| p>Internet recruiting is dead. Or at least it should be | | | | more efficient. They have their "recruiter" do the first |
| put to sleep. Recruiting independent agents and | | | | and even second interviews. (Wasn't this internet |
| financial advisors on the internet is basically good for | | | | recruiting approach supposed to be efficient to begin |
| one thing - appeasing corporate offices. It produces | | | | with?) What happens when this "recruiter" conducts |
| lots of activity - which corporate loves to see. But | | | | the screening interviews with a candidate? The |
| let's face it, while it does produce lots of activity, it's | | | | "recruiter" makes the decision as to which candidates |
| expensive, eats up huge chunks of time, and produces | | | | would become good agents and which ones |
| pretty poor results. | | | | wouldn't. The "recruiter" makes the decision! You |
| It's true that internet recruiting occasionally turns up a | | | | probably have noticed that I keep putting the term |
| great producer - even a super producer. But the | | | | "recruiter" in quotes. That's because, except for a |
| vast majority of the time the results are mediocre at | | | | few rare exceptions, the person being called a |
| best. The proof is all around. If recruiting via the | | | | "recruiter" is nothing more than an administrative |
| internet worked well, then the majority of managers or | | | | person. No only that, but this administrative person all |
| agency builders would easily meet their recruiting goals | | | | too often makes the call as to who moves on and |
| or quotas. The truth is that as many as two-thirds of | | | | who doesn't. Without exception, every manager I've |
| the managers in a company fail to even meet the | | | | talked to about this has regretted relying on a |
| minimum quotas set by their company. These folks | | | | "recruiter" to find good candidates. They admit that |
| are otherwise sharp, hard-working professionals. | | | | their recruiting has been a disaster when they relied on |
| They possess good people skills, demonstrate good | | | | this "recruiter". The really sad part is that when a |
| judgment, and have a good sense of business | | | | manager is relying on the internet to recruit, there's |
| success. Nevertheless, for the most part they fall | | | | really no way to avoid needing a "recruiter" to sift |
| short of their growth requirements. I say "growth" | | | | through the sheer volume of activity. It's a vicious |
| goals because relying on internet recruiting not only | | | | cycle. Oh,... and the other irony of this is that besides |
| limits one's ability to bring in quality candidates, but also | | | | having to pay to play on the internet, the manager has |
| causes production growth to ultimately diminish. It's | | | | to pay this "recruiter" to help sift through the scores of |
| good to have a strong pace of recruiting, but at the | | | | employees looking for jobs. |
| end of the day, the thing that matters most is | | | | Another interesting statistic from my informal study on |
| increased production. If the agents on a team don't | | | | recruiting is the cost of bringing on a full-time agent |
| produce, not only will the business suffer, but the | | | | advisor. Because of the high cost of playing on the |
| agents and their families suffer. It's a lose-lose | | | | internet and the cost of this admin/"recruiter", the |
| situation. | | | | investment required to bring on a full-time agent via the |
| Trying to recruit on the internet is damaging on so | | | | internet - a "passive" method - is about 4-5 times |
| many different levels. I'm going to explain how this | | | | greater than the cost to bring on an agent from |
| effort is so damaging, but first let me clarify some | | | | "Active" methods! No wonder it's been so difficult to |
| things. I am not a traditionalist. I love to embrace | | | | build a profitable business. |
| new ways of doing things. I virtually live on the | | | | The nature of the dynamics of internet recruiting |
| internet. I am one of the more computer-savvy | | | | ultimately causes agent production to be poor. If we |
| people I know. However, I also understand that | | | | take a step back and examine the differences |
| sometimes the best solution to a problem is a piece of | | | | between an agent brought on via the internet and one |
| paper and a pen. There are many ways to leverage | | | | brought on by one of the "Active" methods, it |
| technology, but recruiting via the internet is not one of | | | | becomes easy to see why internet recruited agents |
| them. | | | | are generally weaker producers, are less responsive, |
| To understand why internet recruiting should be put to | | | | and are less loyal. When a candidate is recruited |
