Yahoo! has just announced Yahoo! HotJobs Pay Per Candidate, a performance-based online recruitment product that allows recruiters the option to pay for candidates instead of just paying per listing.
The Pay Per Candidate product enables recruiters to cap the number of pre-screened candidates they receive per job posting when candidates apply on the HotJobs website. Recruiters purchase credits for each job posted, but their account is only charged when a candidate applies for the job listing or clicks through to the recruiter’s hiring site. They can also transfer unused credits to other open positions should a job be filled or priorities change.
Recruiters on Hotjobs can now choose from two application methods:
a) Candidate completes the entire job application on the HotJobs site, or
b) Candidate clicks-through to your company’s hiring site
With option (a), recruiters have the ability to pay only for pre-screened candidates. They can pre-screen candidates by creating a customized questionnaire, so they only pay for candidates that pass the questionnaire.
With option (b), recruiters keep candidates on their career website for the application process. Hotjobs does not track job seekers after they leave the Hotjobs site, so if the candidate fails to complete the application on the employer’s recruitment site, the employer is still charged for the click.
Pricing is not disclosed, but Yahoo does clarify in their FAQs that prices are not the same for the two application methods.
Pay Per Candidate can also integrate with a recruiter’s ATS via the Hotjobs’ Shared Apply beta product.
According to Yahoo, the product will be formally introduced to the recruitment community at the Society for Human Resource Management Annual Conference (SHRM) being held in New Orleans, June 28-July 1.
“Recruiters are being asked to find top talent using fewer resources than ever, and Yahoo!’s Pay Per Candidate model gives them the tools to increase the accountability of their listings,” said Chris Merritt, vice president and general manager, Yahoo! HotJobs. “With recruiters facing resume overload in today’s job market, the Pay Per Candidate solution will allow them to spend their time and budget on only the best candidates.”
For more information about Yahoo! HotJobs Pay Per Candidate, you can visit www.hotjobsresources.com/.
Popularity: 6% [?]
June 25th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Another brilliant strategic move from a site that might have the worst performing jobs ever. When will HotJobs just realize it’s time to pack up and go home forever.
Can’t wait till the vultures of the world known as ad agencies start promoting this pile of junk.
June 25th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
This is a copy of the realmatch model.
June 25th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
It may be a similar model to realmatch (pay for performance is nothing new) however realmatch with 83K traffic per month…I’ll take hotjobs.
June 25th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
If its a copy of RealMatch then HJ is definitely doomed.
June 25th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Socloseitsscary – This is not Realmatch’s pricing model and it’s not even close to being a Pay For Performance (PFP) pricing model either. Read the Hotjobs press release carefully and look at their graphic. For the record, the PFP model Realmatch established in the online recruiting world means that the job poster gets to decide whether or not to buy AFTER they post the job, AFTER they view resume summaries and AFTER they can determine how well the job posting preformed overall. This “new” Hotjobs model is no different than the old model and still charges the poster BEFORE they can post the job, BEFORE they have a chance to review candidate quality and BEFORE they can determine how the job posting preformed overall.
On Realmatch, the poster posts for free! The poster reviews resume summaries of matching candidates and applicants free. When the poster decides that we have done our job and delivered the quality and quantity of candidates that meet their expectations, THEN they can purchase an unlimited resume opening package and view all the resumes of matches and applicants. So it’s really a question of when does the poster pay and who bears the risks? If I have to pay upfront BEFORE you perform, how is that pay for performance? If I have to pay upfront BEFORE I can see the quality of the applicant, how is that pay for performance? My suggestion to Hotjobs is that they rename this pricing model, “Pay Upfront Before I Can See How You Preform Entirely” or “PUBICS HYPE”.
So while Hotjobs will tell their customers that this is PFP pricing, they won’t really ever offer PFP pricing. They won’t offer it because that would mean giving up ALL their existing revenue and starting from scratch with PFP pricing. So Hotjobs is stuck with upfront pricing and so are their customers. And so the HYPE is really about getting people excited over nothing just to take ahold of them by the short and curlies. (Joel will probably ban me for this one)
June 25th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
come on.. seriously guys, you can’t put lipstick on a pig. how is this going to increase hotjobs abysmal applicant quality or slow down their steep decline in listing revenue?
June 25th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
This really echos what we are hearing in the market about only paying for what gets results. Although, they don’t have a reputation for quality candidates, the strategy is certainly in line with the market demands.
Can’t wait to hear feedback out of SHRM and from people with current Yahoo contracts under the pay per post model.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Raf – You could have done a better job with the acronym. Perhaps “Pay Upfront Before I’m Certain How Applicants Involved Really Stackup…or PUBLIC HAIRS. BTW – Realmatch is a network of 1200 powered by sites and 36 3rd party job boards, The Realmatch Job Network reaches 36 million users network wide. You can some of the traffic on URL’s like thejobnetwork, apply-to, Scientific American, Technology review and others.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Realmatch should thank Yahoo! for all the free PR. Enjoy your day in the sun/shadow. Probably the best thing that ever happend for Realmatch.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Bruzzy Von Pennington = terrible name
June 26th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Reach of 36M? That’s like CB saying they reach 1.5 out of every US household. Very few of those people would ever see anything Realmatch does.
