2010 Predictions? In July?

I just read a post on ERE by the esteemed Lou Adler titled. “Sourcing Trends and Predictions 2010” and as I read down the list of 10 things to come I naturally had a reaction.

You see, like most of you, I’ve been reading Lou’s and everyone else’s “predictions” for years and what I don’t end up reading is anyone who dares to disagree with the fortunetellers or voices opinions in anyway but “way to go Lou” or “I completely agree”.  Well not here my friends.  Let me run down the first 5 of the 10 and give you some balance to the first set of 2010 forecasts by ERE Clairvoyants:

1. Lou: Job Boards will soon be archaic:

Phil: They have been for years but they are not going away anytime soon: From my experience both inside Corporate Recruiting and outside selling against them, People have a love/hate relationship with traditional job boards.  Recruiting departments hate them and hiring managers love them.  Until Recruiting departments can come up with a viable reason to avoid posting jobs on them, they will continue to dominate spending in most departments.  Lou’s assertion that they “target C+ type talent” is absurd.  Everyone knows that a C to me may be a B to you and visa versa.  Classifying talent generically into A, B and C is one of the major problems of traditional Recruiting leadership.  Lou, do us a favor and stop using archaic classifications.

2. Lou: The talent hub and spoke model will dominate active candidate sourcing:

Phil: Only if the industry can restrain itself from complexity: I have first hand experience with some early “Talent Hub” vendors who are now out of business.  The reason they failed is this; they complicated it so much (Build Big Fast) that it served neither the company or the candidate.  It’s one thing to connect people via a talent hub who are banking sales people.  It becomes too complicated (and the value is lost) when you connect THAT hub to another hub, say, people who like to garden or people who own classic cars.  If the industry can keep it simple and not make it like a gigantic game of Tinker Toys (picture below for those of you born after 1970) then it may work.  I’m not optimistic we can keep it simple these days.

3. Lou: Sourcing spokes will come and go:

Phil: Really?  That’s a prediction?: Predicting the coming and going of ideas in recruiting is like predicting the rise and set of the sun.  No comment on this one.

4. Lou: Applicant tracking systems will eventually react and adapt to the new model:

Phil: ATS systems will still hold no place in sourcing:  For the last decade, ATS systems have struggled to reconcile the process management and compliance tracking they were intended to provide and the push toward (and investment in) sourcing solutions.  Maybe we should finally realize that a system architected for compliance and process management will never be as effective for sourcing as a system architected from the Sourcing Desk.

5. Lou: Companies will be unprepared for the spike in turnover:

Phil: Completely agree:  But would add that the “spike” will be much longer than 6 months.  We will hit 11% unemployment in Jan 2010, by January 2011 we will be mired in the greatest job movement in history as underemployed seek new employment and the unemployed are filling roles.  People, process and systems will be unprepeared for this historical mobilization and those companies who are caught unprepared will suffer tremendously.

Ok, so there are the first 5 of Lou’s 10 predictions for 2010.  It’s hot and sticky here in Charlotte, NC – we’ll see what NEW predictions come out when it’s cold.

Things that make you go “huh?”

I woke up this morning to a world that (apparently to our political leaders) is fixed!

You see, here is what Congress is focused on today:

Jackson’s Death Sparks Fierce Debate in Congress

Typically, I don’t get involved in politics in this blog but republican or democrat this has to make you go “huh?”.  To quote Michael Douglas in The American President;

“We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them.”

So if you already feel that we really don’t have any serious people running this country then headlines like this can’t help.

You can click on the link and read the article. Then, when you are done asking yourself “what the &%^$# are my elected leaders doing to help the economy, decrease the unemployment rate and focus on the important stuff” I hope you’ll write your congress person like I just did and ask them the question!

Self Branding

Other than a painful, drunken practice of Frat Brothers and frontier cowboys or the latest topic on Oprah, I’m not sure this term should actually be used as a verb. 

I prefer the noun: “Personal Brand”

As with a corporate brand, your Personal Brand may be something you “manage”  but it is created by the way you work and may not be as you intend.

In corporate America, those of us who do the work of the company (separating from the C-level executives to whom NONE of this applies) are annually evaluated on not only what we’ve done in the last year but how we’ve done it.  Typically a bi-modal evaluation program like this results in great “what” score and a confusing “how” score that is less than anticipated.

