Good recruiting/staffing software needs to adapt into an OUTLOOK environment and the recruiter must be able to continue sometimes less effective steps than if they were to abandon OUTLOOK all together. Efficiency is not necessarily the final word for a recruiter to be successful. Sometimes we as vendors lose track of our goals and make efficiency and features into deities they don’t deserve. If a good recruiter is comfortable, happy and doing a good job, is there any reason to turn his or her life upside down in the hopes that after the ravages of change they will come out better for it. I don’t think so. Many recruiting companies lose good recruiters this way.

What makes OUTLOOK so useful but not a complete recruiting system? The biggest difference is OUTLOOK is targeted for its user and all his or her activities, email, contacts and notes. But it is the view of a single user. Recruiting software is primarily geared for collaboration and the compiling and organizing of information on clients and applicants. OUTLOOK could care less if someone in the contact is an applicant or client. Outlook’s method of storing information as notes, contacts and even resumes does not lend itself to the one critical need of a recruiter, searching for candidates or clients that have a particular work history or job need that demands certain skills. OUTLOOK does not lend itself very well to bringing a job order or requisition together as a complete project. The pieces such as candidate notes, references and interviews have to be manually put together.