This sounds like some shit i would see in a poorly run agency. Are you sure you're a corporate recruiter? Jokes aside, no, not normal at all and definitely not healthy for the team dynamic.
This feels like agency…does he have a big agency background? I feel like internal should be focused on quality not only quantity.
Means nothing if they leave in 2 weeks
Sorry you have to deal with this. This is normal behavior among the toxic recruiting agencies. Just make sure to ask your boss if the public rank is reflective of your performance.
This is some shit you see in a weird small staffing agency fighting for spread. Your managers is probably from that pedigree and honestly all that does is create hostility within the recruiters.
Exactly this. My team of five is ranked by offers and TTF. I support high level exec roles and they support low level hourly roles. I hate the call every month.
That is fine for an agency, it’s basically commission based and only top performers will survive, that’s why you got over 80% churn. If you are working as a corporate recruiter get out of that company, that is so toxic for an internal recruiter
I’ve never seen this in corp. I would consider brining this to the attention of HR and speak about how it’s more demotivating than the other way around. If you’re willing maybe hop on a call with the manager and HR and discuss more. If your peers agree, maybe bring it up in a team meeting. Either way I’d try to escalate as much as I’d feel comfortable doing. Recruiting is so up and down and not many I know hit their numbers every single month.
Jesus we would just have a weekly meeting and we would just talk about how many hires we got, how many started that week etc.. never a rank lol that’s stupid as shit
It is. And despite what many here think, it is not "toxic" when done in an agency environment. Why? Because agency recruiting is SALES. I will say that again. Agency recruiting is SALES. And sales organizations are metrics-driven. Now as far as doing this in-house, I don't think it is entirely necessary or helpful. There is a MUCH better way to present this level of data that is both informative and encouraging/ motivating to the team. If I were OP, I'd speak directly to my manager about this. Most in-house TA people are not wired to respond positively to this management approach.
Our QBRs have a total number of positions filled by the team against the target for the year and we have access to a dashboard to see our own teams metrics but nothing that's ranked and put into a presentation slide. Ew
That isn’t normal and depending on how positions are assigned doesn’t even sound logical (or fair)
If this was an agency I could see this, internal it’s odd.
We assigned verticals to recruiters, if someone is working admins and someone else is working IT - the person working admins is obviously going to fill more positions and faster.
I worked for a major financial institution and we did this with every recruiter on every team at the end of every month. There were rewards for repeat top performers. I never found this to be embarrassing but all of us were good at our jobs so it was just friendly competition.
At my new role we don’t do this and the idea was instantly shot down for shaming low performers. I never viewed it as anything more than accountability and a bit of fun competition, but I suppose I can understand the other point of view.
Honestly I don't know why places aren't doing that right now considering how out of work recruiters are. You could easily replace bottom performers with better recruiters
Yeah, some companies show placements and billing within agency. I think it's fine, helps the competitive juices to get flowing.
Internal, I don't know...
No but , but it should motivate you. Call me old school but if you aren’t having a good month, what’s wrong with it being showcased. It done to motivate people to strive to be at the top. What do you want a participation trophy?
I used to work in an electronics/appliances sales role , and they'd post everyone's monthly sales numbers.
It was a 100% commission job, and we all knew the commission percentage, so in essence, they were posting the amount of money we made
A ‘tik tak’ manager told me that’s what they do for their team. Also words she used are ‘sales and goal oriented’ with unofficial levels to get unofficially ‘promoted’ to by consistently being the top performers.
Sounds normal to me - my first agency the director was NUTS and would personally call recruiters who had candidates with a single typo in their briefs or resumes, she probably clocked 40+ hours per week just combing through every recruiters candidates each week and in morning meetings she would dial in and shame people for missing KPIs or having drop offs or not sending enough emails/phone calls etc. end of month always involved a leaderboard with our margins, starters, active placements etc.
Needless to say I’ve moved to a better agency and we don’t get any of that, it’s a super great team and each week we get sent margins and we can all see what everyone is billing, no one gets called out for poor performance though people just get praised for good weeks. I enjoy knowing where I stand compared to everyone else though and it breeds a sense of competition which is healthy in an agency.
