The pie chart below shows the percentages of the 4,000 recruiters surveyed who said that “recruiting is viewed as a strategic priority at my organization.”

Slightly better are the results below showing the percentages of recruiters who said “my organization values the work we do (in recruiting).”

The Roundtable suggests the following be done to reinvigorate recruiting (explored in depth in the December/January Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership):

• Building pipelines of critical skills
• Honing attraction and branding efforts
• Strategic talent planning
• Clarifying recruiting roles
• Training (and continuously developing) the recruiting team
• Maximizing selection efforts while maintaining candidate care
• Enhancing measurement and metrics.

Although “I’m betting that this downturn will become nasty fast,” he says, that doesn’t necessarily mean that a recruiting department that could have too much time on its hands should be axed.

He argues that before recruiting-department pink-slips get printed, companies should:

• Figure out what the chances are that next year they’ll need recruiters who really know their company.
• Then calculate what it’ll cost to hire such recruiters next year if the company has laid off its critical recruiters and needs to start from scratch.
• Lastly, decide whether it might be better off just keeping who they’ve got.

It’s an exercise that could and should be done in another departments on the proverbial chopping block.

• Corporate recruiters have access to tens of thousands of active candidates via job boards and specialized career sites.
• Corporate recruiters have access to information about tens of thousands of inactive candidates via a variety of Web tools ranging from Google to ZoomInfo to LinkedIn.
• Thousands of corporate recruiters have been certified in advanced sourcing techniques from firms like AIRS and the Adler Group.
• ATS and hiring management systems not only house customized resume databases, but they also enable recruitment processes to be streamlined so that recruiters are able to spend less time on operational details and more time delivering value-added services to hiring managers.
• Once the sole resource of search firms, research, and sourcing firms provide rapid candidate generation services to corporate recruiters at affordable prices.

…Why aren’t search firms out of business?

Out of Business? Search is Thriving!

In the face of all of this, the executive search Industry is not only nowhere near close to going under, it’s thriving. (The current economic downturn will temporarily halt this, but overall growth in the search industry has been explosive over the last 10 years.)

Consider this:

• Kennedy Information reports that the global market for executive search services is $6-8 billion annually, and that growth in that industry since 1990 has been “staggering.”
• Korn/Ferry produced record revenues and earnings in Fiscal Year 2008 ($790 million/38%), an increase of just under 50% from 2006.
• The average placement fee at Heidrick & Struggles reached $114,900 in 2007, up from 2003’s average of $81,100. That, coupled with growth in total search assignments, created 2007 revenues that increased 95% from 2003.
• According to ExecuNet, search firm recruiting assignments rose 24% in 2007, and 25% were adding staff at the end of last year.
• Average compensation for a search consultant can range between $200-$600,000+ annually.

That the search industry has been growing may not be surprising, but the speed at which it is skyrocketing is, especially in the face of all the investment made over that same period into internal recruiting functions.

After all, it wasn’t too many years ago that staffing industry pundits were predicting the demise of the search industry, in the same manner that real estate brokers and stock brokers were supposed to disappear, thanks to the power of the Internet and its open access to information. After all, who needs a third party when all of their previously proprietary information is available for free or inexpensively on the Web?

Don’t Shoot the Messenger

There is an old axiom in the search business about competition that goes like this: “Other search firms aren’t our competition — competent internal recruiting functions are.”

When an internal function is competent and able to fill openings effectively, there’s no need to hire external firms. Therefore, as internal competence grows, more and more difficult positions are serviced in-house and fewer (or no) roles require external assistance. As a result, the market for external search shrinks as fewer positions make their way to external firms.

But this is in fact the opposite of what has happened: the demand for external firms has increased exponentially. This phenomenal growth in the search business tell us that search firms do a better job, or at least that they are perceived to do a better job, by the executives who choose to engage them over their own internal recruiting group.

Now before you pummel me with negative commentary, understand that I wish there were another conclusion to draw. But there really isn’t, and facing our shortfalls is the first step toward fixing the problem.

The recruiting service that is perceived to be the most valuable by executives is recruiting the top roles. This is easily proven by looking at the high fees executives are willing to pay for a single hire. The average search fee of $110,000 for one hire is more than most corporate recruiters make in an entire year.

The reason that executives are willing to pay high fees for search services — and worse, to not even consider giving search assignments to many internal functions — is because they perceive the external provider to be a more credible, capable, and more reliable source of talent. Why is this so?

It’s All About the Methods

There are several key differentiators for search firms that clearly distinguish them from the typical internal recruiting function. Although there are more, here are the top five that internal recruiting functions can adapt that will improve their outcomes dramatically. And, these can be integrated into most recruiting functions quickly and easily:

Run the assignment like a project and dictate methods

The first thing that search firms do differently from most corporate functions is to take absolute control of the project. This includes a documented project plan, timelines, and crystal-clear delineations of roles, responsibilities, and mutual deliverables.

