What's next in recruiting? Hear it all at the next Recruiting Innovation Summit in May

Not logged in. [log in or register]

July  2006 RSS feed Archive for July, 2006

Company Offers Free Database Use In Return For Sharing Talent Sourcing Info

by
J McCool
Jul 31, 2006, 8:30 am ET

“This is going to shake some people up. We’re really excited about it. It’s an unprecedented move.”

That’s how Frank Vaculin, CEO of Spoke Software, a provider of online business contact information, describes his company’s decision to make its database of more than 30 million accessible free of charge for individual salespeople, marketers, recruiters, and job seekers willing to validate where their business contacts work, a process that Spoke automates.

Unlike traditional business data providers that only have corporate information and top-level executives, Vaculin says, Spoke’s free service gives recruiters unlimited access to corporate information and individuals at all levels of an organization, including managers, directors, executives, and individual contributors. Users have online access to all available contact information for the entire database, making it possible to access information such as title, job history, email pattern, phone numbers, and address.

keep reading…

Boring Position Descriptions Are Dramatically Decreasing Your Application Rates, Part 1

by
Dr. John Sullivan
Jul 31, 2006

I often am asked, “What is the easiest way to improve the number of top applicants who actually decide to apply for jobs?” The answer is easy: Rewrite your position descriptions so that they excite candidates rather than turn them off. It’s easy to do and it produces dramatic results.

Employed Top Performers Require a “Better Job”

Unemployed people and semi-anxious people are significantly less picky about applying for open job opportunities, and in some cases apply for any and every job. The job title matters little to them, and no matter how mundane the position description is, they will apply. Any job is a better job to them. But what few people know who haven’t researched the topic is that the very highest quality candidates have estimated drop off rates as high as 90% once they have scanned your position description. Top performers are curious just like everyone else; however, all of your efforts in branding and marketing to get these high-quality candidates to look at your jobs becomes an immediate waste after they scan your position description and then immediately move on because they see no indication that this job is superior to or better than the job they already have. Here are four facts to consider:

On Becoming a Great Recruiter, Part 7

by
Lou Adler
Jul 28, 2006

When someone says “no” to your offer, your goal is not to convince him to say “yes.” Your goal is to get him to say “maybe.” Recruiting and hiring top people who have multiple offers or who are passive candidates is not easy. They won’t put up with weak recruiters, weak hiring managers, or an unprofessional hiring process. The purpose of this series on “Becoming a Great Recruiter” is to provide recruiters with the tools and techniques they need to deal with the challenges of hiring the best.

You should take our 2006 Recruiting and Hiring Challenges survey if you want to compare your team’s or your personal performance to other recruiters. Handling objections, overcoming concerns, dealing with counteroffers, and candidates saying “no” is part of the daily grind of every top recruiter. Expect it. In fact, be concerned when these problems don’t come up. In this article, you’ll discover how to uncover and address these concerns. As you get better, you’ll develop new techniques to anticipate and address the problem before the candidate even brings it up. You’ll know you’re a top 10% recruiter when you’re able to do this consistently. Confidently handling a situation in which a candidate decides to opt out of your hiring process involves three basic steps: uncovering the problem, suggesting alternatives, and getting the candidate to agree to move ahead. Good salespeople who represent customized products or services know that uncovering and dealing with concerns is the key to closing more business.

The same is true when dealing with top people who are looking at your job opening as a career move, and not just another job. To begin, you’ll need to eliminate the transactional hurry-up recruiting model based largely on salary and start date if you use this approach. Then, you need to have a clear understanding of real job needs (reread Part 2 and these articles) before you start sourcing. The downside of hiring top people is that it takes a lot longer, and these candidates demand a lot more information like the scope of the job, hiring manager and team competency, company strength, location, opportunities for growth, and complete disclosure on short- and long-term compensation. So be prepared to give it to them in small bites, especially when they hesitate. To uncover possible deal-breakers early on, always ask what the person likes and doesn’t like about the job after every interview.

