• Current recruiting models and responsibilities in your role
• Recruiting effectiveness
• Greatest challenges
• Sourcing effectiveness
• Technologies used including portals, social networking, and candidate relationship management

You’ll leave the event with data to benchmark your own organization against others, and better understand how to address many of the challenges that organizations face.

| View | Upload your own

Wall Street analysts expect the company to report sales of around $363 million for the quarter, earning it an average of 22 cents a share, down more than a third from the same quarter the year before. And the per share earnings estimates have been dropping since the beginning of the year when the average of the analysts’ estimates stood at 41 cents per share.

Although the company has been furiously building its global business, more than half its sales still come from North America where, as every recruiter knows, hiring has slowed to a crawl. This is especially evident in such industries as finance, manufacturing, real estate, retail and hospitality, where Monster’s own Employment Index shows each of them off from their year before highs by as much as 20 percent.

The Monster Employment Index can almost be considered a proxy for the company’s North American performance. Growing consistently through the end of 2006, the Index began flattening out in spring, 2007 fluctuating for months in a range between 183 and 189. In December it plummeted to 169. Previous seasonal adjustments never were more than three or four percentage points. (December is the yearly low point for recruitment job postings, which is what the Index measures.)

Simultaneously, Monster’s North American sales were also flattening. The fourth quarter of 2007 showed a decline in sales from the third quarter, the first time in five years that had happened. Only robust growth in Monster’s international business kept the company growing.

Since the start of 2008 the economic news has only gotten worse. Net job growth has not kept pace with job market entry. Combined with layoffs, that’s pushed the national unemployment rate up to 5.1 percent. In March 2007 it was 4.5 percent.

It wouldn’t be much of a stretch under the circumstances if North American revenues were flat or even below the $184 million of the same period in 2007. Growth in the international segment is likely to again drive the company’s growth.

Monster’s misfortune is that neither of its two biggest competitors release much or, in the case of HotJobs (profile; site), anything about their financial success. CareerBuilder (profile; site), privately owned by a group of newspaper publishers, voluntarily reports revenue, which, for the last quarter of 2007 was $183 million only a rounding away from the $182.6 million of the same quarter in 2006. HotJobs revenue is aggregated with other divisions in Yahoo!’s financials, so is unknown. Industry sources speculate though that is has grown significantly as has its traffic in the last 18 months.

Other players in the recruitment arena seem to be less directly affected by the weak job market. ThinkPanmure analyst Nate Swanson released a report a few weeks ago with the curious title “Connecting The “Disconnect”: Be Greedy.” In it he mentions two of the HR software companies he follows – Taleo (profile; site) and Success Factors (profile; site) – and reports they are expected to meet or exceed earnings for the year. Of the sector, Swanson says, “We continue to hear of very strong demand within the performance management space, which has been the hottest, fastest-growing area of the HCM sector for the past 12-24 months.”

Taleo and SuccessFactors are expected to report their first quarter financial performance later in May. Kenexa (profile; site ), another major HR software vendor, is scheduled to report on May 12^th.

I had many opportunities to speak with start-up entrepreneurs who were attending with hopes of gaining venture capital support. This conference was a great venue for many to talk with established technologists and business owners about their ideas, and an event called Launch Pad was held. Six new companies had the opportunity pitch their business for five minutes on stage, in front of the Web 2.0 Expo audience and a panel of VC judges. The six finalists, who were chosen through submission and panel review before the conference, were Acquia, Chirp Interactive, JobScore, Oortle, TradeVibes, and Triggit. Each company received feedback on its presentation right then and there from both the VC judges and the audience, and the VCs were given the option to offer these applicants non-binding term sheets for financing.

Following Launch Pad, I was able to spend about an hour chatting one-on-one with Dan Arkind. He has a rich, hands-on recruiting background and is one of the co-founders of JobScore (profile). Those of you who attended the start-up session at ERE in San Diego will remember JobScore — a new product targeted at in-house recruiting teams that “breaks down the walls” between different companies and empowers them to working directly with each other.

Employers use JobScore to build their own pipeline through one-click job posting, referral emails, etc. — which is all well and good — but what’s new and different is that they can also privately share resumes amongst themselves. Dan called it “cooperative recruitment” — basically allowing different employers to share their un-hired resumes directly with each other. For each new resume you add to the pool, you can take one out. If you don’t want to share, or if you want to take out more resumes than you put in, you have to pay.

The way in which this is different from the Jigsaw model is that resumes, not just names/titles/contact info, are being shared, and candidates must grant permission in order for their resume to be shared; as well, once permission is granted, they can turn it off at any time.

I enjoyed talking with Dan, mostly because he let me talk for the first 45 minutes about stuff that I am passionate about (just kidding…kinda) I enjoyed hearing Dan’s thoughts on our industry and how he believes new web 2.0 platforms will impact on the way we work. One interesting topic was that the social/interpersonal skills and relationship development ability that it takes to be successful in recruiting will never be replaced by social media, automation, or any kind of technology tool. I certainly wish Dan the best as he embarks on this endeavor, and I would encourage in-house corporate recruiting teams to check out JobScore (this tool is designed for you!!).

I had the chance to speak also with another entrepreneur named Jacob Visnick, CEO and co-founder of Zambino. The reason I connected with Jake was because I saw him in the Blogtropol.us lounge wearing a University of Florida sweatshirt, and I just HAD to run over and meet a fellow Gator (I am a U of FL alumni)!

Jake and his business partner, Adam Richman, launched Zambino as the first video advertising network geared toward connecting advertisers directly with content producers. Content producers create a profile on Zambino highlighting what brands interest them, and what type of products and services they want to promote within their videos. Advertising options range from preroll to product placement, and is up to the content producers. Advertising companies then match up their products and services to the profiles, and provide content to make it a seamless video on YouTube.

From a recruitment standpoint, companies (advertisers) can post jobs/advertising that they are looking to have done in up coming YouTube videos. This will be a great way for them to viral market their jobs via video to targeted audiences.

A very interesting sidenote: Adam Richman is a 17-year-old high school student. Yes, that’s right – he can’t even vote yet, and this is not his first start-up company either. Several VC’s were quite interested in Jake and Adam because of this, and it looks like this is going to be a profitable endeavor for them.

While I was unable to meet everyone in the expo hall, there were a couple other interesting companies that caught my eye with products and services that will be helpful in our recruiting space:

• Yahoo! SearchMonkey: read the post I did on this last week. Once this search tool gets the kinks worked out and comes out of beta, I believe it has the possibility of being HUGE for us researchers.

This is different from flash previews that some sites, like ask.com, offer in that the ‘preview’ is actually right on the results page, as opposed to popping up when moused over, and can be easily scraped.

Read TechCrunch’s review of this tool: Mark Hendrickson says that “SearchMonkey should be a significant step toward the more personalized, and potentially social, search that’s been anticipated by many.”

• Yoono: a browser sidebar that will aggregate your social network upates and allow you to update all statuses at once. In addition, while you surf, Yoono displays a list of other web pages that are “people-rated” – others have classified them in their favorites. You can also find other users who have a particular web page in their favorites.

The recruiting element of this is more for the researchers and sourcers, in that you can look up users who have added selected websites to their favorites and communicate with them. So for example, if someone has bookmarked several popular sites in your industry, you could contact them about job opportunities you are working on in that particular industry.

• VisualCV: read the post I did last week on this company. It was recently named the multi-media standard by the AESC for their ability to offer greater depth, breadth, and substance than traditional resumes through networking capabilities, online career portfolio management, and social media components. These online blog-type resumes offer a richer glimpse into candidates’ skills and of course are highly searchable.

• eXpresso: a practical application to a commonly-used business tool. For those of you who have multiple locations, you can use eXpresso to share Excel documents and allow for storing, editing, and instantly sharing without having to email bulky documents or wonder which version you’re supposed to be using. This is also great for companies that don’t have shared common drives and/or have many remote employees.

