SmartRecruiters' Sourcing Analytics is a powerful tool that helps you make data-driven decisions to focus your hiring efforts and spend on the sources that provide you with the highest quality hires, and maximize ROI on your investment in sourcing tools.
To access Sourcing Analytics:
- Click Analytics in the navigation bar.
- Click Sourcing Analytics in the dropdown list.
Essentially, Sourcing Analytics takes all the data from your hiring activity, organizes it, and analyzes it against a number of metrics.
There are four primary sections to the tool:
- Group-By list
- Sourcing Graph
- Sourcing Metrics Table
- If the same candidate applies to the same job more than once, only one of the applications is counted.
- If they've applied to several jobs, each application is counted.if you delete a candidate, their applications are removed from Analytics totals and amounts.
Filters help to narrow down your candidates' applications into groups by focusing on specifics like job boards, job types, departments, etc. The list of available Groups is defined by the list of active Job and Org fields for your company.
To create a filter, choose a group from the Group list (1), then choose one or more items for that group in the Values list (2).
For example, to filter for applications to jobs in cities, choose the Location group, then select one or more cities. Note that the Values list displays up to 20 items, so you may need to search for the additional items.
You can add multiple filters to examine very specific groups of applications, or compare different groups. Each new filter adds a tag to the Filters Applied list in the form Group: Value.
- When you select values in two different Groups, the tool returns applications that fall into both groups.
- When you select multiple values for the same Group, the tool returns applications that fall into at least one of the groups.
- Each filter is independent of the others, so you can potentially pick two or more groups that do not share any candidates. In this case, the tool will return no results.
For best results, try to select the most granular Source filtering options possible. For example, if you simply want to analyze the performance of your Paid Job Board ads, choose the Source Sub-type filter and select only Job Boards. Filter Applications by Date Filter the applications for a particular time period by Application Creation date or Job Creation date and selecting the date range.
The Sourcing Graph visualizes groups of candidate application to compare:
- the number of applications for the group,
- the number of those applications that resulted in an interview and
- the total amount you've spent on sourcing and interviewing those candidates.
As you create, edit, and remove filters, the Sourcing Graph will update to reflect the results of the filters.
- Click on a group to compare its number of source applications, interviewed candidates, and the amount spent on sourcing and interviewing candidates. "Interviewed" candidates are those who were (at some point) in the "Interview", "Offered", or "Hired" stage for that particular job.
- Click on one of the bars in the graph itself to see a breakdown of jobs for the group (if not looking the Job group) or breakdown of sources (if looking at the Job group).
- If you’re looking at the Job group, hover over the name of a job in the graph or table to see its REF ID.
The Group By list helps you examine your filtered results from different angles, but doesn’t change your filters.
For example, if you wanted to review which of your locations produces the most referrals through the Referral Portal, you could:
- Create a filter for Referrals.
- Click Location in the Group By list to view the number of referrals made at each location.
Sourcing Metrics Table
The Sourcing Metrics Table presents a quantitative analysis of your recruiting process for the group targeted by the current filters. Good filtering is the key to getting the most from the tool.
The Group By column in the table functions in the same way as the Group By list. When a group is selected in either tool, both will display the same group (e.g., Source type, Source, Job)
Sourcing Quality Metrics quantitatively measure the quality of the applications in a particular group:
- Application-to-Interview (CTI) is the ratio of applications sourced for the job to the number that resulted in interviews. A higher ratio means fewer applications result in an interview.
- Application-to-Hire (ATH) is the ratio of all applications from that source to the number that resulted in an actual hire. A higher ratio means fewer applications result in hires.
- Application Quality (CQ) is based on the actual reviews from the interview team.
Cost Efficiency Metrics measure your expenditures on a particular group of candidates over a particular time period.
- Spent is the total amount you've expended on a particular source.
- Spend per Application (SPA) is the average amount you've spent for all the applications from this source.
- Spend per Interview (SPI) is the average amount you've spent on the candidates whom you interviewed. This amount includes the average costs for Job Posts, Assessments, and any Agency costs.
- Spend per Hire (SPH) is the average amount you've spent for each candidate that you've hired, and includes Job posts or Agency fees, plus any Assessments. This number may be identical to the Spent amount if you only hired one candidate from the group.
Note that If you’ve added your job contract with a paid board to SmartRecruiters, when you post a job through the contract, the Spend for that job will be $0. If you post a job without the contract to the same board (e.g., if your contract expires), the Spend for that job will be tracked.
SmartRecruiters calculates average costs for each source by dividing the total spend amount on that source in a certain period by the number of applications from that source with the following conditions:
- Candidate applied,
- Candidate reached Interview status for that application, or
- Candidate reached “Hired” status for that application
Suppose we'd like to identify which paid job board provided the highest quality candidates, and was the most cost-effective, for an ad that we posted for a Software Engineer position in San Francisco. Our filters are thus:
- Location: San Francisco
- Source Subtype: Job Boards
Now, let's apply these filters.
- In the Filters list, click Location, then select San Francisco. We have all the candidates who applied through a paid job ad to a San Francisco position.
- Now, we need to filter for the Job Board sub-type. In the Filters, click Source Subtype, then select Job Boards. We now have all the paid Job Board postings for San Francisco jobs.
- In the Group By list, click Job.
- In the Sourcing Graph, click on the Software Developer bar.
Click Interviewed to see the number of candidates who were actually interviewed, and Spent to compare how much was spent on positing the same ad to each board.
Now that we've zeroed in on the sources, we can better analyze the performance of our paid ads. Keep in mind that if you posted a job using a contract with a job board, you won’t be able to track the cost of that posting to the source, or accurately compare the source’s performance.
Note that these values are purely illustrative, and may not reflect actual data.
At first glance, notice a few things:
- The Monster ad was the most expensive ($1494.00) of the four successful ads overall, and was the least cost-efficient job board.
- The Ruby on Rails job ad yielded the most highly rated candidate (a CQ score of 3.8),
Based on these results, the Ruby on Rails Job board maximized our ROI and brought us the best candidate. If we were to make a decision based on these results, we'd probably want to stop using Monster to source this kind of job, and continue using Ruby on Rails Jobs.
Of course, the example above is a limited example, and the best performing source may not always be so clear.
- In some cases, you might be more concerned with the quality of your hires than the cost of your job ads. If so, CQ would be the most useful metric for you.
- In other cases, you may simply want to identify boards that provided little or no value at all. In this case, you'll want to look for the sources that have very high ATI or ATH values (high ratios of applications to actual interviews or hires.).