As long as there is some level of interest, all you need to do to keep the process moving forward in the early stages is to just say that you’ll make sure that these issues are addressed in the next round of interviews. Then, ensure they’re covered to the candidate’s satisfaction. When you’re down to two or three candidates, ask the person if she wants to be on the short list of final candidates. If the candidate says no, it’s time to use a solution-selling technique called “closing upon an objection” to uncover the problem and keep the deal alive. First, ask your candidate why she wants to opt-out of the process, and then validate it. Assuming, for example, the problem is associated with the scope of the job, ask something like this: “I can understand why you might be concerned that the job isn’t big enough for you. But, let me ask you this: If we can demonstrate that the job is in fact bigger than your current understanding, or if we could make it bigger, would you be willing to come back for a final round of interviews?” The key here is that you don’t have to solve the problem. You just need to ask that if it could be solved to the candidate’s satisfaction, would she be willing to move on to the next step in your hiring process? If the person agrees to go forward, you’ve probably uncovered the primary concern. Unfortunately, many times the person will still say “no,” meaning the initial concern was just a smokescreen.

To figure out the real problem, use the same close-upon-a-concern technique as you inquire about other concerns, always asking that if these could be satisfactorily addressed, would the person agree to go forward? When the candidate finally agrees to proceed, you’ve identified the real problem. Of course, then you have to solve it, and unfortunately not all problems are solvable. For example, “I think the hiring manager is a real jerk,” might be difficult to overcome even with an, “If I can prove to you he’s not,” counterargument – especially if the person is a real jerk. While you won’t close every deal using the close-upon-a-concern technique, you’ll close many more than normal, and you’ll better understand the reasons why when you lose some. This is how you move the hiring process forward by taking modest “maybe, if…” steps before you get to “yes, I’ll accept your offer.” When negotiating the actual details of the offer, you can use another form of this same process. The principle here is to never make your offer formal unless you’re 100% sure it will be accepted on the spot. You do this by testing. Testing is important if too many of your offers get rejected; if many candidates say, “I have to think about it” after receiving the offer; or, if some of your candidates say “yes” but later renege.

While we want to give candidates plenty of thinking time before they’re ready to accept your offer on the spot, if you make the offer formal before they’re ready to accept it, you won’t find out any potential problems that could have been resolved. Here’s how the “testing the offer” process works. It’s based on the sales techniques known as secondary or trial closing. The simplest way to use this technique is to just ask the candidate if she would be in a position to accept an offer if something satisfactory were put together. If the person says “yes,” find out what she considers satisfactory. You’ll have to negotiate around this point a bit, but when some rough agreement is reached, ask the person if an offer with these terms were made, when she could start. If you get a specific start date like October 17th or two weeks from Monday, you’ll close this person. Anything vague or general like “in a few weeks” or “I’ll have to think about it” is a cause of concern. It means the person isn’t even ready to consider an offer from your company. In this case, you’ll have to find out what the underlying problems are by repeating the close-upon-a-concern techniques described above. However, don’t stop testing even if the person does agree to a tentative start date and you believe the person is ready to accept your offer. Use this approach to test the next step: “If we could put a formal offer together this week under the terms discussed, when would you be in a position to formally sign and accept the offer?” Anything other than “right away” is a clue that the candidate has other opportunities or that your offer is not all it’s cracked up to be. Again, back up and uncover any other potential problems, resolve them if possible, and then ask when the person will be in a position to accept your offer. Of course, some issues are not resolvable. But the techniques described here give you a good chance.

One last test you should use, even if the person said she’ll accept your offer, is by saying something like, “I’m ready to get the offer approved today under the terms we discussed. If Bill (the hiring manager) meets you for lunch tomorrow to make if official, are you in a position to tell him you’ll accept it, other than reading the fine print, and signing it within 24 hours?” The point here is to get the candidate to formally state she’ll say “yes” to your offer with the only contingency being reviewing the key terms, discussing it with her key advisors, and getting back to you the next morning. Under no circumstances should you give a person another three or four days to accept your offer. You’re just asking for problems. When this process is conducted properly, the candidate has just had three to five days to seriously consider every term of your offer. If, after all of this work, you then get a last minute “I have to think about it,” your deal is likely dead. While we want candidates to think about all of the terms of your offer in great depth and take a reasonable time to do it, you don’t want the candidate to use your offer as a negotiating tool with other companies or as leverage to obtain a counteroffer.

Being deliberate and thorough in this closing process is how you make your offer the last one the candidate receives. Doing this every time for every candidate is why great recruiters close more deals, especially the tough ones.

