Join host James Mackey as he chats with Brad Beach, Founder and CEO of Tailored Management and Jobvious. Brad shares his journey from the early days in staffing to building a cutting-edge platform that’s reshaping contingent labor.
They dive into the challenges of traditional hiring models, the power of network-driven recruitment, and how technology is transforming the industry. Whether you’re in staffing, HR, or just curious about the future of work, this episode is packed with insights you won’t want to miss!
Thank you to our sponsor, SecureVision, for making this show possible!
Our host James Mackey
Follow us:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/82436841/
#1 Rated Embedded Recruitment Firm on G2!
https://www.g2.com/products/securevision/reviews
Thanks for listening!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hi, welcome to the Breakthrough Hiring Show.
I'm your host, james Mackey,very excited about today's guest
.
We have Brad Beach on the show.
Brad, thanks for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
Yeah, very excited to have youhere.
Brad is the founder and CEO ofTailored Management and JobVius.
We're very excited to learnabout both companies and really
dial into what you're buildingat JobVius and why you decided
(00:21):
to start the company.
But just to start us off, itwould be great if you could tell
us a little bit about yourselfand how you wound up to where
you are today.
Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
I graduated from Ohio State University degree in
economics.
My first job out of college wasworking for ADM and I was doing
agricultural commodity buys onthe Chicago Board of Trade.
And I lived in Cincinnati atthe time and I was desperate to
get back to Columbus becausethat's where all my friends were
.
I looked in the newspaper atthat time that's what you did
(00:51):
for a job and I found an ad fora staffing manager at Robert
Half and I applied, got the job,realized I loved working with
people, loved the business,stayed there for six years,
Couldn't really wrap my armsaround the large company culture
and so I decided to leave andventure out on my own, and that
(01:13):
was in 2000.
And that's the founding ofTailored Management, and we have
been around ever since.
Luckily, I've had a lot ofsuccess with tailored management
.
I grew it from a one-personshop to having over a couple
(01:34):
hundred people across fourdifferent countries and been
able to provide contingent laborservices and RPO services for
Fortune 500 organizations, and Ifeel very lucky.
But again, I noticed a declineover the last five years, which
is why I ended up coming up withthe idea of Javius, and so
that's my newest passion project.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Yes, that's very exciting and I was happy to
learn that you started off atRobert Half very similar to how
I got started in staffing overat K-Force.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Yeah, similar, very similar cultures.
I know that back in the day wewere big competitors, so, yeah,
very familiar.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah, and there was a lot of turnover, at least when
I was there probably still is,yeah.
So the organizations, at leastat the time, were probably
incredibly similar, because youhad people going from one of
them to the other and it seemslike you had sales reps who had
worked at every major staffingorganization.
If they had more than a fewyears in the industry.
It seems like the turnover wasso high.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
It was exceptionally high and I think that was it was
expected in that large industry.
They didn't try and solve thatproblem, so they just kept
hiring and anticipated peoplewould be leaving within a year,
because the metrics that theyheld you to were very difficult
and very hard to achieve.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Well, yeah, mine, we were talking about this earlier.
Mine were.
I had a hundred cold calls aday plus three in-person
meetings a day.
Yeah, I don't know how to.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
first of all, that's not unless there are two of you.
That's not even humanlypossible.
I think that we used to have 10or 12 out face-to-face visits
that we were required to haveand we were calling every friend
we knew that worked anywhere tosay, hey, can I come out, maybe
I'll take you to lunch?
Just to mark it on our sheetthat we got to visit and to keep
(03:16):
people at bay.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
Yeah, yeah, it was a wild time for sure.
I just remember as an SDRrunning around in my suit with a
tie it's 90 degrees in DC, soit's hot as hell and humid
Running around all thesegovernment contractors trying to
get in front of CFOs, and I waslike 21, 22.
And it's like okay, I got tofind a way to add value to this
like 50-year-old CFO of this bigGovCon.
(03:39):
What are you going to do whenyou don't know what the hell
you're doing?
Right?
You're just smiling.
You learn on the fly, right?
Speaker 2 (03:44):
You learn and you get better with every meeting.
It's funny.
You talk about running aroundin a suit and tie.
I remember those days, and nowthe majority of your audience
probably can't evenconceptualize that right,
because who wears a suit and tieanymore, except for maybe Jamie
Dimon and other Fortune 500executives?
It's virtually outdated.
Nobody does it.
(04:04):
But it was a requirement backin the Robert Half Days,
probably at K-Force too, and youhad to wear a suit and tie
every day to the office.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Oh yeah On a pretty on an SDR salary yeah exactly, I
can't even.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Yeah, you didn't.
That was a long time ago.
It's not like you were makinghuge sums of money regardless,
but it was an incrediblelearning experience.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
Oh yeah, for sure it made me really toughen me up and
it just got me in the motion.
Being good at businessdevelopment, I don't.
I didn't really see myself as anatural salesperson, in fact I
almost had.
I was telling you, they did.
They created the SDR role forme because they didn't have one.
They didn't want to give me theAE role because I didn't have
the experience.
So they were like all right,you have six months as an SDR.
(04:49):
Either we promote you or we letyou go.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
That was your incentive.
If you want to continue to payyour rent yeah, you're going to.
You're going to have to do this.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
Yeah, cause it's like a lot of SDRs are in that role
for years that they become an AEFor me.
They were like look like wedon't know if you can do this,
but if you want a shot, you'resaying you want a shot, we're
going to give you one for sixmonths and I didn't close a
single deal, man, until at thesix month point.
And then a bunch of dealsclosed months.
I had closed nothing.
I was stressing out.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
I was so stressed I bet that that that probably is
an event that you remember sovividly now that gave you the
courage and fortitude right Toknow that you could go out on
your own.
If I can pull it off over atK-Force, I can certainly do it
on my own.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
Oh, for sure, I'm sure that was your experience.
Was that one of the reasons youstarted Tailored Management?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Precisely.
Yeah, I knew I couldn't work inthat large corporate culture.
I knew I wanted to go out on myown Call it maybe a little
(06:29):
ignorance and youth, but I waslike what's the worst thing that
could happen?
I fell flat that my leadershipstyle was what they had always
hoped to have in their career.
I'm more of a servant leader.
We don't have a big hierarchyhere.
I believe everybody is equal.
I have an open door policy.
I believe in autonomy.
One of the things I knew Iwould never do is micromanage.
I believe that innovation comesfrom the bottom up, not from
(06:50):
the top down.
I encourage people to try newthings, to be bold.
That's a line anybody here willtell you.
Don't do things the way thatthey have always been done just
because that's the way they'vealways been done.
We get better by giving peoplethe autonomy to explore
different options and know it'ssafe to do that and it works.
(07:11):
It works for me and it's workedfor everybody here in the
organization and it's great thatmy philosophy on that that I
didn't know if it would workActually it did.
It worked and so that wasreassuring.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Yeah, that's awesome.
And now you're doing, you'rebuilding JobVis, which I think
you started.
Was it about four years ago?
Yeah, we started developing it.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
We've only been live for about nine months, but what
Tailored Management doescurrently is we are a vendor in
many Fortune 500 contingentlabor programs, and we integrate
with their VMS tools.
We get the RECs imported intoour system, we recruit on them
and then we submit people, andover the last four or five years
(07:59):
, I've noticed a trend wheredirect sourcing came in, and
direct sourcing I'm sure you'refamiliar with it is when an
organization allocates a certainportion of their contingent
labor spend or opportunity to adirect sourcing team.