• Twitter: It did not have a booth, but everyone was using it throughout the conference. If you’re not using Twitter currently, you may want to consider doing so. This tool is a great method for viral marketing information, including job openings or candidates seeking work. Take a look at the following video for information from the microblogging session at the conference:

If you question how Twitter can be successfully used in recruiting, just refer to Jason Whitman, Jim Stroud, or you can email me and ask how I’ve personally used it for sourcing and found success.

Check out the rest of the exhibitors here; there were so many I couldn’t possibly get to all of them!

There’s a lot of stuff available out there for us. Should you be using everything? Absolutely NOT. Think of embracing these new web 2.0 tools in terms of grocery shopping: when you hit the supermarket, you wouldn’t dream of purchasing everything there! You go in, get what you need, and get out. But — the items you didn’t purchase are still going to be there, available for purchase, if and when you should ever need them. The same goes for all these technologies — take a look at what makes sense for you and your company to embrace, and then run with it, knowing that the other tools will be available if and when you decide it’s time to try them out.

We got lots of praise over the first puzzle and have decided to challenge you yet again! We’d love to hear your feedback on this puzzle, so shoot us an email if you have suggestions or comments.

What makes these companies so cocky? While other companies are struggling to find enough talent, this group of employers thinks money is enough to keep their new hires happy.

In fact, 24% of employers plan to pay their summer hires and/or interns more this year than they did last year. But as we all know, money is no guarantee that these seasonal workers will stick.

According to CareerBuilder.com’s latest survey of more than 3,000 U.S. employers, 47% plan to dish out $10 or more per hour; 7% will pay $20 or more per hour; 29% anticipate paying between $8 and $10 per hour; and 11% expect to pay less than $7 per hour.

Praise is Priceless

But so what? Is money what matters? Survey after survey finds that quality-of-life dreaming is not just a desire by those demanding Gen Y kids. Most surveys point out that while salary can buy a lot of things, more and more workers prefer other benefits. Things such as telecommuting and flex time, sure, but even more holistic measures like a sense of purpose or consistent praise.

(Check out “Seven things employees want most to be happy at work,” which points out the obvious: “Praise does not cost anything to give, but its benefits on employee morale are priceless.”

But still, the CareerBuilder.com survey says 7% of seasonal workers are still going to get more than $20 an hour. That beats scooping ice cream or mowing lawns for peanuts.

So just who is hiring seasonal workers? The survey finds that hospitality (40%) and retail (39%) are leading in the number of hiring managers planning to recruit summer workers. Among all employers, the most popular summer positions being offered include office support (28%); customer service (19%); landscape/maintenance (14%); research (14%); restaurant/food service (8%); construction/painting (8%); and sales (8%).

One of the specific challenges recruiters face is how to translate a candidate’s qualifications from their military job, Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or Military Occupational Classification (MOC), to the civilian title.

It takes some education and understanding of the military lingo, occupational specialties, and career progression within the military structure to fully understand whether this person can fill your specific need.

Here is the scenario:

You’ve posted a position that will require, from the best-qualified candidate, a demonstration of their ability to lead diverse teams of people. The technical aspect of this role is easily taught in this situation and it is a mid-level management role with four to seven years of management experience expected from your candidate.

Before we look at a sample military/veteran resume, let’s clear our minds of the following recruiter inner voices:

Why didn’t this candidate translate their skills for me? Why does this candidate use all the acronyms? I don’t like the format. They misspelled a word. Why don’t they just tell me what I am supposed to be looking for from their last 20 years in the military. This is too much work!

First, take a deep breath. Second, take a look at this resume:

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 1985-2008

Deputy Training Support Officer, 2003-2008

Navy School of Music, Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Norfolk, Virginia

Managed 14 personnel in the daily operations of the school’s facilities, technical training equipment, safety programs, and security. Responsible for developing, evaluating, monitoring, and analyzing military training support programs, interpreting results and publishing written reports. This position also included the development, supervision and management of a $400K annual budget, including procurement of supplies and training materials valued at over $10M

Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor, Substance Abuse Prevention Specialist 2001-2008

Navy School of Music, Marine Detachment, NAB Little Creek, Norfolk, Virginia

Responsible for drug and alcohol abuse case management, treatment referral, and aftercare monitoring. Developed, evaluated and implemented drug and alcohol abuse prevention programs and education. Provided classroom training, needs assessment, program analysis, and collaborated with community leaders

Head Library Media Division 2001-2005

Navy School of Music, Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Norfolk, Virginia

Supervised library staff and the daily operations of three separate libraries, the Media Library, Text Library and Music Library. Developed, supervised, and managed the libraries annual budget including procurement of computer software, training material, and supplies

Professional Training

• Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Abuse, Prevention Specialist Course, US Navy
• Alcohol and Drug Management for Supervisors Facilitator Course, US Navy
• Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor’s Course, US Navy
• Strategic Management Overview, US Navy
• Staff Non-Commissioned Officers Academy Advanced Course, US Marine Corps
• Ceremonial Conductor/Drum Major Course, US Navy
• Staff Non-Commissioned Officers Academy Career Course, US Marine Corps
• War Fighting Skills Program, US Marine Corps
• Simplified Acquisition Procedures, Defense Acquisition University
• Basic Musicians Course, US Navy

As a recruiter who routinely deals with active and prior military, my first thought is that I have a seasoned leader who may just fit the profile I am looking for. This person has a diverse and multi-faceted background in the Marine Corps outside of their MOS, which was playing in the Marine Corps Band. If I wanted to translate a position title from this resume, such as Ceremonial Conductor, or their collateral job assignment, Training Support Officer, where would I go?

There are resources out there to assist in skills translation for the recruiter without the background and understanding of military career progression through the ranks. One such resource, HireVetsFirst.gov, is funded through the U.S. Department of Labor and The President’s National Hire Veterans Committee. The website offers an Employer’s Zone that takes the recruiter or hiring manager to the Department of Labor’s Occupation Network, O*Net OnLine.

Additionally, a simple Google search (keywords: military skills translation) brings back several sites that also focus on assisting the veteran and the employer.

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times said that 76% of military service members did not know how to translate their own skills in the military into civilian positions. That is a staggering number and one that transition-assistance-program managers for the military should note.

But as recruiters we have a unique opportunity to bridge this gap and really provide value to these men and women who have so unselfishly served our country.

Those recruiters who are up for the challenge and can see the long-term benefit of such a strategy for their business will find value in this extra effort through a network of men and women who value relationships and camaraderie.

Military and veteran candidates are often diamonds in the rough. They have leadership skills in diverse, fast-paced, stressful environments along with being able to adapt to an accelerated learning curve in various environments. The resources are out there, the candidates are out there, and the next step for companies who will truly take the lead in innovative recruitment will be to go after this candidate pool.

The recruiting-costs spreadsheet mentioned earlier “contained a flaw in the calculator related to the macros,” according to MTS.

We’ve loaded up a new version, and buried it under those same words “Excel File” where the old version was. Hopefully it’ll fix the flaw and help those people who had trouble downloading it from the get-go.

As the adage goes, “to catch a thief you must think like a thief.” The same applies to finding resumes in databases.

While thinking about your needs is definitely the right place to begin a resume sourcing campaign, you should translate those needs into “resume speak” to achieve optimal results. Effective resume research in a database requires you to use your command of the English language, your empathetic abilities, your comprehension of industries and professions, and your understanding of the psychology of your target candidate. In short, you need to use every ounce of your experience as a recruiter.

It’s time for some fresh ideas, and below I present three options for you to try today. Let’s pretend that you require someone with a Bachelor of Science degree. You have several options while searching a resume database.

Education Matters

First, you can easily select “Bachelor” from the Education category included in the database search engine. As obvious as this may seem, it is usually the wrong approach.

