5 Reasons for Investing in Your Talent Brand

Editor's Notes

1. 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)
2. 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)
3. 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?
4. 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.
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. 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)