top of page
Indeed Wave.PNG

Ghosting Busters w/ Jeff Shapiro

Tired of hearing about "ghosting" yet? Too bad! It's a serious issue, and employers who engage in the practice are really screwing things up in a wide variety of ways for the company. That's why we brought Jeff Shapiro, Sr. Director of Talent Acquisition at Radnet, to talk about his take on this growing epidemic. Listen up, Casper, there are no friendly ghosts.


INTRO (1s):

Hide your kids! Lock the doors! You're listening to HR’s most dangerous podcast. Chad Sowash and Joel Cheeseman are here to punch the recruiting industry, right where it hurts! Complete with breaking news, brash opinion and loads of snark, buckle up boys and girls, it's time for the Chad and Cheese podcast.

Joel (21s):

Oh yeah. It's your favorite degenerates? The Chad and Cheese podcast. I'm your co-host Joel Cheesman joined as always by my partner in crime Chad Sowash and today we are just giddy to welcome Jeffrey Shapiro, Senior Director of TA at RadNet and also he's founding member of Hacking HR and HR on the House Club. Jeffrey, welcome to the show. I was disappointed that RadNet was not some cool gaming company. It's radiology. So your days must be exciting.

Chad (55s):

It's only life-saving that's it?

Joel (57s):

Yeah. It's actually moneymaking what Jeff does. It's good.

Jeffrey (1m 0s):

I love that. We're triple up trivializing healthcare. So thank you.

Joel (1m 6s):

The jokes will still be a funny in hell Jeff. I promise.

Jeffrey (1m 9s):

Very true. Listen, I'm proud to be a degenerate today. I love to do it.

Chad (1m 13s):

Excellent. Well, a little bit about you, Jeff, the long walks on the beach, what do you like to do? Can we get a little background? How'd you get into Radnets, not to mention, have you been ghosted lately?

Jeffrey (1m 25s):

I was actually ghosted this week by a TA partner we extended an offer to.

Chad (1m 33s):


Jeffrey (1m 34s):

I get it. They disclosed it was my offer and another, the other, was a unicorn organization that they had been wanting to work at their entire life. So I'm anticipating they got that offer, but the ghosting just disappearing without an answer, kind of shocked me. What do I like to do? So I have a one-year old golden retriever, two daughters that are nine and six and they dominate my wife and my social calendar. We basically are at their b`eck and call riding, driving them around to gymnastics, ballet, et cetera. So I do not lead a very fun life. I am a hardcore sports fan. My Braves won the world series this year, tuned out on the NFL this year and gave up the NBA a very long time.

Joel (2m 17s):

Fair enough. He loves baseball.

Jeffrey (2m 18s):

I do.

Joel (2m 18s):

Everything else can suck it.

Chad (2m 20s):

I love about you already. Jeffrey, Jesus. Let's get into today's topic. Today's topic being ghosting. And we're always talking about how candidates, especially right now are ghosting us, but where did they learn this from Jeffrey? Where did they learn this from?

Jeffrey (2m 36s):

I don't know that it's learned so much as part of upbringing. In general And then we'll go way off top of here. I just think human nature, the respect for others, respect for other people's lives in general is not what it used to be. And nobody thinks about like long-term repercussions. It's humans are selfish. I'm in it for me. What's in it for me. This doesn't fit my narrative. I'm moving on.

Joel (3m 1s):

In fairness it's an uncomfortable situation. Sometimes. Telling people no can be uncomfortable. I'm told no all the time. I'm sure it's uncomfortable.

Chad (3m 10s):

I'm sure it's uncomfortable. I don't think so. I think they're like, no.

Joel (3m 13s):

Yeah. So Jeffrey had a really hot LinkedIn take recently. I'll read it if it's okay for our listeners to get a real feel for what we're talking about. So Jeffrey posted on LinkedIn "ghosted candidates are not going to pursue opportunities with your organization in the future. They're also not going to be a customer of yours." This thing got 2000 plus likes and almost 200 comments. It was hot.