Education is an optional field in most databases, so a sizable portion of the resumes in a given database have no Education data in the field. If you select “Bachelor” for the Education field, you will miss all those candidates who opted not to complete that field.

Incidentally, passive candidates are the most likely to skip the field, as they are apt to upload their resumes on a whim, “just in case something better is out there.” However, they typically do a haphazard job of it. Candidates who are eager for new employment complete every field diligently. Candidates who are merely curious ignore whole sections of the resume submission process. That tendency yields the somewhat surprising revelation that the best candidates in a resume database may actually be those with the sparsest information in the category fields.

Unique Expressions: From BS to B.Sc and Beyond

Second, you can include the simple search string “bachelor of science” in the keyword field. This will definitely give you candidates who have a Bachelor of Science degree.

That said, the results will only be a sub-set of your target resumes. There are many ways a candidate can choose to express their Bachelor of Science degree. Some elect to write Bachelors of Science, or Bachelor’s of Science, or BS, or B.S., or BSc, or B.Sc., or BSEE (bachelor of electrical engineering), etc. There is a nearly endless variety of options available to the resume writer, and candidates use them all. Apply some demographic knowledge to whittle down the options.

For instance, “B.Sc.” on resumes will be a typical indication of candidates who received degrees many years ago or who received overseas degrees. If that is your target market, then try B.Sc. or BSc to find them.

Complex Logic Nets More Candidates

One last idea is to attempt to create a more complex search string that captures more candidates.

Here is a pretty good string:

((bachelor* AND science) OR bs* OR “b.s.”)

It will probably miss some resumes, but it should catch the bulk of them. Using the asterisk to indicate “wildcard value” and nested parentheses to indicate which terms must be present simultaneously, you account for most of the probable variations. Interpreting this string into written English yields:

• Any variant on “bachelor,” such as “bachelor,” “bachelors,” or “bachelor’s” AND the word “science.”
• Any variant on BS, such as BS, BSEE, BSCS, BSME, BSc, etc.
• The exact term “B.S.”

Apply this logic to all your requirements. Let’s say you are looking for a technology-related Project Manager. While your ideal candidate may be a current Project Manager, they may also be a Business Analyst who managed projects, or a Software Engineer who was given project management responsibilities, or any number of possibilities.

Searching for “project manager” will be severely limiting. Instead, account for what the candidate might write on a resume, and search for something like “managing projects” OR “managed projects” OR “manage projects” OR “project management” OR “project manager.”

After that, take a look at the words and phrases on the resulting resumes to see whether there are other common phrases you can include.

You may be tempted to use the string:

“manage* project*” OR “project* manage*”.

That string will not work properly in CareerBuilder, Monster, or HotJobs. Placing the asterisk within quotations tells the engine to look for the asterisk itself, rather than using the asterisk as a wildcard value. The string will deliver results, but the results will not be what you expected to see.

The key to effective resume searching is a combination of knowing what you want, knowing the operators of a search string, knowing the English language, and knowing the tendencies of the candidates you are seeking. You have to reach beyond the obvious to find your target. You have to “think like a thief” to catch your candidate.

The new Fetch Footprint is promising recruiters “deep Web extraction technologies,” which is a really fancy way of saying the company will scour public-data sources and lurk on social/professional networking sites to gather information.

The company’s president, ex-ADP exec Jerry Thurber, says Footprint is designed to intelligently parse data relevant to hiring decisions.

In addition to vetting corporate employment candidates, the Fetch folks also can help with background checking, applicant tracking, and job fit assessments.

Stamping Qualified on Sales Candidates…

Go-To-Market Strategies, a sales and marketing online community with claims of about 150,000 users, has a new niche job board, promising recruiters access to “qualified” sales and marketing professionals.

One-part gimmicky, one-part unique, the process allows applicants who both meet the hiring company’s qualifications and successfully pass Go-To-Market Strategies’ prescreening process to be stamped “Qualified.”

Because it does not blindly post jobs found across the Internet, the company says its members can trust the job board to find the best employers.

Despite it being free for employers to post their sales and marketing positions, the site is still pretty bare in the postings department.

If you visit, the site requires that each job include salary expectations. The website will also verify each week that the position is being actively recruited by the employer.

Learning to Share…

A new sourcing cooperative, JobScore is getting a lot of buzz because it allows recruiters to build a candidate pipeline and swap “war stories” with other companies over certain candidates and their resumes.

We like that the “JobScore SHARE plan” lets recruiters share resumes to earn credits, then contact as many candidates as they share for free. But the JobScore SUBSCRIBE plan doesn’t allow sharing of resumes, so you pay a monthly subscription fee.

While you can use JobScore as your applicant tracking system, the company says its focus is on sourcing candidates and cooperative recruiting, not applicant tracking. But if you already use an ATS, you can still use JobScore by running your sourcing through JobScore, exporting the resumes from JobScore, then importing them into your ATS.

Recruiters everywhere should be rejoicing over the latest news from Vurv (profile; site) and the Human Capital Institute, hinting that recruiting is finally getting the respect it deserves in the corporate boardroom.

According to “The Role of HR in the Age of Talent,” which surveyed almost 800 HR professionals and non-HR professionals, more and more CEOs and corporate board members are viewing acquiring, retaining, and engaging talent as the most challenging business problem they face.

Strategic, Critical…and Respected

While talent management has become a board-level concern, the question remains: can HR climb the corporate ladder and receive the same respect and responsibility as other important business functions?

According to the survey, 66% view talent management as either respected or highly respected and occasionally or frequently consulted on corporate strategy.

This number echoes a recent Mercer study suggesting that 67% of respondents think HR is seen as a strategic partner, one that also participates in strategy decisions.

No Wikis? Tsk, Tsk…

But it’s not simply “redefining the role” that will move recruiters to the forefront. For recruiting to truly keep up this impressive pace, it has to get better with technology. No social networking? No wikis? No blogs? According to the report, despite concerns around talent acquisition, few recruiters take advantage of “Web 2.0″ technologies such as social networking, blogs, or wikis.

And as former Valero genius Dan Hilbert once stated, “When the war for talent is waged over the Internet, major corporations will be won and lost over staffing technology.”

During the course of the week, I met a variety of attendees, from technology directors to marketing folks, from CEOs of brand new companies to engineers from industry giants. In talking with many of these people, I found that several of them had attended the conference with the goal of finding talented people to come work with them.

So naturally, since I was attending representing a recruiting resource (and being an advocate of making strategic networking connections), I offered to help them out by bringing some of their needs to the attention of the ERE audience. You can check out some of the folks in this video I’ve made.

Those with hiring needs attending the conference used different methods of outreach, and from my personal perspective there were some that worked well, and others that kind of flopped. Below are two examples, one good and one not-so-good, of recruitment strategies used by those in attendance.

Recruiting That Worked — Personal Touch Coupled With Social Media

Before the event, a Crowdvine social network was set up where conference attendees could reach out to one another and request meetings with other attendees. I thought this was a perfect method of finding people who had expertise in one area or another, or for locating a representative from a company that you wanted to work for. In the days prior to my arrival, I searched this network using keywords such as “hiring”, “recruit”, and “talent” to see who was going to be searching for future employees. I reached out to interesting people and we exchanged contact information to set up times and places to meet and talk.

One of these connections actually produced a very interesting hiring need that I thought would be perfect for several people who read ERE. I met JJ Toothman, co-founder of a new start-up called Shiny New Toy. Shiny New Toy is a social media consultancy that assists its clients in developing online strategy to reach new audiences using a lot of the Web 2.0 technologies that are available.

JJ initiated our contact after reading my profile on the Crowdvine network, and he told me he is looking for a social media researcher to work for him. He reached out to me specifically because in my profile, I mentioned that I work in recruiting and I use social media to do my job. His need is for someone who is an expert social media user and can help with research within their clients’ business areas to find communities of people who would have an interest in their product or service. They would need to uncover the influencers in these communities — the bloggers, analysts, superusers, etc. — and help establish relationships with those people, in addition to helping uncover news resources to provide for clients.