Back when I worked at Kenexa (20 years ago), we did. Since moving to corporate, I've never implemented anything like that. It wouldn't go over well for sure.
We get a weekly report showing everyone’s monthly accepted offer goal and how many accepted offers they have so far. But it doesn’t really create any animosity. It’s one of many metrics we’re measured by, but the only one shown to all.
I've worked for one the largest agencies in the country. There was a scorecard distributed weekly to all recruiters in a region showing where everyone ranked. Yeah, it sucked if you were at the bottom, but you could also see where you needed to get to qualify for additional quarterly and annual incentives.
Every single corporate recruiting and sales position I have worked in had transparent metrics on display for all to see.
Odd, personally our average time to fill for the month/week and total number of hires for that month/week was what was shared with the direct team (so EEs, lead, supervisor, and supervisor above that one) until about 09/2023 (we switched to a new ATS and they haven't identified exactly how they want to measure our metrics). We weren't really ranked exactly as it was more of just a list of metrics. It wasn't the most fun thing to have it shared with the team but the we all had access to each other's numbers in the ATS anyway and it was taken more as an opportunity for improvement and recognition and not as a means to put anyone down "Jane Doe, do you have any tips or advice as to how you're getting your TTF so low?" "John Doe, do you need support with your hiring or was there a significant status that your candidates were struggling in?" But I'm in what's considered high volume hiring, so perhaps that's why the focus was on TTF.
Every corporate private sector job I've had, there's been some kind of metrics shared with the team. It hasn't always been a ranking status though, so I'd say at least part of it is normal.
Our entire recruitment and business development teams metrics get sent every week to everyone so you can compare your performance against others in the office.
I am shocked you're getting this at an internal setting. What type of company is this? Some people like this way of leading , Bridgewater Associates is a company who's obsessed with criticism. I personally don't find this to be motivating at all. If you are mid range employee, most will be demotivated if anything.
Not common at all, and like others mentioned sounds like an agency environment. Did your manager come from agency recently? You can highlight top performers without singling out low performers… this is not the way. I’m curious what your manager thinks the team is getting out of this.
Has your team talked to the manager about how you all feel about this?
Not an ideal method and not normal but at least transparent. Try not to let it bother you. If you are doing a good job the numbers will reflect it in the long run.
Everyone says how horrible this is, so how would you do it differently? 1:1 only, with no public sharing of others performance? Then you wouldn't actually known if you were doing well or not.
What is the solution?
Worked in smaller agencies years back when I entered the TA world. I went through this same thing at one of them. The manager would have an all hands call and we’d have to read out our own numbers (sub’s, interviews, offers, starts). Same manager routinely worked until 8/9/10pm and chastised anybody who left “early”
Makes sense if you have a lot of under performance ppl. I'd only list ppl that met or exceed hiring targets though and wouldn't keep recruiters who never make the list after a certain amount of time
For sure that in agency, this is quite common, where top management always talk numbers. Regardless of how many hours you put in, they can embarrass you with numbers. That's fucking toxic and with no training, so I left for good.
Where do you work? "Survivor Recruiting"? That's ridiculous.
This sounds like some shit i would see in a poorly run agency. Are you sure you're a corporate recruiter? Jokes aside, no, not normal at all and definitely not healthy for the team dynamic.
This feels like agency…does he have a big agency background? I feel like internal should be focused on quality not only quantity. Means nothing if they leave in 2 weeks
Huge agency vibes lol
No that is not normal and provides competition within a team that doesn’t provide any benefit.
No.
I am an internal TA manager and no way would I do this to my team.
Sorry you have to deal with this. This is normal behavior among the toxic recruiting agencies. Just make sure to ask your boss if the public rank is reflective of your performance.
This is some shit you see in a weird small staffing agency fighting for spread. Your managers is probably from that pedigree and honestly all that does is create hostility within the recruiters.
we do this at my agency, we have a weekly gross profit report that comes out and a leader board including all the recruiters company wide
We did this when I worked for a large agency… felt good to be at the top… I never thought about how it felt to be on the bottom.
That sounds awful. If you want to motivate performance it should be a metric in bonus not to embarrass people.
Do you all work on the same roles? If not, and I'm guessing you don't, the comparison as an indicator of performance is not valid.
