Online Recruiting Market Set to Heat Up in 2019 as Key Players Expand

Online Recruiting Market Set to Heat Up in 2019 as Key Players Expand

The marketplace of online recruiting platforms has become increasingly competitive over the past few years, as both big tech companies and startups alike have sought to establish themselves as the platform of choice for both candidates and employers. This week brought news that three of the most-watched competitors in this field are growing, adding new features, or expanding their geographical reach.

LinkedIn announced on Tuesday that it was moving all of its core talent solutions — Jobs, Recruiter, and Pipeline Builder — onto one platform, which it calls the intelligent hiring experience. This consolidation will enable recruiters to “to see all their candidates … in one unified pipeline,” no matter which of these three tools they came from, John Jersin, VP of Product Management at LinkedIn Talent Solutions, explained in a blog post on Tuesday. The company is also “releasing more than 15 new product enhancements for LinkedIn Recruiter and Jobs over the next few quarters,” Jersin added.

In addition to the single pipeline, LinkedIn’s new features include new AI capabilities, which will enable its tools “to talk to one another and leverage machine learning to simplify the hiring process”:

The more you interact with candidates within a project, the more our tools learn about what you like — and don’t like — and then we can surface better candidates for your open role. Based on the applicants, leads, and search results you interact with, the intelligent hiring experience automatically builds a list of recommended candidates for you to consider reaching out to.

The platform is also adding a shared messaging system that will show all candidate communications in one place, a slide-in profile view to more easily look at candidate profiles in the middle of a search, and a feature called “Closing the Loop,” which makes it easier for employers to send rejection messages to applicants, either individually or in bulk. This functionality is meant to address the lack of communication that adversely affects candidate experience and can discourage rejected candidates from applying to other jobs at the same organization for which they might be more qualified. LinkedIn’s mobile app is also getting a call-to-action feature that will enable anyone at an organization to quickly let their LinkedIn network know about a job opening there.

Read more

A Ghost in the Pipeline: What to Do About Disappearing Candidates

A Ghost in the Pipeline: What to Do About Disappearing Candidates

In recent months, many employers have been noticing a trend of candidates and employees “ghosting” them — a term borrowed from online dating that refers to someone dropping out of contact without so much as a goodbye. Recruiters are seeing candidates make it halfway through the hiring process, then simply stop responding to phone calls, text messages, or emails. Chip Cutter, then a managing editor at LinkedIn, was among the first to spot the trend last June:

Where once it was companies ignoring job applicants or snubbing candidates after interviews, the world has flipped. Candidates agree to job interviews and fail to show up, never saying more. Some accept jobs, only to not appear for the first day of work, no reason given, of course. Instead of formally quitting, enduring a potentially awkward conversation with a manager, some employees leave and never return. Bosses realize they’ve quit only after a series of unsuccessful attempts to reach them. The hiring process begins anew. …

Some of the behavior may stem not from malice, but inexperience. Professionals who entered the workforce a decade ago, during the height of the Great Recession, have never encountered a job market this strong. The unemployment rate is at an 18-year low. More open jobs exist than unemployed workers, the first time that’s happened since the Labor Dept. began keeping such records in 2000. The rate of professionals quitting their jobs hit a record level in March; among those who left their companies, almost two thirds voluntarily quit. Presented with multiple opportunities, professionals face a task some have rarely practiced: saying no to jobs.

It’s not only candidates, either; in December, the Washington Post reported that more employees were also “ghosting” their employers, walking out of work one day and not showing up again, with no notice or explanation:

Read more

In Construction Worker Shortage, US Cities See Opportunity for Struggling Residents

In Construction Worker Shortage, US Cities See Opportunity for Struggling Residents

With the tightest labor market in decades, US employers in most industries are having a hard time filling roles. One sector that is especially hurting for workers is construction, where the labor shortage coincides with growing demand for housing and commercial development in American cities large and small. There’s a lot of work to be done, but not enough people to do it.

At the same time as unemployment is historically low, however, many Americans are underemployed, not looking for work, or lacking in marketable job skills. Some cities are now looking at the construction worker shortage as a chance to help improve the skills, incomes, and employability of underserved populations. The New York Times took a look at what these cities are doing in a recent feature:

Facing a tight labor pool, developers, public officials and community organizations are using commercial projects to provide residents with careers in construction. Together, they’re making an effort to recruit men and women from impoverished neighborhoods or challenged populations, such as former prison inmates. In booming markets like San Francisco, Denver and Miami, where gentrification is squeezing affordable housing, demand for these types of programs is growing.

