I understand this line of thinking. It’s simple, concise, easy to categorize. A “sexy” pitch. In fact, it’s the same line of thinking that leads to the idea that anyone who hangs out with a communist must be a communist sympathizer, or that someone who fires a woman must be a misogynist, or who is accused must be guilty in some way. In short, it’s dead wrong.

What’s wrong about it is it’s incendiary, irresponsible, and extreme. One-sided. And it’s not like I believe the opposite line of thinking to be true either (that all recruiting should be focused on those who are unemployed). Quite the contrary. I have a problem with that version as well. I’ve read a number of articles (such as in Workforce Management Magazine lately, in this recession, that imply (or even overtly state) that passive recruiting is a “shameful practice” and contributes to the distrust of corporate America by the many millions of workers who are seeking employment. Passive recruiting shameful? Again, this reasoning is as misguided as the CEOs above.

“To suggest that passive recruiting in the face of a high unemployment rate is unethical is a misnomer that fails to take into account the bigger picture,” says Dr. Cheryl-Marie Hansberger, vice president of strategic development for Delcan, a global engineering firm. “It is true that most industries are seeing an increase in the number of applicants per position; however, for our company this increase has not equated to larger pools of qualified candidates. Instead this increase creates an additional burden for lean HR teams as we spend more time processing unqualified applicants. The fact of the matter is successful companies use the most cost-effective means to recruit qualified candidates, whether it is a direct hire or a passive candidate, period.”

And this is what I’m not hearing much of in all the chatter out there — the middle ground — where the truth lies.

“Recruiters … want to fill the job perhaps more than anyone,” says Ginny Eagle, director of talent acquisition for T-Mobile. “If the requisition has attracted what appears to be top candidates, we look no further. If not, we source. Sourcing involves multiple activities to find the perfect candidate. Professional networking tools are used, and we often can’t really tell if someone is still employed or not because people are not updating their profiles when they first leave a job. They sometimes wait, so they don’t appear to be unemployed.”

One of the themes that I’ve constantly referred back to is, when it comes to recruiting, one size does not fit all. As mentioned above, great recruiting requires both active and passive strategies and, in short, good, hard work. As with most things, to say that something is all or nothing simply isn’t true. For instance, the idea that active recruiting involves “damaged goods” is simply not always the case. It takes a great HR person to know the difference.

“There is no denying that many share the opinion that the best people don’t get laid off. To me, this is a narrow point of view as situations certainly exist, such as our current economic environment, that put even the best people at risk,” notes Jason Farr, vice president, global talent acquisition, Coca-Cola Enterprises.
“I believe it’s important to not limit ourselves and to be open to all candidates.”

To be sure, there are candidates who have been laid off for performance reasons, and companies do use an economic downturn to mask laying off people for performance issues. In this instance, companies know there are a lot more active candidates in the marketplace and thus, they can replace the individual laid off quicker. As a result, there are certainly individuals with professional red flags in the marketplace, but the successful recruiter will have a balanced view of this.

And there are undoubtedly specific roles whereby the chances are that 90% or more of appropriate candidates will be developed through passive recruiting. For certain roles, in certain professions, there are simply not a lot of candidates, and the best people are employed elsewhere. “While passive recruiting is very costly, it is essential in industries that have large barriers to entry and, as a result, smaller qualified applicant pools,” says Hansberger.

“Those in the healthcare industry know this quite well,” adds Christine de la Paz, human resources director, Aurora Behavioral HealthCare. “We are specific to what we are looking for, and not only through our whim … the requirements are dictated by government bodies and accrediting organizations. After all, our RNs need to have a valid license.”

Thus if you’re a company looking for these types of people, you have to know where they are and be able to convince them to come elsewhere. To not adopt this approach for these key roles would be corporately irresponsible.

But a vital element in all of this is you don’t have to pursue only one strategy. The different approaches do require different skill sets. Active candidate recruiters tend to have a “post and pray” mentality and are very assessment-focused; passive candidate recruiters are skilled at sourcing strategy and research, among other things.

The key is that as recruiters and HR professionals, we have to develop skills and techniques to do both and should not necessarily be single-strategy focused. Some (dare I say many) roles will require both an assessment and sourcing strategy.

Notes Chelle Wingeleth, director-global recruitment services, Research in Motion Ltd, the developer of the BlackBerry mobile device, “It is incumbent upon recruiting professionals to design and pursue strategies to find the best talent quickly. In today’s market it is true that there are more active candidates; however, this does not mean that we can become complacent and rely upon one source. Posting a job so that active candidates may apply is not a silver bullet. What if the right candidate does not apply? A good recruiter will focus on attracting active applicants and, in parallel, search for passive candidates.”

A question bigger than all of this lurks, however: As staffing and recruiting teams have dwindled in companies and the recruiting specialists have left, where do we go to identify candidates?

The answer, as you may have guessed, turns out to be not one place but many places. They include everything from using outsourced providers to developing appropriate sourcing methods in-house (as mentioned above).

Ultimately, according to Wingeleth, “Companies and recruiters are striving to do the right thing. Who among us does not want to see unemployment go down? But, the reality of our situation is this: The national jobless rate is 9.5%. This means that 90.5% of Americans are employed. No line manager or company playing to win in this economy would say they want to ignore 90% of the potential talent. Put another way, who would only want to consider 10% of the possible candidates?”

Thus, as I’ve mentioned previously, if your ultimate goal is to increase your value to your organization, and be the best recruiter possible, you have to stay away from only-one-way-or-another, all-or-nothing mentality. In the end, in this economy, it may get you nothing.

As embarrassed as I was to hear that then, my accusers were right! I had dropped the ball and not gotten back to them. What I had not realized (even though I had experienced the same thing during my own period of being laid off), was that during recessionary times, everything we do as recruiters gets magnified.

As a result, to me, times of difficulty do put us under a microscope in which perceptions are skewed. However, so too do they present great opportunities to build even better relationships with candidates and third party search providers, to sharpen our skills and give ourselves greater tools as recruiters, and to further enable us to be unique professionals who stand out from the pack.

But to begin, let’s be clear: It’s an ugly world out there. Your company may have gone through layoffs and decimated its recruiting department. And now you’re the one that’s left — and you still have to fill requisitions and hire people.

On top of all that, for many roles you need to fill (such as in sales, operations, and general management), it can be harder to attract “in-place” people during difficult times than in good times.

Thus for starters, challenging economic times require a greater focus on candidate management. With so many people looking for work and resumes coming in at a much faster rate, there are simply more candidates to manage. Thus it’s easier for recruiters who are usually very good at this to drop the ball (and for those who usually don’t do so well to begin with, it’s doubly worse). And, as mentioned above, since as a rule people magnify their experience during difficult times, any slip-up will be judged much more harshly during a downturn than when things are good.

But the converse is also true (which is why this is a great opportunity for relationship building): Those with whom you followed up and treated well will never forget how you stood out from the rest of the pack of potential employers who never called them back.

And remember, since the way you act reflects your employer brand, how people are treated during this time makes or breaks your employer brand!

Thus for all candidates who have submitted a resume for a role, an email should immediately be sent as a common courtesy. This can be automated through an applicant tracking system.

However, for those who have come in for an interview but did not get an offer, they should be followed up with personally. Sending an email in this instance is not only bad form; it’s cowardly. Emails are a one-way form of communication that provide no interaction, can be passed onto others and, importantly, don’t allow you to develop a broader relationship with candidates overall.

For these candidates, prioritize which candidates to contact first and then set aside time to make the calls. Block out time at the end of the day, at 5:00. Since it’s later in the day, you may have to leave a message. But if you do so, don’t leave the reason you’re calling on their voice mail (it’s the same as sending an email). Rather leave a message saying simply to call you back. Then once you do get them on the phone, be straightforward and genuine (although I’ll comment in a later column on what to say during that call).

To review, here are some reminders for candidate follow-through:

1. Prioritize which candidates to call first
2. Set aside time to make the calls
3. Don’t send a letter or email
4. If you have to leave a message, don’t say why you’re calling
5. Once you talk to them, be straightforward and genuine
6. Network with them for the future
7. Don’t worry about the legal issues of turning them down in on the phone

Recruiting during this time also forces you to hone and sharpen your skills. For instance, with active candidates, economic downturns require more investigation skills and a greater focus on candidate evaluation. Simply because someone is laid off doesn’t mean they are a bad candidate. However, it does require greater investigation to insure that there aren’t performance issues.

