ISS versus Search

PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Thames Pirate

No, they are technically going to the fair at the end of ISS BKK and before SA BKK.

Not needing an agency is not equivalent to not wanting an agency, no one "needs" a premium agency.

ISS doesnt need to be better (though they are) they just need not be worse. No they dont exclusively use SA.

No you didnt, your claims are not self authenticating, your fiat declaration of the superior position is not right because you say so.
Thames Pirate
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am

Re: ISS versus Search

Post by Thames Pirate »

No, I'm right because I made my case. You, however, are not right because you said so. We have repeatedly asked you specific questions, and you have answered in vague and unsubstantiated terms if at all. What SPECIFICALLY does ISS do to help a candidate land job in Europe? Both for unicorns and mere mortals?

Again, the schools ARE recruiting at fairs because they cannot find enough unicorns. Therefore for a mere mortal wanting to go to Europe, SA is better because the schools go to those fairs. If you are a unicorn, you are sending an email to the school and watching them fall over themselves to hire you. You need neither agency--so no edge to either.

So where is the edge for ISS?
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Thames Pirate

No you didnt prove anything, most certainly not your case? You stated how YOU define the criteria of the issues, fiated you met those criteria, then claimed success. That is tautology.

You should review the previous posts, Ive stated the advantages of ISS over SA on several occasions, you continue to maintain that 'fairs' are the sole standard of agency superiority. That is a claim, requiring acceptance of the underlying assumptions, I reject those assumptions. Your claim is not self authenticating, nor subject to fiat.
Thames Pirate
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am

Re: ISS versus Search

Post by Thames Pirate »

Not at all!

I didn't define the issue. The definition is clear: Which agency is better for those seeking jobs in Europe to actually find them? In other words, it isn't fairs, but actual hiring done.

You stated that if you are a special snowflake, ISS gives you more service, but you never said what that service was. You never gave a reason ISS is better for the masses. You said the ISS database was larger for Europe, but it isn't (they are either equal or slightly smaller). You said it repped better schools (not relevant to the question of geography regardless), but you could not support this claim and did not give examples. You also never demonstrated that ISS used its database for hiring. So your saying that ISS gives "better service" (which you have not defined) to special snowflakes is not sufficient to support your claim that ISS is better, either for them or for the masses.

I, however, have demonstrated that recruiters actively use SA for recruiting. I have offered as evidence the fact that the schools actively hire through fairs. I have offered that a recruiter from a top school has told me that they actively use SA, but not ISS. Both of those are evidence, not tautology. I'll add that every teacher I knew when we taught in Europe was hired either through SA or CIS if they used an agency at all.

For the masses, fairs are frequently where they are hired. Advantage: SA
For the unicorns, they aren't hired through an agency. Advantage: Neither

Again, where is the ISS advantage other than this undefined "better service"? Where is the advantage for the masses other than the unsupported claim that the ISS database is bigger and better (even though it isn't and, if there is no evidence schools are using it, its size is meaningless)?
global_nomad
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 12:12 pm

Re: ISS versus Search

Post by global_nomad »

This is better than a chess match. I think Psyguy has met his match. lol
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Thames Pirate

Thats YOUR definition.

I most certainly did describe the benefits of being considered valuable to ISS. I stated the database sizes were essentially the same but that ISS had higher concentration.

Recruiters actively use ISs for recruiting, and that claim is no stronger than your claim that SA is more actively used for recruiting.
Thats not a fact that ISs actively hire through fairs and is its false, its not even within sight of being a fact. Only about half of the appointments made are at fairs (dependent on the fair) the other half occur outside of fairs and may be due to influence and participation at a fair, you cant claim as fact that its true.

Your offer of evidence (you and your one recruiter) does not make anything a fact, and your offer is subject to rejection. Thats a point sample, and of insufficient sample size.

In fact, the only fact is that you have no facts. You cant even make a claim that ''YOU'' would have been more, less, or equally successful had you not used SA and used ISS, or if you used no premium agency at all. Short of a time machine you cant test any alternative hypothesis.