The 2 Keys to Killer Job Ads

by
Mo Edjlali
Jul 27, 2006

Not too long ago, my company was approached by a client who wanted our help with a technical professional search. Our client provided us with the following job ad:

“C#.Net, ASP.Net, and MS SQL. Experience with ASP.Net a plus. Bachelors in Computer Science required. Experience with large database experience a plus. Excellent technical and non-technical communication skills required.”

keep reading…

Monster Media Deal Portends Recruitment Classified Battle

by
J McCool
Jul 26, 2006, 11:25 am ET

There was once a time when Monster.com’s agenda to transform the way employers and job seekers connected went largely unchallenged. Then along came CareerBuilder.com, backed by a group of powerful newspapers unwilling to cede their recruitment advertising business to the Monster phenomenon.

Now, apparently in a bid to compete with a powerhouse CareerBuilder and grow its own bottom line, Monster has entered a new strategic alliance with the new owner of The Philadephia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News, and philly.com, which serve the interests of corporate recruiters and job seekers in the nation’s fourth largest metro area.

keep reading…

A Recruiter Returns to Work in a Very Different Lebanon

by
Todd Raphael
Jul 26, 2006, 1:22 am ET

Two weeks ago, Irene Bedoyan settled down for a good night’s sleep. The next night, in her Beirut office on the 13th floor of a staffing firm called Recruiters, the world had changed.

keep reading…

A Portrait of a Recruiter in a Few More Years

by
Kevin Wheeler
Jul 26, 2006

The world of the traditional, reactionary recruiter is gone. The traits that characterized the 20th century recruiter are summarized in the table below, along with those that will be requirements for a model, proactive 21st century recruiter.

keep reading…

Management Consulting Firms Top Survey of Best Student Recruiters

by
J McCool
Jul 25, 2006, 12:21 am ET

The value of consulting advice may be in the eye of the person writing the check. But it seems corporate recruiters would be well served to follow the practices of three global management consulting firms that have topped WetFeet’s eighth annual State of Student Recruiting survey.

Some 3,055 undergraduate students and MBAs at top-tier colleges and universities participated in the survey and ranked McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group, and Bain & Company as their top three choices when it came to evaluating how effectively they recruited during the Spring 2006 campus recruiting cycle.

The students were asked which companies actively recruited them, how they view prospective employers, how they determine which to include on their short list of prospective employers, and which recruiting tactics were most effective.

keep reading…

It’s Their Space

by
Michael Kascsak
Jul 25, 2006

MySpace, blogging, texting. If you don’t have a true understanding of these words and how they’re influencing today’s candidate pool, chances are you aren’t effectively tapping into the next generation of our workforce. Whether you are a third-party recruiter, corporate recruiter, or hiring manager, showing up for a war for talent with a knife isn’t going to get you very far.

With all due respect to my friends at Monster, HotJobs, CareerBuilder, and so on, they have become a knife in a recruiter’s arsenal. When I started my career, I began working for a very successful staffing agency. I had no experience in recruitment. I just knew I liked the pace and the competition, and I figured out quickly that if you worked hard, you could make great money. So, I came in everyday, logged on to Monster.com, and proceeded to pick the low-hanging fruit. Back then, it was pretty much all low-hanging fruit.

No one had time to cold-call the passive candidate; by the time you convinced him/her to take a look at your job, you could have submitted five or six candidates whom you found off a job board, all of whom were eager to interview for your position. Anyone in the recruitment space today knows just how much times have changed. During my career at this staffing agency, they made us read the book Danger in the Comfort Zone by Judith M. Bardwick, which is about employees getting complacent. A great book, but I never really got the full effect of that read until recently. You see, we’ve spent so much time worrying about our employees being caught in the danger zone that we as corporate leaders have let ourselves start to slip into this zone. We aren’t looking forward enough, we don’t have an understanding of what the next generation of our corporate leaders is doing now, and we don’t have a definition of what an A-player in this generation looks like. A-players in this generation share the following characteristics:

  • They understand the importance of a good education, and they know the value of that education before they walk across the stage and grab their diplomas. They aren’t going to accept a $28,000 job that has them working from 7-7 just to get that next promotion. The days of hiring fresh college grads and dangling the promotion carrot in front of them while you work them to death are gone, and if your company is still trying this method, chances are, you’ve got the low end of that graduating class working for you.
  • keep reading…

Recruiting the Retirement-aged More a Challenge For Employers, Candidates

by
J McCool
Jul 24, 2006, 10:10 am ET

A recent McKinsey survey revealed that almost half of all Baby Boomers expect to work past the age of 65, and a recent Merrill Lynch study found that 76 percent of boomers don?t anticipate a ?traditional? retirement.

