5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
6 gefällt mir•7,199 views
The stats in this presentation demonstrate the value of developing your talent brand. A strong talent brand will boost the stock price of your company, lead to more and higher-quality job applicants, as well as lower attrition rates. Subscribe to the LinkedIn Talent Blog: http://linkd.in/18yp4Cg Follow the LinkedIn Talent Solutions page: http://linkd.in/1cNvIFT Tweet with us: http://bit.ly/HireOnLinkedIn Learn more about LinkedIn Talent Solutions: http://linkd.in/1bgERGj
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ähnlich wie 5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand
Ähnlich wie 5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand (20)
Mehr von LinkedIn Talent Solutions
Mehr von LinkedIn Talent Solutions (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand
- 1. LinkedIn Confidential ©2012 All Rights Reserved 1 5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand
- 2. How we define Talent Brand 2 Talent Brand n. • The highly social, totally public version of your employer brand incorporating what talent thinks, feels, and shares about your company as a place to work. • A significant asset for both hiring/retaining great talent and promoting your corporate image to the market.
- 3. 1. Strong talent + consumer brand lead to better stock performance 3 LinkedInTalentBrandIndex Lippincott Customer BrandView Index Cumulative change in stock price over 5 year period 36% 28%-6% 10% HighLow HighLow Source: Lippincott BrandView survey of 30,000 respondents and LinkedIn’s Talent Brand Index data for 150+ publicly traded companies in the US
- 4. 2. A strong Talent Brand is associated with lower cost per hire Source: LinkedIn July 2012 survey of over 4,700 talent acquisition decision-makers across 15 countries. See: What’s the value of your employer brand? http://talent.linkedin.com/blog/index.php/author/eda-gultekin/ 4 Up to 50% savings in per cost hire is associated with a strong employer brand
- 5. 3. A strong Talent Brand increases response rates to recruiter messages 5 Based on analysis of 2.6 million messages, engaging your audience can double your InMail response rates on LinkedIn NO PREVIOUS ENGAGEMENT 1X 2X ENGAGED AT ALL TOUCHPOINTS Relative response rate
- 6. 4. Companies with a strong talent brand attract 50% more applicants to their jobs 6 2X 3X Relative applications per job WEAK TALENT BRAND STRONG TALENT BRAND
- 7. 5. Companies with a strong talent brand find 3X as many of their hires through LinkedIn 7 NO PREVIOUS ENGAGEMENT ENGAGED AT ALL TOUCHPOINTS 1X 3XRelative % of hires influenced by LinkedIn
- 8. …which leads them to better qualified talent New employees sourced through LinkedIn are up to 40% less likely to leave within the first six months 8
Hinweis der Redaktion
- JOHNThe result – was this. Explain what 36% means and what 6% means. Quick explanation of how we did the research using these two metrics.Be prepared to explain sample size and how this was actually done (John)
- JOHNThe result – was this. Explain what 36% means and what 6% means. Quick explanation of how we did the research using these two metrics.Be prepared to explain sample size and how this was actually done (John)
- Why should you care about your employer brand?It’s something your talent peers are thinking about and investing in93% are investing in it this yearEven if it hasn’t been a priority for your company, it is for your peers, and it will impact your ability to hire2) Why are your peers thinking about it? Having a strong talent brand makes it easier for you to hire talent A strong brand means that talent is more interested in working at your company It can reduce your overall cost per hire by up to 50%Today we want to talk about how LinkedIn can help you measure your employer brand and strengthen it to engage the talent you are looking to hire. (Discovery questions you can use to intro the discussion) How do you think about your employer brand? How do you measure/track your employer brand today? How would you rate your employer brand vs your peers? How easily would you say you attract talent to your roles vs your peers? Are there groups where it’s harder/easier? Who are your biggest competitors when it comes to hiring top talent? Why are they more effective? Is it related to brand?
- Here are best practices for you to consider from companies with very strong employer brands. Which of these do you feel like you do well today? Areas for opportunity?We can work together with you to develop your employer branding presence on LinkedIn.
