This is an ongoing list of parallels between RecOps/tools and other fields or ideas.

Lessons #1 - Hostile Architecture

What is hostile architecture?
It is an urban-design philosophy that uses elements of the built environment to purposefully guide or restrict behavior. I am borrowing the term because I think it can also work here to succinctly explain an idea.

But Jeremy that is building architecture, not recruiting! Why bring it up?
Three reasons:
1. It impacts if people will apply to your open jobs
2. It impacts your candidate experience
3. It impacts your internal teams

Ok but how?
Job Seekers: There have been plenty of posts and memes made about applicant tracking systems, like Workday, where if candidates see it then they know it is going to take 10+ minutes to complete their application. This is creating a barrier more than a bridge.
Candidates: You have an excessive number of interviews or demands of a candidate's time. You designed an interview process for a role that is filled with bias that favors a specific type of candidate.
Internal Teams: You design highly restrictive processes or get tools that are extremely difficult to understand or use.

Part of the goal of a RecOps team is to reduce hostile architecture wherever possible but they can't do it alone. It is still important to be aware of situations where you have hostile architecture and do what you can to mitigate it since Talent Acquisition/Recruiting is a human business.

Lesson #2 - Economy of Motion

Let me explain:
Economy of motion, sometimes also referred to as motion economy or no wasted motion, is a concept that originated in manufacturing that focuses on increasing efficiency by eliminating unnecessary movements. While many of us on LinkedIn don't work in manufacturing, we all likely use principles based on the economy of motion because we organize our workspaces or computers to have everything we need right in front of us in the fewest movements or clicks possible.

So how does this relate to RecOps?
When designing processes/tools, RecOps pros must think about what will get the desired result in the fewest movements possible from internal stakeholders (e.g. recruiters, interviewers) and external stakeholders (e.g. candidates). I've seen brilliant tools/products or processes that can help a Recruiting Team be more efficient flounder because they require too many clicks or moves. Heck I've even designed a few of these processes myself to get the right data (no, I'm not proud of this, so I apologize to all my previous teams 🙇‍♂️ ).

But a great example of economy of motion is #recruitingcoordination.

Inefficient Economy of Motion
#recruiters emailing #recruitingcoordinators their interview requests. This can then kick off a chain of events involving the RC transcribing the request into a spreadsheet (so they can get coverage if they are out or data), sending emails to candidates for their availability, putting that availability into a system, scheduling, etc.

Decent Economy of Motion
Recruiter submits a form that goes to a central spreadsheet, and the RC takes it from there. This removes the transcribing aspect and increases data.

Excellent Economy of Motion
Scheduling tools like ModernLoop, Prelude, InterviewPlanner, Cronofy, and GoodTime.io or #ats like Ashby, Greenhouse Software, and SmartRecruiters with native self-scheduling features. These significantly reduce the number of moves necessary to schedule a candidate thereby getting to the result faster.

Keep in mind is that sometimes you need to spend the energy upfront to reduce moves later. This should not be confused for wasted motion but it can be if you are over-engineering a process or don't understand the Why for the changes you are making.

Why did you group GAI into this?
Because people inherently like using tools that make their lives easier. This is why more GAI tools are entering the Recruiting Technology space. Tools like BrightHire and Metaview realized that manually writing interview notes is wasted motion because it distracts the interviewer and prevents them from fully capturing a candidate's answer (which has a huge impact on whether the right candidate for the job is selected).

Lesson #3 - Linguistic Relativity

RecOps and linguistic relativity (aka Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) have a lot in common.

What is linguistic relativity/Sapir-Whorf hypothesis?
The hypothesis of linguistic relativity, also known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, is a principle suggesting that the structure of a language influences its speakers' worldview or cognition, and thus people's perceptions are relative to their spoken language.

Why does this relate to RecOps?
RecOps teams often cover a wide number of functions (e.g., Data, Programs, Operations, Strategy) and stakeholder groups (e.g., engineers, executives, and other recruiters). RecOps professionals learn the languages of each stakeholder group to be effective. By learning these languages and how their stakeholder groups think about the words they choose, RecOps pros can expand their thinking and borrow words/concepts for other areas.

Could you give me an example?
Revenue Operations teams classify deals lost in the same ways that RecOps teams classify candidates lost. Different words, same concept. However, suppose RecOps teams want to help get Recruiting/TA viewed as a revenue generator. In that case, it is time to start coding our rejection reasons in the same way as the other revenue-generating functions.

Or maybe I'm just a little out there 😂 😅

Lesson #4 - Aviation

The Metaphors
Flying on autopilot 🛫 - Autopilot is a feature designed in aircraft that allows the pilot to automate some of their work. Early autopilots were only able to maintain a constant heading and altitude, but modern autopilots can control every part of the flight envelope from just after take-off to landing.
Flying on instruments 🛬 - Also called instrument flight, this happens when the pilot navigates only by reference to the instruments in the aircraft cockpit.

You went high-level again Jeremy (no pun intended)...what is the connection to RecOps and GAI here?
The rise of more sophisticated recruiting tools allowed Talent Acquisition departments to start setting processes more on autopilot. This started with structured interviews, which made interviewing more standardized, predictable, and measurable. With GAI in the mix, this is accelerating the autopilot aspects. We've already started seeing this when it comes to things like interview note transcription (like Metaview and BrightHire), which allow interviewers to focus purely on the candidate and not take copious interview notes (this is a good thing, by the way 👍🏼)

A foundational element of RecOps is maintaining the tooling. To be effective at this, you need to understand how the tools work and what steps to take if there is an issue (flying on instruments). In many cases, it takes time to master the skills that allow you to be equally effective both with and without the tools (though it goes faster with a training montage video). However, this skill will likely be lost in future generations of RecOps professionals.

What is an example?
You have an interview scheduling tool (e.g., ModernLoop, InterviewPlanner, Prelude, or it is native to your ATS). For some reason, it stops functioning as expected. Interview scheduling can't stop even though the tool isn't working, so the decision is made to schedule manually. Coordinators trained exclusively on these tools (autopilot) may need help to reach the same output and more errors than those trained without these tools (instruments). For the latter group, these tools elevate their skills, and they aren't dependent on them for success.

This isn't a plea to stop the evolution or a cry that the old ways were better. This is more an appeal to say that learning the more difficult style first can help when you are given tools later.

Lesson #5 - Mysteries/Scary Movies

Mysteries and Scary Movies?
Yup, let me explain. Though not a hard and fast rule for writing a mystery/scary movie writing, in these genres, you generally start at the end and write to the beginning of the story. This gives them the ability to design (e.g., determining a MacGuffin, plot twists, and character development) with the solution to the problem in mind (i.e., who is the murderer (yes, it is always the Butler))

So what is the parallel here for #RecOps?
In RecOps, you do the same. When there is a problem, you start at the outcome (e.g., a negative hiring experience, a tool breaking, a program getting off track) and work backward through every step to see what happened. Sure, you can start at the beginning and design forward; however, in doing so, you may create a number of inefficient processes.

Are you writing about this because of the ongoing strikes?
No, but interesting observation since recruiting and interviewing is about collecting candidate stories. A comedy about recruiting and RecOps would be a fun ride.

Disclaimer: The views expressed and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and they do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer, or company. Assumptions made in the analysis are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the author. Since we are critically-thinking human beings, these views are always subject to change, revision, and rethinking at any time. Please do not hold them in perpetuity.