It also includes getting the client to agree to follow the search firm’s project methodology, not the client’s. A critical mistake we often see corporate recruiting teams make is asking higher-ranking leaders how they would like to see the project unfold. Expert service providers dictate methods so that they can guarantee the results. Insisting on following the correct methodology is a key step that is too often missed by internal teams.

Force the client to define their hiring requirement in light of market realities

A good search consultant will excel at making sure the hiring requirement is specific, realistic, and actionable in the talent market.

This can be challenging since managers often provide requirements that read more like a wish list rather than a carefully considered formula for success. We have observed internal recruiters accepting assignments that contain so many hiring requirements that they cannot be fulfilled in the market.

Recruiters should take an active role in helping to build the hiring requirement right from the outset. It may be necessary to challenge the hiring manager on unrealistic requirements, too many requirements, or too broad a requirements set.

Secure the proper level of project funding

Why do we fund search firms with high fees, while internal organizations are forced to continually drive down the costs of recruiting to lower levels?

In some ways, internal organizations themselves are to blame because they have positioned their value equation in terms of cost reductions. They brag about reducing cost-per-hire and total recruiting spend. Yet, the reality is that some positions will cost more — and perhaps dramatically more — to fill than the average.

No search firm would accept an assignment for less than the cost of delivery. Internal teams shouldn’t either. To gain approvals for higher levels of funding, make the value of the service crystal clear and avoid focusing on the cost of the service.

Hire top recruiters with deep industry experience/subject-matter expertise

The most clearly visible difference between search firms and internal functions is the level of recruiter working in each.

In the course of our consulting work, we’ve met plenty of excellent internal recruiters. Unfortunately, we have met many more who really aren’t qualified for recruiting roles. Worse, we’ve meet some recruiting leaders who really don’t have much of a background in recruiting.

To really excel at recruiting, internal functions should take a lesson in staffing their recruiting functions with strong, industry-savvy recruiters who possess foundation knowledge in recruiting as a profession. Start by hiring a seasoned recruitment leader who understands talent markets, marketing principles, selling, internal consulting, and knowledge transfer. Select staff members who have been trained in the recruiting industry at some point in their careers and have enjoyed success in contingent/search roles but also understand the realities and limitations of internal recruiting functions.

Continually work a database of industry contacts/potential future hires

This is straight out of Recruiting 101, but let’s face it; search firms do a better job of building and maintaining recruiting networks than internal functions.

Part of the reason, of course, is that fees give them ample funding to do so. But another large part is that they are serious about recruiting for the long haul, and internal organizations are serious about recruiting to fill the open req in front of them.

This difference in focus changes everything about their behavior. When recruiters are pressured to fill today’s openings, they have little time to focus on cultivating tomorrow’s potential hires.

Most companies have plenty of resumes in the ATS/hiring management systems but have not built the capability or the know-how to stay abreast of who’s who and who’s where in the target talent markets critical to their growth. Building a robust database of key talent targets, engaging those targets in meaningful dialogue, and nursing relationships over time will pay big recruiting dividends over the long haul.

If corporate recruiting functions were truly great at recruiting and had the credibility they seek with top executives, then there would be limited need for third-party search firms. Realistically, there will always be a need for competent search firms. But the accelerated growth of this industry over the last 5-10 years indicates that internal functions are failing to deliver the most critical, and arguably the most valuable, recruiting services in a way that puts internal functions on equal footing with our external counterparts.

It’s time we took a hard look at why.

We should all use the pause in the hectic pace of the past few years to begin and frame the future we want when we emerge. And we will emerge. I am not sure when, of course, but within a few years we will be back at the global hiring process with renewed vigor and increased challenges.

The cry we all heard over the past five years has been that there was no time to plan, think, experiment, or implement new methods. Most of us used the methods we were comfortable with but just worked harder, longer, and faster than before. This is the opportunity to figure out how to do things differently.

Be Strategically Bold; Tactically Careful

The first step in dealing with the current situation is to sit down and plan out a 3-5 year strategic plan for the future of your recruiting function. Envision a new tomorrow where you can use the technology, processes, and learnings that have emerged over the past decade. Some of the technologies and tools include such things as social networks, blogs, wikis, and candidate relationship management tools.

The processes that have shown promise include less-restrictive internal mobility practices, real time candidate assessment, virtual job fairs and other virtual recruiting techniques, as well as more authentic candidate engagement using online communication tools.

This strategic planning process should be formal, should involve your team and other employees as well as outside people, if that is acceptable in your organization, and should be designed to force yourself and others to think outside the usual assumptions about talent and recruiting. If you have any budget, it would be wise to engage a facilitator who is experienced in this kind of activity. They can make the process robust and much more valuable.

By formulating strategies that use these tools and practices, you can emerge from our current morass with a roadmap for quickly trumping your competition.

At the same time, you need to act right now with fiscal caution and show your management that you are a responsible manager.

This means finding ways to conserve your budget by lessening the need for contingent labor, perhaps, or by reassessing your current practices and challenge why you do whatever you doing the way you do it. Try to find ways to be more efficient, without spending money. Cut back, but cut back where it will do you some good from a strategic perspective. For example, by reducing staff right now, you can position yourself to implement technology or bring in a person with a different skill set once things recover.