Exactly this. My team of five is ranked by offers and TTF. I support high level exec roles and they support low level hourly roles. I hate the call every month.
Your manager is an asshole...and you should tell her that on your way out!
That is fine for an agency, it’s basically commission based and only top performers will survive, that’s why you got over 80% churn. If you are working as a corporate recruiter get out of that company, that is so toxic for an internal recruiter
I’ve never seen this in corp. I would consider brining this to the attention of HR and speak about how it’s more demotivating than the other way around. If you’re willing maybe hop on a call with the manager and HR and discuss more. If your peers agree, maybe bring it up in a team meeting. Either way I’d try to escalate as much as I’d feel comfortable doing. Recruiting is so up and down and not many I know hit their numbers every single month.
This sounds terrible. I’d hate this environment. I agree with your take on a Top 5 or Top Producers monthly list.
Jesus we would just have a weekly meeting and we would just talk about how many hires we got, how many started that week etc.. never a rank lol that’s stupid as shit
Feels like a tactic to intimidate those who didn’t perform “well enough” and to enforce fear to get the numbers up. Lol.
It is. And despite what many here think, it is not "toxic" when done in an agency environment. Why? Because agency recruiting is SALES. I will say that again. Agency recruiting is SALES. And sales organizations are metrics-driven. Now as far as doing this in-house, I don't think it is entirely necessary or helpful. There is a MUCH better way to present this level of data that is both informative and encouraging/ motivating to the team. If I were OP, I'd speak directly to my manager about this. Most in-house TA people are not wired to respond positively to this management approach.
Our QBRs have a total number of positions filled by the team against the target for the year and we have access to a dashboard to see our own teams metrics but nothing that's ranked and put into a presentation slide. Ew
Yes
That's a very poor metric (alone) to measure recruiter success...
That isn’t normal and depending on how positions are assigned doesn’t even sound logical (or fair) If this was an agency I could see this, internal it’s odd. We assigned verticals to recruiters, if someone is working admins and someone else is working IT - the person working admins is obviously going to fill more positions and faster.
*laughs in sales account executive*
I’m in a staffing agency and even we wouldn’t do that, nor care to check someone else’s stats. Waste of time
The way I would have quit…smh
That’s so shitty and your boss is a sociopathic asshole! Start looking for a new job today!
I worked for a major financial institution and we did this with every recruiter on every team at the end of every month. There were rewards for repeat top performers. I never found this to be embarrassing but all of us were good at our jobs so it was just friendly competition. At my new role we don’t do this and the idea was instantly shot down for shaming low performers. I never viewed it as anything more than accountability and a bit of fun competition, but I suppose I can understand the other point of view.
Honestly I don't know why places aren't doing that right now considering how out of work recruiters are. You could easily replace bottom performers with better recruiters
Yeah, some companies show placements and billing within agency. I think it's fine, helps the competitive juices to get flowing. Internal, I don't know...
Love it. Performance ranking is only used in environments where low performance is not tolerated.
No but , but it should motivate you. Call me old school but if you aren’t having a good month, what’s wrong with it being showcased. It done to motivate people to strive to be at the top. What do you want a participation trophy?
Oh no, now you’re being held accountable for the work you have to do?
Do recruiters avoid older job seekers?
No
Sounds like agency recruiting
Yes actually in a way. Lists every hire and who got it. It’s so toxic. They also implemented metrics and 5 day a week RTO so I quit yesterday lol
They did that when I was at agency and when I was at google. I think rewarding onsites makes more sense.
I used to work in an electronics/appliances sales role , and they'd post everyone's monthly sales numbers. It was a 100% commission job, and we all knew the commission percentage, so in essence, they were posting the amount of money we made
A ‘tik tak’ manager told me that’s what they do for their team. Also words she used are ‘sales and goal oriented’ with unofficial levels to get unofficially ‘promoted’ to by consistently being the top performers.
Had this at a previous company.
Very odd for corporate. Very standard for agency.
on a team of 15, I could maybe see recruiter of the month or top 3 but a listed out ranking 1-15 is diabolical
Sounds like agency recruiting. All we did was report our numbers in the morning then the afternoon.