Why?

For one simple reason; measuring your Personal Brand (i.e., reality checking it internally at the company) is virtually impossible.

Now HR practitioners will argue that a 360 degree review (where your Mgt, co-workers and subordinates are all anonymously polled and the feedback provided to the individual) account for this internal Personal Brand check but anyone who has been through a 360 knows that’s not true.  So not true that I once completed one for a manager of mine and in our next 1:1 she said to me “I heard your voice in my review”!!  I had been honest and made some grueling recommendations for improvement in her “how”, was assured it was confidential and low and behold – she parsed the comments out and knew what I had said.

Needless to say, any 360 degree review I was involved in from that point forward was a highly edited, cliff notes of what the true feedback could be.  This is true for a large majority of people being polled in these “feedback” sessions.  Your true Personal Brand is what is said about you around the water cooler.

So what does this look like (inability to accurately access your true Personal Brand) in real life?  Let me ask you if you know this person at work:

1. Considers himself a “SME” (subject matter expert).  Note; I said “considers himself” not “is considered by the team/group/company!
2. He’s always adding his 2 cents to a conversation, even when he’s not really part of it.
3. Acts like he’s always too busy so that any time he gives you is perceived to be at a premium.
4. Asks for ideas and input but does what he originally intended to do in spite of it.
5. Lets everyone know every time he has a conversation with an executive and it always seems to be that this Exec asked for his advice.
6. Eats lunch alone.
7. Is never invited to the after work impromptu beer gatherings
8. Has been in his same job for 10 years + (consistently passed over for promotion)
9. Bugs you.

Now when someone asks this guy how he’s seen at work, he’ll rave about how he’s respected, consulted and admired.  But, is that the way you really feel about him?

Before we can go about “managing” our internal Personal Brand, we have to find a handful of honest co-workers, supervisors and subordinates who will tell us the hard-to-hear truth.  And then we have to accept it with grace and go about changing the things that caused us to shudder when we heard them.

Fact is, YOU have some things you can change today to make your self-brand better – are you willing to hear them and do the hard work to change them?

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.”

Dogpile on the Job Seeker

I never watch nature shows where they show one animal eating another because I find nature very brutal.  It’s always the sick or weak or young that are getting eaten and it’s never with a knife and fork.  While my college education provided me a backdrop on natural selection and the food chain – I’d rather watch CNN.  Here, I can see many of the same predatory behaviors being acted out by civilised people in business suits.

For instance, recently there has been a rash of what I call “dogpiling on the job seeker” – spamming them with false hopes of jobs, treating them like a commodity, internet phishing scams simply becasue they posted their resume and now the worst of all – charging them money for the false hope of getting a job.

I recently received a newsletter from one of the “6-figure” job boards – it came from their CEO (as it usually does) but I can’t believe a C-level executive would put this in writing.  However, this particular job board has always charged job seekers (they let you have a “free” account where you can see summaries of jobs available and even be contacted with “someone wants to talk to you” offers but if you really want to make contact with any of the companies – who they charge for postings now – you have to pay to get connected.  Charging job seekers and employers in this market) so it shouldn’t surprise me that they view the millions of out of work people as a great revenue source. 

Here’s how the “Newsletter” read;

Good Monday morning, Phil,

…And what I’ve discovered over the years I have been in this business (9 years in job boards, none in recruiting – PH) is that it takes a professional writer, who is familiar with what recruiters are looking for, to turn your resume into a very effective advertisement of your skills, talents, abilities and background.

 …

we have seen average applicants per job rise from 15 per job two years ago to 26 today.And that extra competition means you have about 10 seconds to stand out – to ensure that your audience can find exactly what they need to know about you, and find it fast.

And those are the most important 10 seconds in your job hunt.

Are you going to leave your fate in the hands of an amateur?

 

 

So here’s a guy who’s probably reviewed 100 resumes in his lifetime (look him up on linkedin) telling his readership that they all need to go hire a professional writer to create their resumes or risk their FATE!

Whew!  I’m so freaked out I’m going to go hire a professional PR Firm to manage my job search becasue without it, I’m leaving my fate in (que the vampire music) my own hands!!