This position would be a great fit for someone with excellent research skills in addition to a thirst for knowledge, the ability to communicate effectively, and of course in-depth knowledge of the use of social media. JJ also told me that this would be a virtual position, and after speaking with him I told him that I had a perfect audience to present this opportunity to. :)

He was pleased, and I hope that this may result in a hire for him! (if you’re interested in his position, please let me know (amybeth at amybethhale.com) and I’d be pleased to do an introduction!)

(Admittedly, I also took advantage of the PR talent that was available and did a little bit of sourcing for Waggener Edstrom while in town. I was able to meet with a couple of potential candidates while at the conference which should result in some excellent hires for us!)

Recruiting That Didn’t Work — the Fishbowl

Lots of companies who had set up booths in the expo hall put out fishbowls to collect business cards. Several of these companies were giving away free stuff and all you had to do is provide a business card to be eligible to win. My guess is that many of these companies will also be using these business card collections to do some recruiting. I would imagine that about 90% of the people who dropped their cards in the fishbowl just wanted the free stuff (heck, Etelos was giving away a free MacBook Air; I’m perfectly happy at Waggener, but I dropped my card in for that!!)

Amazon hosted an after-party across the street from the Moscone West hall on Thursday evening, and at the party they had a fishbowl for business cards and a rep who was handing out cards with a list of job openings for which they are currently hiring. Sounded good, but there was absolutely no mention of this ulterior motive in the official party schedule.

In addition to that, the venue was terribly inadequate for the number of attendees, the food and drink service was too slow (party-goers descended upon the food table like starving piranhas and servers were taking drink orders as opposed to having an open bar available), and in the middle of all this chaos, they decided to have an Amazon rep make a speech about something that I’m sure no one remembered. For about 10 minutes, this poor guy stood up at the top of the stairs and spoke (about what, I couldn’t tell you because I could barely hear him and I was busy trying to elbow my way to the food table).

While I’m sure Amazon will find one or two good candidates from this chaos, again, I’ll bet at least 90% of the attendees were there for the food and booze, not to get an interview at Amazon. And whoever thought it was a good idea to give a speech in the middle of all this probably should have re-thought that strategy.

That being said, one could argue that gathering hundreds of business cards using a fishbowl could produce some good hires, but at the same time, purchasing an expo booth slot was VERY expensive (I heard one company spent $60,000!), as is hosting an after-party like Amazon did. I think the best route was the one taken by companies who explored the attendee network, pinpointed interesting people, and requested to meet with them. The cost of doing this? Maybe a cup of coffee (which was provided to us for free), 15 minutes to have a quality conversation, and whatever the admission cost was to attend (starting as low as $100 for the expo hall only).

Being a big fan of social media, and especially after having met these individuals, I believe that while it is important to know and embrace the fundamentals of recruiting, it is equally important to understand the impact that social media and the rest of the Web 2.0 technologies have already had, and will continue to have, on the way that we do our jobs in recruiting, sourcing, and research. These tools will help us do our jobs easier, but only if we allow them to. And career opportunities in this space are hot right now (obviously!), so jumping on board at this time could be financially rewarding for you as well!

In an upcoming article, I will discuss specifically two entrepreneurs I had the pleasure of meeting whose companies are geared to serve the needs of the recruiting community. I will also review some of the technologies that were showcased that will have direct impact on our recruiting research practices. Please keep an eye out for more videos, pictures, and reviews of the conference!

Most corporate recruiting functions are far from strategic, and most recruiters are intensely resistant to change that. It’s a fact that the business world is rapidly changing, and how organizations recruit talent will be forced to change dramatically as well.

The corporate recruiting function of the future isn’t likely to be created from scratch, because the risk of failure is just too great. Instead, when corporate recruiting makes a shift in strategy and composition, it will most likely follow one of the existing “business models” that have already proven to be strategically effective.

In part one of this article, I highlighted the business value-added model, which is the most likely future recruiting model. In this follow-up article, I highlight two additional models likely to serve as part of the foundation of many future corporate recruiting functions.

Model # 2: The Sports/Entertainment Recruiting Model

If you study a wide range of industries, you’ll find that many industries are highly competitive, including finance, air transportation, retail, sports, and entertainment. However, of all the highly competitive industries, the two that rely most heavily on “talent” as a primary reason for their success have to be the sports and entertainment industries.

For example, in entertainment, adding a single “star” to a movie or TV show can make it instantly successful. In sports, although all players make a contribution, it’s generally top talent in a handful of positions who separate the winning teams from losing ones.

If you’re looking for a model to follow, it’s hard to argue against the fact that you can learn a lot from studying the sports and entertainment talent acquisition and management models. If your corporate leadership philosophy is “winning is everything,” this is the model for you.

Powerful Reasons Back The Sports and Entertainment Models

There are many factors that make studying the talent management approaches of the sports and entertainment industries an essential step in understanding the future of recruiting:

1. Dollarizing the value of top talent. Both of these industries excel at putting a dollar value on top talent. Athletes and entertainment stars receive millions of dollars in compensation for as little as six months’ work because both industries have taken the time to “do the math” on the dollar impact of top talent. For instance, last year the Boston Red Sox spent $51 million just for the right to negotiate with Japanese pitching star “Dice K.” They later paid another $50-plus million to sign him to the team that eventually won the world championship. In sports and entertainment, it’s not the “costs” (which are admittedly sky-high) but rather the ROI of talent that matters.
2. An extraordinary focus on visible metrics. The best-selling book “MoneyBall” demonstrated how applying “fact-based decision-making” to what were formally “emotional” talent decisions can make a team successful, even though their overall payroll is well below the league average. Baseball stands out as the perfect model for measuring the performance of talent because it actually posts each player’s performance metrics on the scoreboard for all to see. I’ve helped many firms design HR metrics, but there is no better metric and performance-management approach to follow than professional baseball. It’s also important to realize that top performers love visible metrics because of their intense competitive nature.
3. Prioritizing positions. Rather than assuming that all positions contribute equally to a team or a movie success, this model uses statistics to identify which positions (when filled with top talent) have the highest impact on success. In the NFL, for example, everyone knows that the quarterback is a much more critical position than a punter. Not only are top quarterbacks paid $10 million per year but there are also at least two backups on the payroll.
4. Planning ahead. Even college sports teams assume that talent will eventually leave the organization, so they plan ahead to continually recruit and develop replacements for as much as four years out. One insider even shared with me that one NFL team lists on a white board (for all coaches to see) the players who are currently on other teams they are targeting to “poach” and bring into their organization within the next five years.

As you can see in these four examples, the approach taken under the sports/entertainment model is more advanced and aggressive than 99% of the corporate recruiting models currently in use. It is the competitiveness and the aggressiveness of this model that makes it an ideal one to copy in order to survive in a talent environment that is likely to be at least 50% more competitive and aggressive than what corporate America faces today.

