Are Job Boards Dead? A Look Into The Future of Recruitment Advertising

July 11, 2024

Last week marked the end of an era, as Monster and CareerBuilder announced they were entering a marriage of equals, more or less undermining most of their sales messaging over the last two decades of this once powerful duopoly. Not so very long ago, of course, such a move would have been unthinkable.

When I first started out in this industry, Monster was an S&P 500 index stock (NYSE: MWW) and CareerBuilder was the only thing keeping the ersatz Tribune Company from imploding during those early days of digital transformation, as newspapers and traditional publishing were suddenly displaced by anything with a .com in its brand name.

This was so long ago, in fact, everyone was too busy undergoing digital transformation to talk about what’s essentially a theoretical construct as something worth paying billable hours for. No one needed a consultant to figure out how to use that AOL CD that plumped the profits of magazine publishers – which, in retrospect, was an act of self immolation.

There were no management recommendations or metrics involved in the sudden influx of advertisers wanting to pedal their wares online, but there sure were a ton of innovators willing to take their money, and annoy users with pop up and display ads (it was so much worse when Flash was still supported, for the record).

When Job Boards Ruled The World Wide Web

It might seem weird today, given the decidedly unsexy and anachronistic connotations that most of us subconsciously associate with online job postings, or by glacial pace of progress with which the HR Tech industry has slogged along for decades now. The way candidates look for jobs online and the enterprise systems through which they must apply have not really changed, like, at all, since George W Bush took office. The first time.

One can only hope that history is as kind to job boards as it was to the second President Bush, who, history has proven, is a case study in the power of winning by comparison rather than by competency. Doesn’t look so bad now, does he? I’ll give you one guess who LinkedIn Talent Solutions is in this extended metaphor.

Given the future alternatives to traditional job boards (a definition that includes the likes of Indeed and LinkedIn, who have done a great job distancing themselves from a category in both which clearly belong), the plethora of shit results and a UI/UX that’s pretty much the professional equivalent of MySpace minus the midi might not look all that bad. In fact, sometime soon, we might more or less approach a time when candidate generated content was contained to cover letters with a faint hint of nostalgia.

Of course, this merger was somewhat sentimental to me, as someone who came up through this industry as part of the internal marketing and communications team at Monster.com – a job I interviewed for as a joke, since I was still a corporate recruiter at the time and even a decade plus ago, recruiters dismissed job boards as a punchline.

Of course I took it, because Recession. And it’s way easier to write about trends than actually hire talent. And I quickly learned who the real enemy truly was.

CareerBuilder was the Pepsi to Monster’s Coca Cola, the Ali to its Frazier, the Joan Collins to its Linda Evans, the Biggie to its Tupac, the Boston BTS Army squaring off against those Swifties from Chicago.

Not really sure about that last metaphor, by the way, but I was trying to include a reference each generation in the workforce would understand, but my pop culture knowledge pretty much ends so long ago I still blast Kanye and Kid Rock with zero shame. So, sorry Gen Z.

Well, I’m old enough to appreciate the fact that the rivalry between Monster and CareerBuilder was actually good for both companies (and the larger market), in a blatantly codependent kinda way. And that these two companies brought recruiting, for a fleeting moment, to the bleeding edge of tech.

For real.

In fact, back when the industry was more Wild West than Silicon Valley, CareerBuilder and Monster were becoming billion dollar businesses selling something that they literally invented – specifically, recruitment advertising.

When Recruitment Advertising Was Cutting Edge

Job boards may have few fans and more than enough bad will from the general public, but the fact that both of these companies are still around today, with only cosmetic changes to their core product roadmap and strategies to maximize shareholder value since they were both founded in 1994; by comparison, there were only 2300 registered websites in the entirety of the World Wide Web by the end of 1994; 23,500 sites had been registered by the end of 1995. For the entire internet. Globally.

Man, I wish I could go back to those days. I’d buy so many friggin’ domain names.

Yet, Monster was one of those core original sites; reportedly, it was the sixth URL ever registered, beaten only by the likes of CERN and Stanford. It was joined by CB in 1995, which means that by December of 1995, one out of every thousand registered domain names was a job board.