Actually, I’m just freaked out that a Harvard educated (”with high distinction”) CEO would be this transparent.  You see, neither he nor anyone in the traditional job board industry is actually interested in helping you get a job.  Proof point: if he WAS, he’d be writing about how tough the market is and that you may actually have to go get a “survival job” to carry you through this downturn.  He’d write that you may have to put your ego in check and just do whatever you can to keep your house and fancy car or even downsize and go minimalist. 

Oh, but wait, who would sign up to pay him to look at 100K+ jobs if those people who LOST their 100K+ jobs started working for less than 100K?  Hmmm…

Instead, he’s advising his “readership” to go “spend money” or risk their fate.  (transparent fear sales pressure) What he’s not telling you is that the professional writer can’t CREATE JOBS which is the only reason people are not getting hired left and right.  Remember 4 years ago?  Who was advising job seekers to get professional resume writing when the unemployment was at 4%?  No one because everyone knew (and still knows) that a resume is a poorly written document, professionally or not. 

I HAVE read hundreds of thousands of resumes in my career (17 years, look me up on linkedin) and I can tell you it’s easy to notice the “professionally written” ones from the “leaving fate to an amateur” models.

I can also tell you it made NO DIFFERENCE in my decsion as a Recruiter whether I put a candidate into a process or eliminated them.  You see, that’s what I get paid to do, decipher resumes, uncover talent and get them hired. 

The moral of the story is thus; in this economy as in ANY economy – as a job seeker you should never have to pay to get a resume, get interview coaching or get a job.  Only job board CEOs and Chicago Congressmen belive you should.

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.

Just in Time to Just Right

Just in time vs just right.  Reactive vs proactive.

I’ve always liked the analogy of recruiting and dating.  The stages are the same, notice, invite, woo, date, move forward or break up.  Clean and everyone can understand – been there done that.

So in looking at paradigm shifts in recruiting, it’s only natural that I venture into this analogy to make a point about where recruiting is going.

Old way of dating:

1. go to a crowded, busy bar night after night, putting your best face forward and hope to meet the perfect match
2. Repeat night after night (week after week?), having coffee or lunch with a few people but really not making amazing connections
3. become despondent, bored and willing to settle and choose a “close match” for a longer term commitment.
4. break up and start again.

Wow, that was depressing.  See how it mirrors our current “just in time” recruitment process?  We conduct the best search we can, find the best “available” talent (by the way, availability is NOT a skill set) and choose the candidate who matches most closely with our requirements and requires the least headache to close.  Hope and pray it’s a good decision but more often than not, end up repeating the process in 24 – 36 months.  Ouch.

New way of dating:

1. Complete a profile on one of the scientific matching software systems – tell it what you do and don’t want, what you will and won’t accept.
2. Only be notified when someone matches what you require.
3. Connect by phone or email, do some quick due diligence and then meet for coffee or lunch.
4. Find a lasting relationship.

In essence, what we’ve done is move about 25% of the work from the back end (really bad dates) to the front end (setting up our profile and search requirements) and free ourselves from the other 75% so we can focus on other things (like living life!).  For the recruiting analogy, the percentages are the same.  If you can move about 25% of your effort the the beginning of the process, you’ll save about 75% on the back end.  You do this by using new tools (newer than Boolean searches on the web) and shifting your energy from sifting through results to creating them.

The point of all this is that there are NEW  ways to do about everything today including dating and recruiting.  For those of you out there on a really bad date today or reviewing your 100th resume of the day – why are you living in the past?

When Reality Knocks

For months now I’ve been writing about the Candidate Experience and it’s ever growing importance for Corporations in this economy.

Recently Taleo, in one of its Taleo Cafe presentations, put forth the following research metrics: 

23% of job seekers has been badly treated by a prospective employer.

53% of jobseekers will not purchase products and services if they have been badly treated.

55% tell at least 3 people about their bad experience.

49% of all jobseekers find the lack of acknowledgement of their application the most annoying part of hte recruitment process.

and I would add one of my own: 

100% of job seekers find the lack of closure to their application process (the Black Hole) an unacceptable business practice and all the above metrics apply.

Today is the day to focus on the candidate experience.  This time next year, you’ll be too busy, you’ll be in too many meetings and once again the Candidate will become the victim of a very bad candidate experience with your company.

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.