Most Influential Online Recruiters

November 5, 2010 in General Blogging with 11 Comments

So another list has been issued by the good folks over at HR Examiner. This time around, it’s an update – the first of its kind – to one of their previous lists. The review takes a shot at picking out, with the “least amount of human intervention possible,” who the most influential online recruiters are today.
Was I flattered to be in the #2 spot? Absolutely!
Did the remix get me thinking more about the idea around this project? Yup.

It’s no secret of course, that this type of a list can sometimes cause quite a stir. There are those that think they’re popularity contests and others that think they’re simply a list that is randomly spun. I’ll be the first to tell you that I find them interesting and I find the methodology promising. In a time where tools like Klout are getting some buzz in certain circles, the last few lists created with Trakker technology are worth taking a look at. In fact, I’d argue that if there weren’t an ounce of validity in how the lists were created, they’re still a list made primarily of solid people worth noting online.

Of course – that’s the key, right? These are the people that are most vocal ‘online’ about the work that they’re doing. So while you check out the listing that follows, I’d be interested to know your thoughts around how to recognize and draw more attention to those that work a bit more quietly behind the scenes. Because I can most certainly guarantee that for every impressive person that makes an interesting list like this, that there are 5 more that are quietly doing things just as interesting within our space. I can say this because I get to meet them all the time at conferences and in the comment boxes.

Rank / Influencer	Reach	Resonance	Relevance
1 / Peggy McKee (USA)	95	70	99
2 / Chris Hoyt (USA)	85	90	96
3 / Amybeth Hale (USA)	95	85	93
4 / Bill Boorman (UK)	85	75	97
5 / Jim Stroud (USA)	80	85	94
6 / Dave Mendoza (USA)	70	65	95
7 / Shally Steckerl (USA)	75	75	89
8 / Jon Ingham (UK)	65	95	82
9 / Michael Long (USA)	75	75	83
10 / Jessica Lee (USA)	75	85	80
11 / Peter Gold (UK)	55	60	90
12 / Barry Deutsch (USA)	65	60	86
13 / Paul DeBettignies (USA)	95	98	69
14 / Kris Dunn (USA)	75	85	78
15 / Alice Snell (USA)	60	60	86
16 / Josh Bersin (USA)	80	80	74
17 / Jennifer McClure (USA)	50	55	91
18 / Kevin Grossman (USA)	60	80	78
19 / Josh Letourneau (USA)	50	50	92
20 / Glen Cathey (USA)	20	65	98
21 / Jason Buss (USA)	65	55	82
22 / Trisha McFarlane (USA)	60	90	71
23 / Dr. John Sullivan (USA)	35	60	88
24 / Sharlyn Lauby (USA)	55	80	75
25 / Mark Stelzner (USA)	90	98	60

http://www.researchgoddess.com Amybeth Hale

As the #3 person in this list perhaps I am a bit biased in my assessment that there are some excellent folks included in this list

All kidding aside however, the uproar that I’ve seen is that “many of these people aren’t even recruiters!” True… but aside from the 2-3 individuals who I don’t know on this list, I know every single person to be an effective influencer of recruiters. And isn’t that what this list is – online influencers?

I myself am not a recruiter – at least not a typical one. I’m a researcher/sourcer, but my job as of now is to ‘recruit’ recruiters and sourcers to write and/or speak at my events. So, as the list would suggest, I influence recruiting types. One can influence a group of individuals without carrying the same title as them. I would not think myself a very effective sourcer if I was unable to influence the very people for whom I source.

My two cents’ worth.
http://www.impacthiringsolutions.com Barry Deutsch

Chris,

Excellent thoughts regarding thought-leadership as it relates to the list.

The list that is essentially a representation of people who have the word recruiter or recruiting in their twitter profile, have a threshold of followers, and a certain frequency of tweets and re-tweets. Is activity on Twitter the dominant criteria for being influential in the field of recruiting?

I’m glad to be in position #12, but I’m not sure my twitter activity is representative of me being the 12th most on-line influential recruiter. I might be less influential or more influential based on other criteria. What is the real meaning of being influential in a niche field like recruiting?

Perhaps, there are other measures of recruiter influence and thought-leadership. Some that pop into my mind at the moment include quality and frequency of blogging on the subject of recruiting, number of books on recruiting published and sold, number of magazine articles on recruiting published on-line or off-line, number of speaking engagements about recruiting before trade conferences, associations, and “C-level” forums.

Finally, there is no distinction of content. Some of the individuals on the list talk about sourcing/finding candidates from a third-party perspective, some of the people on the list are focused on job search topics for candidates, some of the people on the list write content specifically for other recruiters, and some focus more on subjects of improving hiring effectiveness for employers.

