Recruiting for Remote Positions

Whether a candidate gets a job or not, they deserve feedback or a response, not to be ghosted. A rejection is better than silence. ❌ > 🫥 When I was a recruiter at my last company, my manager set an expectation that all candidates would receive a response no matter if they got an offer or not. In addition to that, the interview process would provide them updates every step along the way. By ghosting and not providing a response or feedback, it shows the culture of the company. Companies who provide transparency, empathy, and communication to job seekers are more likely to see a positive outcome of : 👏 Strengthens Candidate Experience: Providing clear communication, even in rejection, contributes to a positive candidate experience, which can impact how candidates talk about your company to others. 🤝 Reflects Company Culture: How you treat candidates reflects your organization’s values and culture. Consistent, respectful communication shows you prioritize transparency and integrity. 🫶 Enhances Employer Brand: Candidates who feel respected, regardless of outcome, are more likely to view your company positively, boosting your employer brand and making it more attractive to future talent. Candidates deserve transparency on where they are at and that’s why I love ActiveCampaign. It is an essential tool for keeping candidates informed during the interview and offer process, ensuring they receive timely updates and don’t feel ghosted—even if the decision is a rejection. With automated follow-ups and personalized messaging, it shows respect for candidates' time and efforts, creating a positive experience that builds trust and professionalism. A clear response is always better than silence, and ActiveCampaign makes it easy to deliver that respect throughout your hiring process. The candidates that didn’t end up getting an offer or moved forward through the process,  expressed that they appreciated that there was some form of response even though it was a rejection. The job search is hard enough, let’s not make it harder by ghosting 💙 #activecampaignpartner

WORD OF WARNING JOB SEEKERS! A dear friend of mine was recently contacted by someone presenting as a recruiter about a role with a well-known software company. He provided very specific details — the role, company, salary, and benefits. He even boasted that the candidates he puts forward “always get interviews” because he prescreens their references and submits both the resume and the references to the client. Trusting the process, she provided several references. Soon after, all of those contacts received calls — not about her candidacy, but with sales pitches for the recruiter’s services. Here’s what she uncovered: there was no job. When she called the company directly, they confirmed they weren’t hiring for that role and had never heard of his recruiting firm. She documented everything with screenshots and reported him to LinkedIn. Red flags to watch for: • Requests for multiple references before you’ve had any interview or confirmation of candidacy. • A recruiter who emphasizes “prescreening” or “special access” to gain your trust. The job market is challenging enough without tactics like this. Sharing this as a reminder to all candidates: protect your network, and trust your instincts.

The Case for Maximal Referencing of PMs: In a past job, I worked with two product leaders with equal skill in building products. But they had completely divergent skills in hiring. One hired phenomenal PMs. They quickly grew to be company-wide favorite PMs due to their strong viewpoints. The other hired on paper phenomenal PMs. But they just weren’t right for the company. It’s not really a surprise the first got promoted - and the other left for greener pastures. 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 One of the practices the first hiring manager swore by was lots of reference checking. She was a master of back channel reference checking throughout the interview process. And her reference checks were notoriously long. The other just did one reference check after he had already decided he was giving out the offer. 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝘀: 𝘚𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘬𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘩𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘯. I, too, have found it works really well. Nowadays, I’ve started to do these reference checks at three stages. Let’s break this approach. 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝟭 - 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 Committing to a conversation with a candidate means I’ll also tap into: • Previous workplace colleagues • Mutual connections Direct collaborators get a call, a brief 10-minute check-in. My aim here is to pinpoint standout candidates that I really want to push through. 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝟮 - 𝗣𝗼𝘀𝘁-𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 The second reference check I like to do is post-interview. I’ll use this to 𝘷𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺 of what people said in the interview. If the pass this second reference check, they’re almost ready to hire. 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝟯 - 𝗣𝗿𝗲-𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 The third and final reference check is the one most companies do. But I like to focus it on supervisors and skip levels. All PMs need to make an impact on leadership. This is the only round I actually use references supplied by the candidate. Everything else is back-channels. 𝗜𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀 𝗮 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 “𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘈𝘢𝘬𝘢𝘴𝘩, 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳!” I know that it seems a lot of work to add two stages of reference checks to your process when you probably only have the pre-offer stage right now. The thing is, getting your hiring right makes you much more impactful. But getting them wrong really hurts you. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂: 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸.