Chad (3m 41s):

So right now, Jeffrey, I mean, this is an issue because we have problems finding candidates, for the most part, right? This was also an issue two years ago when we weren't having problems finding candidates. So why is the topic surfacing now? Why does it matter now, when it should have mattered back then?

Jeffrey (4m 0s):

Agreed. It should always matter. I think it matters now more because recruiting, retention, engagement is at the tip of all C-suite executives lips right now. It is a focal point, there is more time being spent on it. There are more dollars being put into it and everybody's really just measuring anything and everything they can to just move that needle in any direction to become more competitive, to fill positions faster, to retain people longer, to get more people to apply. Even on the corporate TA side, the focus is shifting from not looking at how many people apply, but outbound recruiting, getting your corporate to your recruiters, more in the mindset of going out and pursuing people because nobody's applying anymore.

Jeffrey (4m 45s):

Everybody's going to kind of go back to basics and really cold calls, solicit and actively source, screen and recruit. Recruiters have to recruit. Now there's nowhere to hide.

Chad (4m 56s):

So the way that I see it, and I know it's not just one individual, but this is a leadership problem. Talent acquisition for years should have been able to fully understand the negative impact to the overall brand and business. Meaning that, you know, just first and foremost, if you treat candidates like shit and you ghost them, or they go into a black hole, then more than likely, they're not going to want to work with your organization or buy your stuff. Right? And I think that's very, it's a very compelling narrative and or discussion that you can have with your CRO, your CMO, your CEO, to demonstrate just how important talent is.

Chad (5m 41s):

First and foremost, you can't make the product or provide the service without having talent in those seats. I mean, that's number one and that's core to the business. But then also beyond that, if you start pissing millions of people off, they're not going to buy your product. So is this the time right now, where TA starts to collect their backbone and they start going into the C-suite and they start making their business case.

Jeffrey (6m 7s):

I hope so. I really do. I think the origin here probably comes from a business model, where business model would be bad customers are better than no customers. You have no customers you're not in business. You have bad customers you're still in business. But when you're on the talent side, a bad candidate is not better than no candidates. A bad candidate experience will equal no candidates. I mean, only you can measure infinite amount of things. I am cautiously optimistic that one of the responses to what is happening in the world now is more people will start to measure the actual candidate experience.

Jeffrey (6m 50s):

I don't think enough organizations are doing it. There's very easy, low hanging fruit ways to do it. But I think this is the direction that we are going down. We need TA to embrace the partner model, moving away from open rec Philly, open rec Philly, to have those difficult conversations with their partners and operations and let them know when you do this this is the downstream effect. The candidate gets mad at the recruiter. The recruiter wants to salvage the relationship with the candidate and hiring manager. Recruiter is not selling hiring manager down the river by telling the manager, Hey, sorry. It took them four days to get back to me. They're the ones saying, oh my God, I'm so sorry. You slipped through the cracks.

Jeffrey (7m 30s):

I forgot about you. It's my fault. Because you don't want to ruin that relationship, but we still need to teach hiring managers that these, at the end of it all, are all humans, the seeker, the human, and every single one of them are a potential customer for the business that you work for.

Chad (7m 44s):

Yeah, but what we need to do is we need to demonstrate how it impacts revenue, because that's how we're going to move the C-suite. So talking about how the nice fluffy way of how we treat humans. I mean, nobody gives a shit hiring managers don't give a shit. If they did, they would treat people better. But if we demonstrate how it's impacting revenue negatively and how that position open every single day cost money, whatever that number is, then we could have a much different outcome at that point. Don't you think?

Jeffrey (8m 17s):

A hundred percent agree. One of the things we have tried to quantify, it's still a work in progress is what is the cost or lost revenue of having that position open, starting with what, how many overtime hours your burning through? Going through your budget? You're you're paying 8,000 hours of overtime a month. Why don't we back when we pull that back, what's your FTE had count? Negative implication in my world so diagnostic imaging of not having let's pick a mammography tech, not having a mammo tech in that one site means 20 procedures per day, seven days a week is 140 procedures every week, which comes out to what, 560 procedures a month by that one person being missed on billing.

Chad (9m 4s):

There you go!

