Page Comparison

This tool has solely been researched by the WilsonHCG Innovation team

...

Technology Demo Notes

Call Notes

• Came to us through Hilton
• John told them we have 150 RCs; they can support that
• Started 4 yrs ago with predictive index tool and evolved a year ago to Engage; focused on passive audience
• Bring in millions of new candidates every month
• 30K sources
• New pools of candidates with targeted messaging; takes into account what is happening within economy
• Google Chrome extension
• LI & LIR extension as well
• "Likely to Engage" - 120 data points that assess industry, titles to tell us who is more likely to engage with a recruiter
• Compensation is from Payscale (an Engage partner)
• Flexible workflow process (through Zapier) - ports data into CRMs/ATS'
• Through workflow management - can set up any number of workflows
• We would have the ability to customize on our own if we want to
• Can have multiple admins
• Admins can see what people are searching, regions being searched, industries being searched, can see what individual users are doing
• Large engineering, tech, sales and marketing professionals
• A chart will tell you how healthy a company is - data is pulled data but the Recruitability is
• Inline image 2
• Watch-list - can set up watches for articles for specific companies and/industries,
• Helps us know what is happening in our client industries to focus our direct sourcing
• Shows us Glassdoor ratings
• From there, can search candidates within those by multiple filters (boolean, job function, level, industry, degree, exp, etc.)
• Will show: Phone numbers (direct lines, not general numbers), email addresses, LI extension
• You don't have to live in Engage when you have the Chrome extensions
• "Similar candidates" base on title and location
• Companies - can be anywhere, not specifically only from U.S.
• Candidates - 90% in US, 10% in Canada
• Data is coming from multiple sources; regularly updated (hour on the hour updating)
• Use articles to customize messaging to candidates
• Do not report on social indicators - more of "a lagging indicator" but does aggregate information like contact information for candidates
• License by groups - ala carte - usually $100 users per month (basic plan if $4500 a year for up to 5 users)
• Each seat is limited to a certain # of credits (i.e. enriched profiles) - shared with entire company (if I click on Tom Jones, then everyone in the company would see Tom's info)
• Kim & I to come up a # of users we would want to start with; scaling?  <-- Kim, I have this on my notes for our one on one.
• Doesn't do trials - the data is experience
• Long-term:
• Engage is working on plotting multiple companies on one chart
• Ability to sort candidates by engagement likeliness

11.13.17 Call Notes

Mike Elder, Sales Director, ENGAGE Talent (843.425.3576 - mike.elder@engagetalent.com)

Below are the details for both the Supply/Demand and Tenure Analytics that we gather for each specific corporation’s industry. 

• Competitive Demand Analytics:
  • Target demand for locations and roles specific to the customer
  • Based on crawling and analyzing the customer’s career sites and job postings on different job boards
  • Automatically builds a list of “demand competitors” and analyzes their postings, time to close a requisition, and compensation (where published)
• Tenure Analytics:
  • Access to ENGAGE Research Tenure Analytics
  • Tenure data is based on analyzing 50m+ professionals over 10 years
  • Breakdown of tenure by Location, Job Function, Job Level, Experience Level, and Industry
• Candidate Pool Supply Analytics:
  • Visual mining and analytics of candidate supply pool
  • Accurately predict the difficulty level in filling a position
  • Get analytics on available candidates by location, industry experience, job levels, job functions, experience level, education level, ENGAGE availability, different employer characteristics, gender, and many other parameters

Note on use case:

Executive Search decided not too proceed for their business needs at this time, as it seemed the data was not accurate despite them claiming "84% data accuracy."

Related articles

...