When you tag yourself as being a recruiter on twitter, there is a wide variation of how it might be defined. My traditional perspective is that a recruiter is someone who spends the bulk of their time helping a hiring manager hire a candidate for an open position (this could be an internal recruiter or an external recruiter). That’s my definition. I’m sure if surveyed everyone on this list, we might have 25 different definitions.

I’m curious what others might define as being influential on-line in the area of recruiting.

Barry Deutsch
Partner
IMPACT Hiring Solutions
http://www.impacthiringsolutions.com/blog
http://www.RamerGroup.com Mike ramer

Congrats Chris. Yes, great group of people here. I’m glad you posted to express views on this important issue.

The title of this list is “25 Most Influential Online Recruiters”. It’s not “25 Most Influential Online Sourcers” or “25 Most Influential Online HR Professionals”.

What is the definition of “recruiter”? To me, this is a person who places candidates in jobs, third party or corporate. Maybe 10 of the 25 (if that) on the list do this.

There are good people here, but many have never placed candidates in jobs. One HR professional on the list stated he didn’t know how he got on it and would give up his space.

What’s the big deal? This list is sending the wrong message to the market. How do candidates seeking jobs view this? Can people on this list help them get jobs? Do they want to help candidates get jobs?

As well, the people on this list use this badge for promotional purposes. If they are not recruiters, is this misrepresentation? That’s like me using a badge saying “25 Most Influential Online HR Pros”. I wouldn’t do it, since it’s not accurate.

In addition to the definition of “recruiter”, the heart of the issue is the criteria used to make it on lists. How did the folks get on this one? Perhaps by tagging themselves with recruitment-related key words? Unchecked data input results in incorrect output. A human needs to cross-check and verify IMO.

Mike Ramer, CPC, CSP
Executive Recruiter & Recruiting Industry Trainer
Ramer Search Consultants, Inc.
http://Website Anonymous Recruiter of 11 Years

I have just a few things to say about this list & your ranking, Christopher.

1. After finally having a chance to meet you in person after years of seeing you online I think I can say that you are one of the most passionate persons in our industry. I enjoyed & appreciated the time you took to talk to me outside of the sessions at the Talent Connect event this week. Your candor about recruiting today was tough in some regards & generous in others & in talking to others while in San Francisco I found that you are highly thought of by our peers for more than your off-beat thought process.

2. I know that you do not fill requisitions any longer but are instead now working nearly completely in a strategic role & I understand that there may be some people on the list that may have never filled a requisition in their lives. It is my belief that the list is not full of the wrong people but instead that it is named incorrectly! Might “Recruiting Professionals” be more appropriate in this instance?

3. Yes, there are some people on here that I think may have made the list due to keyword issues as opposed to true influence. I do not think that Mr. Mendoza, while a very nice gentleman, is any type of influencer to any recruiters that I know of. And while I have not met Mr. Stroud, I thought that he had retired to another profession a few years ago. Please understand that I mean no offense by this & hope that no one is extra sensitive about the topic!
People like Mr. Steckerl, Mr. Cathey, Mr. Sullivan, Ms. Lauby & yourself are very much appropriate members of this type of listing in my opinion.

Mr. Deutsch says that clarity is needed around what a recruiter is according to this list & Mr. Ramer makes a point that it could be very misleading to many people. I agree with them both.

That fact that you called out the ranking & reminded us that there are many out there that are doing interesting work but never make a list just solidifies why I think you are one of the leaders we should be watching. I hope to see you again soon & will keep a watchful eye on your schedule & what you are doing at Pepsi.
In the event you do not remember talking to me this week, I shared coffee with you on the royal chairs in the lobby! =))
http://www.recruiterguy.net RecruiterGuy

@Amybeth – thanks for the comments and congrats to making the list also! I’d take a dime of your $0.02 any day.

@Barry – Agreed. As I mentioned, I think the methodology is promising and these lists are always very interesting. So far, however – I think that Klout is the most scary accurate type of automated ranking that I’ve seen. It would be interesting to use that tool to create custom listings such as this one and compare the results, I think.

@Mike – Also good points. Sumser does a good job of detailing the criteria used to get the list running within the original article. While it’s not perfect, I like the direction.

@Anon w/11 years – YES I remember you! Very kind words, thank you. I can’t imagine that anyone would be “upset” by your feedback and I hope that next time you’ll sign your posts. Besides, it’s okay to be a little disruptive now and again when done with honesty and care.
http://www.hirecentrix.com karen M

Not surprisingly many who “defend’ this list are individuals who are somewhat connected or associated with individuals on this list.