- Clients who adopt the LinkedIn solution are moving the most important metric: They’re bringing in more high quality candidatesWhen companies shift from thinking about LinkedIn as a narrow solution to adopting the Core Solution they see on average a 65% increase in hires sourced through LinkedIn.That’s interesting, but more importantly, we see that hires sourced through LinkedIn are higher quality and a better fit than hires from other sources. Candidates sourced through LinkedIn are 25-40% less likely to leave their new company within the first 6 months compared to candidates sourced otherwise.Data methodology: 65%: Clients who start with only seats and slots, and (1) Add WWU and LCP and (2) Increase job slots by 50% or more, see a 65% (median) to 94% (75th percentile of clients) increase in InPacted hires. See slide 7 for definition of InPacted Hire25-40%: Members who joined a client company AND were a LI InPacted Hire were 25-40% less likely to leave their new company in the first 6 months than members who joined and did not interact with an LTS product prior. Joining and leaving defined by changing LinkedIn profile. (25% = Small companies -> 40% = Large companies)InPacted Hire definition: (1) Member changed LI profile to client company from another company; (2) Prior to joining, member interacted with an LTS product (e.g., viewed a job, viewed a Career Page, received an InMail, etc.) See slide 7.Data based on 2.5 MM members , data from q4 2011 (so we had long enough to look at future retention)
- Clients who adopt the LinkedIn solution are moving the most important metric: They’re bringing in more high quality candidatesWhen companies shift from thinking about LinkedIn as a narrow solution to adopting the Core Solution they see on average a 65% increase in hires sourced through LinkedIn.That’s interesting, but more importantly, we see that hires sourced through LinkedIn are higher quality and a better fit than hires from other sources. Candidates sourced through LinkedIn are 25-40% less likely to leave their new company within the first 6 months compared to candidates sourced otherwise.Data methodology: 65%: Clients who start with only seats and slots, and (1) Add WWU and LCP and (2) Increase job slots by 50% or more, see a 65% (median) to 94% (75th percentile of clients) increase in InPacted hires. See slide 7 for definition of InPacted Hire25-40%: Members who joined a client company AND were a LI InPacted Hire were 25-40% less likely to leave their new company in the first 6 months than members who joined and did not interact with an LTS product prior. Joining and leaving defined by changing LinkedIn profile. (25% = Small companies -> 40% = Large companies)InPacted Hire definition: (1) Member changed LI profile to client company from another company; (2) Prior to joining, member interacted with an LTS product (e.g., viewed a job, viewed a Career Page, received an InMail, etc.) See slide 7.Data based on 2.5 MM members , data from q4 2011 (so we had long enough to look at future retention)
- Clients who adopt the LinkedIn solution are moving the most important metric: They’re bringing in more high quality candidatesWhen companies shift from thinking about LinkedIn as a narrow solution to adopting the Core Solution they see on average a 65% increase in hires sourced through LinkedIn.That’s interesting, but more importantly, we see that hires sourced through LinkedIn are higher quality and a better fit than hires from other sources. Candidates sourced through LinkedIn are 25-40% less likely to leave their new company within the first 6 months compared to candidates sourced otherwise.Data methodology: 65%: Clients who start with only seats and slots, and (1) Add WWU and LCP and (2) Increase job slots by 50% or more, see a 65% (median) to 94% (75th percentile of clients) increase in InPacted hires. See slide 7 for definition of InPacted Hire25-40%: Members who joined a client company AND were a LI InPacted Hire were 25-40% less likely to leave their new company in the first 6 months than members who joined and did not interact with an LTS product prior. Joining and leaving defined by changing LinkedIn profile. (25% = Small companies -> 40% = Large companies)InPacted Hire definition: (1) Member changed LI profile to client company from another company; (2) Prior to joining, member interacted with an LTS product (e.g., viewed a job, viewed a Career Page, received an InMail, etc.) See slide 7.Data based on 2.5 MM members , data from q4 2011 (so we had long enough to look at future retention)