Your job is to balance today with several possible recruiting situations in the future.

Envision a New Workforce

The really best recruiting and talent leaders will sit down with management and have some open discussions about the desired workforce of the future.

Every recession is an opportunity to recalibrate, learn and decide on what skills and competencies are most likely to be needed as we emerge from this recession. I have lived through a few recessions now and one lesson I have learned is that out of each come new needs. As we emerged from the September 11 mini-recession, it was clear that security was the new issue and that we would need people with experience and skills not only in physical security but also in data and financial security. By anticipating these needs, recruiters could have had an edge on any competition.

Once you have even a blurry picture of the skills and competencies you may need, you can begin sourcing for these kinds of candidates and begin to populate a talent community with people whom you are getting to know and who are getting to know you.

Collaborate and Learn

Your third step is to collaborate and learn from your peers and from experts in the field. This is a golden opportunity to attend webinars, which are mostly free, catch up on the blogs you have wanted to read but didn’t have time to, and make a few phone calls to friends, colleagues, and others you may have heard of.

These calls can be partly social and partly learning experiences. Ask what they are experiencing, what they are doing to use this gift of time wisely, and what tools and practices they are considering. I have always found this kind of networking to be one of the best ways to learn about emerging trends and to get a calibration on where others are.

Everything you hear and learn can be used as part of your strategic planning process. You can get these colleagues to demonstrate what they have done and you can even experiment with many of the technologies for free or for a small amount of money. One of the best things about the past five years is how inexpensive software has become. There is really no excuse to not try blogging, wikis, or even social networking tools.

Focus on Candidate Engagement

The final step in your plan for the future is to carefully, authentically, and regularly communicate with all the best candidates you have. Experiment with tools like blogs, email, newsletters, Twitter updates – anything that might engage and stimulate the many potential candidates you should already have in your talent pools.

If you neglect them or just tell them that there are no openings now, you lose a resource that you have spent lots of time and money finding and developing. Better to be honest with them, let them know exactly what your situation is, and keep them updated regularly.

Invite the best to join you in a monthly phone call update (just like your financial people do for the analysts) or hold a quarterly webinar. Anything you do to maintain the connection with your candidates will pay itself back when times get better.

Economies will recover and the emerging world will be different and more challenging than ever. Use this precious resource of extra time wisely and well to frame the future you want.

Problem solved? Not exactly … the conversation turned political and heated up this past week when Amanda Blazo and others recommended using an RPO firm operating in either the Philippines or India. Charles Hillman was left asking, “Why utilize an India based RPO when there are a ton of quality researchers right here in the USA that can do the job.” Jeff Altman responds with a call for patriotism…why aren’t we creating more jobs in the United States? Hope Blaythorne argued that we are in a global economy, and encouraged cooperation with overseas markets. While Josh Letourneau supported Jeff and noted that many of the responses in favor of outsourcing come from outsourcing vendors. According to Josh, “Arguing about whether offshoring is good or bad isn’t going to solve the problem — it’s overall job LOSS that is the issue (which comes in many forms), and I hope we can figure out a solution.”

Where do you stand on this issue? We would love to hear from you…

Unethical Competitors
Who knew recruiting could get so ugly?

Laura Nyp has a competitor who sends her great candidates who “ditch their interviews at the last minute without any warning.” Jill Gilliland, Paul Lipman, and Joseph Ray offer some simple advice that many others echo … stop working with them! Joseph Ray and Pam Claughton recommend doing your homework on both the client and the candidate. The reputation of a client can turn off a candidate before the interview process. Tracy McKenn and Jim Cargill want to know more … Is Laura sure the competitor is sending these candidates? What would be the motivation? How long have they been working together. We would love to hear an update, Laura!

Employer-paid Benefits
Tami Heyden wants to know what potential candidates would look for in a benefits package. What are the pros and cons of employee vs. employer-paid benefits? Peter Raloff’s company offers 80% of employer-paid benefits plus three weeks of vacation time … not too shabby for the D.C. area. However, Scott Robinson and Pam Claughton feel that companies can do better. Scott had a candidate who accepted a job where the employer paid 100%, in addition to country club membership, company cars, and flex time. Hmmm….are they hiring? Pam feels that 100% coverage is a “huge selling point.”

I Am Sensing a Freaking Out
Maureen Sharib is … from people in the industry. Times are tough and Maureen is noticing dramatic cuts in departments. I have been talking to companies that are “going back to basics” and cutting anything that doesn’t fall under recruiting basics (i.e, campus recruiting). Jim Constantine and Karla Baierl warn us of the negative impact of the media. “Keep your head down, deliver great value, and ride it out!” is Jim’s advice to staying afloat. Amanda Blazo would agree with Jim and shares a positive story in the construction industry. Maureen concludes by reminding us that “those recruiters that don’t embrace the fact that we’re in a sales business are gonna have a hard time.”