It could be internal, it couldbe another company.
The challenge, though, is thatall of those recs go to all the
(08:22):
vendors and to direct sourcing.
When direct sourcing hascandidates, they look at their
candidates first, becausethey're at a much lower rate,
and then they cancel the onesthat are distributed to the
vendor population.
So we, in some cases, have seenrec cancellation rates as high
as 30, 35 percent.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
That got passed through to you as an agency
because they have 35% yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
So let's say there's a hundred recs released this
week and let's say that thereare 20 vendors, and then you
have direct sourcing.
Those recs are going to directsourcing as well, and all of the
vendors are working on it, butdirect sourcing provides
candidates at a significantlylower cost because, they have
(09:08):
first dibs many times where theyget them before us, and so what
happens is we work on them andthen we submit candidates and
then the rec gets canceledbecause someone from direct
sourcing found somebody.
In addition, the vendorpopulation exploding.
We have clients that have 200million in annual spend, which
sounds like a lot, but when youdivide that up amongst 50
(09:32):
vendors, or 60 vendors, 70vendors, it's not that much.
And here's the catch is thatcompany that spends 60 million
annually as a participant, as avendor, we have to submit to
every one of those recs, eventhough on average we might fill
one out of five or six or seven,and the margins aren't exactly
(09:58):
robust.
And so it's become increasinglymore and more challenging to be
profitable in these largeprograms, because they have an
overpopulation of vendors, andyou would think that they would
understand that it doesn't makesense, and I think sometimes
they do, but the politics withinlarge companies doesn't afford
(10:22):
them the luxury of just cuttingvendors because of the changes
that are happening, and so theyremain overpopulated.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Yeah, this is a very interesting concept.
I think what ends up happeningis when you it's just like
self-fulfilling prophecy, whichthey want they work with
multiple vendors and then ofcourse, you also have multiple
agencies working on that andthey also have to balance out
the fact that maybe they're onlyfilling one out of five roles
or one out of six roles, and sothey can't really put all their
(10:53):
eggs in one basket and focus onpossibly even that customer as
much as they would potentiallylike to, because they're
operating in a contingentbusiness model and, of course,
when you're dealing with Fortune500, there's assigned team
members and whatnot to certainaccounts.
But it does.
It also makes it harder thatmodel actually makes it harder
for the agency to produce greatresults for the Fortune 500
company.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
You can't reinvest If you're barely making enough
money to get by.
You can't reinvest incontinuous improvement.
And that's the biggestchallenge, because I think I
know we want to provideexceptional service,
over-the-top service, but youcan't do it if it's going to
result in a loss on your booksevery month.
(11:33):
And so these are the challengesthat we face.
To give you an idea of kind ofthe mindset, I had a
conversation with a client,which I won't name names, but
they have a massive program, 900million in annual spend, and
they have 200 and somethingvendors.
And this gentleman was sayingI've got procurement on this end
(11:54):
.
They're worried about cost andthey want to save money.
I've got the end user on thisend they don't care about costs,
they just want speed andquality.
And how do I bridge that gap?
And I said one simple way to doit is cut your vendor list in
half.
Go back to the vendors thatremain, tell them that you want
a 4% cut in rates.
(12:16):
They will be happy to obligebecause you just doubled their
revenue opportunity and thenthey'll reinvest.
And the response is well, youcan't throw the baby out with
the bathwater.
You need to have vendors in thepipeline, because vendors
always become lethargic andcomplacent.
I said no, they don't.
The only reason they becomelethargic and complacent is if
(12:38):
they are just continuing to seediminishing returns month over
month for the same amount ofeffort, money and work that
they're putting into anorganization, which is
essentially what starts tohappen right when, every time
you add a new vendor, it's oneother person you're splitting
that pot with.
And I thought why can't you, intheory, have the vendors
(13:02):
partner with them, talk to themon a regular basis, find out
what they need to provide betterservice, find out what their
challenges are, and you havethis wonderful relationship, if
you can do that, where vendorsare bought in and obligated
right Because they were theirchosen one or their chosen ones,
(13:24):
and they see you investing allthis time in them.
They're going to be verycommitted to going above and
beyond to make sure that youguys are happy.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
You always say the company that's hiring those
agencies.
You have more leverage whereyou can push them harder right,
If there's a bigger revenueopportunity.
When I was in the early days ofSecure Vision, my RPO firm, I
was billing myself out, and if Iwas billing myself out as a VP
of talent acquisition I wouldusually get one contingent
(13:55):
agency.
Give them exclusivity, At leastlike a three to four week head
start.
Sure, Because I didn't.
I would pick the best agencythat I could find for the roles
we had open.
And I give them exclusivitybecause I essentially managed
them as an extension of my team.
We had calls twice a week and Iwould push them aggressively,
but I was able to do thatbecause they knew that they were
(14:15):
going to get the return oninvestment.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Yeah, and see, you were smart to do that right.
I.
This isn't rocket science.
It seems very commonsensical tome, but and I can't explain it
in large organizations I don'tlive in that space and I
realized that.
So I would talk to individualsand ask them help me understand
(14:41):
the obstacles that you encounter, the roadblocks, because I've
been an entrepreneur for 30years and so I don't know what I
don't know.
I don't know what it's like toexist in that environment
anymore, and the walls that theykeep running into and competing
, competing sets of prioritiesand all of the other stuff that
to me, it just is overly complex.
(15:01):
To me, it just is overly complexand, at the end of the day,
that's why I developed JobVis.
No-transcript.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Yes, and I would love to learn more about Javius.
I actually was looking at thewebsite and the LinkedIn page
before our call and I actuallyhave the website even pulled up
right now too.
But for everybody tuning in,would you mind giving a quick
overview on the company, whatyou're building?
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Uber.
I'm sure a lot of people saythat, but what inspired me was
there was a need in the marketfor paid for hire transportation
, and what they did is theyempowered the masses to become
the drivers that are going totake you to the airport right or
home from the football game.
And the concept seems verybizarre.
(16:03):
If you can step back 10 yearsand somebody told you that, hey,
the future of paidtransportation is going to be
you calling up a random strangeron your phone and this random
stranger coming to your house topick you up, 10, 12 years ago
you probably would have thoughtthat is the craziest thing I've
ever heard.
No way I would ever let my wifeor anybody I know get into that
(16:26):
stranger's vehicle.
Now it's become commonplace,but at the end of the day, it's
created immense opportunity foranybody that has a vehicle and a
little spare time.
And so I thought how can weapply that to contingent labor,
spare time?
And so I thought how can weapply that to contingent labor?
So what we built was anetwork-driven platform that is
(16:47):
somewhat like if an Uber and aLinkedIn kind of merged right.
So you get invited to JobViusbecause let's say, I invite you
and I say, hey, james, you wantto join JobVius?
It's this new network drivenplatform that allows you to earn
passive income and look at jobs.
Great, sure, there's a lot moredetail to it than that.
(17:08):
But so you join and then youstart inviting people.
They join and now they are inyour network, your team, within
JobVius OK, and then, when thosepeople join, they can build out
their networks and so on and soforth.
But let's just say that one ofour clients that is
participating in JobVis weintegrate all of their
(17:28):
contingent labor requisitionspopulate in the platform.
We have an AI matching toolthat matches everybody in the
platform based on skills,education, geographic, location
and multiple other things.
Let's say a project manager isentered by IBM okay, and it's
paying $50 an hour and you havesomeone in your network.
(17:49):
That's a match.