Neurodivergent candidates are not a monolith.  But too often, "inclusive" hiring procedures fail to take this into account. Consider this common practice: an employer offers a “more equitable” process by replacing interviews with multi-hour, or even multi-day, skills assessments. Seems fair, right? Skills assessments ARE generally more neuroinclusive than interviews. But only if you can afford to spend a significant amount of time, unpaid, completing the project. And in reality many people, regardless of education or skills, are balancing precarious hourly work, unemployment, caregiving, chronic illness and other types of disability, lack of health insurance, or unstable housing. So this "inclusive" hiring opportunity? Completely out of reach. Neuroinclusion must be intersectional. And economic inclusion must be a part of it. Many neuroinclusion programs did a great job with removing the neurotypical small talk requirements that are often problematic for neurodivergent candidates but are irrelevant to many jobs. Now, we need to do the same with the expectation of running back and forth between multiple buildings for interviews if the actual job does not require this type of stamina, or driving to the remote testing facility only accessible by car if the actual job does not require driving. And we should not demand free labor, which ends up being a prohibitive burden for those who can least afford it. Check out my newest article for specific advice on making socioeconomic considerations a part of ensuring fairness in hiring. #HumanResources #neurodiversity #hiring #talent #skills https://lnkd.in/gNwZ8fBD

I've spoken to 4,000+ companies about remote work since March 2020 Here are the most common things I've heard 👇 1. 🏢 HQ Obliteration: Return to office has stopped, companies have cut back the real estate they could, and will cut a lot more as leases expire. The majority of workers will work remotely at least part-time and the amount will grow 2. ⭐️ Access talent: The first reason they are going remote-first is simple – it lets them hire more talented people. Rather than hiring the best person in a 30-mile radius of the office, they can hire the best person in the world for every role 3. 💰 Cut costs: The second reason is because it makes them more cost-efficient. Rather than spending $10K-$20K per worker a year on office space they can provide a worldclass remote setup for less than $1,000 a year 4. 🌐 Universal problems: doesn’t matter the size of the organization, every company is dealing with the same thing. How do we operate as a global business? Equipping teams and managing assets is a huge pain point 5. 🏭 ESG Considerations: many companies care massively about the environmental impact eradicating the office – and the commute – has. 108 million tons of Co2 less every year. Boards are looking here as well 6. ❤️ Quality of life: companies also know they don’t need workers to waste 2 hours a day commuting to sit in an office chair for 8 hour. Companies have seen reducing commute frequency leads to happier more productive workers 7. 🚀 Outcomes vs. Time: the measure of performance in the office is how much time you spend sat in your seat. The measure of performance while working remotely has to be output. Companies are moving slowly here 8. 🎡 Hybrid Conflict: what companies and workers think hybrid means are two different things. Workers think it is being able to work remotely whenever they want. Companies think it is telling workers when they must attend. Big problem 9. 🛑 Bad Software: companies continue to use software and tooling designed for in-office teams causing issues for distributed workers. New tools developed by remote-native startups are emerging but not being adopted fast enough 10. 🔐 Tech & Security: in the old world the edge from a security perspective was the office, now it's every device. This creates big security risk and vulnerabilities as devices are lost. Companies lack good solutions

Using AI in recruiting (e.g., for AI Sourcing) is like working with a junior recruiter. It takes things way too literally and might not get everything right the first time around… …but it's an eager partner and very good at taking feedback. Hundreds of recruiters have leveraged Gem AI at this point, and my biggest takeaway is: Prompt quality matters so much — the quality of your written qualification determines the quality of your output (the profiles you see in AI Sourcing). You need to be explicit and literal to avoid confusing it. Before leaning on AI, get crystal clear on what you’re looking for: - How would you describe your ideal match? - Are there examples of what set apart the best talent in your mind? - What specifically should the AI Sourcer be looking for on a resume? Once you’ve thought through how you’d answer those questions, here are a few additional tips to help you with prompting: 1. Be as specific as possible Avoid language that's too broad, like "software development experience." Instead, use specific language about length and type: "Experience using React and Python on the job (not just on school projects)." 2. Provide necessary information, but be concise The longer and more complex your prompt is, the more likely it is to confuse your AI tool and lead to less relevant results. Instead of "We need the prospect to have between 3 and 5 years of experience working as a product manager, as this is a mid to senior role”... …condense your prompt to "3-5 years' experience with product management in B2B SaaS." 3. Avoid subjective qualifications Your AI tool won't know what you mean if you use terms like "good" or "top." Instead of "went to a good school," say "attended a top 20 college for computer science based on US News 2024 rankings." 4. Avoid vague qualifications about soft skills AI tools struggle with terms like "entrepreneurial skills." Rewrite these as measurable experiences like "experience contributing to or leading new product initiatives." 5. Bundle similar qualifications together Don't list skills individually. Create one qualification that covers related requirements: "proficiency with Python, R, and C++." 💡 Getting the right results from AI comes down to this: The clearer your qualifications, the better your matches. Bonus: Iterate on your qualifications as you get calibrated In the same way, you’d calibrate with an actual Sourcer, you’ll continue to get better and better results as you adjust your criteria once you’re calibrated. For a more detailed view of best practices for optimizing AI Search, check out our blog: https://lnkd.in/g5APPgMr