It’s always been an incredibly crowded category, and the fact that both Monster and CareerBuilder went on to become blue chip brands and among the oldest internet companies with a truly global user base proves that at one point, these properties were leading the enterprise tech adoption bell curve instead of perpetually lagging in the arms race for ad spend.

Not that it mattered. Job boards were right up there with AI in both adoption and spend; overnight, seemingly, the recruiting industry went digital, pushing away from the newspaper classifieds to which they’d long been consigned and instead became such a big business, the Department of Labor soon repurposed an entire regulatory authority whose entire scope was online job advertising and application.

The OFCCP was established after World War 2 but before federal Civil Rights protections to prevent discrimination among government contractors, a mandate that eventually extended to hiring policies and processes. One can safely assume the agency had no idea what it was in for when it agreed to take on job advertising in the early 2000s as part of its portfolio of enforcement responsibilities.

Now, it’s pretty much all they do, an existence that has given job boards a distinct advantage over other industries, although AI is certainly coming into their crosshairs. Thanks to their policies on the disposition and documentation of internet applicants, it’s pretty much illegal to fill a job without first advertising it, a loophole that was big enough to weather multiple recessions, a pandemic, and tens of thousands of emerging challengers, from HotJobs to BranchOut, from Beyond to the Muse and beyond.

It took until last week for the two OGs to join them, at least as standalone entities. In their announcement of the deal, both Monster and CareerBuilder (likely, through gritted teeth) said they were better together, and long term, that’s probably true. This assumes, of course, that either have a long term at all.

Then again, when the likes of LinkedIn and Indeed first appeared to challenge the traditional models upon which the incumbents were built, obituaries were already being written. Both companies, of course, succeeded in finally ending what had been a long entrenched job board duopoly, and are well ahead of the combined entity in terms of ARR, market share and MAUs.

They are decidedly the next generation in the job ad revolution kicked off by their just merged predecessors, and still rake in billions of dollars a year selling perhaps the most simple and basic form of online advertising: job posts.

Neither is perceived as a job board, for whatever reason or at least seems to have the same sort of stigma attached to them, as either of their older rivals. They are largely seen as modern tech companies (lolz), whereas Monster and CareerBuilder are somewhere below the Dancing Hamsters or Vine in the pecking order of internet relevancy. The good news is, they’re still way ahead of Dice.

The bad news is, they were spun off in a joint venture between a Dutch staffing company whose services margins make job ads look like a fast food restaurant, and a white glove PE firm intent on unlocking value.

Marriages of convenience rarely last, and the announcement of this last stand likely still can’t turn back the inevitable unwinding of both of these companies, probably into an auction for their respective IPs and the rapid extraction of any proprietary data that can potentially (and legally) be resold. The announcement felt like an inevitability.

The truth is, both outlasted Indeed (acquired by the Yakuza, er, Recruit, in 2012) and LinkedIn, Redmond’s $26B red headed stepchild, which joined Clippy and Windows Vista in the Microsoft family of properties all the way back in 2016. Yes, Monster was acquired by Randstad, and CareerBuilder was swallowed up by the Apollo Group, a massive PE firm, but both continued to operate as independent entities – that is, until last week.

The meteor finally came for the dinosaurs, turns out.

Consolidation or Elimination: The Future of Recruitment Advertising

It will be interesting to see what happens to LinkedIn if Google decides to limit or completely decoup le from the entire Microsoft online ecosystem, a seemingly inevitable salvo in the ongoing AI arms race.

This would, of course, rob LinkedIn of its primary source of traffic and, unless Bing can finally become a thing (spoiler alert: it won’t), its ability to track, target and triangulate the PII of its purported 3 billion plus global users will be severely undercut, along with the value of its advertising solutions, which remain its primary source of revenue, by a significant margin.

Similarly, Indeed has lived its existence at the mercy of Google deprecating deduplicate content (or at one point, launching its own paid job ad product, which it turns out wasn’t as lucrative – or as simple – as simply continuing to collect the estimated $100M in annual ad spend generated for the search giant by Indeed, one of its largest advertisers.