You'll get notified, james.
Hey, jane Doe is a match forthis project manager.
Do you want to refer her tothis opportunity?
Let's say Jane is active in theplatform.
You can message her through theplatform and say, hey, do you
have interest?
Jane will get a notification aswell and say, hey, you
qualified for this.
She clicks a button, says I'minterested.
You refer to IBM.
(18:09):
If she gets the job, we handleeverything from there.
We schedule the interviews, wedo everything.
If she gets the job the day shestarts working, you start
earning $5 an hour for everyhour.
She works on that jobindefinitely, forever.
So you would earn $200 a weekfor one referral and if people
(18:32):
on the East Coast or the WestCoast, it probably is much more
than that, because it equates toabout 10% of whatever they're
going to be making.
We pay out to the networkchampion that referred them and
that's tracked through yourdashboard on JobVis.
Everything is measured.
You see how many hours thereare.
You get a direct deposit everyFriday, just like a payroll
check into your account, and ifyou get three people on billing
(18:56):
that you refer, you can easilymake 20, 30 plus thousand in
passive income.
And what we've done is we havemonetized your network of
friends, family, acquaintances,colleagues, and we're saying
this has a value.
This network has a value.
Get them into your platform andwe will find opportunities that
(19:19):
they may have interest in, andif you refer them, you get paid.
Now it's not just for activelyseeking individuals.
We have people in the platformthat are joined.
That join job is just becausethey want the opportunity to
make money, right.
But if you are passive, youcertainly want to put your
resume in there anyway.
(19:41):
It's secure.
It is not visible.
If you are currently employedand you join JobVis and you have
your resume in there, the onlypeople that see you're in the
platform are the people that youinvite and your network manager
that invited you.
Nobody else even knows.
But even if you aren't lookingand your resume's in there, what
you're going to get is a lot ofgreat intel, because every job
(20:02):
that's entered that you qualifyfor you'll see.
They'll communicate with you.
You match this job.
This is what it pays, and it'llask you if you have interest.
But even if you don't, you'reconstantly getting updated
information information right onthe opportunities that you
(20:23):
could have if you decided youwanted to look around as well as
whether or not you're beingpaid what you should be paid in
your existing job.
So it's incredible intelligencethat you get that's going to
help you negotiate that increase, but also find out what else
you might be qualified for thatmight be of interest.
So we've empowered just likeUber empowered the masses.
(20:45):
We have empowered the massesfor contingent labor because
everybody has a network.
Why don't we just pay you guys,the masses, to put your network
in the platform and then referthem and you get basically 50%
of the gross profits it'sgenerated for every hour.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
I got a couple of follow-up questions there.
When somebody is referred, doesthe evaluation occur upfront,
or does the evaluation occurafter, let's say, the IBM right
Says oh, that person seems likea fit, we would like to move
forward with them.
Just curious like when does anevaluation occur of the
candidate skill set, and is thathandled by your team at JobVis,
or is that the responsibilityof the end client company?
(21:29):
Who's paying for the contractor?
Speaker 2 (21:31):
So there is an obligation on the network
champion to ensure thatindividual is qualified right
and that they are a goodcandidate because your
reputation's on the line right.
If you refer a lot of badcandidates, you're going to get
dinged okay and then people aregoing to pay less attention to
the people you're referring.
But let's say in the IBMexample in the event IBM says we
(21:52):
want everybody that you referto us to be verified and
assessed, we would say, okay, wehave an integration and a
partnership with a companycalled VeriClick and they do
facial recognition, verificationof ID, so individuals that are
taking the assessment, if it's atechnology assessment, you
don't have one of the situationswhere the person that's taking
(22:15):
the assessment isn't the actualperson and so that's the purpose
of the verification.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
What's the name of that partner?
Again, the partner that doesthat.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
VeriClick.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
VeriClick.
Okay, that's interesting yeah.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
Yeah, and then they have an AI assessment tool as
well, and so if the client doeswant to have that, we charge
them an additional cost forevery submittal that they
receive, because there is a costto that, and I don't know what
the cost is.
Off the top of my head, I thinkit's $3 per referral, which is
minimal, right.
(22:46):
But then they get a verifiedand fully assessed submittal and
so that solves the problemthere, of course.
Now, if they don't want to dothat, then there is no cost
unless they get a referral andhire somebody.
At which point.
If they're going and hiresomebody, at which point, if
they're going to and most ofthese they're going to interview
everybody.
Anyway our clients do, andusually you're going to, you're
(23:09):
going to look at a resume, makean assessment of whether or not
they're qualified and thenschedule them for an interview,
and a lot of our clients do thattoo.
So it's just really up to theclient and what their preference
is that's great, great and sowe can totally pass on this.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
But I'm curious, can we talk about your pricing
structure on this call, or isthat?
Yeah, sure, okay, so like howthat cause I'm wondering, is it
like a base subscription plus,plus the hourly component, plus
the evaluation component, or isit what is?
What does that business modellook like?
Speaker 2 (23:38):
Yeah.
So this is going to sound veryshocking, probably, but there is
no cost for JobVis.
We will implement and deploy itat no cost to a client.
We openly invite all of theassociates of that client to
(23:59):
join JobVis, which then givesyour own employees the
opportunity to earn passiveincome, and we've done that with
a couple of clients.
We learned how exciting it isfor your employees, for a couple
of our clients, when theyrelease this to their employees.
The employees were ecstatic andguess what?
Your employees start referringtons of people because they're
(24:19):
going to get paid.
Oh, that's really cool.
Yeah, they fill your jobsquicker.
And if I'm working at ABCcompany and I refer James to ABC
company and I'm making $4 anhour off of you, I'm going to
make sure you're happy so thatit increases retention, and so
(24:41):
you call up your buddy like hey,I think you should stay at this
job for the next few years andso it increases retention of
contingent labor.
We have this all documented inwhite papers.
It increases referralstremendously exponentially for
contingent labor, labor, and youend up having a very happy
workforce, not just contingentworkforce, but your own
(25:08):
employees that get theopportunity to, to take part in
something larger than their UIUX position or their accounting
job.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
So what about does this?
If there's like attempt to hiresituation, how does that work?
And then what about for likeperm placement?
Right, if somebody wants tohire direct, can they use
JobVious?
Speaker 2 (25:22):
A couple of things, and you asked about pricing.
But our pricing typicallyindustry standards for
contingent labor is.
What we see is anywhere fromabout 40 to 48 percent markups
is pretty much what we see inthe industry.
Jobvious provides contingentlabor at 34% to 36% markups, so
(25:42):
it's a cost saver as well, andso companies can save money,
increase retention, have a veryengaged workforce.
There's tons of benefits, nocost to implement and deploy and
as far as contract to hire,that is certainly allowed.
We do ask that they stay on, Ithink for 700 hours before they
(26:03):
convert.
But what we have found is, evenwith clients where we have
those agreements in place wherethey can hire without a fee
after a certain amount of time,we're seeing a lot of our
clients extend those engagementslonger and longer, depending
upon the we have.
We have contractors that havebeen out at a client site and
for six, seven years, whichseems crazy but it happens.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
That's great yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
And as far as direct hire or perm, I get that
question a lot and we haven't.
We have not deployed thatwithin jobviz just yet, and I'll
share with you why.
When I first started doing alot of research on this passion
project, I did a lot of studies,a lot of trials, working with
clients about internal referralprograms for direct hire and
(26:53):
what I discovered was in mostorganizations they aren't going
to sit there and rave abouttheir internal referral program
because it's lackluster.
