Viewing All Posts In The ‘Industry Commentary’ Category

Zero Sum Game

One of the systemic errors that I see corporations and Recruiting departments making is that they are treating hiring as a “zero sum game”.

The name comes from the fact that there are some games where the sum of the player’s payoffs at the end of the game sum to zero. Poker is a good example. Imagine you and I play head’s up poker. If at the end of the night I’m up $20 then, by definition, you are down $20. Our payoffs, plus $20 and minus $20, sum to zero. The point being that in zero sum games my wins define your losses (and visa versa). Continue reading

Job Seeker Advocate

I’m ushering in a new look (Thanks NZ Team!!), new name and new focus on the AllianceQ Blog.  I hope you like the changes and enjoy reading “Recruiting on Q”.

Today, my focus shifts to the Job Seeker.  Of all the reasons to focus on this population of people, none is more compelling than spending time with Recruiting departments and hearing some of the prevailing attitudes toward them.  Wow!  You’d think the job seeker was put on the earth to bog down and frustrate corporate recruiting departments.  I think your Marketing and Executive teams might have something to say about that!

The job seeker is inextricable tied to your corporate profits.  Follow me here; a job seeker applies to one of your jobs – why?  Probably for a myriad of reasons but one of them is always “money”.  I don’t hang with a lot of independently wealthy folks so everyone I know works for pay.  What do we do with that pay?  After taxes, we buy “stuff”.  Therefore, every job seeker is also a consumer, and a potential consumer of your company’s “stuff”.  Or not.

• 1 in 4 job seekers has been badly treated by a prospective employer.
• 53% of job seekers will not purchase products and services if they have been badly treated.
• 55% tell at least 3 people about their bad experience.

There are many ways a company can increase the positive feelings these job seekers have with their brand.

None is more important than simply acknowledging there is more to do and committing to doing it.

Recruiter Match Race

Since Thoroughbreds were first brought to the American colonies more than 300 years ago, match racing — featuring one man’s horse against another man’s horse — has been an important part of the sport of racing. In the 1800s, match races took place with regularity.

None was bigger than Seabiscuit vs. War Admiral (you may have seen the movie).

So I just read the “Recruiting’s Smart Experiment with Social Media” article on ERE and in it one of the quoted Recruiters said;

“As the only recruiter, it’s hard for me to sit there and Tweet all day (something she says often goes on with independent recruiters). I’m not a beginner with Twitter. I think I know more than a lot of people out there. But it’s time-consuming. I am glad I work really fast. I’m glad I can multitask. My cell phone is loaded up on tweets. Some people just Tweet all the time.”

I also read a great article by Seth Godin about what people really want out of social media and other “connections”;

…….the fact that what people really want is the ability to connect to each other, not to companies. So the permission is used to build a tribe, to build people who want to hear from the company because it helps them connect, it helps them find each other, it gives them a story to tell and something to talk about.

So I got to thinking; if I put together a “Recruiter Match Race”between a modern, Social Networking Recruiter vs. an old fashioned “smile and dial Recruiter”, who would win?

I believe Seth, that people connect with people not with companies.  Maybe the hardcore Apple fans will argue that they hang on every word the mother ship utters but few people will argue that they really enjoy connecting with a company.  Even employees don’t necessarily connect with a company!  Heck, that’s why employee engagement is such an illusive subject for HR folks!

So if you are a recruiter who believes the size of your facebook “Tribe” or the number of people following you on Twitter make you a better recruiter (better than my headhunter with a research list) PLEASE send me an email or comment on this post and tell me why you think that.

By the way, Seabiscuit was a 4 year old (ancient in horse racing) and War Admiral was the new, innovative favorite.  Here’s how the result was written at the race track:

“When they were at the last furlong pole, it was evident that the race was over. Both jockeys put up their whips and Seabiscuit, going strongly, the Admiral a very tired colt, the bay won by three open lengths.”

The Message is Now Mainstream

For the last year, I’ve been writing on, quoting, tracking back to etc. any hints that the “candidate is customer” message may be getting the attention it deserves in Recruiting.

While AllianceQ is making great gains in membership and therefore the message is getting out, having it written about in the New York Times means that the message is finally mainstream:

In this new world, candidates’ correspondence to companies is rarely acknowledged. Calls are seldom returned. Status updates are not routinely provided. Rejection decisions are not consistently communicated.

I highly recommend that you read Jon Picoult’s article.  Job seekers will be expecting more civilised treatment now that word is out.

Interview Illusion

I just read the June edition of Fast Company (www.fastcompany.com).

In it there is an amazing article on page 51 called “Hold the Interview”.  In it, authors Dan and Chip Heath make a very compelling, fact-based argument against interviewing candidates.  The research they quote says that much more often than not, the interview is NOT a predictor of success.  They go on to suggest that one of the best predictors of job performance is a work sample;

“if you are hiring a graphic designer, get them to design something.  If you are hiring a salesperson, get them to sell you something.  If you are hiring a chief executive, ask them to say nothing – but reassuringly.”