That detente is now irrelevant, as Google plans to pretty much phase out cookies by the end of 2025, requiring companies to use their own data for online advertising instead of APIs and channel partners, meaning that the downstream revenue generated by aggregators like Indeed by hijacking job seeker traffic through a combination of SEO, paid media will likely end even before all those AI bets can pay off.

It also, ostensibly, means the death of “programmatic advertising,” at least in the recruitment advertising ecosystem; these platforms all rely heavily on the same sort of cross platform user data that Google is basically killing off; most of the “programmatic” vendors in recruitment advertising, after all, are impenetrable black boxes for any sort of data, from their algorithms to their attributable results. But most, if not all, leverage GDN – Google’s programmatic ad network – in some capacity.

Many “programmatic vendors” in the TA industry are also, in a dirty secret everyone but employers kind knows, effectively Google Ad shops making money off a lucrative and closed market that’s facing an imminent embargo by its sole trading partner outside of the cabal of “programmatic providers” living, quite literally, on the margins.

They’re still pretty good, after all; US employers spent over $60B on job ads last year alone, proving that there’s still a market for the most specious, transactional and, at this point, mandatory part of the hiring process. It’s just that the value chain is slowly, inevitably, shortening.

Which means the future of recruitment advertising, likely, looks a lot like consumer advertising does today. And that old cliche about how your candidates are your customers will finally stop being a nicety and start being a reality.

In the meantime, pour one out for Monster, CareerBuilder, and the end of an era in talent acquisition and recruitment.

Fluent in Hiring: How Language Skills Boost Talent Acquisition Success

By Andres Moreno, Founder, Chairman and CEO of Open Education In today’s global market for top talent, businesses that fail to invest in attracting, retaining and developing bilingual talent are leaving money on the table. For employers, language gaps cost opportunities, erode profitability and hinder growth.It’s no secret that actively recruiting bilingual candidates leads to improved business and bottom line outcomes. In fact, a recent study by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) revealed that fully nine out of 10 U.S. employers rely on employees with language skills beyond English.Yet, many employers continue to face a critical gap between the language skills they need and what their employees can offer.The Role of Bilingualism in Employee Recruitment and RetentionAs the CEO of a company operating across 20 global markets, I’ve seen firsthand how bilingualism fuels growth and innovation and our experience mirrors the ACTFL findings.In a survey we conducted among C-Suite and HR professionals to better understand the importance of bilingualism in the American workforce, over 90% of respondents agreed that language skills are essential. They emphasized that bilingual employees enhance customer experience, boost engagement, and optimize service delivery—all of which directly affect profitability.The ACTFL study also found that nearly one in four employers lost or couldn’t pursue business opportunities due to a lack of foreign language skills. For companies with a pronounced language gap, that figure jumps to 50%.These missed opportunities aren’t just frustrating—they’re preventable. Implementing language training can immediately improve cross-functional collaboration, reduce miscommunication, and open up new markets. In fact, more than 70% of HR professionals in our survey believe language training programs improve communication and positively impact business outcomes.Spanish is particularly valuable in the U.S. market, where 85% of companies say they rely on it for business. Since Spanish is the most widely spoken language in the U.S. after English, offering employees the opportunity to learn it can help businesses better serve their Spanish-speaking customers, ultimately boosting profits.On the global stage, English remains dominant for business. Jovana Arguelles, Head of People Development at Scania, a subsidiary of Volkswagen that’s widely recognized as global leader in sustainable transportation, noted that English is essential for her company’s international projects.By providing language training, Scania has improved communication between employees and clients, enabling employees to take on new roles and transfer to other markets.Talk Global, Win Local: The Power of Multilingual TeamsOur own organization, where over 70% of employees work remotely, has observed that continuous learning programs, including language training, significantly improve employee engagement. The 2023-24 SHRM State of the Workplace Report highlights that upskilling and maintaining engagement are two of the most critical challenges organizations face today.Employee development programs, like language training, directly address these issues. Companies that invest in employee growth see higher levels of satisfaction, productivity, and retention. According to Forbes, businesses with comprehensive training programs—including language skills—achieve 218% higher income per employee and 24% higher profit margins.In conclusion, integrating language training into employee benefits is not just an advantage—it’s a necessity in today’s global market. Both ACTFL’s research and our own findings show that bilingualism is a critical driver of business success.Over 90% of industry leaders agree that language proficiency enhances customer interactions and improves organizational performance. With U.S. companies increasingly relying on Spanish and English essential for international operations, language skills open doors to new opportunities, boost profits, and foster a more engaged workforce.The gap between language skills and business needs represents both a challenge and an opportunity. In a world where every competitive edge counts, bilingualism is no longer optional—it’s essential. Companies that prioritize language training now will not only future-proof their workforce but also seize opportunities others miss.Andrés Morenois the Founder, Chairman and CEO of Open English, the leading English-learning platform in Latin America, the U.S. Hispanic market, Europe, and the Middle East providing live, online instruction to +3 million students that have enrolled to date.The company is disrupting the brick-and-mortar language-learning market with a proprietary technology platform that offers unlimited, 24/7 access to live classes with native-speaking teachers.Open English has raised over USD $130 million in venture capital from top-tier firms including Insight Partners and TCV and is headquartered in Miami, FL, with offices in Mexico City, Bogota, Buenos Aires, Istanbul, Bangalore, and São Paulo.Follow Andres on X @TalktoAndres or connect with him on LinkedIn.