12 Elements of the Sports/Entertainment Talent Model to Adopt

If your corporation decides to shift its talent acquisition and talent management models in the direction of the sports/entertainment model (which shares some elements with the business “value added” and open-market model) here are 12 approaches:

• Global search. Much like the “Champions League” in European football, this model would require corporations to identify, recruit, and retain top talent from literally every country around the world. Rather than shifting a large amount of the work to areas with a lot of talent (like India), this approach would target no more than a handful of top talent from every country.
• Continuous search. Rather than just looking for talent when you have an open position, following the sports/entertainment model, the talent acquisition process would be continuous. Just as college teams begin looking for talent in high school, corporations would also extend their search to pre-identify talent in its development stages whether the talent was in school or working at a competitor.
• Countering your competition. Most current corporate recruiting models are inward focused. Unfortunately, as the talent marketplace of the future becomes highly competitive, corporations will have to learn to do “side-by-side” talent comparisons with their competitors. Firms will have to “mirror” the sports model where teams compare their talent, paying attention to the competitors’ employees.
• Star treatment. As global competition for talent increases, individuals in every industry who realize they are in high demand will begin to consider themselves to be stars. That means that in the future, the entire recruiting and selection process must be tailored to treat top applicants like “stars,” sensitive to candidates’ needs and high expectations. Managers and recruiters with big egos won’t be successful in this environment where the candidate is king.
• Executives as recruiters. In the current corporate recruiting model, recruiters and hiring managers do all the work. However, when you’re recruiting individuals who consider themselves to be stars, you’ll need help from the “big guns” to close the deal. That means that the CEO and key executives will have to step up and begin to play a key operational role in the recruiting of stars, just as they do in sports and entertainment.
• An emphasis on proactive poaching. The best players (those who can make an immediate difference in your team’s performance) are currently playing for one of your competitors, so target 90% of your recruiting efforts toward “poaching away” the very best from other excellent firms (the remaining 10% would come from college hires). This “poach first” strategy requires a highly sophisticated recruiting and closing process, as well as great recruiters. Convincing well-treated individuals to leave a perfectly good job at a quality firm is 10 times harder than recruiting desperate individuals who are currently unhappy or unemployed.
• Brand consciousness. Both movie and sports stars want to work for glamorous directors and sports franchises. If your talent model doesn’t build an employment brand as strong as the Yankees, the Red Sox, Google, or Manchester United, it will have little success with talent who wants to be in the spotlight.
• Relationship recruiting. Because both sports and entertainment stars realize that they have multiple choices in where and when they work, any corporate recruiting process that is built on the sports/entertainment model will emphasize the building of “relationships” with the talent they target. These relationships must be strong because it takes a long time to build up the needed “trust” that is essential in order to get these individuals to even consider your firm.
• Assessment. Following the sports model, corporations will need to adopt more realistic talent assessment processes that go beyond interviews. These assessment approaches might include “tryouts” and problem-solving simulations.
• An emphasis on referrals. When you are recruiting “star” individuals, don’t under-estimate the power of employee referral programs. New stars might convince their colleagues to consider working at your firm, so invest in educating them on how to effectively convince their peers.
• Bidding for talent. Adopting the sports/entertainment model requires senior managers and compensation to realize that a majority of the top talent they are seeking to recruit will have multiple offers. This direct competition will require the development of an effective “talent bidding” process. Currently, most executives philosophically refuse to “bid on talent” but such shortsightedness will guarantee failure in the highly competitive marketplace of the future (Note: this and the following “churn” element are both also part of the foundation of the open market or “eBay type” talent model).
• Constant churn. Once athletes and entertainment stars learn that their careers may only last a few short years, many begin to lose their sense of loyalty to a single organization. In the future talent world, a larger percentage of individuals will also lose their sense of loyalty (some argue that the new generation has already lost it completely). This shift away from any interest in remaining with the same firm for a long period of time will require corporations to embrace “free agency.” When talent begins to consider themselves as free agents, firms will face a continuous “churn” of employees, where talent continually joins and then exits a corporation. The best corporations will take the position that it’s better to have “Tiger Woods” for one year than an average golfer for a lifetime. This means an added emphasis on retention, but corporations will also have to develop workforce plans that provide methods to get the most out of the talent during the relatively short time that you have it. It’ll also be true that in a fast-changing world, employee skills will degrade rapidly. And this will require an increased emphasis on rapidly “releasing” talent that no longer fits the competency needs of the corporation.

Model # 3: The Open Market (or eBay) Talent Model

It is no secret that more and more work inside most organizations is organized as project work, and as a result, the percentage of the labor force that is contingent in nature is growing rapidly.

Today, it is not uncommon for organizations to have a workforce that is 20% contingent, up to 60% in some industries. Add to the contingent worker growth trend the fact that product lifecycles are getting shorter, a global labor shortage is accelerating career growth, and barriers to talent mobility are disappearing, and it becomes clear that the future workforce with be highly variable in nature and aligned to short-term need versus long-term plan.

The basic premise of this talent model is that over the next decade, the forces mentioned above will refine the market for top talent such that competition for top talent will become so intense and visible that firms will essentially have to compete (or bid) in an ?open marketplace” for top talent. Although many firms “informally” bid for talent now (by making counteroffers), the open market model would make the bidding for talent more frequent, less subtle, and more direct.

For those who doubt this possibility, it’s important to look back to the year 1999, when for a short period of time during the “war for talent,” there were instances where teams of top talent had agents and were actually bid on by competing firms. We now know that bidding for things of value has become quite commonplace on popular sites like eBay.

A Closer Look at the Open Marketplace

There are three primary forces that will contribute to the development of an “open marketplace” for talent. First is the changing workforce. Even today, there are many individuals who don’t desire long-term permanent employment at a single corporation, and corporations that routinely admit they don’t need access to certain skill sets long term. Instead, a growing number of workers and organizations prefer working on a contract basis. Contract work allows an individual to essentially “select” their manager, their project, the length of their employment, and their rate of pay.

Second, corporations are attracted to contingent labor because it enables the organization to be significantly more agile and to restructure without incurring significant labor cost.

Third, the Internet and technology makes it possible for the open market “matching” between the needs of potential workers and available work.

When combined, these factors set the foundation for a talent model where individuals frequently come and go as their interests change and as projects begin and end. In essence, an open market for talent that simultaneously suits the needs of both workers and the corporation.

Incidentally, don’t assume that this “open marketplace” will automatically mean a dramatic increase in labor costs, because the attractiveness of the project and the project team are often at least as important as the labor rate paid.

If your corporation chooses to shift its strategy to prepare for this open marketplace, here are key elements to adopt:

• Ideas come from everywhere. Under the traditional employee model, 100% of corporate ideas come from its own employees. As the talent marketplace continues to evolve, it will become more and more possible to obtain a portion of the needed innovations and ideas from “non-employees.” Even today, firms like Google use competitive contests to gather product ideas. Procter & Gamble and IBM are leaders in getting ideas from both customers and partners. We can see this shift occurring quickly with the proven financial viability of websites brokering innovation (mystarbucksidea.com, InnoCentive, NineSigma, yet2.com, and YourEncore.com). The future of recruiting talent will require firms to develop new processes to leverage talent that doesn’t formally work for your firm.
• Project marketing. Some firms are currently developing processes (Whirlpool is a leader here) where they “market” available projects on a website so that external talent, internal talent, and even college student interns can apply or bid to work on short-term projects for monetary or developmental incentives. Working on these projects can also be used to assess “unknown” talent in order to determine whether the firm should convert these individuals to employees. The internal posting of available “part-time” projects can also provide opportunities to current employees that are seeking new challenges, as a way to develop skills in addition to those garnered via their current job.
• Bidding for talent. As the global competition for talent increases, it is highly likely that there will be online virtual marketplaces where you can literally “bid” for talent, either as contractors or as permanent employees (there is a website, NotchUp.com, that allows you to bid online just for the right to interview highly desirable individuals).

Final Thoughts

Whether you agree with my premise that the “future of recruiting” will follow one of the three talent models that I have outlined, it’s hard to make a credible argument against the fact that the recruiting landscape will change dramatically in some direction. Like it or not, the future of corporate recruiting will, without a doubt, be significantly more competitive, more global, more electronic, and more business-like.

Unlike in the past, the rate of change in recruiting will be so fast that if you don’t act in advance, there just won’t be time to catch up. It’s time to think ahead and realize that the upcoming economic downturn will force almost every corporate recruiting function to dramatically change. Now is the time to shift your approach toward one that will make your corporation a dominant player in the “future” of recruiting, so don’t be caught unprepared.

In a recent ERE article I made the case that a tipping point was close at hand for converting recruiting and sourcing into a scalable and systematic business process.