I am candid – my honesty is not often done with “care” and some have even suggested, Maybe I come off as a troll…

But, call it what you may – as a person with over 20 Years experience a list like this creates more harm than good — especially to those who actually Do recruit.

As a recruiter – a person who knows what it is like to be bloody in the trenches – a person who has to deal with the frustrations of the industry.. it is not just annoying or frustrating, but actually it is Downright Insulting to see people whom have Told me directly that they NEVER want to be recruiters; that they Never liked recruiting, and they NEVER have recruited to considered Influential with me and my peers?

How? how are these people influential? in what way? How can they tell me how to manage MY desk , also through a recession when they not Only never have done it, but they also Stated they never want to do it, even during the good times.

This is an insult to the Many GREAT people out there who are never going to make this list because you will never hear of them.. Why? because they are spending their time Working.. in the trenches,.. being productive for their businesses.

There are also those who are doing great things with the associations to make sure that we don’t have regulation to harm us.. to make sure that we are educated and informed regarding our business – and these are individuals who also practice.

Mike Ramer, Doug Beabout, Patricia Drain, Jeff Cohen, Greg Doershing, Mike Goldman, Gene Rice are some of the Best trainers, all who have over 20+ years experience and all whom have each provided more influence to this industry as an individual than the combined list alone.

There are big billers like Nadia Gruzd, Pat Licata, that have been part of the industry, and their business practices are bar none some of the best, and they have so much to provide to the industry

There are the individuals who have vested their time and ability with the associations.. that have done more to influence individuals in this industry..

these are people whospend time doing.. not spend time talking about it..

I hope that my comment get’s posted.. but considering that I am a “troll” it may not..
karen mattonen.

http://www.recruiterguy.net RecruiterGuy

@Karen – your reputation for trolling* groups and websites does precede you – in part because I think your text very often comes off as aggressive and angry when perhaps you are actually just incredibly passionate and excited.

I’m not sure about your comment in regards to not getting posted here… As far as I’m concerned, if you’re not inciting any riots or being malicious, you won’t find much censorship on my site, ma’am.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

http://Website KM

Kudos to Laurie’s comment back in 2009 on this said list Top 25 Digital Influencers in HR | Punk Rock Human Resources http://bit.ly/9mUpTa
http://www.recruiterguy.net RecruiterGuy

A great update with a few annotations to the list over at HRExaminer…

http://www.hrexaminer.com/influence-project-status-report
http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

First, I have to say that I’m honored to be on the list at all, and I’m certainly in good company!

Second, I noticed that I slipped from #16 to #20 from v1. While I can totally appreciate the limitations of any ranking effort such as this, I am a little confused with the “Reach” component for which I scored very low. I’d like to see some traffic stats from the top 10 on the list so I could get a sense of an “apples to apples” comparison.

My site has about 2400 subscribers, and I get about 10,000 unique visitors on a monthly basis. For a niche blog that’s not focused on “how to make money online” and only posts 1 article a week (a blogging no-no, from what I understand), I thought that was pretty strong. But I don’t know how it compares to the other people on the list… I think blog stats should weigh more heavily than Twitter followers and Facebook friends/likers/fans for obvious reasons (the latter can be easily gamed/inflated, and could also be argued to be more shallow in terms of true influence).

Chris, I think you are spot-on with regard to this list being representative of the most vocal and present online recruiting personalities.

I am definitely not the most vocal online, and I don’t spend any time trying to increase my Twitter followers, Facebook friends and “likers,”, and LinkedIn group members. In fact, in comparison to some of the other people on the list, I am surprised I even made the list.

To your point Chris, there are many very sharp, influential and innovative people in the recruiting space all over the world that are simply getting their job done and making an impact on talent acquisition efforts on a daily basis who simply don’t take the time to create an online presence and thus will never have the opportunity to make it onto a list such as this one.

With regard to the recruiter vs. non recruiter discussion, I think that as long as a person is directly affecting hires on a regular basis, they are a relevant presence on the list. Although in my current position I don’t make recruiting calls on a daily basis like I have in the past in individual-contributor roles, I do directly facilitate and affect hiring on a daily basis, supporting over 500 recruiters in my organization.

Finally, I must say that I can see how some people could have an issue with some of the people who are more of an “online recruiting personality” making the list rather than people who are directly affecting hires.

In the end, this is just a list compiled using some online tracking and measurement tools, and I don’t think anyone should get hot and bothered over it. We all have more important things to get passionate about and spend our energy on, right?
http://www.jobbrokersinc.com Austin

Chris -

Congrats! Do you know of any more centralized rating systems for staffing firms; say a state or regional wide rating system?

Most Influential Online Recruiters

Related Articles:

Search

Recent Comments