And, as mentioned, “passive” candidates can be harder to recruit than in good times. Actively recruiting someone in a sitting position from a competitor is harder because there has to be a compelling reason for them to take your call. In addition to likely being overwhelmed (since they’re the people doing all the work), passive candidates will be a lot more risk-averse. Thus they will have less patience for your inquiry and will need to know a lot of information up front (this doesn’t just apply to senior executives, but to lower-level employees as well).

For instance, a passive candidate will likely want to know on the first call the risks, rewards, and the reasons they should consider making a move. They will definitely have a “show-me-the-money” attitude. This requires that you talk to your hiring managers ahead of time about a range of issues, including compensation, severance, relocation, change in control and layoffs, and have many “tools” in your toolbox, before making the call. And when you make the call, be legitimately open and empathetic with candidates, and to hear their concerns.

Candidate relocation, in particular, is a hard issue to deal with during this time, but again with every challenge comes the opportunity to think out of the box and have more tools at your disposal for the future.

Companies need to be prepared to pay more than they normally would for relocation. A candidate will typically not want to take a financial hit on their house and will need to “made whole.” Some companies will guarantee a buyout of a house at its appraised value (and some will even offer more than the appraised value). Another option is a company can provide rental assistance for a candidate’s current home (helping them find a renter), while the candidate looks for a buyer, and if they can’t sell it in six months the company will buy it. And there are many variations for how to deal with this issue. The key here is to be open-minded and come up with creative solutions. Work with internal or external relocation experts to come up with options and then educate senior leadership on this issue.

Lastly, these challenging times enable you to deepen and improve your relationships with third-party recruiting partners. Let’s face it: we can’t do everything ourselves. There’s no reason you can’t leverage your relationships with outside recruiters for help in ways you hadn’t before considered. And because they’re hurting too, many outside recruiters will likely be more flexible in partnering with you.

For instance, many search firms will be more open to unbundling their services and perhaps discounting as well. But the key is to reach out to them and figure out a way to work together. And, as with candidates, outside recruiters too will remember which companies reached out to them to try to find a way to work together during these challenging times, and which never returned their call.

Thus these challenging times are, in fact, opportunities for you to build your skills and relationships as a recruiter, which will enable you to continue to stand out from the pack, add value to your organization, and have greater tools at your disposal for when the tide turns and the good times once again roll!

In our communities, we’re constantly coming up with and discussing great ideas about initiating change, but all of that is worthless unless we can execute and implement those ideas. In this new year, change is a real buzzword — but rightly so! Because we have to change and flex every minute of the day, planning for difficult times and good times alike require excellent change management skills. And as someone who has learned some hard lessons over the course of my 25-year career in not knowing how to manage change, I speak from experience.

For instance, several years back, when I was head of staffing for a large, multibillion dollar company, the whole company participated in a global reengineering initiative. In HR, we decided to take advantage of this effort to implement some changes of our own. We decided to combine all of the staffing functions in the separate business units into a centralized, shared-services model. As the leader of the staffing area, I figured that since the whole company was going through change, there was no need to have any additional communication with our clients about our staffing reorganization — after all, it could be considered as simply another element of what we were all going through. Thus it wasn’t until the head of HR of a business unit and my boss were sitting in my office, complaining about my team’s dwindling performance in the wake of this change, that I realized just how important it is to communicate extensively about, and have a comprehensive plan for, implementing change.

It’s not that I didn’t communicate at all about what was happening; it’s that I didn’t “get it” in terms of what was necessary with respect to engaging others and making them “partners” with me in this change. I was subjecting my plan to what we like to call “Death By PowerPoint” — I was going around with my little PowerPoint presentation tucked under my arm, informing everyone as to what was going to happen versus truly engaging and communicating with them.

Though the change was ultimately implemented, the cost was high — people we wanted to keep within our recruiting organization left and some of our customers were alienated.

Thus when I was asked to facilitate a panel at the ERE Expo Spring 2009 this coming April, I could not think of a more important subject in today’s climate of almost constant change. So the question I introduce in this article (and which we will cover more thoroughly in our panel entitled “Managing Change: A Dialogue With Recruiting Leaders on Leading Through Change” in San Diego at the upcoming ERE Expo Spring 2009) is “What are the key elements involved in successfully managing change?”

The first step in this process is to realize that whenever change is involved, there’s always something called “S.A.L.Y.” in the room. SALY stands for “Same As Last Year.” SALY is that urge in all of us (in some stronger than others) to resist change. It’s the urge to say “Let’s stick with what we did last year,” to cling to the familiar, the comfortable. So before anything happens, it’s always important to realize SALY’s in the room.

However, knowing this can help frame how to begin to address implementing change. The other important thing to realize is how people deal with change. My experience is that, though everyone deals with change differently, generally people meet change with the following reaction I call S.A.R.A.H.: Shock, Anger, Resistance, Acceptance, and Help.

So knowing this, what are some guidelines for leading people through change? This topic is so important I decided to reach out to other recruiting leaders for their thoughts. I have asked some really well-spoken, highly experienced people to join me on our upcoming ERE Expo Spring 2009 panel and I have asked them some of their thoughts on change management.

“Not having an effective change management plan is usually the death of projects,” says Rodney Moses, vice president, Global Talent Acquisition, Coca-Cola Enterprises. (CCE is the world’s largest bottler and distributor of Coca-Cola products.) According to Moses, CCE is a constantly changing environment in which they are rolling out new processes on a regular basis. In fact, change is so frequent, they have developed a Global Change Management Program, including a guidebook. But as far as plans go, even that isn’t enough. “For each change”, says Moses, “we have to have a change plan and internal and external change communications plans. Without those plans, not only is it confusing for everyone but it ends up costing the company money.”

So in order to manage change, we have to have at least one, but perhaps several, change management plans. This was the beginning of the mistakes I made in my scenario above. Since I figured our change would be part of the larger change plan, I did not feel the need to create a separate one for us in staffing.

But because change in an area as vital as staffing affects so many, it really can’t be successfully implemented without a plan. An effective change management plan will focus on many levels, the broad as well as the specific, and will include an emphasis on everything from the organization, to your team, to individuals. In fact, the act of putting together the plan will be enormously helpful because it will not only require identifying who the stakeholders are and who will be affected, but it will also require strategizing about how to approach and engage them in the implementation. Importantly, having a plan will enable you to plan for mistakes, which is a vital and valuable part of any new venture. How will a plan give you the opportunity to make mistakes? Because the cornerstone, foundation, and lifeblood of any change-management plan is perhaps the most vital element in the whole change-management scenario: Communication.

“When we were planning to start up a corporate recruiting function, we engaged people from the very beginning”, says Vicki Perry, director, Strategic Staffing, for Avery Dennison Corporation, the world’s leading manufacturer of pressure-sensitive labeling and other retail, office, and packaging products. “By using focus groups, we not only got people involved who were going to be affected and shared our vision and proposed process, but then we listened and prompted them to help us figure out how to really make this work.”

She adds: “Since this was a new concept for everyone, it was critical to engage stakeholders and then communicate, monitor, and adjust our process continuously. It’s a constant process of educating hiring managers, HR partners, and key business leaders and getting feedback. When communicating we try to mix it up and entertain, so people remain interested. During our focus group meetings we used interactive voting devices to keep the audience engaged in answering questions and giving feedback. In our rollout of the new process we made a video showing the recruiting process in action with a touch of humor to keep it fresh. In our monthly written communication we would hide a question related to the recruiting marketplace and give a prize to the first few people who answered it; we would also use a ‘Myth Of The Month’ whereby we debunk the latest ‘myths’ that have surfaced with respect to the new processes. Through the use of hiring manager and candidate surveys, we are constantly monitoring to determine what is or isn’t working properly, and then adjusting accordingly.”

But sometimes, even that level of communication isn’t enough. “You know that old rule of when you pack for a trip, you lay out all your clothes, and then take away half? I think of change management communication as the opposite of that,” says Aziz Chowdhury, VP, Talent Management, for Baker-Hughes Corporation, the global leader in oilfield engineering services to the energy industry. “No matter how much I plan to communicate with respect to change management, I always take that concept and double it.”

