There’s more demand than ever for financial and insurance services. In the current economic downturn, individuals are particularly in need of having their assets secured and require expert advice from a professional to prevent the loss of their investment. It’s not a surprise that the demand for more highly productive advisors and agents is growing. There’s an unending rush to increase sales teams.
Most people I talk with regarding recruiting use the internet to find candidates. In the case of local recruiting (instead of nationally), Some make use of the internet as an instrument; however, most of them employ it to help. People who employ it for recruitment know that it’s extremely costly, extremely time-consuming, and comparatively unproductive (yes,… INEFFICIENT! ). It, in the majority of cases, produces only minimal results. They use the results of the internet to augment their efforts to recruit. The other group (made from people who rely on the internet for their recruitment other than the occasion of an agent referral) or doesn’t understand the concept or doesn’t know how they can do it. This means that many managers put in a lot of effort in their quest to improve but run out of money and then leave. It’s sad. It shouldn’t be this way.
To break from the web-based recruitment rut, it’s important to know why internet-based recruiting is so baffling, and once the understanding is established and you’ve got it, implement more efficient recruiting strategies. Here, we’ll explore why internet-based recruiting isn’t a good idea at all.
INTERNET RECRUITING MYTH #1:
The web is brimming with thousands of people seeking the next opportunity.
Truth: It sounds like it’s true, but it’s actually not. It’s not too difficult to debunk this myth to reveal what it really is. Just answer two simple questions. The first one can be: “What kind of people post their resumes on sites like Monster, CareerBuilder, and HotJobs?” It’s tempting to answer the question with, “People looking for new opportunities,” or “People who are dissatisfied where they are.” But, in reality, you’re overthinking it. These are the answers to justify why you’re on the internet. The simple, straightforward answer is that these websites are job-related websites. People who post their resumes on these sites are searching for a JOB! On the other hand, we are searching for business owners who could be interested in joining our team. If you are looking for business owners who could be potential candidates in an employee pool, You’re in the wrong lake. It’s similar to trying to locate the needle in a haystack.
INTERNET RECRUITING MYTH #2:
The internet is a great method of recruiting.
The truth The first impression is that hiring on the internet appears to be the most effective method to find individuals. Many prospects, but so little time! Except for a handful of cases, this isn’t an accurate statement. Actually, it is found that it’s one of the most ineffective methods to attract new employees. Here’s the reason…
As a first step in the beginning, as we’ve just talked about previously, we’re fishing in the wrong place. It’s a long process of sifting and filtering, contact, and turning over of stones to locate anyone who even has just a little desire to take advantage of our chance. Then, you must kiss many frogs in order to discover the “prince” or “princess”. My informal poll of the top managers across the United States over the course of a few years shows that on average, you must interview around 20 of these slightly interested candidates to identify someone who is willing to work with you and one you would like to work with. A majority of them have been identified as “suspects” rather than prospects. And, as you would imagine, if interviewing these suspects isn’t enough, you also have to handle each of those “no-shows!” Managers regularly report a no-show rate of 50-75 percentage!
Internet effectiveness in recruiting? This is a complete oxymoron.
INTERNET RECRUITING MYTH #3:
Internet recruitment is cost-effective.
TRUTH: OK,… I don’t think anyone believes this; however, I’ll try to make some key observations. One observation is that nearly all managers who rely on the internet for their recruitment needs are struggling to make a profit. Apart from having difficulty getting their business to meet its growth targets and targets, they are also slipping deeper and deeper into debt. The second reason explains why this happens. Through the years, I’ve asked managers to estimate the cost of hiring an Internet-generated new agent when compared to hiring an agent through an individual referral. Here are the findings. An Internet-generated agent can cost between $20,000 to $25,000, in comparison to the cost of an “actively recruited” agent, which is about $4,000 to $5,000. This is why profitability is difficult to achieve.
INTERNET RECRUITING MYTH #4:
While online recruiting may be costly and inefficient but at least the quality is worth it.
Truth: I believe that after answering a few basic questions, the truth of this will be painfully evident. Have you ever had a new agent begin their journey and then, within a month or two, the program quit? They are then offered the job they’ve been looking forward to. (See: “fishing in wrong pond” above) There is no production. Ever seen an agent put in extremely hard to meet minimum requirements for production, and after that, begin to cruise? (I refer to this as “striving for mediocrity.”) Poor production here… Finally, which agents generally are more successful than were recruited via the internet or “actively” recruited? If you’re like most managers, “active recruiting” always yields better production. At the end of all, the most important factor that important is production, isn’t it?
Now that we are clear on the reasons why online recruiting doesn’t make sense, what can we do? Even though we don’t have enough time to come up with an answer here, I’ll give you an idea…
Leave a Reply