So job boards can now pay Hot Lizard 30p per application - is it a wonderful new model that the job board market should extend to the advertiser? Many discussions and forums have people who seem to think it is the best thing since sliced bread. It is an idea - job boards, why not charge HR and Rec Cons per CV?
I really like the "pay for quality rather than quantity" model - but I would. Allthetopbananas.com already has a reputation for quality and we are not the largest out there, so quality is better than quantity :).
What is interesting is the speed that the discussions following Hot Lizard's offering has taken the IT solution with a new model through to the advertisers. The IT solution in the case of a job board is somewhat similar to that of electricity, a job board does not exist without it. For all those using free email services, do you reduce your rates or do your job for free?
It is a nice marketing model to reduce risk and allow boards to start up and pay for applications, which is great - well done Hot Lizard.
But would a board with a successful brand achieving good traffic really want to pay by application? No of course not! There will be a cut off point where the cost of all those 30p's along with service charges is more expensive than simply paying a fixed fee for the technology. And boards need to offer some variation of features to compete and stand out - this will cost more than 30p.
This model is an attractive way to reduce costs for new start ups and existing low traffic boards focusing on cost reduction during a difficult climate. It is very attractive for Hot Lizard - as some of the start ups or smaller existing boards grow they will have that relationship to deliver added value and eventually a fixed cost model. It allows them to take seeds and grow them - nice. Hot Lizard are also going to cash in on delivering well structured sites that Google likes. Many of the 30p's they bill will be due to SEO which many solution companies fail to deliver on. The Hot Lizard client is paying 30p for the ability to except an application.
As for HR paying per CV and response? They already pay for placement (rec con) so it could catch on assuming there is a model to filter out the rubbish. But it would change the game for HR. It alters budgeting processes and it will increase the focus on how their own recruitment web sites deliver - which is not a bad thing for the industry or the job seeker.
Without Google entering the jobs market this type of paradigm change would put them right in the middle. HR could take on an AdWords agency to market their recruitment web pages in Google, it would be the same model for HR as a job board with a pay per application model.
The future in our open markets and the web models rather than newspaper models will surely change today's approachs, but I feel phrases such as "service", "ease", "simplicity", "multi-channel", "social networks" and "response" will be the key. I don't expect main stream leading boards to jump on the approach of pay per CV - it would be a complex model, I assume a Nuclear Analyst CV would cost more than a Telesales Rep? Fish 4 have tried it, with a £10 - £15 per CV rate card aimed quietly at SME rec cons. Complex is not usually sucessful!
What the model evolves to will depend on the creativity and competition in the market, but Job Boards will have to deliver more service than they do today eventually for the same buck.