Jeffrey (9m 5s):

Like that's now, then you start you saying, what is the average reimbursement for a screening based on the payer mix. There's just so many different ways to look at it. But showing that type of data is what gets people accountable to, okay, had an interview, better follow up with my TA partner within 24 hours of this interview. That way they could get back to the candidate as quickly as possible. And now we're moving to the hiring philosophy. Like where are the pitfalls? Where are we slowing down? And I can tell anybody on this podcast right now, if you're measuring hiring velocity, you are never slowed down by a recruiter. It is never a recruiter. You want to talk to candidates. They want to talk to the hiring managers.

Jeffrey (9m 47s):

You are being slowed down by the follow-up from your hiring manager or the candidate having multiple offers bird in hand, Hey, I got your offer. I just interviewed here. I still think that I'm going to get another offer there. And then what do you want to do as an organization? Do you want to say, here's my offer. It's an expired, it's an exploding offer. If you don't respond within X amount of time, we're going to move on. What does that for an experience, but you still need to listen to the business. So do you be a human and say, okay, get back to me by the end of the day, Friday, like there's so many things that you need to measure and figure out. And there's no one size fits all. Every business, every industry, every organization, different sizes. But the one thing you've got to start doing is looking at how do you want to fix your experience?

Jeffrey (10m 29s):

Where are you going to do it? How are you going to measure it? And what's the plan to make it a little bit better?

Joel (10m 35s):

Well, we love recruiters and companies that walk the walk. So you touched on it here. And I, by the way, I love the fact that you're so focused on this and you're not a typical sort of service industry, right? Like you're not that customer facing like a restaurant or something of that nature. So what does RadNet do? What tools does it use? What protocols to make sure that candidates don't fall through the cracks and get ghosted. What do you do? But the mirror on you.

Jeffrey (11m 4s):

Our tools are very remedial. Our TA tech stack is horrible. We use ADP, my TA partners send me manual reports every week, every month, every quarter. We're in the process of RFP upgrading the TA tech stack, some other technology to sit on top of a new ATS CRM, but something we have internally is from our IT department they built something called Radar. So think about organizations in any industry that reach out to their customers in our world, patients with reminders to schedule appointments or target a sale. So that's what Radar is for us. We use Radar to NPS. We're not using it yet. It's coming out very quickly.

Jeffrey (11m 46s):

We're going to use Radar to MPS measure our candidate experience for those who don't know MPS has participated in before 10, how likely are you to X, Y, and Z? So we're coming up with a three question zero to 10 scales. You were 10 how easy was it to apply for your position? Zero to 10? How would you rate your overall interview experience? Zero to 10, how likely are you to recommend opportunities at this organization to friends and family members? So that is one thing we are going to start doing. My TA partners. Sorry, I can go on and on.

Joel (12m 22s):

Your stone age based on what we talk about on the show. So my question then is if you can do it with, you know, stones and rocks, anyone should be able to do it. Is it your sense with so much technology, so much automation so much out there to make sure ghosting doesn't happen? Is it your sense, particularly in the organizations that you serve in HR, do you think it's getting better or with all these tools? Is it still a horrible ghosting problem?

Jeffrey (12m 53s):

I think it's not getting better. I think it's still horrible. I think many people have a mindset that technology is the fix. Technology is not the fix. It's the human is the fix. Technology is there for the human. If the human is not using it properly or even using it, I mean, in reality, how many organizations pay for tools that never get used? So it's, you're a carpenter building a house, technology is just one of your tools to build that house. You still need the human. Candidates still want to talk to humans. So no matter what you automate, you still have a human to human interaction, no matter what.

Chad (13m 28s):

So let's talk a little bit more about the tech stack. I think we have the stones kind of like an arrows conversation on one side, and then we have, you know, way too much tech on the other side, where some companies are spending so much on point solutions that are layered in, they're not integrated, recruiters pay hell just to use all of the tools that they're provided. The question is what should an organization do to move forward, to ensure in a couple of different areas. First and foremost, you have a great recruiter experience, because if you don't have a great recruiter experience and it's a pain in the ass, you're probably going to have to be looking for new recruiters soon.