The majority of ITs that I know that have or work in WE were hired through ISS or CIS, theres my offer of proof. At best (BEST) you can claim is that our experiences differ. None of your claims in any way shape or form constitute "proving your case", and they are so far from being anything remotely equivocal to fact as not even being in the same realm that facts poop in.

No, for the masses, about half (40%) of premium agency candidates who attend receive offers 'AT' recruiting events fairs, another 40% receive offers following recruiting events. That group as a whole accounts for (this is really dependent on definitions) about 5% of all recruiting (lot of third tier ISs, that doent even use premium agencies) which equates to about 2% of recruiting success attributed to successful appointments at recruiting events.
Of those ISS has a better success rate.
Thames Pirate
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am

Re: ISS versus Search

Post by Thames Pirate »

@global nomad
Not much of a match when the opponent insists on sticking to a position which is flatly wrong.

@PsyGuy
Well, since we are talking about being successful (i.e. finding a job) with an agency, yes, I would say that finding a job is my definition. Not sure what definition you are using . . . .

Higher concentration? Of what exactly? If the databases are essentially the same and they show mostly the same schools, there is little to choose between the two agencies. However, what is the good of a database other than to help a teacher find vacancies to which they apply directly? If there is little to choose between the databases in that regard, neither company has an edge. What matters is the behavior of recruiters, not the size of the database.

You have offered ZERO evidence that recruiters actively use ISS. I have at least offered an example that they don't. How do they use ISS to find teachers?

Yes, recruiters hire at fairs--it is a fact that ISs actively hire through fairs. That is generally why they go. Your claim that they don't is just silly and shows how desperately you insist on clinging to a belief and arguing with me just because you cannot admit you are wrong. Seriously, listen to yourself. It's "not a fact that ISs actively hire through fairs"? That's nonsense and you know it. Of course they hire at fairs!

Sure, fairs are not the only places they hire, but if they hire half of their staff through fairs (where did you get that number?), that's still a lot of European jobs obtained through fairs--and since they are mostly going to the SA fairs, I'd say candidates wanting European jobs should go to those fairs.

Since we got hired at a fair for our school, which attended NONE of the ISS fairs and three SA fairs, I can say with certainty that we would not have been successful with ISS (unless they had flown us to the school to meet with the recruiter). We might have been successful on our own, but that doesn't give ISS the edge, either.

There is a consistent pattern of European schools no longer attending ISS fairs but moving to SA. We cannot ascertain the cause of this pattern without a recruiter survey, but the sample of one I have indicates that recruiters prefer SA. Yes, he is one data point (though his answer indicated that his colleagues felt the same way), but he is one data point more than your zero.

Sure, our experiences differ, but you still offer no real evidence that ISS is better. You still have evaded the question of what ISS does for those special snowflakes that helps them land jobs (in Europe or elsewhere). You still haven't explained how the masses can get jobs if there are no European schools at the fairs. Does ISS actually put in a good word for their snowflakes--call up recruiters and say "you should Skype Mr. Smith, he's great"? Do they set up the interview times? Fly you places for F2F? No? I will ask again--what does ISS do for their special candidates that SA doesn't? And what do they do for the masses that SA does not?

Really, only 5% of hiring is done at fairs? Earlier you said it was half? Where do you get your numbers? I get the 40% number (from the agencies), but to say that accounts for only 5% of all recruiting is nonsense. That is a made-up figure. However, you say that this is because of the schools that don't use agencies. Well, that's great, but the question was which agency is better. So if we take out the 95% (really?) that don't use the two agencies, we are left with the schools which do use them. They are the ones hiring at the fairs (again, advantage SA). Then you say "of those ISS has a better success rate" with no evidence or even context. So a higher percentage of those applying for the two European jobs available at the ISS fair got hired than the percentage of people applying for the 150 jobs at SA? Doubtful.

I am not the one making up numbers and making unfounded claims here.
Post Reply