“Here’s why this is important”, Chowdhury continued. “Whatever the change is you’re implementing, it’s not about it being a good or the right idea, it’s about bringing everyone along with you. One of the things people in staffing management often don’t understand is that communications is not just about making sure you and your ideas are heard, it’s about making sure everyone is with you. It’s a bit of a paradox: in order to do what you want to do, you need to focus less on that and more on the communication needs of those affected. Because in the end, that will help you get to where you want to go. You need to focus on what your clients and stakeholders need to hear and know so that they’ll arrive at where you want them to be.”

Aziz’s perspective comes from years of talent acquisition experience in both international and domestic environments, but in particular from his current experience of repositioning the role of recruiters at Baker Hughes from those with a more hands-off, removed “sourcers-only” approach to more hands-on, vested, and partnership-oriented recruiters, with a greater ownership stake in the entire hiring process.

Nonetheless, this underscores yet another mistake I made in my scenario above: I was so focused on communicating my change and insuring I was heard, I didn’t focus on the communication needs of my clients and stakeholders.

However, when it comes to managing change, there is nothing more important than communication. And as with a change management plan, constant communication gives you the room to make mistakes.

In summary, here are some guidelines for leading people through change:

1. Prepare for the change before it occurs
2. Provide a clear description of the change and a picture of success
3. Find and remove obstacles before the change occurs
4. Allow adequate time for people to accept the change
5. Involve affected people in planning the change
6. Provide motivation for people to embrace the change
7. Find and use resources and people that support the change
8. Allow the change to be shaped by ongoing feedback
9. Provide clear implementation objectives for all people involved in the change
10. Continually monitor the change and adjust resource levels
11. Reinforce the new behaviors through formal and informal methods
12. View leading others through change as an ongoing process

So please join us for our panel discussion at ERE Expo Spring 2009 where I will lead Rodney, Vicki, and Aziz in further discussion and detail into this topic and provide more specifics on the above. Between now and the Expo, I know a lot of change management challenges will confront you. I welcome your thoughts and questions about managing change (just post in the comments section of this article), and I will look forward to incorporating them in future articles and in our panel discussion at the Expo.

Remember, though there are a thousand great ideas out there, only when you’ve developed a plan, and successfully executed on that plan (and SARAH has met SALY!) will you have developed perhaps the most important skill there is as a Recruiting and Staffing/HR manager and improved your value in your organization. Happy New Year and welcome to the year of change!

It’s coming?the biggest ERE Expo of them all. The 2007 Spring event is officially the largest ERE Expo ever. This, the 12th ERE Expo in the U.S. (14th overall), will have a record number of attendees, exhibitors, and speakers!

I’m excited about that many attendees all gathered in one place, all focused on one thing: improving and enhancing recruiting and talent management.

This is my second time serving as chairman, and while we’re busy putting the finishing touches on the program, I thought it would be great to start a dialogue and share “behind-the-scenes” info and tips to maximize your time.

I know many of you have already registered, some of you will register (you’ll need to grab a room in San Diego fast; they’re in short supply!), and some of you just cannot be with us.

Let me first clue you in a little bit on the conference program and how it’s put together. As the conference chairman, I do much more than serving as your emcee; I have helped to frame the conference program, including coming up with program session ideas and speakers.

For those of you who haven’t met me, I’m actually a working talent acquisition professional. I do write articles periodically for ERE online and in the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership, but I’m working with clients to help improve their internal recruiting and staffing functions, so I don’t have much time to write.

Over the course of my experiences, I have met thousands of people in the trenches of recruiting and talent management, and I have learned from them what they believe are the biggest challenges and opportunities for our profession. This is how we have built our program; we have listened to our past attendees, and have had our heads to the ground to learn what people want to hear and learn.

What we do in recruiting and staffing is not rocket science. It’s fairly simple: its all about relationships. So, much of the conference’s content is built on improving and enhancing your recruiting and staffing processes.

You’ll learn from people who have been in the trenches and have some great stories to tell. When I go to conferences, I don’t want to hear some talking head spouting out why they are so great and all the cool stuff they have done.

I want to hear some real, authentic professionals telling me about what worked, and most importantly, what didn’t work, so I can learn from them.

Pre-Conference Events

If you can come to San Diego a day early, on Tuesday, April 17, ERE will hold several pre-conference workshops.

We have quite a few great sessions, with some ERE regulars such as Lou Adler’s “The Best of Recruiter Boot Camp.” This event is great because you’ll be able to get a solid three-hour taste of Lou’s famous “Recruiter Boot Camp,” which usually takes much longer. If you are a recruiter or sending recruiters to San Diego, this would be a great session for them.

I’m especially excited about the session on Screening and Assessment: The Best Practices and Metrics, presented by my friends and colleagues, Charles Handler and Joe Murphy. These presenters are the top gurus in the field of pre-employment assessment techniques, focused primarily on the tactical “hows and whys” in the world of assessment. I know both of these experts personally, and there’s not a lot of “consultant-speak” and other mumbo-jumbo. You can walk away from this session with an action plan on how to move forward with assessments.

Some other great sessions are planned for the pre-conference events, including a program on workforce planning by Ed Newman of The Newman Group, and a program on re-energizing employee referral programs and strategic referral recruiting by Laura Stoker of AIRS.

I recommend all of the pre-conference sessions, but of course, that’s impossible. So my recommendation is to determine what your needs are and then decide. If you’re a recruiting professional, but not yet a leader of recruiting teams, then the sessions on skill development are very valuable. If you’re a recruiting leader, the sessions on strategy are perhaps more valuable to you.

Tuesday caps off with the Recruiting Excellence Awards reception and dinner. The reception and dinner is the perfect place to network with some of the best recruiting minds in the business.

Most important, it’s not as crowded as the rest of the conference, which officially starts the next day. You can really add to your business card and LinkedIn networks by working the room on Tuesday.

If you’re coming to San Diego to really network with other recruiting and staffing leaders, plan to come on Tuesday.

Conference Sessions

There are so many excellent sessions that have been scheduled for the conference. Here are some highlights:

On Wednesday morning, our opening keynote is Arte Nathan. If you’ve never met Arte, you are in for a treat. Arte is the former chief human resource officer of Wynn Las Vegas and Mirage Resorts.

He is one of the most fascinating people I’ve ever met in the world of recruiting, and you’ll marvel at his humor and style as he walks you through his journey of staffing thousands of hospitality positions and opening casinos around the world. As an expert on taking advantage of technology, you’ll learn from one of the best.

My friend and colleague, Barbara Pizzala, who is the global head of Recruiting for W. L. Gore and Associates, will share her own journey in the really unique world of W. L. Gore. You may not know Gore right off the bat, but if I mentioned GORE-TEX fabric, you may have heard of them.

Gore is a privately held company that has been on the “best workplace” lists as long as they have been published. They also have no traditional titles, no “boss/subordinate” relationships, and the whole place operates as a true team. Barbara has been at Gore for many years and is now trying to globalize the entire recruiting organization. She’s a real practitioner, with both innovative tips and lessons she has learned along the way. Don’t miss this one.

Also on Wednesday, my partner in crime here at Riviera Advisors, John Vlastelica, will give a great working session on “Effectively Managing Your One-on-One Hiring Manager Relationships.” John’s session is very tactical and practical. You’ll walk away with some actual techniques on how to manage your hiring managers more effectively. Again, here’s a perfect example of someone sharing some real ideas that have worked for him in real-life, as well as some that have not worked.

My colleague Rodney Moses from Invitrogen Life Technologies will speak on how to turn your talent acquisition team into a profit center on Wednesday afternoon. Invitrogen’s recruiting team is 100% charged back to the business and their model works. They have much more involvement from the line (because they are 100% invested in recruiting now), and they actually make a profit. If you are a recruiting leader trying to figure out how to do more with your HR budget, this is a great session to get some interesting tips.

I’m also doing a session on Wednesday. I am really excited about it, since it’s a new talk for me. I have been working in this field for more than 20 years, and I can tell you that corporate politics are a big factor for recruiting professionals.