Chad (14m 11s):

Turnover is going to suck because their job sucks. And then on the other side, the job seeker experience out of your whole stones and arrows kind of scenario right now, what would you do differently if you could? What's utopia look like?

Jeffrey (14m 25s):

So the buzz term out there is an effortless experience everybody's using it. I want to know that it is as easy as possible for anybody that's interested in my organization to let me know. I think about all the different technologies out there for job seekers, where they have to register to then physically apply. Why? Like, why can't I just give you my LinkedIn profile? Why can't I just send my resume? Resume parsers are terrible. They never work. Make it as easy as possible. Talk to the person as quickly as possible. How great is it? Like everybody relies on automation. Automation is great. I acknowledge I've received your application. Great. I applied on the 14th and I got an email three minutes later, it's automated saying we got your application, but then nobody physically pick up the phone and called me until the 20th.

Jeffrey (15m 11s):

It's six days later, I'm not having a great experience. It didn't matter how easy it was for me to apply. Again. We need the human, we don't need the technology. Why didn't that person respond to me? So we got to start looking at, and it's really the recruiters. Is it time management? I think too many recruiters are thrown into the job without proper training. They're not given strategies and tactics. I think that when I stumbled into recruiting on day one, it was like, here's this list call as many people as you can. And don't leave until you've made your a hundred calls for the day and documented.

Chad (15m 44s):


Jeffrey (15m 44s):

No one really sat down until I was much further in my career. And I started admiring from afar, others asking questions. So no one really gives recruiters training. Like there's no college degree to become a recruiter. There's no certification course. It's just

Chad (16m 1s):

Trial by fire.

Jeffrey (16m 1s):

Right. Someone gets thrown into it. Someone stumbled into it. No one really sets out saying, I want to be a recruiter. And then recruiters are put in positions that are performance-based. We measure everything. I am obsessed with data. We measure everything. That we get so focused on the data that we often leave out the narrative. Like I made my call. I'm not even listening to this person because right away, the first thing they said was not interested. I'm not even going to get to the sell of trying to talk them in my value proposition, give them my elevator pitch because I need to make my 50 calls for the day.

Chad (16m 35s):


Jeffrey (16m 36s):

Everybody just needs to slow down and remember that every person we're interacting with is a human being. And then every single one of them is potentially a customer. If I have a bad candidate experience somewhere, how likely am I to then want to support that organization as a customer?

Chad (16m 54s):


Jeffrey (16m 54s):

So we all have unicorn organizations and I have a unicorn organization that I had a horrible experience with that they're no longer a unicorn of mine. Like forever I have had a dream of working at ordered organization X and based on one interaction I've had at organization X, I'm just done with them. They're no longer my unicorn.

Chad (17m 12s):

So how do we change this narrative and discussion? How do we take all of these data points? Because again, as everybody looks at all the rest of the organization and they feel like HR and TA's the redheaded stepchild, well, that, there's a reason behind that. It's because you haven't been able to make a case. You haven't been able to demonstrate how you actually impact the business. So the question is, how do we start to as a profession and maybe just as groups first, right? Starting, maybe it's grassroots, who the hell knows, but TA leaders, how do we get them to think more business-like versus transactional day to day making that your recruiters are in the trenches?

Chad (17m 57s):

How do we change this?

Jeffrey (17m 59s):

I mean, you said something super profound, more business like, and I would tell anybody in TA it is worth the time to take a day away from recruiting and sit in on meetings, really observe the business, learn what your company does in and out. Ask questions, talk to different department leaders. I think mentorship is phenomenal. I tell everybody that I've ever come into contact with, mentorship is amazing. The best thing you can do is find a mentor that has nothing to do with your job. A mentor that works for your company in a leadership role, that is not part of your department will have tremendous value on you.

Chad (18m 34s):

Well, and I think you have to do this real quick though. You have to, whenever you're sitting with those individuals, you have to understand how you are impacting, whether it's marketing, whether it's sales, whether it's product, whether it's developers, right? How are you directly impacting those departments? And if you don't get great talent into those seats, how's that going to impact the bottom line, in all those different areas, right? That's not something that we think about. We look at numbers, we look at seats to fill, but we don't go past that into the actual business impact.

