When protocol causes prime talent to be lost – that’s BS

When Hiring Managers are not evaluated and educated on how to properly evaluate talent – that BS

When prime talent that could save or drive millions is tossed aside because of a fee which represents 1% of that persons contribution – that’s BS

There are exponentially more loads of BS, than Bulls.

Stop the BS

Good thoughts Keith. Seems like you could be adding to the next Public review to see how much of those thoughts have been considered. Here’s the link to the last draft (May) http://hrstandardsworkspace.shrm.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=6504&wg_abbrev=mamt02

2) When unprofitable, the company institutes executive comp cuts and companywide hour-reduction policies before implementing layoffs. (“Sharing the pain”)

3) Workplace behavior that contributes to a toxic, dysfunctional environment (bullying, manipulative politicking, etc.) is not tolerated regardless of how well the person performs/produces. (aka, a “No A*****s Policy.”)

4) Employees are handsomely rewarded for employee referrals (it’s part of their responsibilities to refer hirable people and get paid for it), and the company gets 40%+ of its hires from ERs.

5) Hiring and personnel policies reflect current best-practices, not the prejudices and whims of the founders/CXOs.

Cheers,

Keith

So much rhetoric in the talent space evolves around individuals who believe they are a good judge of talent. As such, it lends itself to personal positioning on various approaches of finding people and selling opportunities. Rarely does the content of the talent space conversation focus on objective metrics of economic impact from systemic process improvement.

Staffing is a business process with a yield to manage. As Gerry points out, manufacturing gets it and has established ISO as a method of documenting process.
There are three major yields to consider in staffing:
Administrative load
Waste and rework, and
Performance variation

Every manufacturer knows the cost of a finished good. In the business process of staffing, what is the cost of a finished good? By this I mean a proficient performer. Therefore, an important number to know is cost to proficiency. What does it cost to go from sourcing to self-sufficient performance? Cost per hire is the landed cost of raw goods, or a new hire. Cost to proficiency is the total investment for finished goods.

Kudos to the CPH Standards team for engaging, listening, defining and refining. It is a step in the right direction for staffing process improvement.

Write me for a worksheet to consider and calculate cost to proficiency.