I’ve developed what I call “The Recruiters Guide to Navigating Corporate Politics.” I’ll chat with you about how to manage tricky political issues with HR generalists, hiring managers, your senior leaders, and everyone else. I’m excited to share with you some stories from my own experience on what works, and especially what doesn’t.

On Wednesday afternoon we’ll have an opportunity to work together. Back by popular demand (from last fall’s conference in Florida) is the “Afternoon Brainstorming Session.” You’ll find lots of tables with specific topics that we have heard are important to you (such as improving diversity, technology, hiring manager relationships, metrics, etc.).

You get to select the table topic you want to go to, and then for the next hour, you will work together with your peers to discuss and share best practices and ideas. Every roundtable is facilitated by one of the ERE award winners or another expert. You’ll walk away with not only great ideas, but new contacts.

On day two, the conference continues with a great keynote from one the true stars of the recruiting world, Michael McNeal, Intuit’s vice president of talent strategy and acquisition.

The best part of Michael is that he does not take himself too seriously, and his presentation style is humorous, self-aware, and really smart. You’ll walk away with some great ideas and a huge smile on your face.

Also on day two, we have a featured presentation from the United States Army, Don Bartholomew, a replacement for MG Tom Bostick. If you think you have employer branding issues, think about the Army!

In this presentation, he’ll share some very specific thoughts about how the Army is tackling its recruiting challenges head on. You may not have to hire 105,000 people each year, but I guarantee you can learn from this session.

We have some additional programs on day two that will be very interesting to our attendees, including a session on social networking from ERE regular Kevin Wheeler; a session on customer-focused recruiting from the recruiting team at Lowe’s Companies; an interesting session on the future of applicant tracking systems from ERE’s own Madeline Tarquinio as well as Elaine Orler of The Newman Group; and John Sullivan will talk about building world-class career websites.

I’m excited about the “Ask the Bloggers” panel on Day 2. We’ve assembled a great group of recruiting bloggers to chat with us about what’s working and what’s not working in the world of recruiting blogging. Attendees will get a chance to really engage in a dialogue with this group of experts, and they get to do it in person (and not just online).

Speaking of blogging, we are starting something new for the expo this year: a blog. Speakers, attendees, and exhibitors can communicate with each other before, during, and after the event. Look forward to my part of that blog, too, with some fun and interesting “behind the scenes” stories for you.

Finally, it’s really important to let you know about the Expo hall itself. Some of the best recruiting and talent management suppliers, vendors, and resources will be exhibiting in the Expo hall. The hall is a place to go check out new ideas that you can try inside of your own organization.

It has been a lot of hard work helping to put on these events, but I can tell you, it’s worth it. I personally look forward to meeting with you, and I look forward to keeping in touch with you prior to, during, and after the Expo as well.

It’s a good thing that we can close the doors of our ERExpo to the outside world. We don’t want anyone to know that recruiting is essentially so simple?it’s all about relationships. It’s just a challenge to execute!

See you in San Diego.

As I spent time at these conferences participating in the various sessions, I felt like there was a constant trend in the messages being delivered: The recruiting and staffing function is not working effectively, and we better fix it or else! (We could be outsourced, laid off, someone else could do it better, etc.) If you read all of the articles written about recruiting and staffing on ERE.net and other media, you could also hear that message.

This profession – and it is a profession – sometimes carries a collective burden. But, we as a profession need to be proud of the great things we have achieved. We don’t hear much of that in conferences and in the recruiting media, but I’ve seen it, and there’s a lot to be proud of. I wrote an article for another publication about metrics in HR and recruiting in which I noted that evaluating and analyzing your HR and staffing activities with even the most rudimentary metric-oriented approach can be very useful and have an immediate impact.

I began the article by mentioning that we all know about the value of even basic metrics, but that more often than not, we don’t even do these basics, even though we know they can help. That got me thinking: Why is it that even when we know it’s good for us, we don’t do the basics? Now, I realize that this is a bigger topic than recruiting and HR. For months I put off upgrading my virus protection on my computer, even though it was only a few mouse clicks away and it was only by sheer luck I avoided about four different worms. This is only one of many examples for all of us, and the true answer for my procrastination lies between me, my therapist, and my inner irresponsible child. But when applied to the world of HR/staffing, the question becomes “Why is it we still have people in top HR/staffing roles not doing the most fundamental of things?”

And, with those who are doing them and succeeding and doing even more sophisticated things, why do they keep so quiet about it? Why is it left to others, like consultants like myself, to write these articles? And, why is it that when the top HR/staffing professionals do speak, they often claim the profession is broken? The answers to these questions have their roots in a bigger issue – the issue of taking our profession seriously.

There are many who have been in the profession for a long time who still don’t take themselves and what they do seriously, who don’t believe in their bones that we’re legitimate. Because they don’t take themselves seriously, they don’t put much time into the basics, and it’s certainly easier for them to look at what we do negatively and wax on about how the glass is half-empty. People inside and outside of this line of work have to continually be reminded (and remind themselves) that this is a profession. It’s an end unto itself. And, it deserves to be treated as such. I’m speaking to those both in the profession and outside of it. People within these roles are more often than not some of the biggest offenders. I’ll get to the reasons why later. Outside of the profession, they don’t have to be convinced. In my sphere of knowledge, I know of about 75 heads of staffing and recruiting roles open today in the U.S. alone.

During the downturn when there were cutbacks, people left the role and the profession; now, during this new expansion, the role is so important that companies won’t hire just anyone. Employers want solid, business-oriented professionals in these roles and often times require that they have in-house experience as well (in the past, they used to hire a lot from outside, third-party recruiters, but the bar is higher now). In short, they want good people, but there aren’t a lot out there. I’ll tell you why people who are in these roles don’t take them seriously.

For many who have been in talent acquisition and talent management for years, there are scars and baggage from the era during which they were treated like second-class citizens – stepchildren of the corporate administrative world. It’s hard to let that go. And for people who are new to staffing, this is often a stepping-stone on their way to somewhere else. But as in all endeavors, the beginnings of taking ourselves and this profession seriously lie in executing the basics well. It builds confidence. These basics include how to find, source, and assess the best candidates. And, they include communicating with your clients and measuring their needs and your effectiveness in a basic way, i.e., metrics. You need these to do your job well. Once that’s taken care of, then it’s on to looking down the path and thinking about how to help your organization strategically. Anticipating and being proactive. To look into the future and have a vision always requires risk, and that you go out on a limb. But you limit your exposure by doing your homework and being thoughtful. In order to do this, the end-goal has to be a big one, such as a shift in your organization’s thinking to one that has a really strong brand, a strong employee value proposition, or a real reason for working that’s actually backed up by the experience an employee has on the job.

In my case, when I was the head of staffing at a large, global media company, I took a big risk and went out on a limb to completely change the way we used third-party search firms. I had noticed our use of third-party search firms was completely inconsistent throughout the company. It was driven by cronyism and individual relationships between the hiring managers and recruiters.

One day, I saw a presentation on a preferred-provider relationship in which the staffing group used a consultant to help structure the arrangements. I was reluctant to use a consultant because, after all, wasn’t that my job? But I talked to this guy and realized he knew more than I did. I also realized that the culture shift that I was shooting for was big enough (and so was the cost savings) that I needed help. And if it worked, regardless of whether I used a consultant, we would all look good. I lobbied my boss to spend a substantial amount of money to hire the consultant. I met with some conflict internally, but I was willing to explore it.

The conflict became constructive, but my credibility was at stake. I believed in the idea, and this was the battle I was willing to fight. I had pushed in my entire stack of chips to the dealer. It worked. The consultant was worth every penny because the results were so large. And, the experience was a highlight of my career. I can actually say that for a time, I changed the culture of a company. I stepped up and made my impact along the lines of other senior leaders in the organization. I was tempted to go out and preach my success to the world. But I didn’t because I was too busy, or I secretly harbored fears that, God forbid, the competition would discover, steal, implement, and ultimately take credit for my work. And these are the answers to the second question I often ask myself, which is, “When good things happen in staffing/HR within organizations, why is it left to others, like consultants (i.e., me) to write these articles?” Because we don’t think we’re legitimate, and because we don’t have the confidence to let things go. But I think it’s important to communicate your successes: what you’re doing that’s working. There’s some reticence for this because of the war for talent.