Jeffrey (19m 13s):

Yeah. This is turning behaviors into actions. Like you gotta be selfish. You have to be consumed with your world, but then with a lot of integrity and accountability, you need to speak up, raise that flag and talk against the bad behavior. And that's hard. It's really hard to be the voice of opposition in a room. But if you've built your brand, as in who you are, your behaviors dictate your personality. When you are raising that flag and calling bullshit on something.

Chad (19m 44s):


Jeffrey (19m 45s):

The receiver should know that you are not attacking them so much as identifying a problem and trying to find a solution. I am not calling out manager, Jane Smith for consistently not giving feedback. I am reminding Jane Smith, hey, here's why I need that feedback. And then we're going to kick it to escalation, like if we're going to talk to Jane, one-on-one like we are coming to you without problems. If it remains an issue, I am going to be going to your leader hey, we've done X, Y, and Z. I need your help. I think you understand how important getting an interview feedback and scorecard in a timely manner is, but Jane Smith consistently is not giving it to me.

Jeffrey (20m 27s):

By the way, let's take a look at Jane Smith hiring manager, batting average, and she's losing more new hires than anybody else.

Chad (20m 31s):

Why aren't we more transparent though? The CEO should see all this to be able to demonstrate how all of this is actually creating a supply chain management fiasco.

Jeffrey (20m 43s):

People are just scared.

Chad (20m 43s):

Get a backbone, man.

Jeffrey (20m 44s):

Yeah. We start a bit by saying like somewhere along the line, we were talking about how saying no is difficult. Like saying no to someone you don't know, the job seeker is difficult. Imagine being in a room and like having to say no to somebody face to face, it's so much easier over a phone, over a text, over email. This is why it goes back to those behaviors. Integrity and accountability is huge. Like we need to physically speak up and say, we can't keep doing this quote Einstein and that definition of insanity, like how do you expect it to get better if we're not willing to do anything different?

Joel (21m 20s):

Speaking of backbone, can we talk about my poll for a second?

Chad (21m 23s):

No. You mean the poll that you've been writing for, I don't know, the last couple of weeks?

Joel (21m 26s):

We have so many polls to talk about, but I'm going to talk about a specific poll of a question I asked on LinkedIn, which was what percentage of employers deal with ghosting from candidates? Zero to 10, 40% of employers deal with ghosting. 10 to 25% of their candidates ghosting them, that was 35% of employers. 25 to 50, with 17% of employers and 50 plus getting ghosted is 9% of employers. My question is Jeff, with so much ghosting from candidates, and I know you're not a shrink, but is there something, something psychological with employers that make them say, well, if candidates don't give a shit, why should we give a shit?

Joel (22m 13s):

And if so, how do they overcome that mentality?

Jeffrey (22m 16s):

The mentality, I guess, I think you're right to answer your question. The mentality is kind of just I don't owe you anything, who cares if he ghosts me, that's how bad, like, I might remember who they are, it might impact them long-term. My bio so I will remember that you disappeared on me. Now I have my own bias. Does that really change if you could do this job or not. So candidates don't owe us anything. They could do what they want. The recruiter represented that organization. They can't just disappear on somebody because their actions have repercussions. They have downstream negative effects. Like if that candidate wants to ghost my TA manager, fine, that candidate's still going to find a job somewhere else.

Jeffrey (23m 1s):

But if my TA manager ghosts the candidate that's a much bigger problem than someone applying to a job, going on an interview and we can't get a hold of them to extend an offer, right? That happens. You also have people who accept an offer and then disappear. I call this "Phantom Attrition" accepted offers never started. That happens now more than ever.

Chad (23m 20s):


Jeffrey (23m 21s):

Either either way, no matter what I would say, like to your poll, my answer would be who cares? The candidate doesn't owe me anything.

Joel (23m 30s):

Tons of people care about my polls, Jeffrey, tons of people care.

Jeffrey (23m 36s):

If I had to write in what percentage of candidates ghost you, don't care, that's what it is.

