Job boards are a common tool for any recruiter. They sit in our “recruitment tool belt” right next to our coffee cups, LinkedIn profile and Google toolbar. There are a variety of job boards to choose from, and new ones are consistently being added to the market. However, compared to our one dollar coffees, free site searches, and our fancy but free Boolean search strings, job boards tend to come with a hefty price tag.
Workopolis versus Monster - “Big fish” in the Canadian recruitment pond
They have the largest databases, the highest traffic, and the greatest social presence. Although both job boards give recruiters access to extremely large databases (millions of candidates), they come at a great cost and they don’t exactly promise high quality candidates.
Here at Stafflink Solutions, we use the resume databases of both Workopolis and Monster, and up until a month ago we only used the job posting services of Workopolis. However, we recently re-evaluated our job board expenses and switched our job postings from Workopolis to Monster.
Why Would We Do Such A Thing? Here Are Five Reasons:
After evaluating our placements, the Stafflink team agreed that the candidates we connected with through Monster were of a higher quality than Workopolis. In order to back up our assumptions, we completed a trial run with Monster. Monster gave us 7 free job postings to test out over a 30 day period. When comparing candidates via our postings on Workopolis vs. Monster, we found that Monster attracted more qualified candidates and more senior technical candidates than Workopolis. This was our experience with a very limited sample of job posts. Your results might be entirely different.
Money, money, money! When comparing the numbers, there is no denying that Workopolis is more expensive. For their prepackaged services (resume database and 100 job postings), Workopolis was approximately 20% more expensive than Monster. In addition, if you pay-per-job Workopolis is $750/job for a 30 day posting, whereas Monster is $725/job for a 60 day posting. Monster also provides significantly higher savings than Workopolis for job packages. Monster charges $550/job for 5-9 jobs in comparison to Workopolis’s $655/job for 5-9 jobs. Also, for any enhanced features (such as bolding or feature jobs), Workopolis tends to be $20 more expensive per job post.
Monster is flexible. They cater to both large and small businesses. Workopolis tends to be all or nothing. Monster has smaller packages available such as a 7 day power resume search or a 14 day “target post” for hourly, skilled, or admin jobs. Monster also lets you pick up to 3 categories for each individual job post.
4. Customer Service
Monster gives us freebies, and they do it with a smile! They let us test out 7 jobs for free and they have offered us free live training seminars. Anytime I have emailed a question, someone has called me back within an hour. An agent guided me through my first posting, and when we ran out of job postings before our new contract began, they gave us some more free jobs to tie us over. They have “wowed” us with their care and concern.
Both Monster and Workopolis have jumped on the social media bandwagon. However, Monster seems to be driving the wagon. Monster has partnered with BeKnown, a social platform that allows you to connect to jobs via Facebook while keeping your social information and business profile separate. To compare, Workopolis has over 81 twitter feeds, a Facebook feed, a YouTube channel and and an excellent blog. Monster has all that, plus mobile apps, and a presence on Foursquare and Flickr. Tweet that!
Maybe we are just in the honeymoon stage with Monster, but so far it has been smooth sailing. They fit our company’s needs, they make our recruiters happy, and they have wooed our social media team. But enough about us. What is your opinion? Which job board would you prefer in your bag of tricks?
Where do you stand on the Monster versus Workopolis issue? Let the debate begin!