Monday’s Question of the Day
The discussion last week about keeping recruiting costs down is still hot this week … what’s your strategy?

Do you have problems keeping your internal clients happy? Do you arrive at work first thing in the morning dreading e-mails and phone messages from certain hiring managers? Do you ever have the urge to chase some of your internal clients around the office with a blunt instrument while screaming something like, “More candidates? I’ll give you more candidates you miserable &*%&*,” as they scatter in fear of their lives? Does any of this sound familiar?

If this charming reality is even a part of the story of your recruiting life, you can change that story by adopting a radically innovative mindset and you can do it today. I urge you to consider the following fact: it is not your job to make your internal clients happy. Never was and never will be. You might have thought it was because we were all trained to think that way, but that is not our goal from a business perspective. Our real objective is to present them with two or three qualified candidates who could be hired. End of story. If your internal clients are not happy after that, the problem is theirs, not yours, because you have done your job.

Let’s take a closer look at this concept of “happy.” Consider the following words: “profit, objective, performance, leadership.” The omission of the word “happy” in that group of words is not accidental. That is because those are business-oriented words, whereas “happy” is an emotional state of being. As recruiters, making people happy is not our job. Good, proactive, and effective recruiting is our job. Locating, attracting, and presenting candidates for the positions we are trying to fill is our business, and that is the only business with which we are involved.

Taking it one step further (Sorry I’m on a roll…) Keeping internal clients “happy” is a fool’s errand. Recruiting is difficult enough. Crazy expectations, poor response time, and un-communicated changes in requirements just scratch the surface of the recruiter’s typical day. We roam the halls with this creepy feeling that a good many of our internal clients are not happy. We struggle to do the best we can; we locate and present qualified candidates; yet, we still have this sinking feeling that they are not happy. Forget happy. Just do your job as a recruiter and that will have to be good enough.

With that in mind, let’s see how we can execute on this new way of doing business.

1) Present only candidates who could be hired. In terms of definitions, a hirable candidate is one who has a reasonable chance of accepting an offer if one is tended. For example, do not present candidates, however qualified, if there is no good reason for them to accept the position. Case in point: the comp range on your position is $80,000 and your candidate is earning $79,000 with a raise due in a month. Your commute is 45 minutes and theirs is five minutes; they get four weeks; vacation, you give two. Get the point? You have a candidate who might be qualified but generally speaking, not likely to be hired. All this candidate will do is get a hiring manager excited about someone they can’t have. Honestly, why should they change jobs?

2) Present only qualified candidates. This is a basic, but it bears repeating: never present a candidate who is not qualified. For the more senior recruiters, I know that you can get creative at times and try to present off-label candidates to create an innovative hiring solution, and that is OK. On the other hand, be advised that you really need to know what you are doing to get away with that. You need to have both a good relationship and track record with the hiring manager if you wish to swim in these waters.

3) Understand the position. Once again, a basic that’s worth repeating. Understand all that you need to know before you source your first candidate. You can’t sell what you don’t understand.

4) Understand the candidate. Do interviews that are deep enough to understand not just the candidate’s qualification but what they really want/need in their next position. Take the extra 15 minutes to really know your candidate and you will never be sorry. (See “10 Things Recruiters Should Know About Every Candidate They Interview” for some real depth on this topic.)

5) Never make them wait. Be sure that your internal client never has to wait for you. If you have an action item as it relates to a position, a reference check, a question on their comp, whatever, do it as soon as humanly possible and get back to them with the results. Never, ever, make them wait.

6) Drive the process. You are either a driver or you are a passenger. Be a driver! If the internal client has to contact you to find out what is happening with their position, that is bad. If you contact them to ask what is happening with the candidates you have sent, that is good.

7) Document everything. Phone calls and quick hallway meetings are OK, but getting it in writing is even better. Send a “cc” to yourself on all e-mails and in the event you get verbal instructions, put it in e-mail to the hiring manager to keep it all straight. It is called CYA and yes, it is a sad way to live, but it is one of life’s realities.

8) Worry less about being liked. All of us want to be liked, but recruiters seem to carry it to an extreme. I know because I want to be liked as well as the next person. Do not let your judgment or activities be affected by this malady. There are times you will have to drive hard and make noise to get things done. Better to fill the position and scuff a few egos then fail to fill it and be loved by all. They do not pay us to be loved by all. (Looking for unconditional love? Get a dog.)

I know what you are thinking. Clients need to be happy. No — clients need to have their needs successfully met based upon the parameters established in the beginning of the relationship. If you are a driver, your job is to get them to the airport safely and on time. If you are a recruiter, your job is to present good candidates. “Happy” is an entirely different world whose meaning conjures up images of group hugs and bumper stickers that say “Have You Hugged Your Recruiter Today.” (Creepy huh?)

Personally, I think that internal clients should very happy if you manage to locate two or three candidates who are qualified and could be hired, but that’s just my opinion. All the rest is unnecessary drama; we are not in the drama business either.

While I’m sure we all aspire to have the discipline to implement new things that will ultimately make us better recruiters, it’s easier said than done.