As a judge for ERE’s annual recruiting awards, and someone who has worked with companies around the world, I’m convinced that most recruiting leaders are starting to realize the need for consistent processes, workforce planning, metrics, demonstrated results, a consumer marketing-based approached to sourcing, trained recruiters, and the effective use of technology.

The justification for a tipping point is based on the idea that many companies are now implementing these types of integrated recruiting and hiring systems.

In the article, I suggested that one huge obstacle remained: getting hiring managers onboard. A few readers believed this could never be systemized, and recruiting would forever remain more art than science. This article will demonstrate otherwise.

Here are the typical problems with hiring managers as they relate to the recruiting and hiring process:

• They don’t want to spend time with their recruiting team.
• They often make interviewing mistakes.
• Many are not good at recruiting top performers.
• They over-rely on skills and qualifications before seeing candidates.
• They’re not willing to invest the time in exploratory meetings with passive candidates.
• They won’t prepare for the interview.

There are probably other items that could be added to the list that are equally relevant, but the idea is that unless hiring managers are better managed, end-to-end hiring results won’t improve. The question remains?does it take art on the part of the recruiter to work through these issues, or can science prevail?

My success as a full-time headhunter for 20 years was based on overcoming these identical hiring manager issues. But when the process I used to pull this off is studied, it’s pretty clear there was little art or magic to it; it was all science.

In 90% or more of the cases where I prevailed, despite these exact hiring manager challenges, with hundreds of different managers filling positions from entry-level to executive, the methodology was always the same. When others (hundreds, not a few) used the same methods, they also had similar and successful results. This is all science.

Test This Theory Yourself

I recommend that you try out the ideas described below on your next assignment to see whether you get better results.

First, stop using traditional skills-based job descriptions to attract and qualify candidates. Instead, ask the hiring manager what he’ll be telling the newly hired person what she’ll be doing on the day she starts. The list of tasks and expectations generated by this line of questioning is referred to as a performance profile in Performance-based Hiring lexicon.

An example best illustrates how this works and how it can be systematized throughout a company. About 10 years ago I conducted a VP Marketing search for a high-tech telecommunications company in the Silicon Valley. It was the first of many searches for this company. The CEO was unsure that I was qualified to handle the assignment, but he started the discussion by telling me the person selected had to have 5-10 years direct telecomm experience, a BSEE from a prestigious school, and must have an MBA from an Ivy League school. Then he asked me what experience I had finding this type of person.

I didn’t answer the question. Instead, I asked him to tell me why a top person as described would want this job. He was flustered, but putting a client on the defensive is a good thing to do to gain a slight edge.

Once I had some reasonable big-picture strategy, I then asked the CEO what he’d be telling candidates their primary role would be in achieving these company objectives. It took about 15 minutes to get a reasonable answer. He told me the VP Marketing would be responsible for preparing a five-year product roadmap, taking into account the company’s technical expertise, the evolution of the Internet, and the key competitors, constrained by available financial and technical resources.

I then asked if I could find a top performer who had accomplished something comparable, but didn’t have the Ivy League MBA and the exact background, if he’d a least meet the candidate for an interview. “Of course,” was his response.

As a result of this “aha,” we placed six senior-level executives with this firm over the next two years. In each case we used performance profiles, rather than job descriptions, to define the real job. Eliminating job descriptions is the first step in managing managers, and replacing art with science.

Interviews as a Way to Collect Evidence

The next aspect of better ways to manage managers is to convert the interview into something more than a popularity contest or an assessment of technical or intellectual brilliance. This starts by recognizing the superficiality of adding up a bunch of yes/no votes of interviewers who are unprepared and making narrowly based assessments.

Instead, have interviewers use the interview just to collect evidence, not make a judgment. As part of this, narrow the range of focus of each interviewer from evaluating everything to evaluating just a few things (e.g., technical competency, organizing work, or managing outside teams).

A deeper (rather than wider) focus will naturally increase accuracy. Then for the yes/no decision, don’t add up the votes. Instead, have the entire interviewing team formally share their evidence in a deliberative manner. Since every other important business decision is made this way, this is not too far-fetched an idea. (Here’s an article for more on this type of hiring decision-making approach.)

A short time ago, I had the opportunity to present this evidence-based candidate evaluation idea to a VP HR of a Fortune 1000 company. He thought it wouldn’t fly at his company, since managers wouldn’t support it. I then asked if his company had a formal expense reimbursement procedure and if his managers supported this. He gave me a puzzled look, and responded with an obvious “yeah, what’s your point?”

I then asked a more reasonable question regarding the formality of his company’s capital appropriation request policy and how non-budgeted business expenses get approved. His answer involved using a very formal procedure directed by the CFO.

My question to him, and to you, is obvious:

“If the CFO doesn’t need manager support to implement expense controls, why does the VP HR need their support to implement a policy far more important?the hiring of top talent?”

While support is nice to have, good systems and appropriate controls are sometimes needed to offset inappropriate behavior. You’ll also get the support you need if the rules are easy to use and help managers make better decisions. It just might not be right away.

Managing managers one-on-one is art, but managing them all can be science. It starts by implementing two simple procedures. The first is to eliminate job descriptions for hiring purposes and replace them with a clear definition of what the person taking the job needs to do to be considered successful.

The second is to eliminate the crude process of adding up a bunch of poorly considered yes/no votes and replace it with an evidence-based assessment process. To enforce it, also make managers responsible for the quality of their hiring decisions.

This is not art. It’s just common sense coupled with sound business practices. And if you track your hiring successes and mistakes and see improvements in both, you’ll get all the support you’ve ever wanted.

This latest “D” round of financing brings to $56 million the total amount invested in the company since its founding. Even before the latest round, Jobster’s hometown newspaper, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer , called the company one of the most heavily funded consumer startups in the nation.

The uncharacteristically terse, two-sentence statement said simply that the company had gotten the money and the investors include Ignition Partners, Trinity Ventures, Mayfield Fund and Reed Elsevier Ventures. Nothing was said of the company’s financial position or how it planned to use the money.

In light, however, of the company’s heavy losses it is likely that the $7 million infusion will be used to cover operating expenses. In the four years since its January 2004 founding the company burned through some $46 million, most of it coming from the same group that put up the latest round.

A letter sent to earlier this year to stockholders and those holding stock options, detailed the company’s financial position. The letter said Jobster lost about $11 million in 2007 and had less than $3 million in the bank. It also said it was seeking additional funding.

Since the departure in December of its founder and former CEO Jason Goldberg, Jobster has assumed a low profile. Past funding rounds were accompanied by widely distributed press releases, entries on the company blog and interviews with the CEO. This announcement doesn’t even mention the name of the current CEO, Jeff Seely.

Basically, it takes Yahoo’s search engine and allows you to see into the data on the results link without having to click on the link:

Yahoo has combined “a free, open platform with structured, semantic content from across the Web.” SearchMonkey “gives all Web site owners an opportunity to present more useful information on the Yahoo! Search page as compared to what is presented on other search engines. Site owners will be able to provide all types of additional information about their site directly to Yahoo! Search. So instead of a simple title, abstract and URL, for the first time users will see rich results that incorporate the massive amount of data buried in websites — ratings and reviews, images, deep links, and all kinds of other useful data — directly on the Yahoo! Search results page.”

From a recruitment standpoint, this is an incredible timesaver for clicking through our results page! I asked them to do a sample search using LinkedIn, since LinkedIn had already provided some code for this demo. I know this photo isn’t the greatest quality, but this is what the results can look like. And if you know how to write code, you can actually write code tailored to what you want to see — so for example, using a site:linkedin.com search string, you could write code that would display the industry, title, location, etc. directly on the results page for individual LinkedIn profiles.

