The DL on TA.

This blog was originally posted in March 2018 by Jessica Kay , the  writer and master content strategist behind   Cubical Chic . To Cover Letter or Not Cover Letter, That Is The Question || Are Cover Letters Still Relevant? If I had a dime every time I hear the question “should I create a cover letter”, I would be a happy person with a great passive income (a very specific example, I know.) In my personal experience, I have not done a cover letter in the last 3 years and I have definitely managed to get not only interviews but job offers. However, this has been my personal experience, and a part of me still wonders if I simply got lucky. So, I consulted with a talent acquisition professional who is an industry expert experienced in evaluating talent and extending interviews… I present you Virginia Lloyd and her perspectives on  whether or not we should still do a cover letter in 2018 . Skip the Cover Letter Applying for jobs has become increasingly easy, in most scen

This interview was originally posted in January 2018 by Manan Shah , Co-Founder & CEO of Recruiterflow , for the blog series Flowing Conversation . Flowing Conversation – An Interview with Virginia Lloyd written by Manan Shah M: I am a bit of a tools nerd and always the first questions I ask is – What is your toolset? V:  I use a number of strategic tools to find the right people for the roles I’m recruiting for. Entelo:  I really like Entelo where I can find a candidate’s web presence and email them in a very engaging and personalized manner.  Vettery:  Vettery is great! It has a lot of great candidates that are either active or semi-passive. They may not be aware of my company when I reach out, but most people on the platform are open to hearing about new and exciting roles.  BuiltIn:  BuiltIn is one of my favorite sites for engaging with passive talent. It not only helps us source great candidates, it also allows us to get our name out to the local community.  N

Human Resources more often than not has reflected an ideology that employees are liabilities instead of assets. From the way the subject is typically taught, implemented, and understood, HR is handled with the assumption that employees' intentions are bad rather than good. It may sound trivial, but this one shift in perception can have a huge impact on a company's culture all the way through its bottomline. Guidelines vs Policies Most HR policies are done reactively, either due to something that happened at the company directly or as an attempt to learn from other companies' mistakes. Regardless, these policies are in place to protect the company and not its employees. EEOC regulations and employment laws are there to protect employees, but by the time those come into play, it's usually too late for the company to fix the problem without penalty. The conundrum ends up cycling with the company trying to cover its tracks and employees filing claims after leaving in

Traditional recruiting involves gathering as many applications as possible and hoping the right one finds its way to the top. At any given point in time, the candidate pool will change, so essentially this means you're left trying to find the best of what's available and not necessarily the best candidate for the role. Most recruiting teams focus on gathering rather than hunting; being reactive rather than strategic. The focus has primarily been on high volume and a short time-to-fill (the period of time it takes between posting a job to hiring someone into the role) rather than searching for highly qualified candidates in a proactive manner. Outdated recruiting practices are inefficient and costly for many reasons, but many companies continue to use them today. Compare candidates to the requirements of the role, not to each other. Hiring is expensive and extremely time consuming. Unfortunately, we've become accustomed to believing that talking to more candidates means

For anyone who's ever interviewed for a new job, the experience is typically less than pleasant. Throughout the process, there is usually a significant amount of stress, anxiety, and preparation involved. This ultimately leads to the traditionally awkward moment of negotiating the salary. At this point, I would venture to bet most people feel drained and hope to never go through the experience again (at least not for a few years). The reality at this point is that many people change jobs every 6-18 months. One major reason, especially within tech, is that we're working within such a competitive landscape that if our current company doesn't value us, we can easily find another that will.  Salaries should be based on impact, not years of experience. Years of experience is a starting point, but when it comes to compensation, the impact an employee makes far outweighs the number of years they've been working in their field. Assessing someone's value in terms of yea

Diversity hiring has become a hot topic lately. With several companies being pushed into the limelight for either doing a great job of diversifying their workforce, or doing it incredibly poorly, it's become a major discussion point for most recruiting teams across all industries. Something I've personally noticed in various conversations is the lack of clarity and understanding of what the word "diversity" really correlates to. "I believe Diversity was an old, old wooden ship." - Ron Burgandy, Anchorman The word diversity essentially boils down to: "a variety of different things". When we think about diversity in the workplace, it can be reduced to identifying factors such as ethnicity, gender identity, religious beliefs, nationalities, veteran status, disabilities, and many other under represented groups that typically fall into a protected EEO category. What many businesses fail to keep in mind is that checking a box is not enough. Without