Comments on: Directing Traffic http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/ The Power to write about the online recruitment industry Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:04:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: CareyEaton http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-55 CareyEaton Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:02:37 +0000 http://blog.onrec.com.au/2008/02/04/directing-traffic/#comment-55 Hey Craigvn I agree that it would be great to get a 'quality' metric in the industry. Problem is that the recruiters and employers don't provide that data to anyone, least of all a job board, and never will. Since recruiters are making say $7,000 per placement, and the most online expensive job ad in Australia is currently around the $200 mark, you can see why they'll probably never be telling us job boards that information! Hey Craigvn

I agree that it would be great to get a ‘quality’ metric in the industry.

Problem is that the recruiters and employers don’t provide that data to anyone, least of all a job board, and never will.

Since recruiters are making say $7,000 per placement, and the most online expensive job ad in Australia is currently around the $200 mark, you can see why they’ll probably never be telling us job boards that information!

]]> By: brettiredale http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-41 brettiredale Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:40:55 +0000 http://blog.onrec.com.au/2008/02/04/directing-traffic/#comment-41 Justin - yes the bigger guys with lots of money who opt not to enter MI do so for different reasons. If you are telling people you compete with Seek, MyCareer and CareerOne then the last thing you want is for the world to see you with your pants down. Justin – yes the bigger guys with lots of money who opt not to enter MI do so for different reasons. If you are telling people you compete with Seek, MyCareer and CareerOne then the last thing you want is for the world to see you with your pants down.

]]> By: craigvn http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-40 craigvn Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:18:43 +0000 http://blog.onrec.com.au/2008/02/04/directing-traffic/#comment-40 "Statistics are king in businesses such as online job boards, where success or failure is measured by the amount of traffic to a site." Surely success should be measured by the ability to connect job advertisers (not recruiters, actual employeers) with good quality applicants. High traffic will help in a pure numbers game, but better processes will help more. The seek.com.au process is not good. “Statistics are king in businesses such as online job boards, where success or failure is measured by the amount of traffic to a site.”

Surely success should be measured by the ability to connect job advertisers (not recruiters, actual employeers) with good quality applicants. High traffic will help in a pure numbers game, but better processes will help more. The seek.com.au process is not good.

]]> By: Justin Lyster http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-33 Justin Lyster Tue, 05 Feb 2008 04:40:44 +0000 http://blog.onrec.com.au/2008/02/04/directing-traffic/#comment-33 Geoff Whilst Nielsen do have a panel based methodology in their Netview Panel Product the standard methodology for the online recruitment industry in Australia is from the Nielsen Market Intelligence Product. MI is site centric ie cookie based and is relatively accurate. The metric for ranking in MI is now 28 day daily average UBs rather than monthly UBs. At SEEK we have a belief that the best measure is one which represents true audience engagement. The best competitive measure at this point that we have identified is the total time metric that Nielsen now publish in MI. This measure represents the total audience time on the site for the month. In other words how many jobseekers ,by how often, by how long. From this measure we can see that approx 7 out of every 10 minutes spent on the top 3 jobs board is spent on SEEK. We find that this message is more meaningful to our customers than 2.8 Million UBs per month. Re the small guys - Brett you make a good point and NNR should look at their pricing - having said that we have seen a number of new entrants with large marketing spends who have clearly made a call not based on $, to not enter MI. Wouldn't entering MI provide them and more importantly their customers a clear view on the value they are bringing to the market in a clear and transparent manner using a consistent methodology? Geoff

Whilst Nielsen do have a panel based methodology in their Netview Panel Product the standard methodology for the online recruitment industry in Australia is from the Nielsen Market Intelligence Product. MI is site centric ie cookie based and is relatively accurate.

The metric for ranking in MI is now 28 day daily average UBs rather than monthly UBs.

At SEEK we have a belief that the best measure is one which represents true audience engagement. The best competitive measure at this point that we have identified is the total time metric that Nielsen now publish in MI. This measure represents the total audience time on the site for the month. In other words how many jobseekers ,by how often, by how long. From this measure we can see that approx 7 out of every 10 minutes spent on the top 3 jobs board is spent on SEEK. We find that this message is more meaningful to our customers than 2.8 Million UBs per month.

Re the small guys – Brett you make a good point and NNR should look at their pricing – having said that we have seen a number of new entrants with large marketing spends who have clearly made a call not based on $, to not enter MI. Wouldn’t entering MI provide them and more importantly their customers a clear view on the value they are bringing to the market in a clear and transparent manner using a consistent methodology?

]]> By: brettiredale http://geoffjennings.com/2008/02/directing-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-32 brettiredale Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:33:30 +0000 http://blog.onrec.com.au/2008/02/04/directing-traffic/#comment-32 One thing we can agree on is that NetRatings is not the "industry standard" that some people make it out to be. It is a very small cross section as a result of being totally over priced for the service they deliver to small to medium businesses. If NNR is to become the industry standard then a greater representation from the industry is required. We have made it clear that we would love to be involved and are happy to make our numbers transparent, however $15,000 a year for a few half arsed reports and a comparison to SEEK is of little use. If NNR come to the party and offer a pricing model that reflects the amount of traffic or size of the business (or any other fair metric) then I know a number of other job boards including ours who would jump on. Until then NNR's only use is to support the ongoing pissing contest over positions 2 and 3 between CareerOne and MyCareer. One thing we can agree on is that NetRatings is not the “industry standard” that some people make it out to be. It is a very small cross section as a result of being totally over priced for the service they deliver to small to medium businesses.
If NNR is to become the industry standard then a greater representation from the industry is required.
We have made it clear that we would love to be involved and are happy to make our numbers transparent, however $15,000 a year for a few half arsed reports and a comparison to SEEK is of little use.
If NNR come to the party and offer a pricing model that reflects the amount of traffic or size of the business (or any other fair metric) then I know a number of other job boards including ours who would jump on.

Until then NNR’s only use is to support the ongoing pissing contest over positions 2 and 3 between CareerOne and MyCareer.

]]>