The training programs are also occurring in smaller markets. In Milwaukee, for example, Gorman & Company, an apartment developer, has teamed up with city, state and community agencies to give former inmates on-the-job training restoring dilapidated, tax-foreclosed homes, which are then rented to low-income earners.

Read more

New Studies Challenge Conventional Wisdom on Gig Economy, Skills Gap

New Studies Challenge Conventional Wisdom on Gig Economy, Skills Gap

Over the past decade, particularly in the US, there has been considerable debate over whether the labor market trends we were seeing represented fundamental shifts in the economy or business-cycle responses to the Great Recession that followed the 2008 financial crisis and the long, slow recovery. In new studies, two of these trends—the skills gap and the gig economy—are reconsidered in light of new data, with researchers finding that phenomena they once thought were secular may actually have just been products of the recession after all.

Economists Alan Krueger and Lawrence Katz made headlines in 2016 when they released the results of a survey they had conducted the year before, which found a major jump in the number of Americans making a living in “alternative work” arrangements (i.e., not in regular, full-time employment), though gig economy platforms like Uber made up a small fraction of this contingent labor market. At the time, Krueger and Katz found that around 16 percent of the American workforce were engaged in this type of work, compared to 10 percent in 2005. Follow-up work indicated that alternative work accounted for almost all of the jobs created since 2005.

Now, the leading economists of the gig economy say their initial study overestimated its impact, the Wall Street Journal reported this week. In a new paper, Krueger and Katz look at new evidence and conclude that their 2015 survey overstated the size of the contingent workforce because of a weak labor market and the impact of the recession. Many of the alternative jobs they counted were stopgap jobs people took to make ends meet while they were unable to find full-time work. Once the economy and their job prospects improved, these gig workers returned to more traditional employment. The vast difference in the health of the US economy between 2005 and 2015 skewed the data.

Accordingly, the economists now revise their estimate of the growth of alternative work during that period to a 1 or 2 percentage-point increase, not 5. This brings their findings more in line with other recent studies that have painted more modest pictures of the gig economy—including the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 2017 Contingent Worker Supplement survey, which claimed the alternative workforce had actually shrunk since the last time the survey was conducted in 2005. At the same time, Krueger and Katz argue in their new paper that the surveys used to measure alternative work arrangements, including those conducted by the Labor Department, are seriously flawed (the huge gap in the BLS data due to the dozen years when the survey wasn’t conducted is part of the problem).

Read more

US Job Market Finishes 2018 Strong, but Talent Challenges Remain

US Job Market Finishes 2018 Strong, but Talent Challenges Remain

The US jobs numbers for December, released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday, exceeded expectations by a wide margin with the economy adding 312,000 jobs last month, while figures from October and November were revised upward by a combined total of 58,000. It was the best month of job growth since February 2018, when 324,000 jobs were created. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had forecast just around 176,000 new jobs, according to CNBC.

The unemployment rate increased slightly from 3.7 to 3.9 percent in December, but for a good reason: not because workers lost their jobs, but rather because 419,000 new job seekers entered the labor force. The unemployment rate has fallen from 4.1 percent since December 2017, while the workforce expanded by nearly 2.6 million people. With the final report for the year, the US added an average of 220,000 jobs a month in 2018. Wages also grew in December by 0.4 percent over the previous month and 3.2 percent over the previous year, tying with October for the best year-over-year increase since April 2009 and indicating that the tight labor market is finally leading to higher pay for US employees.

“It appears that higher wages are the reason why people are returning to the active labor force in large numbers,” Paul Ashworth, chief US Economist with Capital Economics, commented to CNN, adding that wage growth might spook investors by suggesting that the Federal Reserve would proceed with its planned schedule of interest rate hikes this year. Ashworth added in a note reported by CNBC that the big jump in jobs “would seem to make a mockery of market fears of an impending recession,” while Jim Baird, chief investment officer for Plante Moran Financial Advisors, told the network: “Employers, it would seem, didn’t get the memo from Mr. Market that it’s time to tighten their belts.”

Nonetheless, the robust jobs report comes amid market jitters over the possibility of an overheated economy, missed earnings projections from some major US companies, and concerns about the domestic impact of President Donald Trump’s trade policies toward China. In remarks after the report was released on Friday, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said the central bank was prepared to adjust monetary policy in response to changing economic conditions, meaning it could ease up on raising interest rates if the economy shows signs of trouble. Powell described the jobs report as encouraging, saying the rise in wages “does not raise concerns about too-high inflation” and would not prompt the Fed to accelerate rate increases, the New York Times reported.