But the McKinsey research found that only 13% of retirees have actually worked as long as they had intended and that the average actual age of retirement is just 59.

keep reading…

How Kevin Bacon Can Help You Recruit No-Cost Referrals

by
Dr. John Sullivan
Jul 24, 2006

Having been coined the unofficial “Godfather of referrals,” I am frequently asked how to utilize referrals in the all-too-common case in which the organization has no formal referral program or budget. Because the situation is more common than you might expect, it’s no surprise that some great workarounds have been developed by leading practitioners. My favorite approach leverages the whole “six degrees of separation” phenomena made famous by the Kevin Bacon connection. It centers around holding small parties where employees open their Rolodexes in whatever form they may exist to recruiters. T

hese events are typically so low cost that they are almost free, they require little structure, and have been used successfully by recruiting powerhouses like Eli Lily, Booz Allen Hamilton, and FirstMerit Bank, to name a few.

What is a Rolodex Party?

Rolodex parties are informal departmental or business unit meetings where top performers are brought into a conference room and are then asked to “download” and share from their personal contacts the names of the very best individuals that they know at other firms. If you were around in the ’60s and ’70s, that data might be stored in a Rolodex; if you’re a product of the ’80s and early ’90s, it might be an organizer. And if you’re current, it is most likely in a PDA, mobile phone, or email-based contact manager. Regardless of where the information is stored, the very best names are gathered at the party and are then targeted by recruiters to fill current and future job openings.

Why Do Rolodex/PDA Parties Work?

Most referral programs rely on advertising or marketing materials to motivate employees to produce referrals. Unfortunately, those materials stop working after a short period of time. In addition, many of the top-performing individuals in your organization who are well connected are just too busy to offer referrals on a regular basis. What is needed is a proactive approach that seeks out these individuals and asks them directly to join in a team effort to identify recruiting targets. Yes, part of their motivation for showing up is a free lunch or cake or ice cream during a slow work period, but the primary inducement is that Rolodex parties are a team effort, in which everyone chips in and does his or her part. The energy at these parties is contagious, and everyone strives to produce both high quality and a high quantity of names.

The reason that you target address books and contact lists is because, just like Kevin Bacon’s famous six degrees of separation, the very best at other firms can almost always be connected to the very best people in your own firm. Now, you can ask your own employees in a one-on-one meeting to identify these top performers; but, it turns out invariably they draw a blank if you ask them in an unstructured way to identify who is really good at other firms. If you don’t believe the degrees of separation phenomena, test it yourself. If you look through well-connected employees’ Rolodexes, PDAs, address books, mobile phone listings, and email addresses, the number of people that well-connected individuals know is phenomenal.

Frequently Asked Questions about Rolodex/PDA Parties How often should they be held?

Because individuals don’t add names to their PDAs or Rolodexes at a rapid rate, there’s not much benefit to holding Rolodex parties too frequently. I recommend twice a year and certainly no more often than four times a year, unless a sudden need arises. In addition, if you request information too often, you’ll frustrate or bore your employees.

Where should they be physically held?

The most effective parties have participation limited to the department or the business unit in which the recruiting will occur. This is simply because the individuals who are most likely to know the great names in a particular field are generally concentrated in a single department or business unit. Because everyone participating is from the same team, there’s more willingness to attend and contribute to help the team. A lot of the energy is lost with a large group, so the team’s own conference room is generally the best size and location to hold the event. Other options include holding these events during regularly scheduled quarterly business meetings, during group training, or at off-site meetings.

How do I entice individuals to attend? Generally, the best way to start the invitation process is to send out an e-mail “red alert,” notifying only the targeted individuals that their help is desperately needed. Other approaches include making a simple announcement at the regular staff meeting and directly asking the local manager to set aside 15 minutes at the beginning, during a break, or right at the end of regular staff meetings for the name-dumping event. If you decide to hold a separate event, try to schedule it during a slow part of the business cycle when an offering of a free lunch or cake will likely attract almost everyone you want. Individuals who cannot attend for some reason can later be approached individually. If you have the funds, offering something as little as a $10 Starbucks coffee card or having a senior manager attend will also dramatically impact attendance. If you want continued participation and attendance over time, communicate how successful the effort has been by providing a “feedback loop” that notifies participants if any of the names presented at their session resulted in a successful hire, or eventually, a hire who turns out to be a top performer.