It's usually here and there.
They don't really it's therebut it's not like we're really
investing in it.
It just doesn't motivate peopleto get a $2,500 bonus for
referring somebody and then youget part of it upfront.
(27:17):
You get part of it after 90days and then you might not get
the last part until after sixmonths.
It just isn't motivating andthe one payment is appealing but
it still isn't incrediblymotivating.
But when you talk about peoplewith contingent labor having a
continuous stream of passiveincome, it's incredibly
(27:37):
motivating for people.
Because it's my side gig, I canbuild this, I can count on this
.
It's going to pay me dividends.
If I have 70 people in mynetwork, it's going to pay me
dividends potentially for manyyears to come, Very different
kind of mindset and it allowspeople to have, if you will, a
(27:59):
side gig that is their business,that is going to help them have
more financial independence,more financial freedom, and that
feels pretty good to be able totry and create something like
that.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
Yeah, I also.
I like the idea of dialing intothe staffing use case.
Just get like really good atthat use case and that type of
customer, versus going too wideand trying to solve everything
at once.
We're coming up on the towardthe end of our episode I, from
an adoption perspective, I'mcurious if there are specific
(28:32):
types of organizations, industry, company size that seem to be
benefiting the most or that youthink would be ideal, or is it
pretty much any type of company?
What are you seeing?
I?
Speaker 2 (28:43):
think right now, the companies that we are targeting
are probably your Fortune 1000organizations and as far as a
specific industry, there isn'tone specific industry.
Just about every company usesIT, accounting, finance.
The positions are very similarfrom one company to the next.
(29:04):
The difference is culturetypically, and that's really
what people hone in on.
But if you have employees inthe platform that work there,
who better to describe theculture than them to prospective
contract labor people?
And ideally, what I would loveto see happen after we get
beyond tackling the Fortune 1000is I see the 20-person
(29:27):
architectural shop down thestreet being able to really
capitalize on this because theydon't have the expertise.
They probably don't have aninternal recruiting resource,
they don't have the knowledge,and so they end up spending a
lot of money on Indeed orZipRecruiter or a search partner
(29:48):
to find each and every one ofthose people and so opening up
the door to additional resourcesto them.
Whether it's an architecturaloffice, accounting office, salon
, it doesn't really matter,because I bet, if you think
about your own network, itdoesn't really matter, because I
bet, if you think about yourown network, it's probably
incredibly diverse.
I suspect it's not everybody instaffing.
You probably know tons ofpeople of all different
(30:08):
backgrounds and that's betterfor you as a network champion is
to have a diverse skill set ofpeople in your network.
It increases the likelihood ofmatches.
It increases the likelihood ofthem being placed in various
locations, not all in one, andso I think it will be incredibly
useful.
And yeah, I didn't touch on it,but one of the other reasons we
(30:30):
created this was I.
Over the last 10 years I'm sureyou can attest to this I have
seen the fees from the Indeedsand the ZipRecruiters skyrocket,
and to an almost unsustainablelevel.
They've got a monopoly on themarket.
I don't know what happened tothe old days when there was like
30 job boards out there, and itseems like now everybody fishes
(30:52):
from the same pond, and whatused to cost me $6,000, $7,000,
$8,000 a year now costs me me40,000 a month.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
Yeah, Not to say opening up to new channels.
Getting as many new channels,different avenues to talent is
important.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
Yeah, and now that we have AI, I think that's going
to evolve and change a lot ofthings.
But a couple of years ago, whenI was doing research, I read an
article about contingent laborand it said oh, the contingent
labor market is ready for adisruptor.
There has been no innovation incontingent labor since the
(31:28):
invention of the internet and Ithought that is so true.
I didn't think it, but I'm likethat is so true.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Yeah, it is.
Both of us have started productcompanies that are assisting
staffing efforts in one way oranother.
Mine is directly working withthe staffing companies, yours is
working directly with theFortune 1000.
So different play, of course,but I saw the same similar
opportunity to you.
It's like, when it comes tojust the staffing motion in
general, there's been such alack of innovation and it's
(31:59):
coming at a time, particularlynow with AI, that staffing
motions are going to have toevolve and are going to fall by
the wayside, and it's going tohappen really fast over the next
18 months.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
Yeah, completely agree, because I think that,
much like yourself and myself,we took a step back and realized
status quo is not going to flyanymore.
It's not sustainablefinancially and the clients want
more.
There's got to be an evolution,and thankfully there is, and
people are more accepting of thechanges.
(32:33):
When we first started withtailored management, as you
probably know, years ago, if youwere going to provide
contingent labor or staffing,you had to have a brick and
mortar office in everygeographic location that you
serviced and I thought I don'twant to have managed a bunch of
offices.
There's got to be a better way.
And so one of our clients gaveus a test.
They asked us to help staff inan Albuquerque, new Mexico,
(32:56):
office, and we're in Ohio.
I thought I don't know howwe're going to pull this off,
but we're going to figure it out.
And we had success and Ithought we can do this
everywhere from our centralrecruiting hub.
And we had a lot of pushbackhow are you going to recruit for
us in New York when you're inOhio?
I'm like the internet andbecause it just was different
(33:16):
and it allowed us to haveincredible growth.
But I knew that others wouldstart adopting that, but we had
a good four or five year runwhere our story was incredibly
unique and it allowed us tocapture a lot of business.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Yeah, that was another time.
It was critical to stay aheadof the curve, ahead of the
competition, and innovate andchallenge assumptions and be
able to handle those objectionswhen customers bring them to you
.
We've done a fair amount ofthat as well.
Different flavors of the remoteaspect to delivering solutions
to customers.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Yeah, because you remember the days when you were
providing candidates.
You had to have them come inthe office and interview with
you face to face.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Oh yeah, that was K-4's days for sure.
Speaker 2 (34:02):
Yeah, and those days obviously are long gone.
But that was the pushback Likehow are you interviewing these
people on the Internet?
We can interview them, we cando this, that and the other.
And it was funny that one ofour biggest challengers and it
was a Fortune 500 company saidthere is no way that you guys
are going to be able to havesuccess in our program and then
but we're going to give you ashot.
(34:22):
She was just under the CPO andthe CPO said I want to give them
a shot and we became the numberone vendor.
And then she was an advocatefor us at different conferences.
She's I was their biggestnaysayer, but they certainly
showed me I was wrong and weended up getting a couple of
clients from her as a result ofthat.
I probably owe her a gift, butanyway, but yeah, stay ahead of
(34:47):
what you think is coming downthe road and you'll win.
And I think that jobvious iscertainly something that if I
didn't create it, I'm prettydamn sure somebody would have,
because it just seems like a nobrainer.
Speaker 1 (35:05):
Yeah, it makes a lot of sense.
I think it's a great.
It's a great concept and I'mreally excited to continue to
hear from you on how how it'sgoing, and maybe you can come
back on the show in six monthsor a year and talk to us about
progress and more featurebuildouts and what you've
learned.
That'd be really cool if you'reopen to it.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Yeah, absolutely Love to Love to share the story.
I love talking about thisbusiness, as I'm sure you do.
You've been in it for so long,you know the ins and outs and
what's really needed, and havingthe freedom to be able to say
those things is liberating.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
Definitely for sure, and, Brad, we're up on time here
, but I wanted to say thank youso much for joining us today.
You've added a ton of value toour audience and I know they're
going to enjoy this episode.
So again, thank you for joiningme today.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Thank you very much, James.
I appreciate it.