 But the most compelling statement in the article is the last paragraph;

Giving job tests might be the easiest competitive advantage you ever acquire.  While your competitors hire friendly people whose “biggest weakness ” is “working too hard, ” you’ll be discovering the true stars.

So now, all of the HR and Recruiting Professionals reading this are saying to themselves (or aloud) “yeah right – no interview – that’s absurd”.

What’s absurd (and absolutely intriguing in it’s obviousness) is that the FEATURE article of this issue is the 100 Most Creative People in Business.

There are NO HR or Recruiting people mentioned in the feature article.

The Power of Positive

I just read a great article on HR.Com about the benefits of hiring optimistic people.

It is an important article for our current times because there are not a lot of people out there who are exuding happiness, optimism and portraying a positive attitude.  Not blaming many of them but if you are someone who’s been out on several interviews (meaning your resume is getting the attention you desire) but are not getting many call backs or any offers – maybe it isn’t your knowledge and skills, maybe it’s the unspoken words that are killing your chances.  Maybe it’s the lack of a positive attitude.

I’ve interviewed tens of thousands of people in my career and I can say with certainty that there are a large amount of applicants who leave you feeling depressed and run down at the end of an hour phone conversation or in person meeting.  There are also a smaller number of people who you want to invite to have a beer afterwards or that you look forward to meeting after you’ve had a phone call – this is the un-trainable, undeniable power of positive.

In his article, Dr. Mercer talks about focusing on solutions instead of wallowing in the problems you either have or had at your last job.  So many people are happy to use an interview as a “vent” session and then wonder why they didn’t get the job!  When asked about challenges in a behavioral interview, can you really say that your answer leaves people feeling good about how you handled it?  I mean good in a “I feel good”, James Brown way – the “gee, I’d like to work with that person” way?  Probably not.  And it may be killing your chances of finding a job today.

There is a flip-side to this “power of positive” too.  As Recruiters, how are you coming across to your applicants?  Are you leaving them feeling great about their decision to apply for your job or are you treating them like one more hassle in your hassle-filled day?  As many really bad interviews as I’ve had, I’ve also come across way too many recruiters who seemed to feel that a person applying for a job was in imposition on their precious time.  How does that go over with your candidates?  Dr. Mercer has some research that I think is an appropriate answer:

Eye-opening research revealed the more an employee smiles, the happier the customer. Harvard Business Review (5/07, page 24, www.hbr.org) reported Patricia Barger of Bowling Green State U. and Alicia Grandey of Penn State U. studied employees and customers in a coffee shop. They found the more an employee smiled, the more the employee’s customers felt happy with their coffee shop experience.

So I guess the net, net is that Candidates have a better experience when Recruiters are upbeat and positive about their role, the company and the job they have open AND the Recruiters have a better time when the candidates are upbeat, positive and leave the Recruiter/Hiring Manager wanting more time with them.

The magic happens when these two “positives” meet in an interview.  In this case, two positives DO NOT make a negative, they make another very positive.

An ERE Summary

Last week I traveled across country to sunny San Diego for ERE – The Recruitment industry’s largest gathering and trade show – normally.

But we are not in normal times and that was evident at the SD Convention Center where the girth of the venue dwarfed the actual event.  It was obvious to all that our ranks have been reduced and of the 250 – 300 (estimated) attendees there was not one who wasn’t grateful to have the opportunity to attend.  That can’t be said for all the vendors as there were some empty booths and notable absences.

As the attendees passed by our booth I was sure to ask them about the sessions going on and what they thought.  For anyone who has attended an ERE, the answers won’t suprise you.  The highlights were a live feed of Kevin Costner (noted Recruiting pundit? No, investor in the company GreenJobInterview.com who sponsored the session) speaking on recruiting and someone actually qualified to do so, Vicki Perry, Director of Strategic Staffing at Avery Dennison who’s session was the buzz at lunch on Wednesday.

But the same ERE complaint was echoed by almost everyone I spoke to; too much philosophy by the same pundits and not enough real world “how to get it done” by practitioners.  I think we all have recognized this fact with the big “shows” – too many people telling you how great life could be for Recruiting if you could; (fill in the blank) get hiring managers to behave, get candidates to behave, innovate, streamline etc, etc.

I got the distinct feeling that the lucky folks who got some travel dollars and were asked to attend ERE this spring were tasked with bringing back real solutions, whether in practices or technology – go find us something that will make a difference.  They saw a couple new items in the trade show and may have heard a couple of tidbits in the sessions that ran for three days but overall, they were left wanting/needing more.