Why not offer regular referral bonus rewards?

The key motivator and the prime reason that Rolodex parties work is because it is a team effort in which everyone pitches in to identify recruiting targets. It’s a group activity and the competitive pressure in the room is generally enough to get attendees to participate and provide names. Once you add an individual referral bonus, you change the “do it for the good of the team” mentality. In addition, you essentially waste money on rewards that are not necessary. Before you offer significant individual rewards, remember that the end product of these events is generally just names. The participating individuals have not completed the time-consuming process of prescreening, pre-selling, and convincing the individual to apply, which normally are required in order to earn a referral bonus.

Who should be invited?

Almost everyone knows someone, but top-performing individuals like Tiger Woods tend to know more highly qualified people than someone like Homer Simpson. As a result, focus on recruiting participants who are top performers in the job family you’re targeting for recruiting. You should also invite “super-knowers” – well-connected individuals who just seem to know and remain connected to almost everyone. Next, focus on individuals who are currently in the particular job for which you are currently recruiting, followed by well-connected managers, contractors, or even consultants currently working for you. In most cases, the optimal number of people to invite is 12 or fewer because large numbers of people are hard to manage. It’s also true that the sheer volume of names offered by large groups often results in meetings that last longer than an hour, which is a mistake if you want people to come back to these events in the future.

Are there technology alternatives?

In the case where your team cannot meet physically very often due to geographic dispersion, Internet meetings, conference calls, and even team instant-messaging sessions can work, provided that the person directing the meeting is well-respected and the time is limited to 30 minutes or less. Another technology option, which for some reason very few people have taken advantage of, is a software package known as ActiveNet (there are several competing packages also available). This type of software has the capability of searching through your entire corporation’s emails, PowerPoint slides, and online address books to identify the individuals who are most likely to know someone at a targeted firm, or to know someone with a specific area of expertise. This kind of software can search files and assign a probability to which employees, for example, are likely to know “Tiger Woods,” which employees speak Korean, which used to work at Apple Computer, or which employee has expertise in nanotechnology.

Should I target specific individuals or firms?

Most definitely. Some firms create a most-wanted list of individuals whom they identify at the beginning of the year, and then target them throughout the year. The names of these game changers are already known, so in these cases, you are looking for individuals who have relationships with them, so that they can eventually use the relationship to help convince the individual to actually come in for an interview. If your organization is trying to learn from specific competing or benchmark firms, start the session by saying you’re looking in particular for individuals from certain targeted firms.

What should you do after you gather the names?

The right approach here varies by company. Some enter the names in a centralized who’s-who database for future sourcing. Other firms look for situations in which identical names are provided by two or more different employees, and in these unique cases, the individuals will be immediately targeted by recruiters. Some organizations with limited recruiting staffs ask the employees who know the targeted individual to make the first recruiting contact directly.

Common Problems

Rolodex/PDA parties are pretty straightforward, and as a result, they are hard to screw up, but errors do occur. The most common ones include having the meetings last too long, holding the parties too often, not using the manager to encourage attendance, having a weak facilitator, and not providing metrics or feedback on how successful they were.

Conclusion

Recruiters in many fields and especially health care (in which every nurse and radiologist knows a hundred others) are constantly whining about how difficult it is to find the names of top candidates. They spend thousands of dollars on agencies and job boards when the names of the very best people were available right under their noses in their own employees’ contact files. If you’re willing to try them, you will invariably find that holding a well-run Rolodex/PDA party can produce maximum results for little more than the cost of a few desserts. So, let them eat cake, and see if the results aren’t as amazing and as easy as finding actors connected to Kevin Bacon!

Drugstore to Hire People With Disabilities Through New Recruiting Website

by
J McCool
Jul 21, 2006, 9:23 am ET

The nation’s largest drugstore chain has launched a new recruiting website to hire people with disabilities for its future distribution center in Anderson, South Carolina, beginning next summer.?