Chad (23m 43s):

Yeah. And you're saying pretty much what every female said in college.

Joel (23m 47s):

Oh, that's not cool. Curious on your share that you did on LinkedIn. Somebody brought up the point of sharing and it strikes me as something relevant that if you ghost someone they're going to tell friends and that bad experience is going to be compounded. Some studies say between 7 and 10 people that you tell is that your experience and you know, what words of caution would you say to someone that thinks, oh, it's just isolated to one person.

Jeffrey (24m 18s):

I think about, like myself, as a consumer. I how forget myself. Just think about Yelp and how the whole entire platform is given a voice to someone who doesn't want to have that awkward conversation in the restaurant. My hamburger was under cooked. I said nothing while I was there. But the second I got home, I went on Yelp and talked about how my hamburger was undercooked. I'm never going back there. And it's because it's just so much easier to hide behind that computer that has the difficult conversations. The whole thing is set up for negative has a much larger voice than positive.

Jeffrey (24m 58s):

So if you gave somebody a negative experience, you could almost guarantee they are shouting it at the mountain tops to anybody and everybody, Maybe go through four interviews and then they disappeared on me. I sent my application, the recruiter responded to me that he'd follow up by the end of the day, it was 10 days later, I haven't heard back! Like job seekers are now @mentioning, like cancel culture. Seekers are @ mentioning the recruiters on social and the organizations. There is a near and dear. I think everybody here knows Edie Miller. She was recently bashed and tagged by someone saying like, look at you spending all your company time at mentioning the company she worked for arguing with me on LinkedIn, I don't think your CEO would like that.

Joel (25m 43s):

Everybody's Dunkin.

Chad (25m 44s):

Everybody's dunkin. Well, I mean, in some cases, you know, Amy probably didn't give a shit to be quite Frank. You know? It's like her, she's not worried because she's doing her job and she's doing it well. But, there are consequences, so you can call it cancel culture, or you can call it consequence culture. If it is something that matters okay, great. If it isn't, it doesn't. So who gives a shit? Right? It's like, you're, I don't care, you know, box for me that's I don't give a shit. But what I do give a shit about is we still have recruiters that are out there and somebody actually posted on the flip side that if somebody reneges on an accepted offer by ghosting, they will most likely be put on a do not hire list.

Chad (26m 28s):

How can we, be so ivory tower that we treat candidates like shit and we throw them into a corner and feed them and feed them shit but yet when they treat us the same way, we have a problem with it. And we put them on a list. I mean, this to me is more of an ivory tower kind of scenario that we can't afford right now, or really ever.

Jeffrey (26m 54s):

It's definitely ego. Ego is definitely there. I love your do not hire list reference because I think about like hiring managers at what will say, Hey, I know this person. I know this person, I went to school with them at the beginning of our career, 10 years ago, not interested. And immediately, are you the same person today that you were 10 years ago? I'm not even the same person I was a year ago, let alone 10 years ago. We do not hire list. Can we, I know organizations use them. How often are you auditing them? Like, what's the statute of limitations when you're there? Is it permanent? Like if I go, if I declined your offer, you are so mad at me now that no matter what, you're never gonna think about me again.

Jeffrey (27m 39s):

Think about that as a candidate experience. Like I was a new grad out of college. I declined your offer because when I'm coming out of college, I'm chasing that money. And yet your position may have offered me better long-term career growth. But this other organization over $3 more per hour, of course I would have taken that. Now it's five years later. I'm no longer a new grad. I perfected my craft and I want to add to you. Like you are best in class at whatever you do as a company. And now you're not going to hire me because I said no to you that one time forever ago. That's just insane to me that people do that.

Joel (28m 18s):

Curious a little bit about definition. And I listen to people who listen to the show, know that my 15 year old son is applying to jobs. And we had an experience where we showed up for the interview and the employer was not prepared, was not ready, we weren't on the schedule to be interviewed. And we ended up waiting 30 minutes and eventually left. Right to me is that ghosted? Is that worse than being ghosted because we had actually had to make a trip down there? What's your definition of ghosting and is that ghosting?