For those of you lucky enough to stumble onto some travel dollars in the fall, there is a show that is NOT in Hollywood Florida that promises to actually TEACH you something.  It is the First Annual Recruitment Learning Conference put on by Qualigence, Inc.  This is a new format designed to really teach you how to do something in your department.  You will want to check it out and attend if you can.  For more details go to www.qualigence.com .

I hope to see you in September in Chicago and am sure to see some of you in Florida again for yet another ERE mini-mega show.

Frustrated Job Seekers

Here is an interesting article that comments on the frustration most job seekers experience in online recruiting.  Speaking of the difficult time job seekers have of actually finding their “dream job” online, Jennifer Hamm says;

Still, trolling job boards remains a very time consuming process, contends Richard H. Beatty, author of “The Ultimate Job Search.” There are over 40,000 career websites, including mega job boards, industry-specific sites and listings on company sites.

“Job seekers are faced with the daunting task of somehow screening through this bewildering array to discover those sites that will prove most productive for them,” Beatty says. “Huge amounts of precious job-search time can be completely wasted.”

Continue reading

Open Letter to Job Seekers

After a comment on my blog (yes, some people read it!) asking “what is an exact fit?” and the general exacerbation that the job seeking process causes most job seekers, I thought I’d write an open letter to all job seekers, allowing them a peek into the recruiting process:

Dear Job Seeker,

We know you are frustrated with the job search process.  We understand that you apply and apply and are rarely granted an interview or even an email communication telling you why you were not selected.  We also understand that even when you get a phone call or email telling you that you were not selected, you would like details on why.  Here is a glimpse into the world of recruiting and HR so perhaps you will understand the method to the madness.

• Our lawyers prohibit us from giving you detailed feedback on why you were not selected for an interview.  We can give you a broad category of why but not specifics.  Why?  Because you sue us.  If the company gives you feedback that you misinterpret as discrimination or bias, we get sued.  We mitigate our risk by being vague.
• We have a timer on positions and have to get them filled.  Even in this economy, most positions have a cost of vacancy associated with them.  As such, we have to fill our roles in a timely fashion.  Sometimes, this means that the best candidate for the job is not considered because they applied late to the opening.  This TIMING element of filling jobs is the most misunderstood by job seekers.  We hire the best candidate in a given timeframe otherwise we’d never fill our jobs because we’d always be waiting for YOU to apply!
• You apply to the wrong job a lot.  Sometimes it’s because you think by applying to every job we have posted, you’ll get noticed.  You do, but not in a good way.  Most of the time it’s because we’ve posted a vague, laundry list of requirements that could be you but is probably not.  We need to do better and really put a great job description up.  A video of the hiring manager telling you what she needs in the ideal candidate would be best.  We’re working on it.
• We have less jobs to fill (75% less in some cases) but we get between 100 – 300+ applications for every job we have posted.  Most recruiters carry between 20 – 25 openings.  Do the math.  To require that we personally contact each person and give them feedback and advice is simply not reasonable.  We are trying to let you know your status.  If you get an email from us we really ARE doing our job.
• Interviewing and hiring are human processes and as such, are inherently flawed.  Recruiters make suggestions on who to interview – sometimes geting it wrong but mostly getting it right (meaning the people who are interviewed are good candidates).  Hiring Managers make hiring decisions – sometimes getting it wrong but mostly getting it right (meaning the person they hire is usually a good hire for the job).

We empathize with your frustration (there are a lot of us out of work today too) and just want to tell you that we are doing the best we can and are constantly looking for ways to get better.  One way we’ve found is AllianceQ – where at least we can offer you the option of continuing your job search with our fellow Member companies and 3000 small and medium sized businesses.

Good luck with your job search

Sincerely,

Corporate Recruiting

Monster.com – Wrong end of the Moose

Many of you are aware that, for the second time in 18 months, Monster’s database was compromised.  This time the personal information of 1.2 million job seekers was stolen, in 2007 it was the username and passwords of legitimate Recruiters. 

According to the dictionary;

Hack; to damage or injure by crude, harsh, or insensitive treatment; mutilate; mangle:

Using this definition of HACK; we can safely say that Monster’s inability to secure the sensitive data of jobs seekers and paying customers has created the “follow on” hacks below: 

They hacked the confidence of millions of job seekers and paying customers world wide

They hacked the job board industry by creating distrust in eRecruitment

They hacked the hopes and dreams of millions of job seekers who will now get phishing emails instead of bona fide communications for employment

They hacked a percentage of these job seekers lives because they will naively give personal information to criminals who call or email them based on this stolen data

They hacked  customers in 2007 when they used the breach of their database as the reason to squeeze hundreds of thousands of additional license revenue out of us, saying that it was OUR fault for sharing passwords!

 And finally, another definition of HACK from the dictionary – this time in reference to the person who made the decision to spend $3 Million on a Superbowl ad instead of on additional security measures:

Hack
Noun;
1. A person who engages in an activity without talent or skills

Enjoy the humor, marvel at the irony!