The real issue, the one that is two-thirds below the surface, is the fact
that Applicant Tracking and Recruiting are worlds apart, and that Recruiting
is the much higher value, less traditional, and more difficult operation to
support.
ATS buyers from the corporate side nearly always underestimate the
dimensions involved with actual recruiting. They see applicants as just
that, and imagine that the only organization that they need to track is
their own. When they go shopping for software, they generally reject
anything that has an "agency" feel (in other words, a system that tracks
multiple organizations, roles, and opportunities) or anything that is not
"user-friendly" (in other words, anything that reveals or recognizes the
complexities of people and organizations).
I mean really, people are still paying good money for systems that treat
every "application" as a separate event, requiring all data to be re-entered
for another to occur for the same candidate. Believe me, you can do
applicant tracking with any number of recruiting systems, but you cant
really do recruiting with a number of leading brand ATS systems.
In almost six years in this business,I have learned a few things about this topic.
I truly believe that recruiting will be the more important discipline
going forward, and that many companies that have invested heavily in ATS
technology will find themselves equipping recruiters with dedicated
recruiting technology as well.
An ATS system should have much more in common with a CRM application than an
HRIS application. There are many ways to track, count, quantify, present,
and otherwise control hiring data.
There is only one way to induce a person to join your organization- via the
arts of persuasion.
That requires salespeople, and they require applications that are easy,
open, and offer comprehensive and variable methods to meet sales goals. I'm
not even talking about the culture and infrastructure need to support sales,
just the mere software tools.
Martin Snyder, CEO Main Sequence