Not Easily Spooked
Despite a wave of recent hardships, Monster is pushing ahead with ambitious plans to strengthen its business. Talk of its demise (or imminent acquisition), says CEO Sal Iannuzzi, is unfounded.
By Ed Frauenheim
Recommend 0
t’s a scary
time to be Monster.
Not only is the online recruiting giant still dealing with
fallout from an embarrassing stock option scandal, but it faces a host of other
challenges. These include a less-than-stellar reputation among employers and job
seekers, new competition, significant executive departures and, most frightening
of all, an economic slowdown that is devouring jobs and the job ads that are Monster
Worldwide’s lifeblood.
Monster managed to survive the tech bust and recession at
the beginning of this decade. But some observers argue that the end may be near
for the job-board pioneer—at least as a stand-alone company. Gerry Crispin, a consultant
with recruiting advisory firm CareerXroads, predicts Monster will be sold to one
of a number of large media companies in the months ahead. "I would be shocked if
it took a year or two," he says.
But Monster Worldwide chief executive Sal Iannuzzi says rumors
of his firm’s doom are off the mark. Iannuzzi, an outsider to the staffing world
who took the reins at Monster a little more than a year ago, conceded in an interview
with Workforce Management that Monster has work to do to improve its customer
experience and that his firm is not recession-proof.
Yet he’s anything but fearful. A native of Brooklyn, Iannuzzi
says through his thick hometown accent that a restructuring launched last summer
has streamlined the company and re-energized the 5,200-person staff. Confronted
by competitors with highly focused job boards and advanced job matching, New York-based
Monster is fighting back with its own industry-specific sites and technology upgrades.
It has fast-growing international operations. And even in face of a recession, Mon-
ster is investing in its business. The firm just spent $31 million to market its
brand, and by the end of the year Iannuzzi hopes to more than triple a sales force
of 62 that is devoted to larger clients. There’s been speculation that Iannuzzi,
54, came to the company simply to spruce it up and sell it. But he has laid out
a vision for a much bigger Monster, imagining the firm could provide hubs for people
to connect both on professional matters and personal hobbies.
Never mind that these social networking plans would pit Monster
against Internet titans like Yahoo and Facebook—Iannuzzi and crew are undaunted.
"Monster not only can survive independently, but I think it can broaden," Iannuzzi
says. "That’s what keeps me and 5,000 other people pumped every day."
Company's rise
Monster effectively created the category of the Internet
job board—Web sites where job seekers can post résumés and employers can list openings
and search through those résumés. In 1994, the "Monster Board" was just the 454th
commercial site on the Web, according to the company. During the mid- to late 1990s,
the Monster Board—later renamed Monster.com—was part of TMP Worldwide, a marketing
firm focused initially on Yellow Pages ads. But the job site grew to be the best-known
brand in the company, which changed its name to Monster Worldwide in 2003. Monster
has since sold off assets, including its North America recruitment ad agency business.
Monster not only can survive
independently, but I think it can broaden. That’s what keeps me and 5,000
other people pumped every day. —Sal Iannuzzi, CEO,
Monster Worldwide
|
Today, Monster’s business includes Military.com—a community
site focused on members of the armed services, military families and veterans—as
well as FastWeb, a scholarship search service for students. Monster has expanded
into the growing area of talent management software and does work for the U.S. government,
such as providing technology for USAJobs.gov, the official federal government job
site.
The company also has pushed hard into overseas markets. Monster
now operates in 36 countries. It entered India and China in 2005 and is in talks
to acquire Chinese recruitment site ChinaHR.com. The parent firm of ChinaHR .com
already is 40 percent owned by Monster.
In the quarter ended March 31, Monster’s "international careers"
revenue—which reflects all of the firm’s career-related services in Europe and Asia—leaped
44 percent year-over-year to $153 million. That was the driving force behind the
company’s overall revenue growth of 13 percent, to $370 million. Monster’s "North
America careers" revenue was flat at $184 million. Monster’s net income for the
quarter dropped 43 percent, to $22.6 million.
Backdating, matchmaking
A less-beefy bottom line is just one of the problems the
company has wrestled with in the past few years.
The most glaring of its difficulties has been a flap over
backdating and improperly accounting for stock options. That prac- tice, which took
place at a number of technology companies, inflated Monster’s earnings by $340 million
from 1997 through 2005, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
scandal has tarnished the reputation of former Monster executives including ex-CEO
Andrew McKelvey. Iannuzzi, who worked on the company’s investigation into backdating,
is untouched by allegations of wrongdoing.
But even if its corporate image is on the mend, Monster faces
other challenges. For one, its effectiveness for both job seekers and employers
has been questioned. From the employer side, Monster has come to be seen as a kind
of recruiting fire hose—spraying out too many résumés and not targeted matches.
