There are two ways of approaching your recruitment requirements:
- Passive: Find candidates, ask them for their personal information, conduct a background verification, and decide whether or not to hire them depending on what results you get from their checks.
- Active: Instead of just waiting around for the results, you use data and analytics to derive insights about the people you want to recruit, and take pre-emptive decisions to weed out those candidates who will cause your organisation harm.
So which one is better?
- You lose time waiting around for background verification results. While IDfy is, of course, India’s fastest background verification company, there is still some lead time between when you identify a candidate, obtain their information, request a check, and (this is the quickest step) get their background verification results.
- Time is money. This is a cliché, but also true. The more time you wait around for people to join your organisation, the more productivity – and profit – your organisation loses. Not only is the clock ticking, it also costs you money to keep it ticking.
- What if your candidate has already commenced employment (of course you’re smart enough to ensure that their employment is subject to their background checks coming back clear, right?) and you then find out that they were lying to you all along? Imagine the reputation risk this could cause your organisation, especially if the candidate was in a customer-facing position, or the exposure to liability if the candidate was involved in any work that could receive regulator scrutiny.
It should be fairly obvious by now that it makes much more sense to be an active recruiter, rather than a passive one.
But that’s not really the correct answer…
Let’s keep walking through this: but what sort of data, analytics, and insights are we talking about? Here’s one example:
The treemap above shows the breakdown (numerals are percentages) of the errors we’ve spotted in candidate’s recruitment application information, in relation to their previous employment checks. Here are some quick insights:
- People are most likely to lie about how long they’ve worked in their previous jobs. Obviously, this is so they can claim more experience, and negotiate a larger pay package.
- Nearly one out of ten people lie about their designation in their previous place of work. Once again, this is probably because they want to join your organisation with a more senior designation than they may be qualified for, and again, negotiate a higher salary or perks.
- Only about 3% of applicants lie about the value of their previous salary. The reason for this is simple: such lies can be easily caught out on a scrutiny of the pay slips you’ve asked them to submit. And this last insight tells us why ‘active’ recruitment isn’t necessarily the correct choice:
Both, active and passive recruitment approaches need to work together – unless you’re doing background verifications with a good service provider, you’re opening your doors wide to all sorts of liars. And unless you’re being active in gathering, analysing, and interpreting data, you aren’t optimising your passive checks – if you didn’t know that the way to avoid people lying about their salaries is to ask them to submit their pay slips and have them checked by a good background verification service provider, for example, you’re going to end up paying people a lot more than you ought to have.
IDfy has long built a reputation for being India’s fastest and most accurate background verification company – but it is insights like these that make us our clients’ darlings. If you love data and insights just like we do, write to me at firstname.lastname@example.org, or just fill in your contact details at this link, and we’ll get right back to you!