I had a good time.
Speaker 1 (35:54):
Likewise, and for everybody tuning in, make sure
to stay on top of recentepisodes.
We've had some phenomenalguests, including Brad, here,
and we also had Hugo, presidentof Kelly Services, so we're
going to continue to bring yousome incredible folks to share
their insights on the show.
Take care.
Hi, welcome to the Breakthrough Hiring Show.
I'm your host, james Mackey,very excited about today's guest
.
We have Brad Beach on the show.
Brad, thanks for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
Yeah, very excited to have youhere.
Brad is the founder and CEO ofTailored Management and JobVius.
We're very excited to learnabout both companies and really
dial into what you're buildingat JobVius and why you decided
(00:21):
to start the company.
But just to start us off, itwould be great if you could tell
us a little bit about yourselfand how you wound up to where
you are today.
Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
I graduated from Ohio State University degree in
economics.
My first job out of college wasworking for ADM and I was doing
agricultural commodity buys onthe Chicago Board of Trade.
And I lived in Cincinnati atthe time and I was desperate to
get back to Columbus becausethat's where all my friends were
.
I looked in the newspaper atthat time that's what you did
(00:51):
for a job and I found an ad fora staffing manager at Robert
Half and I applied, got the job,realized I loved working with
people, loved the business,stayed there for six years,
Couldn't really wrap my armsaround the large company culture
and so I decided to leave andventure out on my own, and that
(01:13):
was in 2000.
And that's the founding ofTailored Management, and we have
been around ever since.
Luckily, I've had a lot ofsuccess with tailored management
.
I grew it from a one-personshop to having over a couple
(01:34):
hundred people across fourdifferent countries and been
able to provide contingent laborservices and RPO services for
Fortune 500 organizations, and Ifeel very lucky.
But again, I noticed a declineover the last five years, which
is why I ended up coming up withthe idea of Javius, and so
that's my newest passion project.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Yes, that's very exciting and I was happy to
learn that you started off atRobert Half very similar to how
I got started in staffing overat K-Force.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Yeah, similar, very similar cultures.
I know that back in the day wewere big competitors, so, yeah,
very familiar.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah, and there was a lot of turnover, at least when
I was there probably still is,yeah.
So the organizations, at leastat the time, were probably
incredibly similar, because youhad people going from one of
them to the other and it seemslike you had sales reps who had
worked at every major staffingorganization.
If they had more than a fewyears in the industry.
It seems like the turnover wasso high.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
It was exceptionally high and I think that was it was
expected in that large industry.
They didn't try and solve thatproblem, so they just kept
hiring and anticipated peoplewould be leaving within a year,
because the metrics that theyheld you to were very difficult
and very hard to achieve.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Well, yeah, mine, we were talking about this earlier.
Mine were.
I had a hundred cold calls aday plus three in-person
meetings a day.
Yeah, I don't know how to.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
first of all, that's not unless there are two of you.
That's not even humanlypossible.
I think that we used to have 10or 12 out face-to-face visits
that we were required to haveand we were calling every friend
we knew that worked anywhere tosay, hey, can I come out, maybe
I'll take you to lunch?
Just to mark it on our sheetthat we got to visit and to keep
(03:16):
people at bay.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
Yeah, yeah, it was a wild time for sure.
I just remember as an SDRrunning around in my suit with a
tie it's 90 degrees in DC, soit's hot as hell and humid
Running around all thesegovernment contractors trying to
get in front of CFOs, and I waslike 21, 22.
And it's like okay, I got tofind a way to add value to this
like 50-year-old CFO of this bigGovCon.
(03:39):
What are you going to do whenyou don't know what the hell
you're doing?
Right?
You're just smiling.
You learn on the fly, right?
Speaker 2 (03:44):
You learn and you get better with every meeting.
It's funny.
You talk about running aroundin a suit and tie.
I remember those days, and nowthe majority of your audience
probably can't evenconceptualize that right,
because who wears a suit and tieanymore, except for maybe Jamie
Dimon and other Fortune 500executives?
It's virtually outdated.
Nobody does it.
(04:04):
But it was a requirement backin the Robert Half Days,
probably at K-Force too, and youhad to wear a suit and tie
every day to the office.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Oh yeah On a pretty on an SDR salary yeah exactly, I
can't even.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Yeah, you didn't.
That was a long time ago.
It's not like you were makinghuge sums of money regardless,
but it was an incrediblelearning experience.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
Oh yeah, for sure it made me really toughen me up and
it just got me in the motion.
Being good at businessdevelopment, I don't.
I didn't really see myself as anatural salesperson, in fact I
almost had.
I was telling you, they did.
They created the SDR role forme because they didn't have one.
They didn't want to give me theAE role because I didn't have
the experience.
So they were like all right,you have six months as an SDR.
(04:49):
Either we promote you or we letyou go.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
That was your incentive.
If you want to continue to payyour rent yeah, you're going to.
You're going to have to do this.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
Yeah, cause it's like a lot of SDRs are in that role
for years that they become an AEFor me.
They were like look like wedon't know if you can do this,
but if you want a shot, you'resaying you want a shot, we're
going to give you one for sixmonths and I didn't close a
single deal, man, until at thesix month point.
And then a bunch of dealsclosed months.
I had closed nothing.
I was stressing out.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
I was so stressed I bet that that that probably is
an event that you remember sovividly now that gave you the
courage and fortitude right Toknow that you could go out on
your own.
If I can pull it off over atK-Force, I can certainly do it
on my own.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
Oh, for sure, I'm sure that was your experience.
Was that one of the reasons youstarted Tailored Management?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Precisely.
Yeah, I knew I couldn't work inthat large corporate culture.
I knew I wanted to go out on myown Call it maybe a little
(06:29):
ignorance and youth, but I waslike what's the worst thing that
could happen?
I fell flat that my leadershipstyle was what they had always
hoped to have in their career.
I'm more of a servant leader.
We don't have a big hierarchyhere.
I believe everybody is equal.
I have an open door policy.
I believe in autonomy.
One of the things I knew Iwould never do is micromanage.
I believe that innovation comesfrom the bottom up, not from
(06:50):
the top down.
I encourage people to try newthings, to be bold.
That's a line anybody here willtell you.
Don't do things the way thatthey have always been done just
because that's the way they'vealways been done.
We get better by giving peoplethe autonomy to explore
different options and know it'ssafe to do that and it works.
(07:11):
It works for me and it's workedfor everybody here in the
organization and it's great thatmy philosophy on that that I
didn't know if it would workActually it did.
It worked and so that wasreassuring.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Yeah, that's awesome.
And now you're doing, you'rebuilding JobVis, which I think
you started.
Was it about four years ago?
Yeah, we started developing it.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
We've only been live for about nine months, but what
Tailored Management doescurrently is we are a vendor in
many Fortune 500 contingentlabor programs, and we integrate
with their VMS tools.
We get the RECs imported intoour system, we recruit on them
and then we submit people, andover the last four or five years
(07:59):
, I've noticed a trend wheredirect sourcing came in, and
direct sourcing I'm sure you'refamiliar with it is when an
organization allocates a certainportion of their contingent
labor spend or opportunity to adirect sourcing team.
It could be internal, it couldbe another company.
The challenge, though, is thatall of those recs go to all the
(08:22):
vendors and to direct sourcing.
When direct sourcing hascandidates, they look at their
candidates first, becausethey're at a much lower rate,
and then they cancel the onesthat are distributed to the
vendor population.