Jeffrey (28m 48s):

I don't think that's ghosting so much as somewhere along the line, human error, somebody told him to show up at that interview. And then on the backend had some sort of brain blockage where they didn't throw it on a calendar. They never confirmed, like human error happens. But the fact that they missed on, you were there, they are hiring. you where an applicant to say, oh my God, so sorry, but this is where we go backwards, we talked about the recruiter source. If the recruiter is physically in the building, the recruiters come out, this is my fault. Do not blame the manager because most likely your manager just didn't want to interview that day, whatever it is.

Jeffrey (29m 30s):

But I don't call that ghosting so much as somebody made a mistake.

Joel (29m 33s):

The negativity is the same right?

Jeffrey (29m 34s):

Yeah, absolutely. Your son was the customer.

Joel (29m 36s):

Used to be.

Jeffrey (29m 37s):

If the customer who wanted to buy something, someone would have come out and apologize. Hey, we know that this was supposed to be delivered for in-store pickup, but we're not ready. We're sorry. We made a mistake. They would have apologized to them, a customer. Think of them as a customer. They let him sit there. They let you walk out. No one came out to check on you to apologize for the wait. That's just could have been handled so differently. Like who could have swapped in just to save face. This person here, they applied it wasn't on the calendar so manager A isn't available. Whereas the assistant manager, where's the lead? Where is somebody to spend time with this person to thank them for coming in?

Jeffrey (30m 17s):

And I'm glad you brought that up because it brought me a thing. I have the candidate experience tidbit of knowledge to share with anybody.

Joel (30m 27s):


Jeffrey (30m 28s):

You know, we talk about candidates sometimes send thank you letters. And we can go on and on, on if that's a pro, a con, a net neutral, when candidates send thank you letters. You want to change your candidate experience. Why don't you thank the candidate 24 hours later via email, thank you for coming in, taking your time to allow us organization A and the opportunity to talk to you about the position and opportunities here at the company. Now they get your offer and an identical offer for just about identical money. Who are they feeling more warm and fuzzy about? I'm seen as a human at one place. The other place I have not, I will probably go where they reached out to me to thank me for my time. So start sending your candidates thank you letters.

Jeffrey (31m 9s):

Very easy, very human. You don't need technology.

Chad (31m 13s):

Be human and start building business cases. And last but not least talent acquisition leaders get a God damn spine and get into those uncomfortable places. Because guess what? Those are the conversations that happen in the C-suite. If you don't want to have uncomfortable conversations, then go ahead and turn it in a resignation because you're not the right person for that gig. Jeffrey Shapiro, senior director of talent acquisition at RadNet. Jeffrey we appreciate you coming on the show, man, if people want, I don't know that maybe they want to come work for you. Cause now they fell in love with you.

Chad (31m 50s):

Who knows? Where would they find you? Where can they connect with you? Tell them.

Jeffrey (31m 57s):

Basically any various social platforms. I go by Jeffery W. Shapiro. So you can find me at that.

Chad (32m 3s):

You go by W, that's awesome.

Joel (32m 3s):


Jeffrey (32m 4s):

I grew up with another Jeffery Shapiro in my hometown. So somewhere along the line, my father beat it in me to just professionally use your middle initial and forever, I think it was if you don't have a college degree and your middle initial make you sound more professional, start using it professionally. I started doing that, then it just never went away. Like I'm not redoing all my social profiles.

Joel (32m 37s):

It works. Another one in the can, Chad.

Chad (32m 37s):

There we go, time for a beer.

Joel and Chad (32m 37s):

We out.

OUTRO (33m 22s):

Thank you for listening to, what's it called? The podcast with Chad, the Cheese. Brilliant. They talk about recruiting. They talk about technology, but most of all, they talk about nothing. Just a lot of Shout Outs of people, you don't even know and yet you're listening. It's incredible. And not one word about cheese, not one cheddar, blue, nacho, pepper jack, Swiss. So many cheeses and not one word. So weird. Any hoo be sure to subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, Google play, or wherever you listen to your podcasts, that way you won't miss an episode. And while you're at it, visit just don't expect to find any recipes for grilled cheese. Is so weird. We out.


bottom of page