A right way & a wrong way for hiring content
There's an idiom about leading horses to water or whatever that would fit in well here...
:60 read | Chime in on LinkedIn here and Twitter here
“The content itself is less important than the permission you give your team to create it.”
-Me, yesterday, totally burying the lede.
Something I didn't believe a year ago but do now: it doesn't matter what your team talks about on social.
As long as they're passionate about it. And it's them saying it.
They know more about why they're happy with their job than you do.
I’ll give you an example. My colleague Kelly Hingtgen made a LinkedIn post this week about employers who pull the rug out on remote work, here. The tldr:
She’s seeing lots of candidates who love their jobs and are happy with pay. But are looking anyway. Because they can’t go remote.
The kicker: these are people who were hired full remote. And companies are pulling the old switcheroo.
And she graciously mentioned at the end that that’s why she likes it at Hirewell: we’d never pull that crap.
She came up with the topic herself. Wrote it herself. No approval from anyone else here was necessary.
👉It got 88,000 views.
How many views did your corporate-driven, boring, by-the-numbers employer brand piece get?
How much time and effort did it take to put together, just to get ignored?
I can’t tell you how to run your hiring content strategy. You do you.
But there’s a way that works and a way that doesn’t…
You can follow me on LinkedIn here and Twitter here. Join the discussion on this LinkedIn post (or give it a 👍) here.