Walgreens has launched the site to describe jobs that will be available at the future Walgreens distribution center and is designed to be accessible by people with sensory, physical, and cognitive disabilities.

keep reading…

On Becoming a Great Recruiter, Part 6

by
Lou Adler
Jul 21, 2006

If one of your client groups has ever incorrectly eliminated a good candidate because someone on the hiring team was a weak interviewer, this article is written for you. But some background first. We’re now into the final stages of this series on becoming a great recruiter. If you’ve participated fully, you’re now much better at taking the assignment and finding more top active and passive candidates and closing more assignments more quickly.

If you haven’t participated, you’re sending out too many candidates to be interviewed, you’re not seeing as many strong active and passive candidates as you could be, and if you haven’t tried out the techniques presented last week, there’s no doubt that you’re losing candidates who drop out due to compensation differences, or you’re overpaying for the candidates you are hiring. Now consider this. If you followed the guidelines provided in this series, you’re at least 20% better than you were just two short months ago, and that’s if you’re an experienced recruiter. You’re now at least 30% better if you’re a mid-level recruiter, and at least 50% better if you’re just starting out. But, you’re no better if you don’t think you need to get better, and unfortunately many recruiters fall into this category. Not wanting to get better is the first sign of decline.

You might want to take the Recruiter Diagnostic and our annual Recruiting Challenges 2006 to see where you stand on this point. Even better, use this same concept when you interview your candidates. Top interviewers know that a candidate’s personal growth rate is a great predictor of potential and self-motivation. Knowing this and a few other interviewing tips which you’ll learn in this article will help you defend your candidate from managers who don’t interview too well. If you’ve ever lost a good person because someone on the interviewing team was unprepared, emotional, or a weak interviewer, you know what a waste of time this can be.

Equally as bad is having great candidates not even be considered because they didn’t have exactly the right mix of skills, experience, or academic background. Good interviewing skills can help recruiters minimize these types of non-hires. The goal of this article is to reduce your sendouts per hire ratio by at least one. For most recruiters, this will result in a productivity increase of at least 20-30%, which means you’ll be able to make one additional hire per month, or 12 additional hires per year. At an average cost per hire of $3,574, this is a cost savings of $42,888. Per recruiter! Each year! Just by following the tips in this article! Here’s how:

  • Know the job. Reread Part II in this series and follow the instructions suggested. If you’re the type of recruiter who uses the traditional skills- and experience-based job description to merely screen candidates while the hiring team determines if they’re suitable for the job, you’re just a box-checker. At a minimum, good recruiters need to determine if a candidate can do the work at a high level of competency, and get the person excited about proceeding in the selection process by positioning the job as a career move, not a compensation increase. Where do you stand on this measure of recruiter competency?
  • keep reading…

What You Need to Know About What’s Happening in the Pre-Employment Assessment Market

by
Dr. Charles Handler
Jul 20, 2006

Over the past several years, an increasing number of companies have begun to realize the potential revenue to be gained from selling pre-employment tests as part of a suite of hiring tools and processes designed to help organizations make effective, legally sound hiring decisions. There’s a wide range of companies offering some form of pre-employment assessments. These assessments span a range from pre-screening measures to personality assessments to full-blown job simulations. The increased popularity of all types of pre-employment assessment tools has led to quite a bit of business activity amongst the vendors who offer them. Much of this activity has taken the form of mergers and acquisitions.

I believe that these business deals are going to have a big impact on the way pre-employment assessment is developed, sold, and implemented. I have boiled down the movement within this field into four major trends. Below, we’ll take a look at each of these and what they mean to you.

Pre-Employment Assessment Vendors Buying Each Other

For the most part, each vendor offers a specific “secret sauce” in the form of a set of products and methodologies that are best suited for predicting applicant success at a specific type of job or within a specific industry. Few companies are able to meet broad-ranging client needs. Unfortunately, best practices in pre-employment assessment often call for more than one type of assessment tool to be used. While there are many, many types of assessment available, it has been difficult to choose one vendor to meet all of one’s needs. This situation either leads to an attempt to force a round peg in a square hole by blindly charging ahead with just one vendor, or a situation in which one hiring process is complicated by the need to involve multiple vendors. Vendors realize this, and, as a result, have the choice of either buying another company to be more of a one-stop shop, or developing more products in-house. Developing assessment products properly takes two valuable commodities: time and money. Doing it right requires a scientific process that involves the collection and analysis of mountains of data. It is often much simpler and easier to leverage someone else’s work (and his customer base too!). So what does this trend mean to recruiters and other hiring professionals? I believe it means the following:

  • Streamlining. In the short term, I believe the real impact of this trend will be that it will become increasingly easier to shop for assessment tools. The ability for one vendor to offer a wide range of tools and thus offer more options for measuring the key factors that drive performance at any given job will cut down on the need to implement and manage multiple vendors. The ability for vendors to offer more services will also make it easier to use assessments for a wider range of jobs. So, the benefit will really be in simplicity, in the form of the need to bring fewer vendors to the table. This means managing fewer vendor implementations, contracts, databases, etc., and will also allow organizations to form deeper, longer lasting vendor relationships.
  • keep reading…

A Case for Better Recruiter Training

by
Kevin Wheeler
Jul 19, 2006

Every time I talk to people who have recently sought new jobs, I am amazed at how poorly recruiters have treated them. Yesterday, I spoke with a friend who is highly respected, highly placed in a major organization, and one of the top 15 or so performers I know. He recounted his recent experiences with a corporate recruiter. The recruiter called him based on a referral. However, she had done no research on him at all. She did not know how highly respected he is nor that he had in-depth experience. Her questioning was basic and simplistic, and she didn’t have any insight into the position – just the job description provided by the hiring manager.

After talking to my friend for awhile, she told him that he probably wasn’t right for the job because he had not previously worked in the same industry, and that was a prerequisite for this position. This came after 20 minutes of conversation in which this was never mentioned, and came despite his 20 years of experience, reputation, and solid credentials. A lack of recruiting skill results in tremendous inefficiencies and higher costs. It means many good candidates are not seriously considered, and many others decide not to go forward. It means that too many candidates are screened before a suitable one is found, and that too many unsuitable ones are interviewed and rejected. While unskilled recruiters in an agency environment don’t last very long, they seem to do well in corporate recruiting, in which standards are lower and no one is paid for being efficient.

I find that few organizations have ever systematically asked for or collected feedback on recruiter behavior and style from candidates, whether successful or not at getting a job. In fact, I’m pretty sure if we were to run a nationwide poll about what job seekers and candidates think about most corporate recruiters, I think it would amount to an indictment of our profession. Job descriptions often fail to differentiate one job from another. Many recruiters do not understand the position they are recruiting for, and many recruiters just check off a list of requirements filled out by a hiring manager. That hiring manager may not really know what his or her top performers need to have as competencies and also lack insight into the talent marketplace.

Technology, websites, and solid assessment tools can increase the chances of finding and hiring a successful candidate, but nothing replaces skilled recruiters in creating excitement in a candidate, in building authenticity, and in finding and overcoming the candidates’ objections. The bottom line is that when we treat candidates poorly, ask simplistic questions, fail to understand what motivates them and what they are really seeking, and have untrained recruiters working the phones, we lose good candidates and create a very bad image of the organization. Here are six ways to quickly change this picture:

  1. Collect feedback from candidates on the recruiting process. Find out what they thought about the recruiter. Ask them if they were asked questions that they felt would discriminate a qualified candidate from an unqualified candidate. Find out if the recruiter had done any research on their backgrounds or qualifications. Get an assessment of friendliness, authenticity, and politeness. Give each recruiter his or her results, and assign a mentor or coach to recruiters to help them develop better skills. This should be correlated with each recruiter’s success in closing candidates and on how well his or her hires do and how long your recruiters stay in your organization.
  2. keep reading…

Job Searches Taking Longer

by
Todd Raphael
Jul 18, 2006, 10:38 am ET

It’s taking longer to find a job, according to John A. Challenger, CEO of an outplacement firm.

The 3.6-month median length of a job search last quarter was almost a month longer than it took the quarter prior.

keep reading…

Former Taleo Research Executive Ready To Stake Future On Launch of Checkster

by
J McCool
Jul 18, 2006, 12:17 am ET

Yves Lermusi says his decision to leave his post as president of Taleo Research after seven years was prompted in part by a Gallup poll that found that employee disengagement is costing U.S. employers some $300 billion per year.