| sleep, let's start by examining some of the logistics and | | | | through an active method, the dynamics are such that |
| demographics of the process. Typically, insurance | | | | the leadership, character and reputation of the |
| and financial recruiters start by visiting the websites | | | | manager as leader play a large role in attracting him or |
| we've all come to know - Monster®, HotJobs®, | | | | her. In contrast, when a candidate is pursued via the |
| CareerBuilder.com(TM), etc. The first question to ask | | | | internet (understanding the nature of the pool you're |
| is this: What kind of websites are these? The | | | | fishing in), pretty much the only thing they're looking for |
| answer is that these are EMPLOYMENT SITES. | | | | is income. They're often either "tire-kickers" or |
| And what kind of people search these sites or post | | | | job-seekers enticed by the idea of flexible hours and |
| their resume on these sites? PEOPLE LOOKING | | | | unlimited income potential. Neither relationship nor |
| FOR JOBS! We are in an industry of independent | | | | connection/rapport plays a part in the recruiting |
| business people. There is a fundamental problem | | | | process. The consequence is that the manager ends |
| with looking for independent business people on | | | | up with a candidate who is on board predominantly |
| employment sites! By that I mean that we are looking | | | | due to financial reasons - and not very motivated. To |
| for business owners in a pool of potential employees. | | | | make matters even worse, besides ending up with |
| The industry needs to identify people who are | | | | poor producers you end up with lots of team |
| entrepreneurial and are self-starters. We need to find | | | | members who require excessive amounts of |
| people who have a business owner's mindset rather | | | | hand-holding, and who are whiners and complainers. |
| than an employee's mindset. We are looking for | | | | Talk about a waste of an executive's time, and a blow |
| people who want an opportunity rather than a steady | | | | to personal attitude and energy! |
| paycheck or full benefit program. When we look for | | | | If internet recruiting is so ineffective and expensive |
| candidates on the internet, we are choosing from an | | | | with regard to time and money, then why do so many |
| adverse pool of candidates. What's the | | | | managers still insist on relying on it? Generally there |
| consequence of this process? We have to turn over | | | | are three main reasons. One reason is that their |
| an extraordinary number of stones to find a candidate | | | | corporate office encourages it. The second reason is |
| who's even acceptable and who has an interest in our | | | | that they don't know what else to do. And the third |
| business opportunity. In an informal study that I've | | | | reason is that everyone around them is doing it. The |
| been conducting over the last five years, the | | | | solution? Get out from behind your desk and recruit |
| consensus is that it takes an average of 20 | | | | "actively". If you want to achieve great recruiting |
| internet-generated interviews to find one good | | | | results and generate increased production, then stop |
| candidate! When you compare that with the 2 or 3 | | | | recruiting passively and start recruiting actively. Here's |
| interviews it takes to find a good candidate from, for | | | | the best part. The managers that are recruiting |
| example, agent referrals, it's no wonder that managers | | | | actively are not only getting better recruiting and |
| recruiters feel overworked and have only weak | | | | production results, but they're working less hard and |
| results to show for their efforts. | | | | enjoying their work more. How much better could it |
| Adding insult to injury, not only does it cost a fair | | | | get?! |
| amount of money to "play" in the internet recruiting | | | | In summary, although internet recruiting is a great |
| world, but because of the sheer volume of activity | | | | corporate office pleaser and appeaser, for the most |
| generated, a manager can't possibly handle the task | | | | part it's an expensive, inefficient process that produces |
| without help. So they hire a "recruiter" to assist | | | | mediocre results at best. The dynamics are all |
| them. This person generally has the responsibility of | | | | wrong, the pool of candidates is made up of people |
| identifying potential internet candidates, contacting them, | | | | who are NOT ideal agents/advisors, and the process |
| and handling the first screening. Some managers | | | | is conducive to inappropriate delegation of recruiting |
| even take it a step further in an effort to become | | | | responsibilities. |