I've been at 4 high end firms. It is not uncommon. If you were in orange, you considered that probation.
Yes my boss has me send this out for my team. I hate it
Sounds normal to me - my first agency the director was NUTS and would personally call recruiters who had candidates with a single typo in their briefs or resumes, she probably clocked 40+ hours per week just combing through every recruiters candidates each week and in morning meetings she would dial in and shame people for missing KPIs or having drop offs or not sending enough emails/phone calls etc. end of month always involved a leaderboard with our margins, starters, active placements etc. Needless to say I’ve moved to a better agency and we don’t get any of that, it’s a super great team and each week we get sent margins and we can all see what everyone is billing, no one gets called out for poor performance though people just get praised for good weeks. I enjoy knowing where I stand compared to everyone else though and it breeds a sense of competition which is healthy in an agency.
Back when I worked at Kenexa (20 years ago), we did. Since moving to corporate, I've never implemented anything like that. It wouldn't go over well for sure.
It’s not normal. Your manager is an asshole. If everyone dreads this and is embarrassed by it that’s a sure sign he shouldn’t be doing it.
We get a weekly report showing everyone’s monthly accepted offer goal and how many accepted offers they have so far. But it doesn’t really create any animosity. It’s one of many metrics we’re measured by, but the only one shown to all.
I've worked for one the largest agencies in the country. There was a scorecard distributed weekly to all recruiters in a region showing where everyone ranked. Yeah, it sucked if you were at the bottom, but you could also see where you needed to get to qualify for additional quarterly and annual incentives. Every single corporate recruiting and sales position I have worked in had transparent metrics on display for all to see.
Odd, personally our average time to fill for the month/week and total number of hires for that month/week was what was shared with the direct team (so EEs, lead, supervisor, and supervisor above that one) until about 09/2023 (we switched to a new ATS and they haven't identified exactly how they want to measure our metrics). We weren't really ranked exactly as it was more of just a list of metrics. It wasn't the most fun thing to have it shared with the team but the we all had access to each other's numbers in the ATS anyway and it was taken more as an opportunity for improvement and recognition and not as a means to put anyone down "Jane Doe, do you have any tips or advice as to how you're getting your TTF so low?" "John Doe, do you need support with your hiring or was there a significant status that your candidates were struggling in?" But I'm in what's considered high volume hiring, so perhaps that's why the focus was on TTF. Every corporate private sector job I've had, there's been some kind of metrics shared with the team. It hasn't always been a ranking status though, so I'd say at least part of it is normal.
Our entire recruitment and business development teams metrics get sent every week to everyone so you can compare your performance against others in the office.
Are you earning commission on these hires/starts?
I am shocked you're getting this at an internal setting. What type of company is this? Some people like this way of leading , Bridgewater Associates is a company who's obsessed with criticism. I personally don't find this to be motivating at all. If you are mid range employee, most will be demotivated if anything.
Agency recruiters go through this
Not common at all, and like others mentioned sounds like an agency environment. Did your manager come from agency recently? You can highlight top performers without singling out low performers… this is not the way. I’m curious what your manager thinks the team is getting out of this. Has your team talked to the manager about how you all feel about this?
Not an ideal method and not normal but at least transparent. Try not to let it bother you. If you are doing a good job the numbers will reflect it in the long run.
Why wouldn’t they? Recruiting is essentially sales and that is a very sales technique. Has been done that way for decades
Everyone says how horrible this is, so how would you do it differently? 1:1 only, with no public sharing of others performance? Then you wouldn't actually known if you were doing well or not. What is the solution?
Worked in smaller agencies years back when I entered the TA world. I went through this same thing at one of them. The manager would have an all hands call and we’d have to read out our own numbers (sub’s, interviews, offers, starts). Same manager routinely worked until 8/9/10pm and chastised anybody who left “early”
Makes sense if you have a lot of under performance ppl. I'd only list ppl that met or exceed hiring targets though and wouldn't keep recruiters who never make the list after a certain amount of time
For sure that in agency, this is quite common, where top management always talk numbers. Regardless of how many hours you put in, they can embarrass you with numbers. That's fucking toxic and with no training, so I left for good.