So we, in some cases, have seenrec cancellation rates as high
as 30, 35 percent.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
That got passed through to you as an agency
because they have 35% yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
So let's say there's a hundred recs released this
week and let's say that thereare 20 vendors, and then you
have direct sourcing.
Those recs are going to directsourcing as well, and all of the
vendors are working on it, butdirect sourcing provides
candidates at a significantlylower cost because, they have
(09:08):
first dibs many times where theyget them before us, and so what
happens is we work on them andthen we submit candidates and
then the rec gets canceledbecause someone from direct
sourcing found somebody.
In addition, the vendorpopulation exploding.
We have clients that have 200million in annual spend, which
sounds like a lot, but when youdivide that up amongst 50
(09:32):
vendors, or 60 vendors, 70vendors, it's not that much.
And here's the catch is thatcompany that spends 60 million
annually as a participant, as avendor, we have to submit to
every one of those recs, eventhough on average we might fill
one out of five or six or seven,and the margins aren't exactly
(09:58):
robust.
And so it's become increasinglymore and more challenging to be
profitable in these largeprograms, because they have an
overpopulation of vendors, andyou would think that they would
understand that it doesn't makesense, and I think sometimes
they do, but the politics withinlarge companies doesn't afford
(10:22):
them the luxury of just cuttingvendors because of the changes
that are happening, and so theyremain overpopulated.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Yeah, this is a very interesting concept.
I think what ends up happeningis when you it's just like
self-fulfilling prophecy, whichthey want they work with
multiple vendors and then ofcourse, you also have multiple
agencies working on that andthey also have to balance out
the fact that maybe they're onlyfilling one out of five roles
or one out of six roles, and sothey can't really put all their
(10:53):
eggs in one basket and focus onpossibly even that customer as
much as they would potentiallylike to, because they're
operating in a contingentbusiness model and, of course,
when you're dealing with Fortune500, there's assigned team
members and whatnot to certainaccounts.
But it does.
It also makes it harder thatmodel actually makes it harder
for the agency to produce greatresults for the Fortune 500
company.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
You can't reinvest If you're barely making enough
money to get by.
You can't reinvest incontinuous improvement.
And that's the biggestchallenge, because I think I
know we want to provideexceptional service,
over-the-top service, but youcan't do it if it's going to
result in a loss on your booksevery month.
(11:33):
And so these are the challengesthat we face.
To give you an idea of kind ofthe mindset, I had a
conversation with a client,which I won't name names, but
they have a massive program, 900million in annual spend, and
they have 200 and somethingvendors.
And this gentleman was sayingI've got procurement on this end
(11:54):
.
They're worried about cost andthey want to save money.
I've got the end user on thisend they don't care about costs,
they just want speed andquality.
And how do I bridge that gap?
And I said one simple way to doit is cut your vendor list in
half.
Go back to the vendors thatremain, tell them that you want
a 4% cut in rates.
(12:16):
They will be happy to obligebecause you just doubled their
revenue opportunity and thenthey'll reinvest.
And the response is well, youcan't throw the baby out with
the bathwater.
You need to have vendors in thepipeline, because vendors
always become lethargic andcomplacent.
I said no, they don't.
The only reason they becomelethargic and complacent is if
(12:38):
they are just continuing to seediminishing returns month over
month for the same amount ofeffort, money and work that
they're putting into anorganization, which is
essentially what starts tohappen right when, every time
you add a new vendor, it's oneother person you're splitting
that pot with.
And I thought why can't you, intheory, have the vendors
(13:02):
partner with them, talk to themon a regular basis, find out
what they need to provide betterservice, find out what their
challenges are, and you havethis wonderful relationship, if
you can do that, where vendorsare bought in and obligated
right Because they were theirchosen one or their chosen ones,
(13:24):
and they see you investing allthis time in them.
They're going to be verycommitted to going above and
beyond to make sure that youguys are happy.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
You always say the company that's hiring those
agencies.
You have more leverage whereyou can push them harder right,
If there's a bigger revenueopportunity.
When I was in the early days ofSecure Vision, my RPO firm, I
was billing myself out, and if Iwas billing myself out as a VP
of talent acquisition I wouldusually get one contingent
(13:55):
agency.
Give them exclusivity, At leastlike a three to four week head
start.
Sure, Because I didn't.
I would pick the best agencythat I could find for the roles
we had open.
And I give them exclusivitybecause I essentially managed
them as an extension of my team.
We had calls twice a week and Iwould push them aggressively,
but I was able to do thatbecause they knew that they were
(14:15):
going to get the return oninvestment.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Yeah, and see, you were smart to do that right.
I.
This isn't rocket science.
It seems very commonsensical tome, but and I can't explain it
in large organizations I don'tlive in that space and I
realized that.
So I would talk to individualsand ask them help me understand
(14:41):
the obstacles that you encounter, the roadblocks, because I've
been an entrepreneur for 30years and so I don't know what I
don't know.
I don't know what it's like toexist in that environment
anymore, and the walls that theykeep running into and competing
, competing sets of prioritiesand all of the other stuff that
to me, it just is overly complex.
(15:01):
To me, it just is overly complexand, at the end of the day,
that's why I developed JobVis.
No-transcript.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Yes, and I would love to learn more about Javius.
I actually was looking at thewebsite and the LinkedIn page
before our call and I actuallyhave the website even pulled up
right now too.
But for everybody tuning in,would you mind giving a quick
overview on the company, whatyou're building?
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Uber.
I'm sure a lot of people saythat, but what inspired me was
there was a need in the marketfor paid for hire transportation
, and what they did is theyempowered the masses to become
the drivers that are going totake you to the airport right or
home from the football game.
And the concept seems verybizarre.
(16:03):
If you can step back 10 yearsand somebody told you that, hey,
the future of paidtransportation is going to be
you calling up a random strangeron your phone and this random
stranger coming to your house topick you up, 10, 12 years ago
you probably would have thoughtthat is the craziest thing I've
ever heard.
No way I would ever let my wifeor anybody I know get into that
(16:26):
stranger's vehicle.
Now it's become commonplace,but at the end of the day, it's
created immense opportunity foranybody that has a vehicle and a
little spare time.
And so I thought how can weapply that to contingent labor,
spare time?
And so I thought how can weapply that to contingent labor?
So what we built was anetwork-driven platform that is
(16:47):
somewhat like if an Uber and aLinkedIn kind of merged right.
So you get invited to JobViusbecause let's say, I invite you
and I say, hey, james, you wantto join JobVius?
It's this new network drivenplatform that allows you to earn
passive income and look at jobs.
Great, sure, there's a lot moredetail to it than that.
(17:08):
But so you join and then youstart inviting people.
They join and now they are inyour network, your team, within
JobVius OK, and then, when thosepeople join, they can build out
their networks and so on and soforth.
But let's just say that one ofour clients that is
participating in JobVis weintegrate all of their
(17:28):
contingent labor requisitionspopulate in the platform.
We have an AI matching toolthat matches everybody in the
platform based on skills,education, geographic, location
and multiple other things.
Let's say a project manager isentered by IBM okay, and it's
paying $50 an hour and you havesomeone in your network.
(17:49):
That's a match.
You'll get notified, james.
Hey, jane Doe is a match forthis project manager.
Do you want to refer her tothis opportunity?
Let's say Jane is active in theplatform.
You can message her through theplatform and say, hey, do you
have interest?
Jane will get a notification aswell and say, hey, you
qualified for this.
She clicks a button, says I'minterested.
You refer to IBM.