Uneven Bars: Diversity, Inclusion and Age Discrimination

When we think about the issues associated with “ageism” in today’s job market, we largely tend to first think of older, more experienced workers who live their lives – and livelihoods – in a somewhat precarious position, plagued by the widespread misperception that they are somehow past their professional prime.Older workers should be valued for their extensive experience and proven expertise, but instead, find themselves with the sword of Damocles perched perpetually over their heads (and headcount), seen largely as Luddites, stuck in the status quo, past their prime and imminently disposable.Time seems to be running out once workers reach a certain tenure, and while they say wisdom comes with experience. In the workforce today, however, the conventional wisdom among many newly minted Millennial managers is that more or less anyone over 40 (or anyone seen as relatively “old,” at least compared to their colleagues) represent what’s essentially a depreciating, disposable asset that’s likely long overdue for a trade-in.Junior Division: A Double Standard That’s Getting OldWhile age might be nothing but a number, it’s a significant workplace liability, too – and the more mileage you have on your resume, the likelier it is you’ll find yourself replaced by a newer model, so to speak. Look at most layoffs or reductions in force; inevitably, involuntary turnover disproportionately impacts established workers over their emerging colleagues.The fact that ageism runs rampant in the workplace is not news; at this point, it’s common knowledge bordering on corporate cliche. While the perception is that much of this phenomenon is driven by aspiring, driven younger workers proactively pushing out their older colleagues, the truth isn’t so simple and straightforward.Fact is, age-based discrimination can be just as pervasive, and just as detrimental, among less experienced, less tenured workers, too – particularly those who work within the tech space. While 2 out of every 3 older workers report having experienced some sort of age based discrimination at work, according to a report published by the BBC, a new, acute and equally pernicious form of ageism is increasingly impacting younger employees, too.For Gen Z, “Zillennial” and the youngest members of Gen Y, the rise of reverse ageism seems like a true Catch 22. In this lose-lose situation, the harder younger employees work, the more likely they are to be seen as doing too much, and thus, find themselves labeled as “overly ambitious.” On the other hand, if they do too little, or who eschew corporate politics and conventional career ladders are seen as lazy, apathetic, and, infamously, “entitled.”Younger workers, like generations before them, inevitably go against the status quo and challenge longstanding workplace norms and conventions; “how it’s always been done” doesn’t much matter to workers who want to do things differently. The emerging workforce, largely, is looking for change; veteran workers, by contrast, tend to stay well within their comfort zone. Passing the Torch: A Lesson Plan for Legacy SystemsThere has to be a happy medium, of course, one that can only be achieved when generations at work come together not as adversaries, but as professional peers. Younger workers’ insistence on staying on the cutting edge and constant change might well provide the nudge that older workers need to start thinking outside the box, and taking the sort of calculated risks that not only benefit their bigger businesses and bottom line results, but also, solidify their job security, too.Older workers tend to be dismissive of their less experienced colleagues and counterparts, yet that attitude of not taking younger employees seriously can aversely impact both the business impact and technological advancement of companies across industries, functions and sizes.The younger generation, conversely, also needs to realize that their “older” counterparts in fact have invaluable technological acumen and expertise, the type that can only be developed over time and honed with hands-on experience.They possess a foundational knowledge of critical business systems; while some of these legacy tools might seem anachronistic and antiquated, they remain foundational tools that remain at the core of business processes and policies.Minds are, after all, far easier to change than infrastructure – which is why every end user could use the institutional knowledge and insights of coworkers who have been there, done that – and done it well enough to ensure, at least, enough sustained growth to necessitate the hiring those same emerging workers who would see them put out to pasture.Major healthcare companies, the banking sector, the federal government and countless enterprise employers continue to rely on legacy systems that require, well, legacy knowledge.And while recent grads may be entering the workforce with differentiated tech skills and experience leveraging the most cutting edge tech and advanced software on the market, this is largely irrelevant for an employer whose business remains reliant on established