Hey ATS - Do you know what you're missing?

It occurred to me as I wrote about the flaws of applicant tracking systems earlier that I was unconsciously comparing my recent experience to McKinsey's recruiting model. While the bar is extremely high and the criteria for entry is not for faint of heart, it is also clear that candidates (and alumni for that matter) are treated with a different mindset than the traditional screen-out, weed-down, and fend-off mindset that I have in encountered in many large Toronto companies. Indeed, it is very personal:

• McKinsey's ATS is best characterized as a CRM tool to engage potential recruits rather than screen them out 
• A real person reviews every resume searching for that special sauce that only a human brain can interpret
• Our recruiters will actually talk to potential candidates - we call it cultivation
• Candidates have multiple rounds of interviews and are assigned a buddy who will provide them with feedback and coaching so that they can put their best foot forward in the interview
• Interviews are conducted by peers - would I like to work with this person?

This is a tremendous effort to find the best of the best. They are not paying lip service to the aspiration, but are actually using methods that back it up. In contrast, when a resume is submitted to a Taleo ATS, keywords are king. In a blog article, The Dirty Secret Behind Applicant Tracking Systems: Qualified Candidates Need Not Apply, the author observes: 

When I read about the so called “skills gap” that employers complain about and the millions of open jobs that aren't getting filled because of it, I have to wonder. Maybe the skills gap lies with the employers relying on a flawed talent sourcing process. 

Katherine Hansen has recently released a report, Have Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) Ruined Recruiting, Hiring, and Job Search? She reports examples of qualified individuals not meeting the selection criteria of the ATS. "Recruiters never read more than the top 20 resumes." How can that ever be a valid approach to finding the best person for a job? The report includes observations from many experts: 

• A purely cold, technological approach results in missing out on good candidates, some hiring decision-makers say. You need a human touch at all levels.
• An ATS should make the process smoother and not prevent companies from looking at the best prospective employees. 
• Fail to meet one the [preset criteria] and your application gets tossed, even if a good HR director might have spotted your potential. 
• Sadly, I have seen many well-qualified candidates discarded because the ATS failed to capture nuanced information. It still takes a human to read between the lines and to knit together the mosaic that represents a candidate's true value.

This is indeed a sad state of affairs. Let's think about a situation: tech savvy candidates who figure out how to get to the top of the list may share a capability such as search engine optimization or a staccato writing style. What if the ideal candidate is not comfortable with technology or writes creatively and has honed a different set of skills that would be more suited to the job. In the psychological world, we call this systemic bias. You don't know it's there, but it is embedded in the approach. Now isn't that interesting.

The challenge: I love technology and all it can do for us. Every company should be testing their systems to ensure their automated approach to selection is actually working. What if I could get my hands on a project to review a company's ATS with fresh eyes. It might go something like this.

• Review current state of the front and back end usability and design
• Create test profiles to feed into and track through the system to see how they score
• Interview recruiters and hiring managers to understand their end-to-end processes and needs
• Analyze hiring statistics and correlate with different sourcing approaches
• Research other approaches to sourcing candidates like social media
• Connect the dots with the resulting findings and make recommendations 
• Pull a great team together to build something awesome that works for everyone and increases the employer's brand

Am I missing something? 

Off I go now to form some more creature connections with fun colleagues.