Data that is relevant (and can be converted to prove a visual point) is always effective. However, it takes refinement as it is truly an art. While I believe regression analysis will lose most hiring managers, being able to communicate information and key points (in a manner that resonates) is what is important. One thing that I learned in consulting is that a simple bar chart or line chart (comparing 2 situations) goes twice as far as any regression analysis chart. Consider Boston Consulting Group’s creation of the BCG-Matrix. This was an outstanding way to take a plethora of data and break it down into a central diagram (which is where the term ‘cash cow’ was termed and most definitely assisted with the marketing aspect/’resonance’ piece.)

For example, when we are speaking of ‘Return on Talent’ or ‘Return on Human Capital’, one simple metric is ‘Revenue or Profit per Employee’. Of course, you can take this further, such as ‘EPS per Employee’, etc., but this is a great place to start. The point is to capture the data that allows you to start with a baseline (or benchmark), to thereby compare your results against.

However, my take on Talent Acquisition is that it is ABSOLUTELY a predictor of success. My recommendation, however, is that Talent Acquisition become savvy in the way that the department positions itself to complementary parties (hiring managers) / business units/etc. Begin communicating like a profit center and you will slowly see the types of conversations begin to change. Don’t throw away cost control, as this is key to all departments, however begin communicating in new ways that speak to how your efforts have impacted the growth in revenues and profits, and more importantly, growth in market cap and shareholder value.

1)Business leaders are worried about talent management because of HR as much as they are about external competition and outside influences. Those words may not be spoken directly to HR, but think about it the next time you hear about struggles from top business leadership who has an HR team that hasn’t built its credibility on relentless talent pursuit, development, and retention.

2)Business leaders also are even more puzzled by why HR isn’t leading the way or leading by example. Business leaders aren’t usually presented with a shortlist internal or external HR leaders who have ‘Acquire, Develop, and Manage Talent’ as her/his top HR mission and have built her/his credibility around results in this area. Most business leaders don’t see their own HR team’s record of acquiring, developing, and retaining HR talent being very good (why are their so many people in HR who don’t know how to tie back to talent but are experts in all forms of administrivia).

3) As a profession, we have to realize business leaders have expected HR to step up on talent, but HR continues to miss out on opportunities to shine and have impact around talent. Don’t believe it, read again the presentations, survey results and books from most top business leaders about how they built business. You’ll find that it was done through the obsession with obtaining, developing, and keeping/putting talent in the right situations to shine. That said, I think it’s immensely perplexing to business leaders who are left wondering why isn’t the mission clear to HR and why can’t the success results even within many HR departments be clearly seen?

I recently had a conversation with an HR executive about the fact that staffing was only about 10% of their department but generated more than 50% of their internal complaints and accounted for anywhere from 20-40% (excluding benefits and other programs). I replied, ‘Would the executive management team allow any other business or department to do that? Wouldn’t any other team be charged with fix it or we’ll have to replace that team or get out of that business?’ Then the lightbulb went bright - she said, ‘No wonder we’re struggling. We don’t have the right structure, team members, leadership, or departmental mission and focus to do anything more than make an incremental difference.’

As the article pointed out, I believe metrics have a place in highlighting what’s going on. So are we measuring the true cost of our investment in talent, the cost of developing and maintainng talent as a part of the organization, and the actual cost of HR related to talent compared to all other non-talent functions? Focus in on these items as a start, and it’s clear that things probably need to be turned completely inside out before dramatice positive results should be expected.

HR also needs to ensure that its team members are educated about the business they are in, understand the job requirements, identify the right candidates holistically, and serve the hiring manager as if they are a client - top level service, follow up, and feedback.

HR seems to be going through what Marketing went through a few years ago, the ’strategic support’ issue. Now we have CMO’s, advanced credentials and certifications, professional memberships, advanced training opportunity, delineations on different levels of marketing professionals, and measurable contribution analytics. The recruiters should follow the same path.

My two cents.

Rachel

Makes sense.

Regression Analysis - singing my song, maybe those courses in Quantitative Analysis were not just a mind bender after all :)