Before You Pay for Passive Candidates, Look in Your ATS

Recruiting has a strange habit of valuing people more the less interested they are in you. A candidate who applies to your posting is treated as ordinary. A candidate who wasn't looking, and has to be talked into a call, is treated as a prize. Companies pay a lot for that prize. One estimate for mid-market companies puts LinkedIn InMail campaigns at $1,200 to $1,800 per qualified response, and response rates have been falling as candidates' inboxes fill up with AI-written outreach.

The reasoning behind the premium goes something like this: if someone isn't looking, they must be good at their job, since good people are rarely out of work. There's something to it, and headhunters have built whole businesses on it. But it's weaker than it sounds. At any given moment plenty of good people are looking for reasons that have nothing to do with ability, a reorg or a bad manager, say. Wanting a new job isn't evidence that you're bad at your current one.

What passive sourcing does reliably get you is a candidate who starts with less urgency. They're comfortable where they are, so they take longer to decide, and they usually expect more money to move. Someone who applied because they want the job starts from the other end.

For very senior or highly specialized roles, headhunting still makes sense. There may be only a handful of people who can do the job, and none of them are applying. But most hiring volume sits in the broad middle of manager, technical and professional roles, and for those I think the passive premium is mostly a cost without a matching return in quality.

Meanwhile there's a group of candidates most companies ignore completely. Look in your ATS and you'll find a lot of people who applied for similar roles in the last 12 to 18 months, passed initial screening, and were never hired. Usually that wasn't because they were unqualified. The role closed, or headcount was frozen, or someone slightly different edged them out in the final round. Recruiters call these people silver medalists. They've been screened already, they fit the kind of role you're hiring for, and at one point they wanted to work for you.

Some of them are still on the market, and others would come back quickly for the right role. Yet almost no company has a routine for going back to them. The ATS filed them under a date and that was that. So the recruiting team pays to cold-message strangers who weren't thinking about a new job, while a warmer pool sits a few clicks away.

It's easy to see why a silver medalist should be easier to hire. They already know who you are, and the conversation picks up where it left off instead of starting from nothing. You'd expect them to go from first contact to interview far more often than strangers do, and I'd be surprised if they didn't.

So why does the pool go untouched? Recruiters know it's there. The hard part is the work of pulling the right names out, figuring out what has changed for each person, and actually getting them on the phone. The ATS holds the records but wasn't built to run outreach. And even if you could surface 200 warm candidates for an open role, a recruiting team can hold maybe 40 or 50 real screening calls in a week. On paper the pool is huge. Measured in conversations a team can actually have, it's small, unless you add headcount or hand that part of the work to software.

This is really the same reason the ATS turned into a filing cabinet in the first place: data went in, and nothing was designed to drive conversations back out. I wrote more about that in the post on why your ATS is just a filing cabinet.

Once you see the problem as a shortage of conversations, the fix is fairly direct, and it's one of the things we use Asendia for. The ceiling of 40 or 50 calls a week belongs to people, and software doesn't share it, so it can phone every matching name in the database instead of the handful a recruiter gets to before Friday. When a role opens, Asendia finds previously screened candidates who fit, calls them, and holds a structured re-qualification conversation. The call knows what each person applied for before, asks follow-up questions about the new role, and finds out whether they're available and interested now.

What your recruiters get back is a ranked shortlist of people who have been re-qualified, with excerpts from each conversation, ready for interview scheduling. The results go back into the ATS, so there's nothing to migrate. A warm call to someone who already knows your company should cost far less than a cold campaign, and it turns a pool you could never get through into one you can.

I'm not arguing you should never source passive candidates. But before the next InMail campaign, it's worth running one simple query: everyone who passed screening for a similar role in the last year and a half and was never hired. If that list is long, you've probably been paying to find candidates you already had.

Ready to transform your hiring strategy? Schedule a Demo with our founders today!