But, articles can’t just be left up to the consultants. Time is a rare commodity, but you, the HR/staffing professionals, are on the front lines, watching and urging innovation at every turn. Communicating what you’re doing can help others. Those in more established administrative roles, such as marketing, share information because there’s a confidence and ease of camaraderie to let things go. But for us, we need to have confidence in our roles and our profession. We need to stop the negativity and the self-flagellation. We aren’t broken, and we are legitimate. Companies and businesses at the end of the day are, and always have been, about people. Any decent leader will tell you that. Thus, we are the keys to the future. We need to believe that, let things go (and know it will help, not hurt us), and have pride in the name of the HR/staffing profession!

Companies now face roles that are difficult to fill, low unemployment, a very competitive recruiting environment, and a growing U.S. economy. They are revisiting the whole idea of hiring recruiters inside the organization. Search firms and recruitment outsourcing firms are also attempting to ramp-up. As a result, I have seen the demand for great recruiting professionals increase significantly. Not only are there numerous postings, ads, and searches underway for recruiting professionals, but during this past conference season at ERE, EMA, HCI, and other functions, recruiters were in solid demand. Companies were actually buying sponsorships, booths, ads, and so on to attract recruiters. I get at least three or four calls a week from search firms asking for referrals.

The problem is that there are just so many good recruiting pros to go around; I cannot keep referring the same people. Some say we’re entering a second “Golden Age” of recruiters. The difference is that organizations are focused on doing it right this time, rather than slapping it together and hiring anyone. They’ll tap into the usual, known sources: other corporate recruiting departments, third-party recruiting vendors, recruiting outsourcers, etc. But we’ll need alternative areas from which we can get great people with the skills necessary to become great recruiters. For starters, we need to know what those skills are. I’m a big believer that if you focus on a core set of skills necessary to do a job, any number of people with varying backgrounds can fill the role (of course, you’ll have to determine if they can fit into your culture). In this instance, whereas the recruiters in the 90s (and even still today) needed great relationship, communication, sourcing, searching, and technology skills, recruiters today need to add skills in project management, enhanced teamwork, and political savviness, among others. Below is my quick-and-dirty list of the some of the core skills necessary in hiring recruiters:

• Communications skills (written and verbal)
• Relationship skills
• Project management abilities
• Ability to be a strategic partner
• Self-starter/takes initiative
• Political savvy
• Computer/technology skills
• Searching, sourcing, other technical skills
• Creativity/innovative thinking

Thus, with this skill-set in hand, we can broaden the horizons of our profession and bring in new blood. But before we look elsewhere, let’s take a moment to look at our own backyard and the issues one might face in recruiting from other staffing environments. Some of these environments include:

• Third-party recruiting vendors (contingency, retained search firms)
• Human resources departments/internal recruiting and staffing teams
• Recruitment outsourcing firms

With respect to these professionals, the most critical issue you can address is what you can do so that a good recruiter would want to leave his or her company to come work for yours. Here are two suggestions:

1. Ensure that the job you’re offering is one that a recruiter gets to recruit. Full life-cycle recruiters really don’t want to deal with “administrivia” ó coordinating candidate travel and interviews, running reports, dealing with applicant tracking issues, etc. All of those things are very important to the process. But they want to recruit. Thus, the more that someone has logistical and administrative support (especially compared to their current role), the more attractive the opportunity to perhaps make a move.
2. Enable the recruiter to deal directly with the end client and be a strategic partner. Whether it’s an in-house or third-party recruiter, invariably she or he had to go through at least one other party (such as an HR generalist) before getting to the client. Enabling the recruiter to work closely with the ultimate client will be catnip to the high-quality staffing professional.

To further the profession, we need to attract and develop the next generation of great recruiters, and bring in people with the skills we need. Here are some other areas that may be attractive:

• Sales and Marketing. Sales and marketing professionals have many of the skills we’ve mentioned above. They’re self-starters with strong relationship and project management skills. They’re not as team-oriented, typically, but the trickier issue is that you’re in a bind with salespeople in the following way: If you recruit from within your own company, you don’t want to take out the best salespeople (also if they’re true salespeople and doing great, they probably won’t want to move). Yet, you don’t want a failed salesperson. However, if anyone on your staff comes from sales, it’s often best to have salespeople recruit other salespeople.
• Operations. Operations people may have many of the skills we seek ó in particular, project management and team- and strategic-orientation skills. But the real advantage to having operations professionals as recruiters is that they typically recruit in their area of expertise. Engineers recruit engineers, and technology experts recruit technology experts. This expertise gives them a built-in credibility with hiring managers.
• Project Management. These would be individuals that could come from purchasing, logistics, or operations planning areas, among other areas. I actually know a company that actively recruits project managers from construction and architecture firms to become recruiters. It was worked immensely well, and this company has nothing to do with construction or architecture. These professionals have great initiative, relationship and, likely, technical skills, and could also come from engineering or design firms, or advertising agencies.
• Management Trainee Programs. Many “academy” companies, such as consumer packaged goods, hospitality, retail, and rental car, among others, have some sort of training program, where they bring in newly-minted college graduates with promises of someday running the world and getting paid handsomely for it. The problem ó or for us, an opportunity ó is that not everyone can be a manager and often, after one or two years (the ideal time to approach someone from this area), a certain number of trainees will have realized they don’t want to be in the industry that they’re in. Perhaps they could fit into our world?
• Professional Service Pros (legal, accounting, management consulting, etc.). It is very natural for someone from one of the service areas mentioned above to make the leap into recruiting. In fact, this is the area from which large search firms draw upon the most. People from these areas understand a service/strategic orientation, have solid communications skills, and are the ultimate project managers.
• Stock Brokers/Real Estate Professionals. These individuals share many, if not most, of the characteristics of salespeople. Thus, if they’re solid performers, compensation issues could be a factor. However, if they have struggled in a competitive market, and the market suddenly cools, they could still have what it takes to be great recruiters. And bringing people like them in-house, especially from the real estate business, would give them the stability they wouldn’t otherwise have.
• Journalists. Journalists are great communicators, have strong sourcing/research skills, and are innovative, self-starters. They also typically have competent interpersonal skills and are great project managers. In addition, compensation would likely be a lure to them. These include freelance and/or staff writers. Several people I have personally hired in my past experience came from simply looking at the masthead of my local weekly business journal, and just introducing myself to the poor researcher who has to call up businesses day in and day out to qualify him for the ubiquitous “book of lists.” These people have been very excited about learning about an opportunity they never considered, and have been successful. (You may need to start them out in the sourcing process, and then later move them into full-cycle recruiting.)
• Technical Education Teachers. Teachers from a community college or business/technical institute ó they even may be part-time or adjunct faculty ó have many of the skills required. What they may lack in business experience, they make up for in substance. Communication, project management, and creativity/innovation skills are all strengths.
• Political Campaign Workers. They are the ultimate project managers, with savvy, great sourcing capabilities and great relationship skills. A natural leap from the volatile (and not the most highly-paid) world of politics.
• College Admissions Professionals. They read a lot about different backgrounds, they meet a lot of people, and they have lots of projects. They’re not as savvy with corporate environments. Thus, technical schools would be ideal.

If you have any ideas, thoughts on alternative pipelines, or sources for people who could be brought into our profession, please feel to post an article review to this article and share your thoughts. Ultimately what’s important is the individual’s underlying skill set. If we don’t start to develop a new generation of recruiting professionals, we’ll really pay the price in the future. If you keep that at the forefront, there are any number of areas from which to draw upon to help expand our industry, foster the next generation of recruiting professionals, and create resources to support this second “Golden Age” for recruiters.

Conversely, who of us hasn’t had that rush of excitement when a candidate unexpectedly turns out to be a winner, surprising us at every turn with their responses, and reaffirming our belief in what we do as recruiters and staffing professionals? Regardless, it’s a setup that’s bound to produce interesting outcomes. I’m not an interviewing guru. I don’t sell my interviewing process in training sessions, books, or other products. The purpose of this is not to produce a best practices approach to interviewing. Rather, as someone who has done a lot of interviews (as a former corporate head of staffing and recruiting, and currently as a staffing and recruitment process optimization consultant), I’m in a position to share the following stories. Maybe you’ll laugh, maybe you’ll cry, maybe you’ll snicker, but maybe, like me, you’ll learn something as well. So consider this our inaugural “Strange but True Interviewing Stories” article. After you’ve read these, send me (jeremy@rivieraadvisors.com) your stories, as well as what you learned from them, so we can begin our collection for future articles.