(18:09):
If she gets the job, we handleeverything from there.
We schedule the interviews, wedo everything.
If she gets the job the day shestarts working, you start
earning $5 an hour for everyhour.
She works on that jobindefinitely, forever.
So you would earn $200 a weekfor one referral and if people
(18:32):
on the East Coast or the WestCoast, it probably is much more
than that, because it equates toabout 10% of whatever they're
going to be making.
We pay out to the networkchampion that referred them and
that's tracked through yourdashboard on JobVis.
Everything is measured.
You see how many hours thereare.
You get a direct deposit everyFriday, just like a payroll
check into your account, and ifyou get three people on billing
(18:56):
that you refer, you can easilymake 20, 30 plus thousand in
passive income.
And what we've done is we havemonetized your network of
friends, family, acquaintances,colleagues, and we're saying
this has a value.
This network has a value.
Get them into your platform andwe will find opportunities that
(19:19):
they may have interest in, andif you refer them, you get paid.
Now it's not just for activelyseeking individuals.
We have people in the platformthat are joined.
That join job is just becausethey want the opportunity to
make money, right.
But if you are passive, youcertainly want to put your
resume in there anyway.
(19:41):
It's secure.
It is not visible.
If you are currently employedand you join JobVis and you have
your resume in there, the onlypeople that see you're in the
platform are the people that youinvite and your network manager
that invited you.
Nobody else even knows.
But even if you aren't lookingand your resume's in there, what
you're going to get is a lot ofgreat intel, because every job
(20:02):
that's entered that you qualifyfor you'll see.
They'll communicate with you.
You match this job.
This is what it pays, and it'llask you if you have interest.
But even if you don't, you'reconstantly getting updated
information information right onthe opportunities that you
(20:23):
could have if you decided youwanted to look around as well as
whether or not you're beingpaid what you should be paid in
your existing job.
So it's incredible intelligencethat you get that's going to
help you negotiate that increase, but also find out what else
you might be qualified for thatmight be of interest.
So we've empowered just likeUber empowered the masses.
(20:45):
We have empowered the massesfor contingent labor because
everybody has a network.
Why don't we just pay you guys,the masses, to put your network
in the platform and then referthem and you get basically 50%
of the gross profits it'sgenerated for every hour.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
I got a couple of follow-up questions there.
When somebody is referred, doesthe evaluation occur upfront,
or does the evaluation occurafter, let's say, the IBM right
Says oh, that person seems likea fit, we would like to move
forward with them.
Just curious like when does anevaluation occur of the
candidate skill set, and is thathandled by your team at JobVis,
or is that the responsibilityof the end client company?
(21:29):
Who's paying for the contractor?
Speaker 2 (21:31):
So there is an obligation on the network
champion to ensure thatindividual is qualified right
and that they are a goodcandidate because your
reputation's on the line right.
If you refer a lot of badcandidates, you're going to get
dinged okay and then people aregoing to pay less attention to
the people you're referring.
But let's say in the IBMexample in the event IBM says we
(21:52):
want everybody that you referto us to be verified and
assessed, we would say, okay, wehave an integration and a
partnership with a companycalled VeriClick and they do
facial recognition, verificationof ID, so individuals that are
taking the assessment, if it's atechnology assessment, you
don't have one of the situationswhere the person that's taking
(22:15):
the assessment isn't the actualperson and so that's the purpose
of the verification.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
What's the name of that partner?
Again, the partner that doesthat.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
VeriClick.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
VeriClick.
Okay, that's interesting yeah.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
Yeah, and then they have an AI assessment tool as
well, and so if the client doeswant to have that, we charge
them an additional cost forevery submittal that they
receive, because there is a costto that, and I don't know what
the cost is.
Off the top of my head, I thinkit's $3 per referral, which is
minimal, right.
(22:46):
But then they get a verifiedand fully assessed submittal and
so that solves the problemthere, of course.
Now, if they don't want to dothat, then there is no cost
unless they get a referral andhire somebody.
At which point.
If they're going and hiresomebody, at which point, if
they're going to and most ofthese they're going to interview
everybody.
Anyway our clients do, andusually you're going to, you're
(23:09):
going to look at a resume, makean assessment of whether or not
they're qualified and thenschedule them for an interview,
and a lot of our clients do thattoo.
So it's just really up to theclient and what their preference
is that's great, great and sowe can totally pass on this.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
But I'm curious, can we talk about your pricing
structure on this call, or isthat?
Yeah, sure, okay, so like howthat cause I'm wondering, is it
like a base subscription plus,plus the hourly component, plus
the evaluation component, or isit what is?
What does that business modellook like?
Speaker 2 (23:38):
Yeah.
So this is going to sound veryshocking, probably, but there is
no cost for JobVis.
We will implement and deploy itat no cost to a client.
We openly invite all of theassociates of that client to
(23:59):
join JobVis, which then givesyour own employees the
opportunity to earn passiveincome, and we've done that with
a couple of clients.
We learned how exciting it isfor your employees, for a couple
of our clients, when theyrelease this to their employees.
The employees were ecstatic andguess what?
Your employees start referringtons of people because they're
(24:19):
going to get paid.
Oh, that's really cool.
Yeah, they fill your jobsquicker.
And if I'm working at ABCcompany and I refer James to ABC
company and I'm making $4 anhour off of you, I'm going to
make sure you're happy so thatit increases retention, and so
(24:41):
you call up your buddy like hey,I think you should stay at this
job for the next few years andso it increases retention of
contingent labor.
We have this all documented inwhite papers.
It increases referralstremendously exponentially for
contingent labor, labor, and youend up having a very happy
workforce, not just contingentworkforce, but your own
(25:08):
employees that get theopportunity to, to take part in
something larger than their UIUX position or their accounting
job.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
So what about does this?
If there's like attempt to hiresituation, how does that work?
And then what about for likeperm placement?
Right, if somebody wants tohire direct, can they use
JobVious?
Speaker 2 (25:22):
A couple of things, and you asked about pricing.
But our pricing typicallyindustry standards for
contingent labor is.
What we see is anywhere fromabout 40 to 48 percent markups
is pretty much what we see inthe industry.
Jobvious provides contingentlabor at 34% to 36% markups, so
(25:42):
it's a cost saver as well, andso companies can save money,
increase retention, have a veryengaged workforce.
There's tons of benefits, nocost to implement and deploy and
as far as contract to hire,that is certainly allowed.
We do ask that they stay on, Ithink for 700 hours before they
(26:03):
convert.
But what we have found is, evenwith clients where we have
those agreements in place wherethey can hire without a fee
after a certain amount of time,we're seeing a lot of our
clients extend those engagementslonger and longer, depending
upon the we have.
We have contractors that havebeen out at a client site and
for six, seven years, whichseems crazy but it happens.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
That's great yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
And as far as direct hire or perm, I get that
question a lot and we haven't.
We have not deployed thatwithin jobviz just yet, and I'll
share with you why.
When I first started doing alot of research on this passion
project, I did a lot of studies,a lot of trials, working with
clients about internal referralprograms for direct hire and
(26:53):
what I discovered was in mostorganizations they aren't going
to sit there and rave abouttheir internal referral program
because it's lackluster.
It's usually here and there.
They don't really it's therebut it's not like we're really
investing in it.
It just doesn't motivate peopleto get a $2,500 bonus for
referring somebody and then youget part of it upfront.
(27:17):
You get part of it after 90days and then you might not get
the last part until after sixmonths.
