We don't talk much about sourcing here, and it might be obvious why. But this article on the Law of the 9 just hit me hard. If you have a sourcer on staff, do you know what they are saying to prospects? Do you know what they are doing with prospects who aren't ready to engage that moment? This article is big on slow-playing the prospect with content until they are ready to bite, which sounds like something we should b very involved in.

Ooof. When you ask the question, “Does TA Understand Passive Talent Engagement?” you know what the answer is going to be, and that answer isn’t going to be positive. But what I was amused by was that after examining the wreckage of the question, the solution the author came away with was that more time and energy should be spend on marketing. Now, if you’re a marketer, you know that marketing can be broken into two kinds: direct and brand. Direct marketing is what you get when you Google “kid’s STEM activities,” the direct response to a need. Any marketing with a clear CTA is direct marketing, which hardly seems in keeping with the original question. So what the author is actually prescribing is that employer branding should be in charge of passive talent engagement. QED, right?