Read more

Tech Giants Plant Flags in Established and Emerging Talent Hubs

Tech Giants Plant Flags in Established and Emerging Talent Hubs

After a yearlong search that saw cities compete for its favor, Amazon announced in November that it had picked two locations rather than one for its second headquarters (“HQ2”) project: the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens, New York, and the Crystal City area in Arlington, Virginia, a major suburb of Washington, DC. The choices proved controversial, as the tech giant had made a spectacle of courting many bidders that may never have had a chance, while both New York and Virginia are giving Amazon generous subsidies to set up shop in their states, despite the fact that these locales are strategically desirable locations for tech companies anyway.

While some observers had speculated that Amazon would pick an up-and-coming city in the US heartland, where the introduction of such a huge employer would transform the local economy, in the end, the choice came down to talent, and the New York and DC areas simply offered better access to talent than any other city Amazon was considering. (It’s also setting up a smaller operations center in Nashville, Tennessee — more on that later.) It’s no coincidence, Recode’s Jason Del Rey observed at the time, that the winning bidders were among the country’s leading tech talent hubs:

[W]hat do you see when you look at rankings of the top technology talent pools in the U.S.? Only two metro areas rank above the Washington, D.C., metro area: The San Francisco Bay Area, which Amazon never considered, and Seattle, the home of Amazon’s original headquarters. At No. 3, Washington, D.C., makes a lot of sense. Fourth is Toronto — but despite its booming tech scene, Amazon never gave any hints that it would seriously consider a big move across the border. Which brings us to No. 5 on the tech talent list: New York City.

Ultimately, Amazon decided it needed two cities — whether it always knew this or not is up for debate — to meet its hiring demands and to reduce some of the potential downsides that Seattle has experienced as a result of Amazon’s 45,000-employee footprint there.

Establishing these new headquarters will take years, the Wall Street Journal added this month, perhaps as much as a decade, because Amazon plans to do most of its hiring for them locally rather than relocate workers from its home base in Seattle. By the end of next year, the company plans to add 400 employees in Crystal City and 700 in Queens — out of an expected total of 25,000 in each city by 2028, assuming the e-commerce giant continues its trajectory of rapid growth.

Amazon’s decision underscores the importance of talent communities for major companies making strategic planning decisions with regard to location. While many workers in tech and other digitally-enabled professions can work remotely today, most organizations still prefer to recruit and base the bulk of their workforce in centrally located offices, so it pays to set up shop in a place where the talent you need already lives or would be willing to move.

Read more

Are American Millennials Rich or Poor? Either Way, They Want Help Getting Out of Debt

Are American Millennials Rich or Poor? Either Way, They Want Help Getting Out of Debt

Millennials now make up the largest age cohort in the US workforce, so employers have an interest in understanding the needs, preferences, and concerns of this generation in order to effectively attract, retain, and develop millennial talent. A common belief about millennials is that their consumption patterns and lifestyle choices are markedly different from those of previous generations: living with their parents longer, getting married later or not at all, and buying homes and automobiles at lower rates. A stereotypical view that has thus emerged of millennials is that they are simply choosing not to do the things their older peers expected them to do in their early careers. The growing consensus among observers of the economic data, however, is that the main reason millennials aren’t behaving like their baby boomer and gen-X predecessors is that they are not as well-off as these generations were at the same point in their lives, thanks in large part to having come into the workforce during and after the Great Recession of 2007-2009.

In the past few weeks, two studies have come out that complicate both of these narratives about millennials, but conflict in how they depict this generation’s financial health. The first is a working paper by Federal Reserve Board economists Christopher Kurz, Geng Li, and Daniel J. Vine, titled “Are Millennials Different?” Yes and no, the economists conclude:

Relative to members of earlier generations, millennials are more racially diverse, more educated, and more likely to have deferred marriage; these comparisons are continuations of longer-run trends in the population. Millennials are less well off than members of earlier generations when they were young, with lower earnings, fewer assets, and less wealth. For debt, millennials hold levels similar to those of Generation X and more than those of the baby boomers. Conditional on their age and other factors, millennials do not appear to have preferences for consumption that differ significantly from those of earlier generations. (Emphasis ours.)

In other words, the paper debunks the idea that millennials are buying fewer houses and new cars because they want to live lower-consumption lifestyles, and instead supports the view that they just haven’t accumulated the wealth to afford these big purchases. On the other hand, economist Alison Schrager argues at Quartz that the Fed data can also be read a different way, and that millennials “are in fine shape, maybe even richer than previous generations, but they have just chosen to invest in different assets”—i.e., higher education:

Read more