“The Restaurant”

During my time in staffing for a consumer company, we had a search for a head of marketing. There was a woman who ran marketing for an entire restaurant chain whom my bosses (clients), the operational heads of the company, were particularly keen to recruit. This executive had attracted a lot of buzz because of her recent accomplishments and bold marketing initiatives. After several attempts to contact her, the woman finally agreed to meet with me but would not travel to our city to interview. Knowing how important this was to my internal clients, I flew to her city and interviewed her in one of her local restaurants. The interview seemed to go well and I remember thinking, “My bosses were right. She is solid.” We talked about next steps and I mentioned we would want her fly to our company to meet with my bosses/clients. That’s when the conversation took an interesting turn: “So we’d like to fly you out to meet with some additional executives in our company,” I said. “We’re very interested in proceeding.” “I’d be interested in that,” she replied. “Great!” “I’d be happy to meet with you and your company further,” she continued, “but it would have to only be in one of the local outlets of this restaurant chain.” “Excuse me?” “I said I can only meet you in one of our restaurants in your city.” “Why?” “Because the world is a dirty place,” she said. “There are germs everywhere and I don’t trust cleanliness, food, or service anywhere but in one of our restaurants.” “You can’t be serious,” I said. “I’m completely serious,” she replied. The problem was my bosses had already pre-judged her favorably and were sold on her!

Learning:

When I returned from my trip, I had to take a pretty hard stand with my business leaders. They had convinced themselves that they needed to hire this person before we even called her. Now I had to convince them (even though it was my job to snag her), that she was not going to be a culture fit. It was a tense situation but I stood my ground. Ultimately, they agreed. What I learned was that as a staffing professional and recruiter, taking a stand to protect our company’s business by not hiring someone is as important as trying to snag an elite person.

“The Hotel”

I once worked for a hotel company where we offered candidates the ability to fill out applications that had a short essay about why they wanted to work for the hotel. We had created an open, walk-in interview schedule whereby anyone could submit an application and we would interview anyone who had applied. A guy came in and filled out the application and was very earnest in his desire to work for the company. My colleague interviewed him and he seemed like a congenial, straightforward individual. It was a busy day for us all and we didn’t have time to thoroughly review every application before beginning the interview. During the interview, my colleague turned over the application to the back section, which included the short essay about why they were interested in working for the company. He read the following:

I have spent the last several years as a male escort/prostitute. I have recently turned my life around and “found God.” I am looking for a “real” job, something more stable and with a healthy future. When I was considering all the companies I might want to work for, I immediately thought of this hotel. I have done a substantial amount of business here — for which I hope you will accept my sincerest apologies — and always found it to be an incredibly nice place. It would be an honor to work here.

Learning:

As strange as this was for my colleague and I, we really appreciated the fact that this individual was straightforward with us. Though he didn’t get the job, we were very open and honest with him about why. It underscored the value to me of being open and accepting, yet at the same time being honest about what is appropriate and what isn’t.

“The Interview”

When I was head of staffing for a large entertainment company, we were doing a search for a particularly difficult role in which there was an individual whom we knew we wanted and who was very appropriate for the role. It was nearly impossible to get through to him. We tried to reach him for weeks and finally did. Even then, he was reluctant to talk to us. He had worked for the same company for 15 years and was really not interested in making a move. Nonetheless, we persisted, and begged and pleaded with him to give us an opportunity to talk with him. Finally, he relented and agreed to come in for an interview. He had mentioned at the outset that he had not really had to formally interview at all through much of his career. The interview began typically enough. I asked him questions about his life, professional experience, and so on. Almost from the very beginning, this individual shifted in his seat uncomfortably. Soon he began to sweat. Not perspire, but Albert-Brooks-in-Broadcast-News sweat. In the middle of a response to one of my questions, he popped up, grabbed a folder from my desk and started fanning himself, talking all the time. I asked if he was all right. He said he was fine. We continued our conversation, but his discomfort only increased. It began to make me uncomfortable. Finally, I asked if he wanted to take a break and go to the restroom, which he did. About thirty minutes later, no word from him. Finally, realizing something had gone seriously wrong, I sent someone in to check on him. Apparently, he was a wreck. He had thrown up all over the place and had become overcome with anxiety. We offered to help him any way we could, and set it up so he could excuse himself discreetly through the back door.

Learning 1:

Our problems with this individual began when we tried too hard to develop him as a candidate. If someone is very reluctant at the outset, there are usually reasons for it. It doesn’t serve anyone well to persuade someone to do what they really don’t want to do. We also could have done a better job of pre-screening this individual on the phone.

Learning 2:

When we eventually followed up with this individual, he was very grateful for the way we handled this very awkward situation. We kept in touch and on a separate assignment, he ended up giving us a referral that was very helpful. It reminded me how important it is to treat those we interview with respect and how they do not go away. I can’t tell you how often I’ve bumped into people in my personal life whom I interviewed in the past for a particular role.

“Doggie Bags and My Homey”

There are other stories. I once, for example, was wooing a well-respected recruiter from a competitor and took him to lunch at a casual dining restaurant. During the course of our lunch interview, he proceeded to order a massive lunch. It was enough food for a family of six. That struck me as odd, but I could chalk it up to “I guess he has a big appetite and maybe eats his main meal at lunch.” The problem was, he ate a normal-size meal and carried the bulk of his food out in doggie bags. I couldn’t shake this creeping sense that he had just done his grocery shopping for the week. I once even had an executive-level candidate show up for an interview in my office with a t-shirt that read, “Jesus Is My Homey.” We’ve all had experiences in interviews where people act strangely. It’s part of the joy of this job and the unpredictability of human nature. But when that happens, here’s what to remember:

1. Remember, the interview is a strange setup to begin with.
2. No matter how awkward the situation, always treat people with respect and dignity.
3. In certain types of roles, especially technical ones, star performers can be bad interviewers.
4. Individuals who have been with the same company for a long time may not be as practiced in their interviewing skills.
5. It’s not what the interview subject does ó it’s how you handle it.
6. If someone does something peculiar or odd in an interview, consider it one data point that can be explored further during the referencing process (assuming it’s not too peculiar or odd).

Lastly, be sure to document experiences with strange interview situations so that you can remember these precious moments for your own amusement ó and for this annual article!

The great HR executive will come to love outsourcing, if they don’t already, the way Johnny Cash loved June Carter. Like June’s affect on Johnny, it will free you up to be the great leaders you always knew you could be. Whether it’s using third-party recruiters, contract recruiters, recruitment research, outsourced resume mining, background investigations, travel and logistical providers, relocation companies, or recruitment advertising agencies — let’s face it, we’re moving toward an outsourced world. That’s not a bad thing. It enables you to focus on the core of HR and recruiting: relationships. I can hear you yelling at the computer screen, “What! That’s my value to the company. That’s what I do. If you get rid of that, I’m afraid of how vulnerable that leaves me.”

First of all, you’re wrong. Your value to the company is what you make sure gets done, not what you actually do.

Second, get over it. Outsourcing effectively still requires that you have excellent negotiation, candidate development, and other skills. The core of recruiting ó your ability to build, develop, and maintain great relationships — cannot be outsourced (domestic candidates will never respond to people calling them from overseas). That notwithstanding, you shouldn’t be spending your time doing high volume, lower value work. Others can and should do the resume trolling. And let’s be honest — as HR executives and staffing professionals, we’ve been outsourcing for years. We may not have called it that, but every time you’ve ever used a search firm, you’ve outsourced. Let’s not be afraid of it. Let’s just do it better. And in order to do it better, we need to be great project managers. Project management is what June Carter did to Johnny Cash’s life when it was going to hell. She stepped in, took charge, communicated effectively, set boundaries and expectations, and above all, didn’t feed his self-destructive behavior (how many clients do we know who are candidate addicts?). I define project management as overseeing, leveraging resources toward, and facilitating the completion of a temporary endeavor undertaken to achieve a particular aim.