Your traffic is less than 100k/month: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/realmatch.com/ and http://www.quantcast.com/realmatch.com.
Again, we’re doomed if this is who we’re modeling our new strategy on. God save us all.
June 26th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
realmatchwho – We dont mind if you talk nice about the Realmatch job network or nasty about the realmatch job network but whatever you do, please dont stop talking about the Realmatch Job Network.
June 26th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
HJer – Only a neophyte would only count the “reach” as traffic on one URL and see that as the total reach. I co-founded an ad network 3 years ago called adblade. You see that compete says that the URL Adblade.com gets 28 million users:
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/adblade.com
(makes twitter’s rise seem weak don’t it – hehe)
Anyway, do you really think that 28 million people go to adblade.com every month? Of course not. Compete registers 28 million users because the code we place on publishers sites registers as adblade.com. Conversely, Realmatch is not a destination site and each of the 1200 sites we power do not have our URL running though them like Adblade, they have their own URL like thejobnetwork.com, phillyjobmatch.com, findkyjobs.com, sciam.com etc etc. Of course our jobs are also on Indeed, Simplyhired, Job.com etc etc. So you can scream and shout and get angry but just remember one thing, we don’t have to buy Superbowl ads then send the bill to our clients like you do. All of Realmatch’s resources go to helping our partners market their employment franchise and not in driving traffic to Realmatch.com. This is less expensive, results in better quality and quantity of applicants for our employers and results is lower costs we have to pass on. I’m going to send this to a few employer prospects now, so thank you for going there.
June 26th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I’m glad that Realmatch has sent all 8 of its employees to comment on this story. Do they always spam the blogs like this…and is it always this transparent?
June 26th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Jennifer – going w/ the any PR is good PR tact? Another brilliant pick up for Realmatch! Rafaesmell must have attracted you from a Cheezhead post.
Btw…when you add a M at the end of the number it means million. When you list your network size at 36M…I think you mean 36k darling. Its OK…letters are confusing.
June 27th, 2009 at 10:52 am
It again shows the job boards having their focus fully on the employer side while missing the candidate side. If they get it right on the candidate side, employers will take whatever model they offer.
Reaching out and getting job postings from company sites (with some form of vetting for duplication, company brand trust, etc.) would probably get good candidate volumes, and with good filtering (which seems to be worked on in the above mentioned model) employers would be more than happy to pay.
Quality job postings, quality candidates, what else does a job board really need to offer? But wait! how about career management assistant built in for candidates (using openid) with integration into social media, personal web pages, etc? Now I am waiting for such a job board (should it be called by a better name?)
June 27th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Amy – We were dragged into this post like several others, just look up. We don’t mind being the topic at all. We definitely have less employers then hotjobs but as “pay-to-post” continues to lose customers, you won’t retain your customers with that argument. You’ll need to have a better product to keep them, that’s all the customer is interested in. Perhaps we could choose a job and metro area, both post the jobs and have a credible 3rd party judge the applicants? Let us know if HotJobs is up to the challenge.
Anonymous – With regard to our PR, we’ll take kudos and props in articles from third parties like WSJ, About.com, Bizjournals and Entrepreneur.com over a copied obviously last minute ditch effort press release any day. With regard to the M behind the number 36, I think you were talking to Hjer. Do the names separating comments get a little confusing for ya darling?
All too easy, good times!
June 29th, 2009 at 9:22 am
To the Hotjobs commenters – This guy is baiting you with each post…and you fall for it each time. You look like morons. If you dont want to talk about Realmatch, stop talking about it!
July 1st, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Rafael, you’re missing the point. She didn’t use M, but she did mention million and RealMatch doesn’t have a million of anything.
And to call someone a neophyte when you’ve been in the business for year is pretty laughable.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
HJER – You see that Realmatch explained very nicely how they reach 37 million people and why its more efficient. I agree with this as we also have a syndication vs destination strategy too. But he als does something which makes his comments much more credible then yours. He actually posts with his real name and real identity. You’ll notice he is the only person here that does so. So he is the only one that comes across as credible as he is the only one that is accountable for his comments. You are not accountable therefore you are full of Sheet. I doubt you even work for Hotjobs.
July 9th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I like this move a LOT from HotJobs. From what they’ve shown me, the brilliance will be in the screeners — only pay for the qualified candidates instead of the “post and pray” model that the other big boards force on you. No longer do you have to buy into their national traffic numbers as rationale for their high prices. Yes, you are putting in money up front, but what…a month’s worth of a Monster contract to get mostly all qualified candidates for a year? (that is if you build your screeners right…think about it) I keep reading about HotJobs as the “worse performing job board” but are you looking for quantity or quality? It’s worth the minimal risk to try, imo.
July 17th, 2009 at 11:02 am
I don’t agree with the pay per candidate model. It seems to me that a large employer would not receive sufficient numbers of candidates and smaller employers would wind up paying more for a listing this way than the previous method. I stick with the basic sites like monster.com, plus a few free ones like uvisor.com . I prefer a company that can actually save ME money!