Jake Urbano

The difference between Talent Acquisition vs Staffing Agencies? Reactivity vs Proactivity TA is great if used correctly, but 99% of companies out there don't understand how to utilize them. High quantity positions that can afford to be reactive are phenomenal for TA to work on and fill. High level, niche roles can start to be worked on by TA for a period of time (dependent on urgency level), but those really should be given to a staffing agency that specializes in that sector and ideally has the relationships to identify the ideal candidate quickly and efficiently. In summary- "saving cost" by avoiding agencies can be doable, but don't shoot yourself in the foot by sending your TA team to war with a butter knife as they just flat out don't have the resources or head start that agency recruiters have! #staffing #recruiting

43

4 Comments

“Open for work” doesn’t mean “open to anything.” I recently spoke with a candidate who said, “I just need something, anything.” My advice was simple: if you take anything, you’ll be back in the same spot in 90 days. What do you actually need? What will drive you? I know the job market can be tough, but don’t take a job just to “land on your feet”. That’s like dating someone just because they have a Netflix password. The right role should challenge you, grow you, and actually make you want to log in on Monday. Focus on the opportunity where your skills create impact, where you will be appreciated and your career truly moves forward.

350

75 Comments

Companies are interviewing but they're not hiring... We’re seeing it more and more: Multiple interview rounds Promising feedback Then suddenly... “The role is no longer available.” What’s really going on? 1. Budget cuts 2. Internal reshuffles 3. Uncertainty at the top 4. Intelligence gathering 5. Or simply—no clear hiring plan in place My gut says it's intelligence gathering. What do you think of this practice? My guess is their internal justification for it is that it is not wasted time as they are interviewing you as a potential candidate to join their company at some point in the future. If you're a candidate caught in this loop, it’s not you.

74

25 Comments

ATTN RECRUITERS - If you’re not making cold calls, you will be replaced by AI. Over the last 3 weeks, I’ve been interviewing candidates for an executive recruiter role at Benchmark Search. Out of a dozen conversations, I was shocked by how few have actually made real cold calls. Cold calling feels like a dying art. But it's the difference between great and good. -Yes, the calls can be awkward. -Yes, the rejection can sting. But when I get that one “yes”? It fuels me for the next few hours. It reminds me of a line I heard: "A good attitude doesn’t guarantee good results, but good results guarantee a good attitude." That’s cold calling in a nutshell. Staying positive doesn’t mean the call will go your way. But when you win, it changes your whole energy.

94

34 Comments

Recruiting teams love data. Until it tells them something they don’t want to hear. You track time-to-fill, cost-per-hire, and maybe even candidate satisfaction. But are you measuring what actually impacts business outcomes? Three most overlooked recruiting metrics that separate top-tier hiring teams from the rest: ✅ Hiring Velocity Yes, how long it takes to fill a role matters. But how quickly do your top candidates move through the funnel? If your best candidates keep getting stuck at final approvals, you’re losing them to competitors​. ✅ First-Year Turnover Rate A great hiring process finds long-term fits. If 30% of your hires leave in Year 1, something is broken—in hiring criteria, onboarding, or culture fit​. ✅ Offer Acceptance Rate (OAR) If your OAR is under 80%, analyze your compensation, employer brand, and candidate experience. Losing talent at the finish line is the easiest fix—most companies ignore it​. Don't track more things. Track the RIGHT things. If your hiring process isn’t improving, you might be looking at the wrong numbers. Hit me up if you need help getting your data metrics where they should be. #peopleanalytics #hiringmetrics #recruiting

283

“If he really wants to work here, then $5K shouldn’t matter…” Yepp, if you've hired, you might have said something along those lines before. After weeks of sourcing, screening, and (honestly) interviewing more candidates than I’d typically recommend, they finally found "the one". I advised the VP of Finance that the Finance Manager had another offer on the table, and exactly what compensation would close the deal. I wasn’t guessing, I knew what would get it done and what we were up against. Well, what did they decide to do? They offered $5k less. Because “if he really wants to work here…” Listen, I totally get it. Your company is fantastic, and you are recognized as one of the best places to work. You have beautiful offices, great work-life balance, and free lunches. This all sounds lovely. But you risk losing top talent. After all the time, effort, and energy you’ve invested....over $5K? Not the first time I’ve heard this logic, and unfortunately, I doubt it will be the last. So what happened? The candidate went with the competitor. They rolled out the red carpet. They offered above their salary range, increased the bonus, and even sweetened the title. And they won. Ugh! If you’re serious about hiring exceptional talent, you have to treat them exceptionally. It’s like when they ask at Chipotle, “the guac costs extra, that okay?” Have you ever said yes and regretted it? Yeah, me neither.

1,718

214 Comments

Earlier, ghosting was common from candidates... now the tables have turned — HR started ghosting consultants and candidates. Here’s what’s happening in the market 👇 1️⃣ “We’re looking for vendors” — really? HRs post on LinkedIn saying they’re open to vendor partnerships. You email — no reply. You call — suddenly it’s: “Vendor empanelment is closed.” All this within 12 hours. 2️⃣ The percentage trap If you manage to get on a call, the first question is: “What % do you charge?” The next line? “We already have vendors working at 4%.” Then why post at all? Why waste everyone’s time? 3️⃣ Zero feedback culture You start working, share profiles… and then, silence. After 20–25 days: “The position is closed. Let’s work on a new one — on priority.” Same cycle again. This time: “Candidate cleared internal rounds but got rejected by the client.” You ask for a reason, and they say: “We’re still waiting for feedback.” If someone is rejecting a profile, there is a reason. Why not share it with the consultant who worked hard to get the candidate in? 🙏 Humble request to all fellow consultants: Stop accepting 4% roles. Recruitment takes effort, time, tools, and teamwork — we deserve fair value. If you've faced similar issues, comment below and let’s raise our voice together. #JagoConsultantJago #RecruitmentReality #FairHiringPractices #VendorPartnership

36

20 Comments

Hiring managers: is your PD tanking your talent pool? 👀 If it’s boring, vague, or vanilla … you’re shrinking your reach before you even start. The top talent, the best people - will run for the hills toward a better job with a better PD. Here’s 3 tips on how to fix it - #TheHonestRecruiter style. #WalkAndTalkRecruitment #TalentAttraction #MarketingAndCommsRecruitmen

42

24 Comments

The Cost of Hesitation in Hiring Delaying a hire isn’t neutral, it’s compounding risk. ➠ Each month a key role stays open, competitors capture market share (Sullivan Research) ➠ Quit rates are at a 9-year low (2.0%), meaning fewer skilled candidates are willing to jump (NY Post, 2025) ➠ Skills have a half-life of just 2–3 years, so every delay means the candidate pool is shifting under your feet (WSJ, IBM) ➠ Compensation expectations rise with inflation and market swings, so waiting often means paying more for less (BLS) Hiring is a time-sensitive decision. Hesitation doesn’t preserve optionality, it erodes it. The longer you wait, the weaker your position becomes. 📌 When it comes to hiring, is the bigger risk a mis-hire or a missed hire?

42

32 Comments