enterprise systems and last-generation solutions.These instances are often highly customized and configured for each company’s business processes and policies. These seemingly obsolete technologies represent, in fact, years of large scale internal development and significant capital investment by a company to extend the lives, and legacies, of their Tier One tools.There’s no way this can be taught in any computer science classroom; not even the most advanced engineers and innovative developers can figure out, independently, how these stacks actually stack up. The only way to learn is by doing, and that lengthy experience many older workers have represents, in fact, years of extensive experiential learning. As long as companies continue to rely on proprietary platforms, outdated tools and otherwise obsolete technologies, emerging professionals are at an obvious disadvantage when compared to their more tenured counterparts. These younger workers would be wise to realize that working with, instead of against, experienced colleagues would create a significant competitive advantage, both personally and professionally.Going for Gold: Winning The Team Competition in Workplace Technology While these systems may seem stuck in the past, understanding these platforms will prove critical to informing and inspiring the company’s future tech stack and strategy – and only those emerging workers who actually know how things have always been done will have any insight – or influence – into how things can actually be done better.As I’ve been thinking about age discrimination in the tech industry, I was recently reminded that tech isn’t the only place with a pervasive ageism problem.All I had to do was turn on the Olympics, and sit back and listen.The commentators, and the crowds, roundly celebrates the 16 year old outlier whose 100 meter dash time crushes the competition, or the elite athleticism of the US Gymnastics team and the cutthroat competitors with the talent to somehow make this elite team. In a sport where competitors peak before their teen years are even over, we recognize how remarkable – and ephemeral – their athletic accomplishments truly are.But then again, as always, there are outliers – like 27 year old Simone Biles, whose reemergence onto the Olympic scene after over a decade of dominance has seen many dismiss her as too old for the competition, the media labeling her the team’s “grandmother” and wondering if her spot should have gone to an up-and-comer rather than an established star. After all, she’s already had her opportunity, said many commentators; maybe its time to move aside and let someone else have a place at the podium. And yet.Biles might be the most experienced gymnast on Team USA, but she’s also the most iconic. She’s been here before, and she knows what it takes to win gold, for both her team and as an individual. Much like older tech workers, she might not be what’s new or what’s next, but she has the ability to go for Gold right now.I think we can glean a few nuggets of wisdom from this disparity. Ageism is both too young and too old. When you hire young tech talent and recognize a special skill set early — foster it. The more support you give a promising younger employee, the more likely they will feel like a crucial part of the team. Encourage younger people to share their thoughts in meetings and actually listen to them. You just might discover an amazing new way of doing something.However, we must also encourage them to embrace their 40+ year old colleagues and learn from them. Over 40 in the tech industry is far from old, with many of these professionals holding critical skill sets that younger workers simply don’t possess.We can also learn another lesson from our U.S. Olympic teams in Paris — the power of teamwork. These athletes know that a teamwork mindset is needed to succeed. They know they are strongest together, regardless of age, and will rely on each other for success. Where a younger athlete will fill the skill gap in one area, an older teammate will fill the gap in another. Imagine a work environment where the vast experience and wisdom of older employees meet the new skill sets and fresh perspectives of younger employees. There, you have a winning scenario that benefits the employees, the team, and the company as a whole. The technology sector can take a page from the Olympics regarding ageism. When you play as a team, you win as a team—regardless of your teammates’ ages. About the Author: Angela Hood is a serial entrepreneur and visionary leader in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), focusing on talent acquisition and workforce diversity.Following four years of R&D at the University of Cambridge in England, in 2014, Angela returned to foundThisWay Global Inc. ,a company focused on leveraging AI and business automation to unlock human potential.It has since become one of the fastest growing SaaS automation companies in the world.Hood is a well-respected thought leader and international keynote speaker on the topics of mitigating bias using artificial intelligence, the ROI of diversity and human-centric automation.