To help with this dilemma, a lot can be learned from our friends at Seattle’s Pike Place Fish market. For those of you that have studied the Fish! Philosophy, you learned that the employees at Pike Place Fish Market created a super satisfying work environment by implementing four key ideas (aka The Four Steps of the Fish! Philosophy):
• Play
• Make their Day
• Be there
• Choose your attitude
While all are very important and excellent steps, incorporating “play” within your work day can dramatically improve implementation of new ideas/tools/techniques and, most importantly, overall improvement.

Let’s face it: playing and contests are more fun than work.

In spirit of recruiting performance improvement, here’s an example of a contest you could implement with your recruitment team to help improve their sourcing and time management skills. While the playful contest outlined below might be a little wordy and a tad cheesy, it could be a lot of fun and drive a huge ROI for the time invested by you and your team.

Recruitment Decathlon

The Recruitment Decathlon is a contest combining 10 recruiting events. Events will be held over the next 90 days and the winners are determined by the combined performance in all events. Performance is judged on a points system outlined below.

Traditionally, the title of “World’s Greatest Recruiter” has been given to the person who wins the decathlon.

• Employee Referrals — Each recruiter picks 25 top performers within the line of business they support. They have two weeks to engage these employees for specific referrals for openings within the organization.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for most qualified referrals.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for regions with most referrals per recruiter.

• Hires from Referrals (maybe break out exempt/non-exempt) — Person who hires the most people from referrals gathered during the Employee Referral contest (see above) by a certain date (say December 15, 2008).
o Gold, Silver, Bronze to the individuals with most hires.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for regions with most hires per recruiter.

• Association Membership Lists — Person who harvests the most qualified association membership lists from/using your Centers of Influence (hiring managers, peers, employees, etc.).
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for regions with most lists per recruiter.

• College Alumni Directories/Passwords — Harvest the most qualified college alumni directories and/or passwords to get online access to the directories from your Centers of Influence.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for regions with most directories/passwords per recruiter.

• Hires from References — Most hires from qualified references from applicants/candidates/new hires.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for regions with most hires per recruiter.

• Most Innovative Sourcing Tactic/Story that leads to a hire — By a certain date (say Nov. 15th), we will accept nominations for most innovative sourcing tactic that leads to a hire.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Region picks up points for having a gold, silver, bronze winner.

• Best ‘Attention Grabber’ email — Winners for best attention grabber email voted/judged by leadership/management team.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Region picks up points for having a gold, silver, bronze winner.

• Best ‘Attention Grabber’ voicemail — Winner for best attention grabber voice mail voted/judged by leadership/management team.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Region picks up points for having a gold, silver, bronze winner.

• Best Perfect Week/Perfect Day Routine - Winners will be awarded for demonstrating their weekly/daily planning process and how it makes them a productive/efficient recruiter.
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Region picks up points for having a gold, silver, bronze winner.

• Best overall success story from participating in this Recruitment Decathlon — Winners will be awarded for sharing their success story (how this decathlon improved performance, customer service, etc.).
o Gold, Silver, Bronze for individual winners.
o Region picks up points for having a gold, silver, bronze winner.

Point System:
Gold = 3 points
Silver = 2 points
Bronze = 1 point

• Individuals will be awarded a Gold, Silver, Bronze metal for each of the 10 contests.
• The individual with the most points will be crowned the winner of the decathlon!
• Each region will receive points for individuals who are awarded gold, silver, and bronze in each event.
• In addition, region will be awarded points for each event as outlined above.
• The region with the most points will be crowned the top region!

But demonstrating the value of recruiting is difficult. The reasons are simple enough — recruiting costs are tangible; the benefits less so. It takes time for new hires to become productive, and their contributions are difficult to measure with any precision. Furthermore, it is impossible to attribute an employee’s performance to the recruiter’s skill at getting the right fit, in the right place and time. Consequently, tying recruiting results to cost is nearly impossible. Few even try. So recruiting managers usually find themselves under pressure to “manage” costs better — which usually means do more with less. Some companies have just given up trying and handed over their recruiting to an RPO vendor.

RPO has its own issues, but one benefit of RPO may just be that recruiting managers begin to understand costs, and how to manage them to their advantage. I don’t mean “manage” as in “limit” (although that’s a very fine thing), I mean structuring costs to maximize flexibility, leverage in-house expertise, and limit cutbacks during down cycles. This is the “manage” they teach in B-school.

Fixed and Variable Costs

The key to managing cost structure begins by distinguishing between fixed and variable costs. Fixed costs are infrastructure costs that are necessary to participate in a business. Once incurred, they are fairly stable. They include things like office rents, recruiter salaries, hardware, and software costs. They are part of the price of entry. Management and organizational theorists have an old saying: structure follows strategy, and strategy is constrained by structure. In English, this means that organizations acquire resources to support their strategy and goals. But once acquired, be it people, buildings, or equipment, it’s hard to change. Your organization’s infrastructure is a fixed cost. It can’t be reduced easily.

