Is Passive Talent Better Than Active Job Seekers?

August 10th, 2016

Balance weighing two spheres blue and red. Scales measuring abstract objects. Comparison choice confusion exchange and decision concept. EPS 8 vector illustration no transparency

One of the more difficult aspects of sourcing and recruiting is engaging with passive talent. It takes a thoughtful and strategic plan, and even a detailed plan isn’t guaranteed to work. So it’s leaves you to wonder — is passive talent better than active candidates, anyway?

The answer isn’t clear. There are benefits to both hiring active and passive talent. Passive talent is often that very niche pool of candidates that has a specialized skill set, and therefore highly sought and generally very valuable to any company. Therefore, recruiting passive talent can be expensive and time consuming, especially without an efficient talent acquisition process.

Active candidates are at least keeping their ears open for a new opportunity and often pursuing those roles proactively. Sometimes, this can mean the candidate is more willing to make a move, will make that move more quickly, and for less of a salary increase. At the same time, why are they actively looking for a new role, good or bad?

Again, it’s hard to determine if one type of candidate is better than the other. Both have their traditional qualities, and both could be the absolute right fit for your company. Generally, having a preference before going into the recruiting process could create undesirable gaps in your talent acquisition process.

Leave a Reply

Outside-In® Book List

Review-Us-Blog-02
© Year CBI Group. All Rights Reserved. Site Credits.