IAEWS Benchmark Study September 2011

1. IAEWS Benchmark StudySeptember 2011

2. Background and Purpose • Effort began in Jan 2011 • Create an industry led benchmark study of key metrics for job board operations and effectiveness • Challenges in defining the scope and depth of questions • Significant work in developing common definitions from worldwide community • Use first year results as a baseline to improve and “dig deeper” in future year

3. Methodology • Input regarding scope and questions solicited from many boards worldwide • Jobg8.com sponsorship allowed for no-cost participation from worldwide boards • Contracted service from professional research company (Critical Insights) to improve online data collection and ensure data security • Relatively short time frame to create/ distribute/collect/correlate and publish results

4. Participation and Response • Solicited all IAEWS members and other worldwide job boards in June and July • 154 Job boards registered to participate in first year study • 124 boards submitted some response • 101 boards completed the online survey • Invited to participate in discussion of results • Survey closed on August 8th- results published and distributed September 1st • High Level results to all IAEWS members today

5. Who participated? Reporting region:

6. Types of Boards

7. Job Board- Years in business

8. Performance Metrics • Data collected on 16 different KPI’s • Cross tabs done on 5 different segments • This morning’s participants requested that the 2hr. discussion focus on: • Sources of Traffic- relative importance • Comparison of Job board features and functionality • Application production rates for different postings • Expense ratios for Marketing/Sales/Technology • Sources of Job Postings

9. Some Interesting Metrics • Average time on Site- Median= 4.0 mins • Wide variations by region and type of board • Types of Traffic – Window Shoppers or Take action • Median= 70% “Window Shoppers” • Median = 30% “Take some action” • Wide variations based on region, type, tenure and size • Bounce Rates- Median = 41% • Wide variations based on region, tenure and type

10. Some interesting Metrics • Significant variations based on region, type, tenure and size

11. Some interesting Metrics • Performance!- generating applications or candidates to an ATS • ATS Postings • Median = 5.0 • Large variations based on region, size, tenure, type (range of 1-22) • “Email” postings • Median= 3.3 • Large variations based on region, size, tenure, type (range of 1-28) • 40% of respondents checked “Unknown”

12. Summary of Discussion Session this AM • Great opportunity for real discussion on common issues facing our industry • Candid discussion - sharing of some best practices • Further individual analysis by each participant to compare results against their niche- set goals as to where they want to be by next year • Confirmation that this study should be done again next year • Great suggestions on how to improve the instrument / process and participation

13. 2011 Study- Lessons Learned • Solicit members to participate in Steering Committee by late Fall • Scope, questions, promotion, response requirements • Utilize 2011 study and comments from member discussion to better craft questions- probe deeper on certain issues • Complete survey by early summer • Use steering committee to improve the survey • Focus on some additional areas of job board performance • Longer discussion period at Fall IAEWS

14. Final Thoughts • A great first year effort by the Association and the members who participated • If you did not participate- you missed the opportunity for some good data • Continuous improvement through continuous measurement and analysis • Watch the IAEWS newsletter for an opportunity to participate in the steering committee or as a survey respondent next year.