Variable costs on the other hand, fluctuate with activity. As activity rises, so do variable costs — things like advertisements, commissions, and travel costs tend to be variable.

CFOs hate fixed costs, and hate increases in fixed costs even more. Most of us can deal with high costs during peak production. But, when activity is low, reducing costs is a struggle. This is because so many of them are fixed, and cutting fixed costs is painful — as anyone who has laid off staff can attest. Unfortunately, layoffs are the fastest way to cut fixed costs. Variable costs, on the other hand, lower themselves during slowdowns, and are infinitely preferable on accounting reports. Not only are layoffs painful, but after laying off core talent, it can be hard to replace them when demand picks up later. Many organizations are slow to ramp up recruiting staff, having been burned earlier. It is much easier if you can keep your core expertise intact. The way to achieve this is to increase variable costs relative to fixed costs. This is done through something called Selective RPO.

Now You See It…Now You Don’t

How does one convert fixed costs to variable costs? The answer comes to us as a variation of Recruitment Process Outsourcing. The initial reviews of RPO indicate that wholesale RPO is risky. Client companies aren’t happy and vendors aren’t profitable. It seems that keeping some expertise in-house (read: recruiters who understand the company) has real value. Didn’t we already know that? Apparently, the market did not. The key is to retain aspects that add higher value, and outsource the simpler, repetitive work. In other words, recognize what you do well and keep those activities in-house, then selectively outsource the other processes.

This Selective RPO allows you to affix costs where you add the highest value, leaving costs for all outsourced processes variable.

As importantly, you leverage valuable recruiting expertise, supporting your talented people with outside vendors to handle repetitive and menial tasks. You’re less likely to cut headcount during a downturn. This combination of managing costs, leveraging expertise, and reducing layoffs is a management trifecta. It is a direct result of carefully structuring fixed and variable costs.

Getting it Right and Wrong

I’ve recently dealt with a company that is making the effort to structure its recruiting costs to maximum advantage. The recruiting organization is small relative to the organizations’ needs. But their processes are well defined and managed. Fed by an external sourcing team, it has reliable and repeatable processes. Because the sourcing team is external, its processes are also modular. This modular structure ensures their recruiters can handle a higher number of requisitions when needed, by outsourcing the (repetitive) sourcing component. And because the relationship with sourcers is ongoing, not transactional, constant feedback flows through the process, allowing a small number of well-qualified candidates to reach hiring managers.

By monitoring individual recruiter workload, the sourcing is turned on or off, ensuring no bottlenecks develop. The organization also requires hiring managers to provide feedback very quickly, and holds them accountable for delays in the interview process. Despite the external nature of the sourcing team, measurement and feedback processes are shared the length of the process in a partnership, rather than in a typical vendor, or transactional relationship. By virtue of strong execution, this recruiting team has managed to convert previously fixed sourcing costs into variable costs.

By contrast, another organization I’ve worked with adopted a similar approach, but without sufficient attention to process. In this case, its brand is very well known — so much so that they rely on it almost exclusively. In an effort to convert fixed costs to variable costs, they too have contracted with outside vendors for sourcing. But they have paid little attention to process.

After months of frustration it became clear that the strength of its brand has enabled it to hire at volume without establishing any regularity in sourcing processes. Feedback is irregular (I’m being kind), and the external sourcers are treated as vendors (read: poorly). Everyone is scrambling to put bodies forth and hoping to get lucky. The outside vendors are servants, not partners, with the expectation that vendors should be grateful for the association. This arrogance has destroyed any likelihood of a partnership, and without decent processes, there are no reliable, repeatable results. The external sourcers, given little feedback, continue to generate large volumes of candidates, clogging the system. Worse yet, they have become fixed costs.

In response, the leadership is trying to bring in a “headhunting mentality,” hiring more outside vendors, throwing more money at the problem. While it is unfortunate, those in charge (at least for now) are so taken with their brand, they are currently incapable of learning. Here, despite an incredibly strong brand, virtually unlimited resources, and one of the best compensation packages in history, costs are rising while results decline. So, even a smart plan to convert fixed costs into variable will fail without attention to execution.

The Take-Away

Managing the ratio between fixed and variable costs is one of the few opportunities a recruiting manager has to demonstrate business acumen. This cost structure lends a number of advantages and becomes even more important when demand cycles are unpredictable. Any process not requiring essential company knowledge that can be removed from fixed costs and converted to a variable cost is a winner.

To ensure success beyond accounting reports, the relationship with outsourced partners needs to be a partnership, not transactional in nature. Feedback must flow freely in order to create reliable, repeatable processes. HR leaders who combine strong processes with this type of fiscal discipline tend to be treated as line managers, with all the right and obligations that go with executive offices.

To compound this situation, we do this in an environment of constant change (shifting priorities, new requisitions, etc.).

If not managed properly, it is easy to lose focus, get de-motivated, and become non-productive.