How — and Why — to Track Your Employee Training Program

Training is a vital part of any business’s long-term growth plan. In fact, a study from the American Society for Training and Development found that organizations that invest the most in employee training have 218 percent higher income per employee.And to make matters even better, employees actually want to be trained. In a 2017 Randstad US survey, 82 percent of employees said lifelong learning is important, 67 percent said they need more training and development opportunities from their employers.But if you want to be sure that your training and development programs are actually delivering these kinds of results, you need to start by tracking employee progress. Otherwise, you won’t have any window into how things are going — and how they could be better.How to Track Employee Training ProgressEvery business leader wants to know whether the time, effort, and money being invested in a project is paying off — and that includes employee training. Training programs can generate tons of value for both your business and employees when done right.You should never put employee training on autopilot! It’s important to be proactive with your efforts so you can make improvements on the fly to make training more engaging and more worth your while.There are typically two ways to track your employee training: using a learning management system or doing it the old-fashioned way with a spreadsheet. Here is a brief overview of each:1. Using a Learning Management SystemA learning management system (LMS) is a tool employers can use to manage employee training programs. As an added bonus, most LMSs come with built-in tracking and reporting capabilities.Here are the pros and cons of using an LMS to deliver and track employee development:Pros:• Cost-effective due to remotely accessible nature — no need to pay for trainers or travel.• Consistent training of employees across all locations.• Contributes to continuous employee development because learning materials can be accessed regularly.• Best used for compliance training, as LMSs can provide proof of course completion.• Tracking is built into the LMS.Cons:• When not used properly, LMSs can become more like administrative software to simply store videos, manuals, and training content, rather than dynamic training solutions. Studies show that employees can forget 70 percent of what they’ve within just a couple of days after taking a course on an LMS, suggesting many LMSs are not used to their full potential.• An LMS is best used as a tool to deliver courses with a clearly defined goal, like compliance, security courses, or training about specific products and services.• LMSs are not necessarily suitable for all work environments. For example, hourly workers in frontline industries cannot access job training through a desktop-focused LMS. Mobile-first solutions may work better for these types of employees.• A company admin controls every aspect of training through an LMS, including content and pacing. Without autonomy over how they learn, employees may find LMS content dull and repetitive. Adaptability and end-user customization are particularly important for younger Gen. Z employees, who have come to expect a certain level of personalization from technology.• Research proves that struggle and failure are critical components of the learning process, but many LMSs are centered around a more passive delivery system of watching videos and checking boxes, which may not be conducive to optimal learning.• Reporting capabilities can vary from LMS to LMS. Some systems have robust tracking options, but others only track employee progress through simple scores that lack granular insight.• An LMS may be expensive to scale as your company grows.2. Using a Manual SystemThe second most common way for employers to track their employee training programs is through spreadsheets, like Excel. Manual tracking is an ideal solution if you only need a small amount of data, lack the budget for a more focused reporting software solution, or have no other options availablePros:• Very easy to implement.• Little to no overhead costs.• No need for additional hardware or software.Cons:• Can be incredibly time- and labor-intensive, depending on the size of your organization.• Manual systems can be easily applied to all forms of employee training, especially more complex and dynamic training.—As the employee training technology space continues to grow, we’re seeing new solutions for managing and tracking employee development every day. My advice? Research the available tools and figure out which ones meet your needs in terms of budget, headcount, functionality, and more.The success of your employee training program depends on getting your tracking system right.Sam Caucci is founder and CEO of 1Huddle.Get the top recruiting news and insights delivered to your inbox every week. Sign up for the Recruiter Today newsletter.

