks.
Because It Is Important To Make The Online Selection Process As Streamlined As Possible
As already mentioned in part, the search by Passport-Photo. Online also proves the importance of timing in recruiting candidates on LinkedIn, especially if you want to contact them directly.
Professionals would not seem to like companies that are too intrusive (this is the case for at least one interviewee in four), so much so that two is the maximum number of reminders that many interviewees (39%) say they are willing to receive from those involved in the process selection.
At the opposite extreme, however, possible candidates do not appreciate ghosting. After being contacted by a company for a job opportunity in line with its professional profile, it disappears and does not bother to give feedback. Or get them again. This is a more widespread attitude than imagined – 73% of employers would have admitted to having ghosted possible candidates – and little appreciated by workers, so much so that 63% of the sample admits that ” probably or very likely ” will not take not even in the future into consideration job opportunities that come from companies that have disappeared in the middle of the selection process.