Keep in mind this is still in beta so some of the kinks are being worked out, but can you imagine the coolness of using site: searches and getting the information you need right on the results page, as opposed to having to click through every single result? Fantastic!

As early as 7:30 Tuesday morning, I was meeting neat people. I sat at a table for breakfast with Sharon Shafer, a librarian at UCLA. She shared some interesting thoughts on research techniques. Sharon said that she believes a lot of research is being duplicated simply because due diligence is not done and people do not know how to look stuff up these days.

I spend about 20 minutes dorking out with her about research. I also met Sam Lawrence, the CMO for Jive Software (pictured) who had broken his ankle and, using Twitter, gotten a couple of companies to sponsor his wheelchair so that he could attend the conference.

I met Brian Solis of FutureWorks and PR 2.0, and Josh Bernoff of Forrester Research, who gave me a personally autographed advance copy of his new book, Groundswell, which talks about how to succeed in a world transformed by social technologies. I even got to shake Robert Scoble’s hand and introduce myself to him. And then, there were the sessions…how to develop social communities and properly manage them, how companies are leveraging microblogs to reach their target audience in a web 2.0 atmosphere, how to monetize corporate blogging…and what does any of this have to do with recruiting you might say? I think everything!

Web 2.0 is changing the way people interact, and if we choose to not embrace it, we will be left in the dust by those who do. After all, communication is a cornerstone of the recruiting business. While never forgetting the basics, we must progress with technology when it comes to social media and understand its importance in communication today.

With that in mind, I headed down to the exhibit hall and found VisualCV (site; profile) there. For those who don’t know, Visual CV was just today named the multi-media standard by the AESC for its ability to offer greater depth, breadth, and substance than traditional resumes through networking capabilities, online career portfolio management, and social media components. I spoke with Scott Herman who gave me some great information on some of the neat things they’re doing. VisualCV was launched back in February and is still operating in beta, so it’s brand-spanking new.

As of right now, over half their users are from outside the U.S., which is interesting because this was not their target market. Scott seemed to think it had something to do with the capability of adding photos and more personal information to the online resume, a practice that is more widely accepted in Europe and South America than in the U.S.

VisualCV also allows you to have control over what components people can view, shows you who’s viewed your resume and who hasn’t, and is in process of adopting OpenID and easy data portability to be in alignment with many social networks today. They’ve got a great concept, and I’ve got a profile there! I would encourage everyone to check them out.

More to come following day 2!

–Amybeth Hale

As Sullivan points out, sending the best talent you can find to your corporate website to make them fill out the same painful application anyone else coming to the site would fill out is beyond ineffective.

And a new study shows that Sullivan’s philosophy is right on the money.

This latest study by Norwalk, Connecticut-based ExecuNet (site; profile) says executives seem to be a paranoid bunch, not only doubtful that their resumes will land on the desk of the right decision-maker, but also skeptical that the position even exists.

The firm’s 2008 Executive Job Market Intelligence Report on trends affecting the corporate leadership employment market shows that approximately 74% of executives believe their resume probably never reaches the decision maker when submitted electronically through a company website.

And 72% of executives agree or are unsure that most positions listed on online job boards are phony or already filled.

Of course, the survey also shows that nearly 86% of corporate HR executives and 61% of search firms don’t normally post positions with a total compensation of $200,000 and above on public websites.

According to ExecuNet, this is because corporate recruiters lack the time to sift through unsolicited resumes. They turn to their networks or employee referrals for leads, while search consultants also prefer to initiate the outreach rather than dealing with the thousands of resumes they receive online each day.

As ExecuNet notes, there is simply no substitute for an expanded diverse network of connections to compensate for the lack of public job postings at the executive level.

Other Executive Findings

The firm’s 16^th annual survey of 4,349 executives and 718 search firm consultants and HR professionals shows other interesting trends:

• Be prepared for the departure of some of your key executives this year, but don’t expect an improved compensation to keep them. Despite total executive compensation increasing 5.7% in 2007 — and expected to grow another 6.2% in 2008 – just 12% of executives jump ship because of money.
• Executive recruiters expect search assignments to climb 17% in 2008, while corporate recruiters are forecasting a 10% increase in executive-level job opportunities at their companies.
• The industries expected to generate the most executive job growth in 2008 include high-tech, healthcare, business services, pharmaceuticals/biotech, and energy/utilities.
• Approximately 60% of employed executives report they are satisfied with their current jobs; the remaining 40% are bored or crave advancement.
• About 51% of all executive compensation packages negotiated in the past 12 months featured perks, including company cars, club memberships, housing, and favorable loans — up from 38% in 2006.

Are you overwhelmed with the hundreds of new tools, applications, websites, and services that have sprung up over the past few months?

Social networking sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn are all the rage. Some recruiters are charging forward with Twitter and other SMS-type tools. Websites are being revamped with videos, blogs, and simulations.

Recruiters who are not using any of these tools or who are not remaking their websites feel as though they are falling behind. Other recruiters are feeling confused and uncertain over how to effectively decide whether these tools are useful or just a waste of time they don’t have.

As a profession, we are faced with too many tools and very little experience or wisdom in applying them effectively. Recruiters are confused, as are the senior management teams of most organizations, as to which technologies are essential to winning the talent war and which are fads.

Some recruiters rely entirely on Internet search or on job boards. Others are busily creating new interactive websites and writing blogs. Some are reverting back to telephone and face-to-face meetings out of frustration and confusion.

Tools and services are often purchased because the salesperson did an effective job in selling the benefits of their product, or because the recruiter is afraid that they will lose their competitive edge if they don’t have the latest tools. Unfortunately, recruiters rarely have a clear strategy on how to deploy and integrate technology into their recruiting process.

In order to steer technology choices, you need to understand what is happening in the world of recruiting technology, and there has to be an appreciation for the evolutionary nature of all technology.

Four Technology Rules to Implement

Here are the most important technology rules that every prudent recruiter should follow and understand.

1. Recognize that technology evolves faster and faster. Whatever software or Internet application you are using today will most likely have evolved significantly within one year. It may have been upgraded, it may have evolved or merged with some other technology, or it may simply be superceded by a better concept. You always need to understand this when you invest in a technology. Never purchase any technology without agreements and understandings about how and when upgrades and changes will be made. Always be willing to “pull the plug” if a technology seems to be going nowhere or does not meet your needs. Have a backup strategy and don’t rely entirely on any tools or technology until you are certain that it works for you. When you first hear about a new technology or tool, use Google to search the Internet and find out what others are saying about it. Log into forums or consult sites such as Geoff Petersons’ StaffBytes, which is a fantastic listing and commentary on emerging tools and technologies. Use your own networks to seek out in-depth information or just survey your colleagues to see who else might be using the tools or technology.
2. Have a technology strategy. Take a step-by-step approach, perhaps starting with a base-level solution that will allow you to handle administrative tasks and automate the transactional side of your work. The tools that handle this are usually applicant tracking tools, and I consider them to be foundation technology. You might then focus on branding and attraction tools that could include a more interactive website, email campaigns, a blog, and other similar tools. From that, you could move to Internet search and talent pool development using Facebook or LinkedIn. Most medium to large organizations could perhaps implement two of these at the same time, but lay out a project plan and set milestones to track your progress.
3. Look for “out-of-the-box” tools and technologies that expand your capabilities. All early tools copy what is done in some other way. For example, early applicant tracking systems simply scanned in resumes, duplicating paper electronically. These early systems rarely add anything new. Over time, the products evolve and become more aligned to their own unique capabilities. Always seek tools that do more than you can do with existing methods. Think outside the traditional and be open to vendors who offer products that seem to break the established molds. They are probably onto something pretty good. Firms like Itzbig, Checkster, SkillsSurvey, Job Fox, Twitter, Ning, and Standoutjobs all offer innovative solutions that are worth looking into.
4. Create a way to sort or categorize technology. Even though the world of technology can be confusing, most products fit into categories that then help you decide what might be best for you. I fit most of these into one of six categories: Branding or Attraction; Sourcing; Talent Community Development and Relationship Management; Assessment; Administrative; and Onboarding. Branding and attraction includes your career site, email, or other outreach campaigns you do along with videos on YouTube, for example, or a corporate profile on Facebook. Sourcing technologies would include any tools and techniques for finding people on the Internet, such as Google. Tools such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Ning are social networks and are useful both for sourcing candidates and for maintaining relationships with them. Tools such as Checkster and SkillsSurvey help conduct reference checks and assess candidates. By putting the technologies into categories, it becomes much easier to decide how relevant they are to your needs and strategy. If you can’t figure out where a tool fits, ask the vendor and have a discussion that educates you and helps build your ability to make tough decisions.