"It is an issue," says Andie Sanchez, manager of recruiting
for Real Mex Restaurants, the parent of Chevys and other Mexican restaurant brands.
Sanchez uses an applicant tracking system to help screen candidates, but she still
wishes Monster had a more finely tuned matching system akin to the one found at
dating site eHarmony.
Other job sites, such as Jobfox, have been rolling out new
matching methods designed to better fit candidates with openings.
A year ago the time to bring a new product to market globally was 44 weeks. Our goal, by roughly the end of this year, is to cut that in half.
—Sal Iannuzzi
|
Monster concedes it has stumbled on the matching question,
but Iannuzzi says the company has improved its technology. A year ago, employers
received an average of 13 responses for each job posting. That figure has doubled,
Iannuzzi says. "Not only do they get them, but they’re much more on target," he
says.
Monster also has turned away work-at-home ads that cluttered
job seekers’ searches and pushed out pop-up ads. It even has decided to bring back
about 100 customer service positions it had outsourced. Iannuzzi says he’s not satisfied
yet with Monster’s customer service, but "the trend is positive."
Data compromised
One thing that threw a wrench into Monster’s customer service
goals was a major data breach last summer. Monster said employer client login credentials
had been compromised and used to download information such as names, home addresses
and e-mail addresses for 1.3 million job seekers with résumés on Monster.com. In
the wake of the incident, Monster said it upgraded its security through steps such
as new user authentication technology.
Jim Hammock, co-founder of recruiting site Itzbig, has argued
that Monster’s data breach amounts to an indictment of the traditional Internet
job board model, where candidates post résumés with personal information. Itzbig
was designed to allow job seekers to remain anonymous, with résumés passed directly
from job seekers to employers if a match seems likely. "Be Found—Not Found Out"
is the company’s tagline.
Monster, though, seems to have emerged from the data breach
incident without major harm to its reputation on privacy. Sanchez doesn’t regard
Monster as a particular risk. "It’s not just Monster," she says. "People are hacking
into so many different Web sites."
In fact, despite her concerns about Monster’s matching technology,
Sanchez sees the site as a crucial piece of her recruiting strategy. She also uses
CareerBuilder, Yahoo HotJobs and Craigslist to find workers, but Monster is king
of the hill. "We’re still finding a majority of our candidates on Monster," she
says.
Timothy McHugh, equity research analyst at investment firm
William Blair & Co., says that "Monster remains an excellent brand." He adds that
Monster benefits from a continuing trend toward more online recruiting activity.
Monster will be sold to one of a number of large media companies in the months ahead. "I would be shocked if it took a year or two."
—Gerry Crispen, consultant, CareerXroads
|
On the other hand, shifts within online recruiting pose potential
problems for Monster. These include the rise of candidate sourcing on popular social
networking sites such as LinkedIn and Facebook—an approach seen as better able to
land higher-quality "passive" candidates. "Job boards must continue to evolve,"
Crispin says. "There’s no question that social networking has to be integrated into
how job boards connect people and jobs."
In addition, companies are focusing attention on their own
career Web sites. And organizations are turning to niche Web sites that concentrate
on a specific region or industry. At Dice Holdings, which provides specialized career
sites for fields such as technology and financial services, revenue for the first
quarter of 2008 grew 30 percent—more than twice the rate at Monster.
The niche competition comes on top of Monster’s traditional
job board rivals, CareerBuilder and Yahoo HotJobs.
Monster is "facing increased competition and an overall decline
in the value proposition that they’re offering," says Nate Swanson, an analyst at
investment firm ThinkPanmure. "Similar to the way they have displaced newspaper
ads, Monster is running the risk of being displaced by a handful of new competitors
or new technologies."
Taking action
Monster, though, has a game plan for the shifting Internet
recruiting landscape. Iannuzzi says Monster can coexist with LinkedIn and Facebook,
and he doesn’t rule out moving into social networking.
And Monster has its defenses against the niche trend. For
one thing, narrowly focused sites have an uphill climb to lure job seekers. "Not
everyone who is posting their résumé may know of the niche boards," says Jacqueline
Kuhn, a consultant who also serves as chair of the International Association for
Human Resource Information Management professional group.
Monster benefits from a continuing trend toward more online
recruiting activity. "Monster remains
an excellent brand."
—Timothy McHugh, equity research analyst, William Blair,& Co.
|
Meanwhile, Monster snagged its own stable of industry-specific
sites through its January acquisition of Affinity Labs. The San Francisco-based
company has created online communities for professions including education, nursing
and law enforcement.
In addition, Iannuzzi plans to increase Monster’s involvement
in talent management software, the fast-growing field of applications for key HR
tasks such as recruiting and performance management. Recruiting software tools can
play a critical role in how job seekers interact with a company’s career site.