That’s why employers should be taking a closer look at how they’re attracting and then filtering job candidates. And that’s also why Lermusi and a team of developers will begin to line up beta testers for this fall for a new company called Checkster. For now, the Checkster website contains little more than a vague explanation of what the site will do, beyond that it will offer a “talent checkup for organizations and individuals.” A formal launch is planned for the end of 2006 of the solution Lermusi believes will help employers recruit the right people with the best possible fit.

keep reading…

How to Leave the Interviewing Stone Age

by
Dr. Wendell Williams
Jul 18, 2006

Once upon a time, there were no human resources departments. Applicants were interviewed by managers and hired or fired on the job. For most employees, work was often simple and labor intensive. Not much changed as the need for workers grew, except management created a new department to process paperwork and administer benefits. As you can imagine, new employee skills were only tested on the job. Eventually, the “paperwork and benefits” department was assigned the tasks of placing help wanted ads and pre-screening applicants.

For the most part, applicants were still interviewed by managers and hired or fired on the spot. For most employees, work was still often simple and labor intensive. As you can imagine, new employee skills were only tested on the job. Throughout this time, interviewers’ primary objective was to screen out blatantly unqualified candidates (i.e., people they either disliked or who drooled on the paperwork) and forward them to the hiring managers. Without any special training or education, their interview questions sounded something like this: “Tell me about yourself. Why do you want this job? Do you have any relatives who work here?”

As you can imagine, new employee skills were only tested on the job. Time went by, and interviewers became more confident, often to the point of believing they were trained psychologists. The personnel department even creatively renamed itself “human resources.” Questions changed slightly and became something like this: “What color do you prefer? What is your greatest strength? If you could be an animal, which would it be, and why?” As you can imagine, new employee skills were only tested on the job. Nothing much changed except interviewers sounded sillier, and applicants read advice on how to fake well and get the job. But would anyone be surprised to learn that research shows that interviews are most predictive of future job performance only when they meet three criteria:

  1. The interviewer works from a competency-based document that outlines the skills necessary for job success or failure. This is not a job description and it is not a job evaluation band. It is a list of measurable competencies based primarily on interviews with successful job holders.
  2. keep reading…

Contest Recruiting: There’s No Better Way to Find Elite Talent, Part 2

by
Dr. John Sullivan
Jul 17, 2006

article by Dr. John Sullivan and Master Burnett

Last week, we introduced numerous examples of organizations using talent contests, corporate challenges, and awards programs to source top talent that might otherwise be overlooked. This week, our attention turns to the action steps required to take advantage of this recruiting approach. Hopefully, you’ve had time to think about what recruiting needs you have that could be resolved through contests, and can start to develop a program as you read on.

Action Steps

If you want to take advantage of contest and award recruiting, here are some suggestions to get you started. We have broken the suggestions down into two categories: using other organizations’ contests, and running your own. Each can be wildly effective. If you don’t have the budget to launch your own contest, taking advantage of those that already exist is the next best thing.

Using Existing Contests, Challenges, and Awards Programs

The first step is to ask your current top performers in each mission-critical job family what prominent awards and contests already exist in their field. Professional organizations tend to offer the most awards and contests, and could often use sponsors and judges. Focus on the associations that represent your hard-to-hire and mission-critical functional areas. While sponsors can make demands in some cases, judges are given greater access to the actual talent, so figure out what you need from the relationship and pursue the role that best suits your needs. If the opportunity to serve as a sponsor or judge is not available to you, consider building a relationship with the judges and follow up with them after the event to find out which contestants impressed them. If the judging panel isn’t cooperative, look for a way that is not as barrier-prone. For example, you might consider sponsoring a special section of a local university’s newspaper to profile the contestants or interview the judges.

Examples of Professional Association Contests and Awards Programs

  • The Robot Challenge. This year marked the 10th anniversary of the IEEE Robot Challenge. Founded by the Baltimore section of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the challenge allows teams of students to design, construct, and battle robots. The contest is intended to provide students with a full life-cycle view of life as an engineer.
  • keep reading…

Philly Eyes Its Future as an East Coast Hub for IT Business and Recruiting

by
J McCool
Jul 14, 2006, 12:17 am ET

The Greater Philadelphia region has a lot of good things going.

For starters, it has a growing labor market, a booming corporate real estate sector, and a steady stream of foreign investment. It also has 83 colleges and universities, a large concentration of pharmaceutical and life sciences companies, and the nation’s second-best air passenger-rated big city airport. All combine to make it an attractive option for economic development.

But the leaders of Select Greater Philadelphia, a non-profit business marketing organization responsible for building businesses in southeastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and northern Delaware, plan to commission a study of the region’s information-technology companies and workforce to learn how it can compete in the IT arena more like Silicon Valley.

keep reading…