Technology is an essential part of being a modern recruiter. Most recruiting will revolve around the Internet, social networks, and the related tools that make this work.

We will be communicating with candidates over email, SMS, and IM. We will be assessing them with simulations and other tests, and we will be checking their references virtually.

No one will be untouched by technology, and having a coherent and well-defined approach to adopting new tools and technologies will be important to your happiness, peace of mind, and success.

Millennials are entering the workforce as quickly as boomers are retiring, and they’ve brought with them a set of ideals and skills that differ greatly from those of previous generations. Needless to say, they’re really shaking things up.

This generation, which most experts define as those born in the 1980s and 1990s, has grown up immersed in a technological world where their friends, families, and almost any piece of information are a click away. They are unabashedly self-confident; they believe they deserve respect; and they value work/life balance even more than financial rewards.

As workers, Millennials are more likely than their predecessors to push for flexible work schedules, extra benefits, and frequent promotions, and they’re far less likely to accept the concept of “paying your dues.” At the end of the day, they’re also less loyal to their employers; if Millennials don’t get what they want, they’re not about to stick around and wait patiently.

Millennials present a new dilemma for employers who want to attract and retain good people but don’t want to compromise established company standards.

Companies that do opt to accommodate the “sense of entitlement” that is so common with Millennials may be putting themselves on a slippery slope that can lead to decreased productivity, lower profits, and resentment among staff who worked hard to earn the right to such benefits. On the flip side, those companies that stubbornly stick to tradition run the risk of repelling a generation of uniquely talented workers, many of whom aren’t prepared to settle for a job that’s less than perfect.

If you’re like most of the HR professionals being confronted with this dilemma, your gut reaction is probably to scoff at this generation’s audacity. But the reality is, we can’t do without this workforce, nor would we want to.

The largest generation outside of baby boomers, there are approximately 75 million Millennials in the U.S. alone. Not only are they poised to take on the positions being vacated by retiring boomers, but they possess crucial technological skills and ideas that will drive businesses forward in the 21st century.

In addition, Millennials are known for their exceptional multitasking and team-building abilities, a direct result of the high-tech, interactive manner in which they’ve communicated nearly all their lives.

Finding a Middle Ground

To form successful and productive working relationships, employers and workers should meet on common ground where they understand and appreciate each other’s approach to work. It sounds pretty straightforward, but recruiters and employers can’t exactly enforce behavioral change in a generation that has been largely brought up believing the perfect job awaits them, and if this one doesn’t fulfill there are plenty out there that will.

What HR professionals can do is make an effort to understand where this generation is coming from, and keep an open mind regarding future organizational policies, work/life balance, and benefits packages. They can even confront change head-on and make deliberate decisions that affect and benefit the entire company. More immediately though, companies can avoid the slippery slope altogether by simply hiring the right people.

By taking a more direct approach throughout the interview process, where the interviewer clearly communicates the company’s culture and expectations, and asks questions designed to screen the Millennial candidate’s work ethic and values, both parties will have the opportunity to gauge whether the fit is a good one.

A New Generation of Interview Questions

In service of this more direct interview approach, it’s time rethink the tired old list of interview questions. By modifying traditional questions and incorporating new ones that speak directly to Millennials’ strengths and weaknesses, recruiters and HR professionals will accomplish two things. They’ll be more successful at weeding out applicants whose demands and expectations may not mesh with a company’s culture, and they’ll gain insight into the unique and valuable qualities Millennials can contribute to a company.

Rework traditional questions in a way that elicits honest and enlightening responses. Millennials aren’t as likely as their elder colleagues to have a clear vision of their professional selves in five or 10 years, but that doesn’t mean they won’t have an answer. Rather than asking them what job title they want to have in the future, it might be more telling to determine a candidate’s perceptions of how one gets ahead in your industry, and how quickly.

Try delving deeper:

• After you’re hired, how will you advance from this position to the one just above it? More specifically, what qualities and actions do you believe are necessary to continue moving up in this organization?
• Where do you see yourself in two/five/10 years? Explain how you’ll get there.
• What do you expect to get out of this job?

Incorporate more personal questions that expose a candidate’s personality, work ethic, and personal motivations. How a person approaches life is often indicative of how they’d approach work.

Rephrase typical interview questions to apply to the candidate’s personal life:

• How do you primarily communicate with friends? How often?
• When you have a dilemma to solve, how do you approach it?
• How do you spend your free time? (Do you prefer doing activities solo, with friends, or in groups?)

Ask questions that speak directly to Millennials’ strengths and weaknesses. This generation is used to giving and receiving feedback on everything from online purchases, to blog and message board posts, to quick exchanges via IM and text messaging. Constant interaction is their way of life, and they’ll probably expect it to be their way of work.

Ask straightforward questions that could predict a candidate’s work style:

• When you do an outstanding job, how do you want to be rewarded?
• Describe your ideal feedback scenario (i.e., What format? How often do you want to receive it? Who should provide it?)
• Describe the ideal work/life balance.
• Is the concept of “paying your dues” outdated?

Make a Millennial Match That Works for You

You’ve probably already hired Millennials. Over the next few years, you may even find that they make up most of your and your clients’ staffs. While it’s tempting to dismiss this generation’s unconventional approach to work as an unfortunate side effect of technology or parental coddling, it’s counterproductive. Sure, they’re shaking things up a bit, but who says it can’t be a good thing?

No one can deny the benefit of fresh ideas from a fresh perspective. It’s just important to know that the success of those ideas depends first and foremost on making an employee/company match that makes sense.

When all is said and done, each side still must be open to a working relationship that may not exactly fit past experiences or future expectations, but that can be enjoyable and profitable nonetheless.

When January 1 rolled around, and the first baby boomers became eligible to collect Social Security, it seems that an alarm bell went off to figure out, once and for all, the employment sector over the next five years.

That must be why, according to a study by Research and Markets, entitled Snapshots U.S. Advertising 2008, recruiters will spend $58 billion this year on recruitment advertising across all media, local and national.

While $58 billion can buy a lot of ad space, can it buy quality candidates? Or is it simply being funneled out without much thought behind the workforce that is replacing the boomers? The study points out that nearly half the job seekers who have Internet access are not using online media to look for a job. This is despite the fact that recruiters are currently spending nearly 60% of their budgets on online media.

How about that wake-up call to make you re-think your recruiting strategy? A colossal budget to find talent, yet many still haven’t realized that it probably wouldn’t be that hard to integrate Gen X and Gen Y if companies started realizing these are distinctly different generations, with vastly different wants and desires.

Even more interesting is that it is expected that over the next four years, recruitment spending will increase 25% to a whopping $73 billion in 2012. The beneficiaries will be online media and full-service employment agencies. Online spending will increase 23.5% to a record high of over $11 billion, according to the Research and Markets report.

The study points out that the main losers of recruitment revenue will be large-circulation newspapers, which will see their job related revenues decline by 12% over the next four years.

Video is also expected to get hotter, however, with total ad spending for online video at $522 million in 2007. It’s expected to reach $10 billion by 2012. The study finds that early spending on video ads is going to job- and employer-related video.