Now that you’ve awakened from that boring definition, let me tell you what I think project management really is in the world of professional staffing: It’s facilitating and communicating effectively to ensure a project gets done. Thus, I break project management skills/techniques down in terms of internal versus external projects. In both cases, we need to talk about the value of utilizing a contract and “contracting” effectively. Here are some steps to ensure success:

1. Contracting. In recruiting, we’re not in control of the results of our work, so we must contract well. Contracting well is the key to successful project management. Internally, this manifests itself in clarifying with a hiring manager who’s responsible for what in the hiring process. The recruiter plays a key role in this because he/she needs to ask the right questions, understand the answers, and insure that the information gathered is correct.
2. Developing a blueprint/position profile. What’s needed by the staffing professional, for example, is to understand the scope of the position and the deliverables. What’s needed from the hiring manager is an honest description of the role. The ultimate goal is to get a good blueprint in the form of a position specification. The staffing manager will need to write something up and give it to the hiring manager as a reflection of what was said. This becomes easier once you build up a library of position descriptions; at that point, you can cut and paste, which is what many search firms do.
3. Service level agreements. The key is to make sure everyone — you and the hiring manager — knows who’s responsible for what down the line. The issues to be addressed should include: Who will be in charge of scheduling candidates and candidate travel? What will recruiting coordinators do? Who will be their hosts when they arrive? Who will follow up with candidates? Who will follow up with those in the interview loop? When will the hiring manager give feedback? (Prompt feedback is essential.) And more. I have seen some use a service level agreement to clarify these issues. An SLA is an explicit contract which maps everything out formally. Whether or not that works depends upon an organization’s culture. More often, I have seen sending an email of understanding as an effective tool. It’s like an SLA, but it’s usually more comfortable for all participants and less formal. (I have a easy, sample agreement that I would be happy to provide you; if you would like one, please email me.)
4. Working with external providers. The parameters of project management and contracting work similarly with external providers and touch upon many of the same issues. However, because they’re external, it’s even more important that we contract well with them. Many agreements provided by third-party providers don’t explicitly lay out who does what in the relationship. There are many assumptions, and with assumptions come issues. For example, companies assume third-party recruiters check references before an offer is made or that they — the recruiters — will sign off candidates. When they don’t, there’s trouble in Graceland.

If you want things done at a certain time, you need to discuss it with the external provider beforehand and put it in the contract. The key to contracting effectively is the quality of the questions you ask and the things you insist get spelled out (remember, June wouldn’t go with Johnny until she was sure he was off pills!). What you neglect to ask will only hurt you. If candidates are not signed off, they blame the company, not the outside recruiter. If a research firm only provides you with certain services for their hourly rate–because that’s what it provides everyone else ó perhaps there’s a way to pay them differently, based on results. Ask. Finally, here are the four key things you need to ask to establish an effective contracting relationship either internally and externally:

1. What needs to be accomplished?
2. Who is responsible for what?
3. How will success or accomplishment be measured?
4. When will we know the task is completed?

Overall, the things you need to do in order to contract well include asking the right questions in advance, figuring out who’s responsible for what, as well as timing and measurements/metrics. Do that, and you’ll become a great project manager. You’ll be able to use your time better and focus on strategy and relationships. You’ll see that outsourcing can be your savior and it will enable you to walk the line toward becoming a great HR executive and a thought leader of the future.

1. It goes both ways! Remember, always remember, that the networking game goes both ways. If you’re looking for someone to help you build your network, you have to be able to give something up to do that. It could be proactively helping them, but more likely it could be as simple as following up with them on the people to whom they referred you or looking back with them to update them on the people they know. Follow up is the magical seed that sprouts in unexpected ways.
2. Keep your relationship contacts fresh and active. Use a technology tool, such as Outlook or ACT (essential in this day and age), that has a category area where you can detail how you know someone. You can integrate that with your other tools, such as Plaxo, that helps maintain your contact list.
3. Leverage new social networking tools. Social networks like LinkedIn, Spoke, Ryze, and even ERE (remember though that ERE is just a bunch of recruiting folks; make sure you’re networking both with recruiting as well as business leaders) can all help you understand who in your network is connected to others. If you’re just starting, you can begin with people in your own organization.
4. Keep in touch regularly with your key relationships. If not by phone, then touch base by email. Have a tickler file to see how they’re doing regularly.
5. Use birthday reminders. One of the most interesting ways to satisfy #4 above is the use of a tool I once dismissed. Plaxo has a birthday tool where you input the birthdays of everyone you know and they automatically get a birthday email on their special day. It’s a shockingly pleasant thing to get because it’s so personal. I’ve had many people who’ve been wowed by that.
6. Spend time with other recruiters in your network. It doesn’t have to be a formal event, such as your local recruiting association, the Employment Management Association, or of course the ER Expo conferences offered through ERE. While those events are wonderful, you don’t have to wait for them; you can create your own. Form a roundtable!
7. Engage with “them.” Lastly, engage with third-party, outside recruiters (see my recent article about how to leverage third-party recruiters). TPRs are well connected and can add value, but as with everything else, make sure you give for what you get, and you get for what you give.

At the end of the day, all the wonderful technological tools aside, it is all about relationships. And the key to great relationship building, as in most things in life, is to do it before you need it. Having relationships before you need to harvest them will enable you to stay one step ahead, always. In this day and age, that’ll separate you from the rest, build your own personal value, and make you one of best. As always, I appreciate your comments and feedback.

• It forces dialogue between staffing professional and hiring manager before recruiting needs happen.
• It forces skin in the game. There is joint and mutual respect for the costs of recruiting, which causes more engagement and seriousness in the process.

There are also some possible pitfalls to this as well:

• If the company is not used to having an allocation charge-back model for other things, financial accounting could be an issue.
• Management and recruiting teams may not be able to do a good job forecasting needs (but they’ll get better).
• It places the recruiting team in the difficult position of constantly having to sell its services internally (they’ll need solid metrics related to time and quality).
• If you can’t perform at a level the business units expect you to at cost value, businesses will complain about those costs and go elsewhere, depriving you of the ability to maintain your department’s overhead costs (the businesses won’t have a charge back).
• Some companies get into situations where they have to renegotiate their deal every quarter, which is taxing time-wise.

The second allocation-with-a-twist model is a retroactive allocation of costs at the end of the year, based on what happened during the year, except that the allocation is based not on a per-hire basis but as a percentage of the average salary of those you’re recruiting. For instance, if a department hires 100 people at an average salary of $35,000 per year, you could come up with a percentage to charge back ó say 10%. So you would allocate $3,500 per hire back to the business unit. And you could tier the percentage based on the level of the employees hired (the higher the level, the higher the percentage). In this model, because it’s percentage-based, the HR department needs to be careful ó they could end up making money. The last allocation model is a slight hybrid where, at the beginning of the year, you allocate your staffing department’s overhead fixed costs back to the businesses, and then as the year progresses, any specific costs above and beyond the overhead fixed are allocated to the businesses that used them. Bottom line (and, after all, this is all about the bottom line), there are many ways to skin the allocation/charge-back cat. But the important skin here is “skin in the game” for both the staffing organization and the business unit. This is the path toward the Holy Grail for staffing professionals ó creating a high quality, highly effective recruiting function without outsourcing, on a zero-cost basis. Do that, and you’ll be a huge hero, a super hero. The Human Resourcer. And then you’re where you want to be: You can focus on how to improve the performance of the recruiting function, not on how to pay for it.

• It requires close contact with hiring managers to not only assess where the business is going and near and long term (18 months) needs but to identify the roles themselves and their importance.
• Knowing the importance of the roles can help you determine which you want to do yourself and which you want to contract out.

Next, both parties need to work on the respect and mutual trust issue. It’s been my experience that in the history of the fissure that’s formed in this area, HR/staffing professionals have a little bit more to overcome in the eyes of TPRs than vice versa. So I recommend the following:

1. HR/staffing needs to sit with the TPR and reveal what the demand is for third party search work, in order to give him or her a sense for the potential for the partnership. The TPR needs to know they won’t get every search, but this conversation gives them a sense that it is worth their time and effort.
2. Both parties can put together an informal service-level agreement, which lays out generally how each party will work together. This can be done via email.

