by 
The Technology Knowledge Group (KG) conducted its second annual career services recruiting platform survey during the summer of 2018. The annual survey is designed to capture the current state of the field and target areas for future programming. The KG conducted an association-wide survey of career centers and offices to identify the types of systems each of us uses as well as some of the common challenges we all face.
For 2018, a total of 83 individuals representing 59 institutions completed the survey; this is down from 2017 where 84 individuals from 74 institutions participated. There were 15 institutions that participated in both years. Like last year, duplicate entries were removed. While further research is needed to confirm why participation dropped, the authors believe that the emerging market leadership position held by Handshake as well as fatigue from ongoing transitions to new systems, may have depressed interest in participating.
Handshake emerged as the most widely implemented platform among reporting member institutions at 63% (n=37). Symplicity use fell to 14% from 19% last year and just 5% reported using Grad Leaders (vs 11% last year). Purple Briefcase saw an increase in adoption from 5% last year to 8% this year. A number of other systems were being used by our member schools as shown in Table 1 below.
Handshake also grew its lead significantly as the platform of choice for providing alumni services: rising 20 points from 36% in 2017 to 56% in 2018. As Table 1 also illustrates, platforms Grad Leaders and Symplicity saw a decline in use for delivering alumni services from 2017, while 12Twenty saw an increase in use during 2018.
New on the survey this year was the question: “How long do alumni have access to use your recruiting platform?” The results are summarized in Table 2 below and show that nearly 60% of schools indicated they provide services for a period of at least a year or more beyond graduation.
The 2018 Survey continued the practice of collecting questions from participants about the platforms and the companies selling those platforms. This year’s questions indicated a shift away from issues related to purchasing new systems and their initial deployment toward learning how to maximize the investments that were made by career centers over the past two years. In reviewing these submissions, we identified the following themes:
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs – Participants singled out a particular concern that crossed all platforms: the increasing numbers of jobs that were not relevant for their students and alumni as well as jobs that tended to be “junky.” Many wanted to know what tools the platforms were developing to help students better identify and filter the opportunities available to them.
Internships – More career professionals asked questions about how the platforms managed internship and experiential learning programs. The desire for specific internship management modules was clearly evident as was the preference for customization capabilities to support the unique nature of internships, Cooperative Education, and experiential learning.
Increasing Adoption and Use – A number of questions around boosting the use of platforms by students and alumni also emerged and included wanting to know how to increase the frequency and efficiency of use and wanting to know what impact the platforms have had on student engagement with career service offices. There were also questions on how easy is it for students to learn how to use each platform.
Data and Reporting – Participants weren’t just interested in making sure students and alumni had access to better quality jobs, many were asking how the platforms could better connect job postings to first destination results. There were also a number of questions around the need for easier report building, data production, and integration with data elements from campus student information systems (SIS).
Security and Safety – While data security and integrity were certainly on participant’s minds in 2017, there seemed to be more questions in this area this year. Also new this year, there were questions about what the platform providers were doing to ensure student safety in the job search and application process.
Platform Versatility – This was a theme in both 2017 and 2018 with participants asking questions about customizability of the platforms, ease of use, and system integration support (for example 2-way calendar synchronization for appointments). In addition, many questions revolved around the perception that the system developers don’t understand what career centers actually do, with several participants indicating that it would be a good idea for vendors to spend some time with career services professionals and build their knowledge of what happens on a daily basis in our offices.
Employer Relations Support – We collected questions related to best practices for keeping employer recruiter or human resources contacts current, as we did in 2017. There were also questions about the ability of the platforms to coordinate both employer and student initiatives all in one place. And there were questions on how the platforms could make it easier to collect hire information from employers (as well as students and alumni).
Overall, it appears that our membership’s use of recruiting platforms is moving out of a period of volatility, where many career services offices were switching systems, into a period of relative stability where offices are focused on getting the return on investment they were promised by vendors. The questions posed by participants also indicated that the need to identify, and share, best practices across the Association is beginning to emerge.
__________
Ashley Graham Phipps
Emerging Technologies Coordinator, SoACE Tech KG
Assistant Director, Employer Relations
Wake Forest University
Peter Thorsett
Chair, SoACE Tech KG
Director, Strategic Initiatives, Communications, & Research
Division of Community Engagement & Career Readiness
University of South Florida
