Well, beyond having forward thinking HR leaders, I have a couple ideas
on convincing HR people of social media's value. Remember of course
that value is relative. Social Media tools by themselves have no value.
Its only when considered in the context of the group you may be trying
to engage, and to what end, that the value, or lack of value reveals
itself.

I think some early adopters from the ranks of recruiting/sourcing would
help. Sourcers especially, since they tend to be “out there” searching
the web more often, they may tend to be more savvy about the dynamics of
social media and its potential value. Ask them, or encourage them to
play a bit, on a small scale. The beauty is, trying stuff is generally
free and can give you some data to work with when going to those who may
be unconvinced.

Also, look to other industries outside of HR to help show the value of
social media. A simple google search should show you plenty of news
stories on how social media has impacted business needs. There are even
some stories now specific to HR or Recruiting. Buzz alone is usually
not enough to convince people, and it shouldn't be.

I can see why you would be frustrated because it is important to manage quality talent that's vital to a company. I agree with you on point 4 that HR departments do seem to be a little squeamish about using all these social networks and media.

In you're opinion what would help HR in getting their feet wet with social networking and media?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BodPOc9kQ4g

Cheers,
Jeremy Langhans
Sourcing Consultant
http://www.visualcv.com/execsourcer

thanks for stopping by and the thoughtful commentary. Agreed that the resources for candidates to connect with or get closer to a company's employment experience are there. Thing is, they're not often provided by the company in a way that fits a recruiting end. So I file this under “the big misses in employment branding”, most companies have ample, and cheap resources to develop a fantastic employment brand, many are either too brainwashed or handcuffed by traditional marketing methods to think differently.

I really like this idea for a few reasons, but I think the overarching theme is that this is engaging.

From a candidate experience perspective, applying for a job is usually disconnected. You read company marketing about the culture, advancement opportunity, and job duties, then you click a button to submit your resume (sometimes answering a few questions). Then in 3-6 weeks you get an email that you're not qualified. You don't get any personal interaction with employees (unfiltered of course), you don't get a taste of what the job is like, you don't really know what the internal process for getting hired is, you don't know what your boss would be like. You're basically in a void. It would be really beneficial for a company to provide transparent answers (and activities) to all the questions and energy existing in the potential candidate marketplace.

Interesting though, if you really look from a candidate side, you're not in a void. There are plenty of outlets to connect with other candidates (employees too sometimes) and share experiences. Indeed.com can be scary sometimes from a corporate perspective… The risk is that right now most companies don't pay attention, not at this detail level. Should they pay attention? I think so, because one bad experience can contaminate an entire pool of candidates.

I'll stop here for now, but this is interesting stuff. I think if you really worked to develop a community self identified, talented, segmented, active and engaged candidates, you would certainly have a competitive advantage in recruiting, and you'd see a number of improved metrics (less time to fill, more candidate quality, less applicants who don't meet min quals, better candidate experience, less help calls, etc).