Monster has a group of about 1,000 technology professionals,
and they have become more efficient thanks to the company overhaul, Iannuzzi says.
Business units that grew up independently made for bureaucratic gridlock, he says.
"A year ago the time to bring a new product to market globally was 44 weeks," Iannuzzi
says. "Our goal, by roughly the end of this year, is to cut that in half."
But whether Monster has the talent to imagine, produce and
introduce new products has come into question in recent months. Several prominent
company officials have left, raising questions about the company’s capabilities
and its morale. Among the losses was Steve Pogorzelski, who stepped down from his
role as executive vice president for global sales and customer development in January.
Other departures include Brian Corey, area vice president of sales, and Neal Bruce,
vice president of Monster’s global innovation group.
They are among the many Monster employees who have left—voluntarily
or not—in the past year. As part of its restructuring plan, Monster decided to cut
700 jobs, a step that can undermine the esprit de corps of remaining employees.
Recruiting industry blogger Joel Cheesman has painted moves
out of Monster this year in dark terms. "The rats are apparently leaving the sinking
ship in droves," he wrote in April. Cheesman is founder of HRSEO, a firm that helps
companies tap search engines for recruiting—a rival approach to job boards like
Monster.
Iannuzzi rejects the notion that Monster has been left shorthanded.
He concedes that employees’ focus has suffered from lingering headlines about the
stock options scandal, and that a gloomy climate was a problem when he arrived.
But he says morale has improved in the past year, partly because the restructuring
made it easier to get things done. Increasing the portion of employees receiving
equity rewards from about 17 percent to nearly 40 percent also has helped, he says.
As proof of a more committed staff, Iannuzzi says voluntary
turnover has decreased from upwards of 35 percent a year ago to roughly 25 percent
today.
Economy is key
Any burgeoning hopefulness at Monster, though, could be severely
strained if the company’s job-ad revenue dries up in an economic downturn. Eric
Wolff, an investment manager and blogger who is betting against Monster’s stock,
predicts Monster’s revenue could drop sharply should the economy hit a recession.
Wolff says core Monster careers revenue fell steeply in the last recession. "[W]hen
the employment market swoons, Monster gets creamed," Wolff wrote late last year.
Iannuzzi doesn’t deny that Monster’s financial fate is largely
tied to the business cycle. But he says that while Monster hunkered down during
the last recession, the company is going to use this downturn to expand its market
share. In a recent 12-month period, Monster did business with just 25 percent of
the 31,000 U.S. companies with more than 500 employees, and just 4 percent of the
1.7 million firms with between 10 and 500 employees.
The company’s marketing push and plans to triple its sales
force stem from a belief that Monster can snag many more of those companies. "This
is not a time for us to retrench, but to build and seize the opportunity," Iannuzzi
said in a May conference call with analysts.
Despite Iannuzzi’s optimism, predictions that Monster will
not remain an independent company for long persist. Fueling the speculation is the
fact that Iannuzzi parachuted into his last firm, Symbol Technologies, and later
sold it. He will not rule out a sale of Monster, but notes Symbol is the only company
he has ever sold.
Iannuzzi has spent the bulk of his career in financial services.
He says the Monster CEO post appealed to him for its challenge and for being an
intriguing business model that included the prospect of growth in China.
Iannuzzi’s grand ambitions for Monster are in tune with the
company’s latest tagline: It "strives to inspire people to improve their lives."
Yes, the firm runs the risk of becoming too diffuse, Iannuzzi says. But he can foresee
Monster becoming central for broader activities around work—think teachers sharing
lesson plans. Beyond that, it can branch into hobbies like rock climbing, he says.
This vision offers Monster a way out of its concentration
on job ads and résumé searching. But it means new battles against established Internet
giants such as Yahoo and Google, both of which have group networking features.
Iannuzzi, though, seems determined to put the mettle back
into Monster. He says he’s not fazed by competing with Yahoo and Google.
"Like I said, I came here for the challenge."
Workforce Management, June 23,
2008, p. 39-44 -- Subscribe
Now!
Ed Frauenheim is a Workforce Management senior staff writer based in San Francisco. E-mail editors@workforce.com to comment.
Next Article: 1. CEO Iannuzzi’s 1-year Review
Sal Iannuzzi, a financial services veteran with just a few years in the technology industry, says he can sense improved morale in his workforce of 5,200. At a recent company meeting with some 500 people in the room, it was obvious, he says. “You can see when people are turned on and when they aren’t,” Iannuzzi says. “There were a lot of lights on this morning.”
Features Archive
|
Reproductions and distribution of the above article are strictly prohibited. To order reprints and/or request permission to use the article in full or partial format, please contact our Reprint Sales Manager at (732) 723-0569.
|