On the mutual respect and trust issue, both HR/staffing professionals and TPRs need to acknowledge the value that each can bring to a partnership. For HR/staffing, it’s:

• Enhanced access to company decision makers.
• Broad details about the company culture.
• An unbiased viewpoint to pre-sort candidates and prospects.
• The ability to smooth over problems and issues between the TPR and the hiring manager (the HR/Staffing person needs to ensure that if there’s a problem with one TPR, the hiring manager doesn’t ban the whole search firm).
• The ability to speed things along and facilitate the work of a TPR versus being a roadblock (an internal HR/Staffing person can walk documents over to the hiring manager).

For the TPR, it’s:

• Recognizing how HR/staffing can add value.
• Identifying the internal HR/staffing person as an advocate, from whom they can get more business, not less.
• Acknowledging that HR/staffing is the client as much as any hiring manager; they are not separate.
• Letting go of any issues regarding “ownership of candidates.” If you keep in mind the overall goal of a partnership, it doesn’t matter who identified the successful candidate. The overall goal is quality and speed.
• Recognizing that the better you make HR/staffing look internally and the more you help them realize their value, the better you will be looked upon by HR/staffing and the more work they will want to give you!

Building a Better Relationship So here are some specific ways in which partnerships can be formed and things that can be done to foster partnerships between HR/staffing and TPRs:

1. Service level agreements. I mentioned these above and they are a good way to start.
2. An annual recruiter/TPR summit. This is a best practice technique in which you bring all of your trusted recruiting partners together and “open the kimono,” so to speak. You sit and talk with them about company strategy, give them information on your top line demand analysis, etc. TPRs also get a chance to see their competition. But if they know your company strategy and feel like a trusted consultant, they can always be proactively on the lookout for candidates for you. It adds to their feeling like a true strategic partner.
3. Preferred provider relationships. This can be a very effective way to consolidate the best recruiting firms with the positions you will need filled. The best preferred provider arrangements are not just about price, but are also set up to create incentives for quality and results. However, HR/staffing professionals need to be careful of the complacent flip side of these situations; preferred provider relationships can be a crutch to not continuing to renew the TPR relationship pipeline and consider others who can do it better and faster. You should always consider trying new firms. If it’s on contingency, why not?
4. TPRs can provide help to HR/staffing executives in ways other than pure recruiting. For example, say an HR/staffing professional is looking to create a position profile but the position is new, so they’re in search of a template. As a TPR, going out of your way to provide them with one and make their life easier goes a long way towards making the HR/staffing professional feel like they have a trusted partner, not just a search person.
5. HR/staffing professionals need to not place TPRs corporately in the same bucket as purchasing, procurement, or vendor services. In other words, if you strike a deal with a recruitment firm, it shouldn’t go through purchasing all by itself. HR/staffing needs to be engaged. TPRs should be considered partners, not vendors.
6. Both parties need to recognize that there’s value when TPRs call HR/staffing professionals out of the blue. To the HR/Staffing professional, you need to treat this “intrusiveness” as something that works for you. Being dismissive isn’t smart or appropriate, and just getting materials isn’t as helpful as meeting in person. Recognize that a TPR’s world (and yours for that matter) is all about personal relationships. Give them a shot, but set boundaries. TPRs, you need to recognize and respect those boundaries.

Ultimately, the relationship between HR/staffing and third party recruiters can and should be mutually beneficial. If both can recognize the value of a true partnership, both will see their own individual values professionally skyrocket. Then there truly will be love actually, all around. As usual, I appreciate your feedback and comments.

• A recruiter’s main focus is all about getting the job done. Anything that impedes that, including an intrusive HR generalist, must be overcome. (In fact, third-party recruiting firms often train their professionals in strategies for circumventing HR professionals.)
• Often, an HR executive relies on a lot of face-to-face, direct contact with a hiring manager to build trust and rapport. More often than not, this factors into a crucial characteristic of success for them: being considered a line manager’s “go to” person. Similarly, more often than not (and I would argue most of the time), in order for a recruiter to be successful, they also need to have direct access to the hiring manager. This can sometimes be perceived as getting into HR’s “space,” which is why the HR generalist frequently wants to see themselves set up as the client. But if the recruiter is locked out from seeing the hiring manager, this often sets up the search for failure.
• Recruiters often measure their own success and self worth in a company by taking a look around and identifying all the faces they were responsible for bringing into the organization. Recruiters view their own success by the impact they’ve made on the company in this way. As such, they want to be recognized and given credit for this.

So what’s going on here that isn’t being said? Darwinism, that’s what. Survival of the fittest. Or, as Dr. Melfi on The Sopranos (Tony Soprano’s shrink) would say, competition between the HR generalist and staffing professional for who is adding the most value to the company. But here’s the biggest problem, the one that trumps all others: The hiring manager doesn’t care. They just want the job filled and the work done, preferably with as little interruption to them as possible. Ah, problems. How do we begin to resolve them? Well, to start, I believe the most important thing for recruiters and HR generalists to recognize is that their mutual survival depends on the success of this process, and that they each bring unique skills and expertise to contribute to its success. The recruiter needs to recognize that the HR generalist is great at understanding the business and the culture, has insight into management, and most importantly understands the unspoken subtle motivations and drivers of an organization ó without which no one, including the best candidate, can succeed. Conversely, the HR generalist needs to acknowledge that the recruiter is gifted at building bridges between the company and candidates on the outside, attracting quality people, assessing them, stewarding them through the process, and closing candidates. Great, you’re saying, but what can I actually do to deal with these issues? The first thing I recommend is for both parties to acknowledge that they need to be perceived as adding value in the recruiting process. As our trusted Dr. Melfi will tell us, understanding the other party’s needs is often the first step towards better communication. Second, and more practically, I have often seen a small service-level agreement worked out between recruiter and HR that outlines the goals and responsibilities of each and how they work together. Specifically, the service-level agreement can be written or verbal, depending on the culture, and can address the following issues:

• Communication between HR generalist and recruiter during the recruiting process. How involved does the HR professional want to be in assignments? Do they want to be kept in the loop? If so, how often? In what form (email, etc.)? What would be the content?
• Communication between the hiring manager (the client) and the HR generalist or recruiter. How will the HR executive and recruiter communicate the progress of the search to the hiring manager? Who will do it? Will it be done jointly? Once this is clarified, many sticky and often times offending (to one party or the other) situations can be avoided, such as one party trying to take credit for something or another agreeing with the hiring manager to curry favor with him or her.
• The role of the HR generalist in the interview process. Who will make the offer to the successful candidate and “close the deal”? Who will follow up with and turn away unsuccessful candidates? Both parties have to recognize that relationships have been formed in this process ó with both successful and unsuccessful candidates.
• Relationship assessment. Candidate and hiring manager satisfaction surveys can be sent to all constituents involved in the process as a mirror to how the relationship has worked (and the effectiveness of a service-level agreement, if used). Formal surveys can accomplish this, but what’s most important is dialogue between all parties.

As we all know, recruiting and staffing scenarios come in all shapes and sizes. There are times when situations dictate that the hiring manager has one and only one point of contact and that has to be the HR generalist. At other times, that one point of contact is the recruiter and the recruiter only. Regardless of the situation, communication and trust between the recruiter and HR professional will ultimately benefit both. So how do you build trust when the relationship is new and neither party has much of a clue about the other? That’s where something written, along the lines of a service-level agreement, can be very effective. At a minimum, it will enable both parties to present a unified, team approach to the client, again to the benefit of everyone involved. Once that’s in place, both parties can build a pattern of trust over time and safely witness and participate in the “paradox” that leads to ultimate success. The HR division head who called me irritated and panicked in the scenario at the start of this article did eventually try my suggestion (she had the client meet the candidates first, and HR meet them second). Guess what? It worked. She realized that by taking a step back, being involved in a different way, and having less upfront glory, paradoxically she could, and did, have greater success. We all did, and that’s the whole point: When you boil it down, we all work for the same company, and we’re all working toward consistently building HR’s credibility in the company. In the end, we all know that an HR department that’s not credible is the death knell for a business. So that’s why I can’t decide if the relationship between recruiter and HR generalist is like husband and wife or brother and sister. Either way, it’s all in the same family, and as we know from Darwin and Tony Soprano, it’s all about “the survival of the family.” I welcome your feedback and your own experiences with this relationship.