It just isn't motivating andthe one payment is appealing but
it still isn't incrediblymotivating.
But when you talk about peoplewith contingent labor having a
continuous stream of passiveincome, it's incredibly
(27:37):
motivating for people.
Because it's my side gig, I canbuild this, I can count on this
.
It's going to pay me dividends.
If I have 70 people in mynetwork, it's going to pay me
dividends potentially for manyyears to come, Very different
kind of mindset and it allowspeople to have, if you will, a
(27:59):
side gig that is their business,that is going to help them have
more financial independence,more financial freedom, and that
feels pretty good to be able totry and create something like
that.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
Yeah, I also.
I like the idea of dialing intothe staffing use case.
Just get like really good atthat use case and that type of
customer, versus going too wideand trying to solve everything
at once.
We're coming up on the towardthe end of our episode I, from
an adoption perspective, I'mcurious if there are specific
(28:32):
types of organizations, industry, company size that seem to be
benefiting the most or that youthink would be ideal, or is it
pretty much any type of company?
What are you seeing?
I?
Speaker 2 (28:43):
think right now, the companies that we are targeting
are probably your Fortune 1000organizations and as far as a
specific industry, there isn'tone specific industry.
Just about every company usesIT, accounting, finance.
The positions are very similarfrom one company to the next.
(29:04):
The difference is culturetypically, and that's really
what people hone in on.
But if you have employees inthe platform that work there,
who better to describe theculture than them to prospective
contract labor people?
And ideally, what I would loveto see happen after we get
beyond tackling the Fortune 1000is I see the 20-person
(29:27):
architectural shop down thestreet being able to really
capitalize on this because theydon't have the expertise.
They probably don't have aninternal recruiting resource,
they don't have the knowledge,and so they end up spending a
lot of money on Indeed orZipRecruiter or a search partner
(29:48):
to find each and every one ofthose people and so opening up
the door to additional resourcesto them.
Whether it's an architecturaloffice, accounting office, salon
, it doesn't really matter,because I bet, if you think
about your own network, itdoesn't really matter, because I
bet, if you think about yourown network, it's probably
incredibly diverse.
I suspect it's not everybody instaffing.
You probably know tons ofpeople of all different
(30:08):
backgrounds and that's betterfor you as a network champion is
to have a diverse skill set ofpeople in your network.
It increases the likelihood ofmatches.
It increases the likelihood ofthem being placed in various
locations, not all in one, andso I think it will be incredibly
useful.
And yeah, I didn't touch on it,but one of the other reasons we
(30:30):
created this was I.
Over the last 10 years I'm sureyou can attest to this I have
seen the fees from the Indeedsand the ZipRecruiters skyrocket,
and to an almost unsustainablelevel.
They've got a monopoly on themarket.
I don't know what happened tothe old days when there was like
30 job boards out there, and itseems like now everybody fishes
(30:52):
from the same pond, and whatused to cost me $6,000, $7,000,
$8,000 a year now costs me me40,000 a month.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
Yeah, Not to say opening up to new channels.
Getting as many new channels,different avenues to talent is
important.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
Yeah, and now that we have AI, I think that's going
to evolve and change a lot ofthings.
But a couple of years ago, whenI was doing research, I read an
article about contingent laborand it said oh, the contingent
labor market is ready for adisruptor.
There has been no innovation incontingent labor since the
(31:28):
invention of the internet and Ithought that is so true.
I didn't think it, but I'm likethat is so true.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Yeah, it is.
Both of us have started productcompanies that are assisting
staffing efforts in one way oranother.
Mine is directly working withthe staffing companies, yours is
working directly with theFortune 1000.
So different play, of course,but I saw the same similar
opportunity to you.
It's like, when it comes tojust the staffing motion in
general, there's been such alack of innovation and it's
(31:59):
coming at a time, particularlynow with AI, that staffing
motions are going to have toevolve and are going to fall by
the wayside, and it's going tohappen really fast over the next
18 months.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
Yeah, completely agree, because I think that,
much like yourself and myself,we took a step back and realized
status quo is not going to flyanymore.
It's not sustainablefinancially and the clients want
more.
There's got to be an evolution,and thankfully there is, and
people are more accepting of thechanges.
(32:33):
When we first started withtailored management, as you
probably know, years ago, if youwere going to provide
contingent labor or staffing,you had to have a brick and
mortar office in everygeographic location that you
serviced and I thought I don'twant to have managed a bunch of
offices.
There's got to be a better way.
And so one of our clients gaveus a test.
They asked us to help staff inan Albuquerque, new Mexico,
(32:56):
office, and we're in Ohio.
I thought I don't know howwe're going to pull this off,
but we're going to figure it out.
And we had success and Ithought we can do this
everywhere from our centralrecruiting hub.
And we had a lot of pushbackhow are you going to recruit for
us in New York when you're inOhio?
I'm like the internet andbecause it just was different
(33:16):
and it allowed us to haveincredible growth.
But I knew that others wouldstart adopting that, but we had
a good four or five year runwhere our story was incredibly
unique and it allowed us tocapture a lot of business.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Yeah, that was another time.
It was critical to stay aheadof the curve, ahead of the
competition, and innovate andchallenge assumptions and be
able to handle those objectionswhen customers bring them to you
.
We've done a fair amount ofthat as well.
Different flavors of the remoteaspect to delivering solutions
to customers.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Yeah, because you remember the days when you were
providing candidates.
You had to have them come inthe office and interview with
you face to face.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Oh yeah, that was K-4's days for sure.
Speaker 2 (34:02):
Yeah, and those days obviously are long gone.
But that was the pushback Likehow are you interviewing these
people on the Internet?
We can interview them, we cando this, that and the other.
And it was funny that one ofour biggest challengers and it
was a Fortune 500 company saidthere is no way that you guys
are going to be able to havesuccess in our program and then
but we're going to give you ashot.
(34:22):
She was just under the CPO andthe CPO said I want to give them
a shot and we became the numberone vendor.
And then she was an advocatefor us at different conferences.
She's I was their biggestnaysayer, but they certainly
showed me I was wrong and weended up getting a couple of
clients from her as a result ofthat.
I probably owe her a gift, butanyway, but yeah, stay ahead of
(34:47):
what you think is coming downthe road and you'll win.
And I think that jobvious iscertainly something that if I
didn't create it, I'm prettydamn sure somebody would have,
because it just seems like a nobrainer.
Speaker 1 (35:05):
Yeah, it makes a lot of sense.
I think it's a great.
It's a great concept and I'mreally excited to continue to
hear from you on how how it'sgoing, and maybe you can come
back on the show in six monthsor a year and talk to us about
progress and more featurebuildouts and what you've
learned.
That'd be really cool if you'reopen to it.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Yeah, absolutely Love to Love to share the story.
I love talking about thisbusiness, as I'm sure you do.
You've been in it for so long,you know the ins and outs and
what's really needed, and havingthe freedom to be able to say
those things is liberating.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
Definitely for sure, and, Brad, we're up on time here
, but I wanted to say thank youso much for joining us today.
You've added a ton of value toour audience and I know they're
going to enjoy this episode.
So again, thank you for joiningme today.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Thank you very much, James.
I appreciate it.
I had a good time.
Speaker 1 (35:54):
Likewise, and for everybody tuning in, make sure
to stay on top of recentepisodes.
We've had some phenomenalguests, including Brad, here,
and we also had Hugo, presidentof Kelly Services, so we're
going to continue to bring yousome incredible folks to share
their insights on the show.
Take care.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.