Keeping Employees Connected and Projects on Track in a Remote Work Environment

Before the pandemic, 17 percent of US employees worked remotely full-time. Now, it’s closer to 44 percent.More businesses than ever before are operating without physical headquarters or offices, giving their employees lots of flexibility around their work schedules and workplaces. And it is safe to say that these remote work policies are here to stay, with 73 percent of workers saying they’d like to continue telecommuting in some capacity after the pandemic.There was a time when remote work wasn’t even a possibility, mainly due to the lack of technology and tools necessary for distributed teams to stay connected and collaborate efficiently. These days, that’s no longer a problem: Plenty of apps now exist to improve the remote work experience and increase employee productivity.Adapting to the remote work world has not been easy for everyone, but I believe many companies could overcome the challenges of telecommuting by investing in the right tech tools. There’s no perfect equation for a flawless remote work tech stack, but here are some platforms and programs that can surely make your remote team more efficient and organized:Tools for Staying ConnectedOne of the biggest concerns about remote work is effective communication between employees. After all, communication is foundational to an optimal collaborative environment. Therefore, reliable instant messaging and video conferencing platforms are necessities.One of the most popular instant messaging apps in the market, Slack offers a simple way for teams to stay in touch. It integrates with other business applications, like customer relationship management (CRM) tools, for added ease of use. Meanwhile, GoToMeeting offers a reliable video conferencing program, with some important features like a “smart meeting assistant” that allows users to record meetings in the form of both audio/video and written transcriptsLoom is another useful tool that blends video conferencing with instant messaging. Loom allows users to record and share short video messages, which can be a much more efficient communication channel than emailing and instant messaging.Tools to Manage ProjectsEffective project management is vital to keeping work on track in a remote environment, but it can also be challenging to manage a project when everyone isn’t in the same room together. As a result, leaders need tools to help them track the stages of a project, follow up on tasks, and delegate to team members.Basecamp is a project management platform where users can create different spaces and timelines for different departments and projects. In addition, admins can create checklist templates to ensure the same steps are followed consistently between projects, and members of each project team can manage their past, current, and future tasks in one place.Asana is another popular project management tool. What I like about Asana is that it offers three main views to choose from: list, timeline, and boards. Teams can select the views that best fit their projects, and no matter which they choose, admins can define workflows and add insights and instructions for team members. Asana also includes some handy reporting tools that help leaders keep track of the team’s progress and workload with real-time charts and status updates.Trello is a good choice for those who prefer a visual representation of projects and tasks. A Trello board consists of lists and cards that contain detailed information about tasks, including who is responsible for the task, when it’s due, related attachments, and relevant productivity metrics.Technology + Talent = Remote Work SuccessRemote work brings new freedom and flexibility to companies and employees, which is why so many have embraced it. However, employers will need to put some new standards in place to ensure employees continue performing at their best while telecommuting.Luckily, the technology is now available for employees to enjoy the benefits of a remote role while staying connected with colleagues and staying on top of their tasks. As a result, companies can continue offering remote work options while minimizing the challenges of overseeing a distributed team.As companies continue building remote teams of talent from around the world, they’ll need to rely on the right tools and platforms to encourage productivity and teamwork in the virtual work environment. It is important to note that the tools highlighted above — and any other tools your company may adopt for remote work — are most effective when employees adopt them with accountability, trust, and discipline. Given the inherent autonomy of remote work, employees must do their part in leveraging the right tools to reach higher levels of productivity and get the most out of working remotely.Lesley Pyle, MSc, is founder and CEO of HireMyMom.com.Get the top recruiting news and insights delivered to your inbox every week. Sign up for the Recruiter Today newsletter.