📱 My phone’s been blowing up lately—colleagues on both sides of the hiring game are venting about the same thing. Job seekers can’t land roles, and hiring managers can’t find people who actually stay. About half of my network who were job-hunting have found something, but the other half are still stuck in the grind. Meanwhile, companies tell me that even when they do make a hire, retention is a nightmare—new employees are bouncing within six months. The disconnect is real: companies are hiring, candidates are applying, but something is clearly broken. Traditional hiring—bloated job descriptions, ATS black holes, and never-ending interview rounds—is failing everyone. So, what needs to change? 🔄 Here’s what I’ve seen work: ✅ Ditch the ATS Dependence – Get back to human recruiting instead of relying on keyword filters. ✍️ Fix Job Descriptions – Make them clear, real, and relevant—cut the jargon. 🤝 Prioritize Personal Connections – Hiring managers should actively engage instead of passively posting. 🎯 Focus on Skills, Not Just Titles – Look at what candidates can actually do, not just where they’ve been. ⏳ Speed Up the Process – The best talent won’t wait around for a four-week approval cycle. 💬 Improve the Candidate Experience – Give real feedback and make the process transparent. Here’s a real-world fix I put in place: At a previous company, the hiring pipeline was a mess—ATS filters blocked great candidates, and the process dragged on. I introduced a referral-first hiring approach, tapping employees’ networks before posting publicly. We also replaced multiple early-stage screenings with a 30-minute call with the hiring manager. 📉 Time-to-hire dropped 35% 🎯 Quality of hires improved—better fits, fewer regrets 📈 Retention rates increased—candidates knew exactly what they were signing up for 🔑 Bottom line: Hiring is broken, but it doesn’t have to be. The best hires come through real connections, not algorithms. What’s been your biggest hiring (or job search) frustration lately? Drop a comment 👇 #Hiring #Recruiting #JobSearch #TalentStrategy #HR #FutureOfWork

I’ve onboarded remote hires across time zones, continents, and cultures. And here’s what I’ve learned: Remote onboarding doesn’t ⭐fail⭐ because of location. It fails because of assumptions. Assuming someone will “just speak up.” Assuming they’ll know what success looks like. Assuming they feel like they belong. Without hallway chats or shadowing, remote employees miss all the informal context that makes onboarding feel human—not just functional. Here’s how I’ve made it work: 💬 Over-communicate expectations and priorities 🎥 Use video, even for 15-minute check-ins 📅 Create a rhythm of connection—1:1s, team intros, buddy syncs ☕ Encourage informal conversations (yes, even virtual coffee chats) Remote doesn’t have to mean disconnected. In fact, with the right systems, it can feel even more inclusive. It took me many years of learning the hard way to build this out. And I’d like to share it with you, no strings attached. (see link in comments) That’s why I built these practices right in our Manager Onboarding Kit—to help leaders support their teams with intention, no matter where they are.

Remote work challenge: How do you build a connected culture when teams are miles apart? At Bunny Studio we’ve discovered that intentional connection is the foundation of our remote culture. This means consistently reinforcing our values while creating spaces where every team member feels seen and valued. Four initiatives that have transformed our remote culture: 🔸 Weekly Town Halls where teams showcase their impact, creating visibility across departments. 🔸 Digital Recognition through our dedicated Slack “kudos” channel, celebrating wins both big and small. 🔸 Random Coffee Connections via Donut, pairing colleagues for 15-minute conversations that break down silos. 🔸 Strategic Bonding Events that pull us away from routines to build genuine connections. Beyond these programs, we’ve learned two critical lessons: 1. Hiring people who thrive in collaborative environments is non-negotiable. 2. Avoiding rigid specialization prevents isolation and encourages cross-functional thinking. The strongest organizational cultures aren’t imposed from above—they’re co-created by everyone. In a remote environment, this co-creation requires deliberate, consistent effort. 🤝 What’s working in your remote culture? I’d love to hear your strategies.

Candidate Experience is not just about the big moments; the small touchpoints matter too. 💡 Start focusing on these commonly overlooked touchpoints and start attracting more qualified candidates: 1.    Streamline the Application Process Remove unnecessary questions and steps from your application form and make it mobile-friendly. 2.    Personalize the Process Stop using no-reply email addresses, use candidate names & pronouns in all communication, and be mindful of what days of the week you reject candidates. 3.    Set Clear Expectations Share details of the process and timeline, and help your candidates prep for interviews by sharing the interviewer’s profile and the topics that will be discussed before the interview. 4.    Timely Feedback Share feedback with candidates! There are a ton of ways you can do this without getting into legal trouble, so stop hiding behind that tired excuse… Your company’s reputation in the eyes of candidates plays a huge role in attracting qualified talent. #candidateexperience #talentacquisition