To avoid this situation, most top sales organizations have a weekly “sales” meeting. Objectives of these meetings include:

• Make sure each salesperson has a focused plan of action for the week.
• Make sure each salesperson’s plan includes an adequate amount of measurable “outbound” activity.
• Set team/individual priorities.
• Discuss any administrative loose ends.

If, for some reason, you are not having a weekly “recruiting” meeting, start now. Based on the challenges outlined above, I can’t think of a logical reason why you wouldn’t.

In our research efforts, we have learned that the best sales organizations not only have meetings, but the salespeople enjoy attending them!

While the clear intent of these meetings is to get focused for a productive week, unfortunately, the majority of companies’ sales meetings are mundane, boring, and unproductive.

Most sales professionals view these meetings as a “necessary evil” to provide management with a status on progress toward their goals.

Indeed, during my 19 years in recruiting, I have attended my fair share of boring, mundane meetings!

To avoid falling into this trap, try the following meeting agenda/format. It provides structure and sets the tone for a productive, positive week:

Meeting particulars:

• Hold this meeting first thing Monday morning starting at 7 or 8 a.m. (depending on company culture, attendee’s personal schedules, etc.)

• Limit the meeting to no more than 15 participants. If you have a larger team, I assume there is some logical way to break the team into groups of 10-15 people based on line of business you support, geography, etc. There is no minimum required. If you have two people on your team — meet. If it is only you, meet with yourself.

• With today’s technology (conferencing, web meetings, video meetings), you can’t use “geography” as an excuse for not getting together.

• Keep the meeting to one hour. To keep the meeting on schedule, remember these tips:

1. The moderator is responsible for keeping the meeting positive and lively, but also on time! Every minute the meeting runs over, the moderator owes $1 (or some other form of motivation).
2. In addition, all late participants must donate $1 for each minute they are late (it is amazing how people become respectful of being on time when you adopt this policy).
3. This money can be used for a teambuilding event, given to charity, etc.

Meeting agenda:

Let’s start the week off right!

• Share a great, positive story from last week/weekend. Stories don’t have to be work-related. Personal, positive stories are the best.

• Business review. Review your current open positions. Discuss status, pending action items, next steps, etc.

• Discuss last week’s achievements. Each week, we recommend each person develop a Perfect Week. This is a list of billable/non-billable activities you would like to get done during the week. These action items can then get scheduled into your Perfect Day routine. At this time, have each person discuss the past week, including:

1. Overall week; how did things go based on what they set out to get done?
2. Top two or three most critical things they accomplished last week.
3. Maybe the two or three things that did not get done last week that will either become this week’s priorities, or, possibly removed from this week’s “to-do” list.

• Biggest frustration(s) last week. Let it out! We all have had weeks when things don’t go the way they were supposed to go. If your frustration is dragging into this week, ask your teammates for solutions to make it better/solve the problem.

• Visualize this week’s “Perfect Week” and post goals in a public location. Discuss the critical things you have to get done (billable/non-billable) to make this week a “Perfect Week.” If possible, have each team member post them in a central location (whiteboard in your office?) so everyone can see. As you go through the week, cross off the activities as they get accomplished. Crossing off tasks on a to-do list feels good and can motivate others around you.

• Visualize your “Perfect Monday.” Discuss the critical activities you have to get done today (Monday) to have a “Perfect Monday.” Being motivated and productive early on Monday can set the tone for the rest of the week.

• Education. Each week, have a person on the team (rotate this duty each week) discuss something we didn’t know about our clients, recruiting, and our industry. Make sure this discussion is no more than five minutes. Providing a “short” handout (don’t pass out War & Peace) people can take away and read is great.

• End with a positive thought (or two or three) for the day.

In order to accomplish these agenda items (on time), everyone must embrace and practice the Milo Frank habits about getting your point across in 30 seconds or less.

Have fun with this process. Each week, have a different person moderate the meeting. This is a chance for us all to come together and get motivated, focused, and ready for the week.

Your thoughts/comments on this subject are welcome. I hope your next weekly meeting is a great one.

If you work for an auto company in Detroit or an airline or a mortgage company, the time to prepare for layoffs has already past. For the rest of us, the time is now to improve your job security.

While recruiting can be a team effort, it is also essential that you take some time to be selfish in order to protect your own career.

Here are 15 concrete steps to improve your job security as a corporate recruiter:

1. Make the business case for the department. Before you start being concerned about your own job, consider building up the reputation of the recruiting department as a major contributor to corporate success. The best approach is to lead a team that builds a strong economic case for the direct dollar impact recruiting has had on business revenue (work with the CFO’s office to make those calculations credible). Help the department demonstrate the catastrophic recovery time required following the last dramatic reduction in the recruiting function. Not only will this effort help limit departmental layoffs, it will also demonstrate to recruiting leadership that you know how to make a strong business case and that you’re doing your part to support the team. Build the case for continued hiring during tough times because of the wealth of talent that is available. Demonstrate to managers the high quality of hires who can be obtained by poaching the very best from firms that have been weakened by the economic downturn.
2. Be recognized externally. If any recruiters are to remain, those who have received external recognition for their excellence traditionally have been much more likely to be retained. External recognition can include winning awards (like ERE, RASBIC, or Optimas) or becoming an officer in professional recruiting associations like EMA. Write articles for the leading recruiting websites (like ERE.net) and the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership. Speaking at local and national recruiting events can also improve your credibility internally as well as your visibility externally at other corporations that might consider hiring you.
3. Focus on growing business units. Most corporations have learned the value of continual hiring in certain key strategic business units even while simultaneously laying off employees in others business units (ask someone in strategic planning to point out the growth areas). Focus on requisitions for these key business units or consider a transfer so that you become the assigned recruiter for one of these growing business units, because this will decrease your chances of being laid off. If you can impress the GM of that business unit by producing some significant recruiting results, they might agree to go to bat for you with your director of recruiting. If you make yourself indispensable, some business leaders might be willing to actually fund your position during down times.

4. Identify the decision-maker. Who would make the layoff decisions within recruiting and HR? Strengthen your relationship with them and make them aware of your successes.
5. Become the “go to” person. Identify critical areas where the recruiting department will need to be strong in the future and become a leader in that area. Proactively make recruiting leadership aware that you are the person who can be counted on to be a project lead (before others) in critical “new” or hot areas of recruiting.
6. Increase your visibility. Identify and become involved with any high-profile projects that are underway at your company (within recruiting, HR, and in the business) and try to take on some type of leadership role on those teams. The more visible you are to management, the more likely it is you’ll be recognized for your contributions to the company. Obviously, becoming valuable to the business and to the broader HR department will improve your chances of survival. If you’re bold, do your own calculations to demonstrate that you have a high ROI to the firm. Also, provide recruiting management with a list of your company’s top performers, innovators, and award-winners that you have recruited.
7. Be a global recruiter. Despite an economic downturn, there will still be recruiting needs somewhere around the globe. If you become an expert in recruiting in one of those geographic areas (or if you show a willingness to transfer to an international office), you can increase your job security.
8. Become future-focused. Forecast for future problems and trends in global recruiting, generational recruiting, CRM, baby boom retirements, employment branding, recruiting technology, and metrics. Incidentally, if you demonstrate your expertise and convince senior management that the recruiting “lull” will only need to last over a short period of time at your firm, you might save both you and your colleague’s jobs.
9. Start a blog or be active in online forums. Writing a periodic blog that covers recruiting and how to get a job at your firm can help your company’s recruiting efforts dramatically. In addition, writing a blog sends a message internally that you are knowledgeable and that you know how to use the Internet. You can use metrics from the blog to demonstrate its popularity. Being active on Internet recruiting forums can increase your visibility both internally and externally. By answering questions and proposing new ideas, you make it easier for your boss to see the breadth and depth of your knowledge.
10. Train recruiters. Individuals who can successfully train new recruiters have an obvious value at firms that will need to hire and train “rookie” recruiters after the downturn.
11. Offer to go on a contract basis. Sometimes volunteering to work on a contract basis will provide you with income during a time when your organization is unwilling to invest in “permanent” recruiters.
12. Sales is an option. Great recruiters are, by definition, great salespeople. During down economic times, great salespeople are still in demand. As a result, consider transferring to a sales job until recruiting jobs return within the firm.
13. Transfer into HR. Unfortunately, great recruiters don’t always “fit” within the less-aggressive HR department. But if you’re looking for security, it’s an option to consider until recruiting returns. Avoid OD and training because they are often cut dramatically during corporate downsizing.
14. Become an expert. Make everyone aware that you are an expert in critical areas of recruiting that are unlikely to be totally eliminated (even after the recruiting department is decimated). Some of those areas of expertise that are likely to be more secure include employment branding, employee referrals, technology, metrics, social networking, and internal movement, among others.
15. Use budgets to stay current. Before the recruiting budget gets frozen or cut, take advantage of any available funds to upgrade your skills and employability through recruiter training (i.e., AIRS), seminars, and conferences.

Increase Opportunities

Although risky, here are some steps if you decide to leave early:

• Target growth firms. Identify the firms in your industry or region that are likely to continue growing, in spite of any economic downturn. Benchmark with them and build relationships with recruiting management there to increase your options.
• Build your networks. Great recruiters are experts in networking and now is the right time to utilize your networks to help judge your future employability.
• Target customers and competitors. If your firm’s customers and competitors see the excellence of your work, they are more likely to consider picking you up after a layoff.
• Think consulting. If your firm allows it, do some external consulting (even for free) in order to improve your skills in case you later want to become an independent consultant.
• Consider third-party recruiting firms. This only works if you’re really aggressive, but building relationships with the vendors that your firm currently works with might increase your options.
• Consider relocation. Even during severe downturns, there is intense recruiting going on somewhere around the world. Because most international firms realize that U.S. recruiting expertise is some of the best, your chances are good, if you are willing to relocate and you have strong language skills.
• Consider a little vacation. The war for talent has been a real battle and any recruiter worth his or her salt has earned a little vacation! If you saved your money, you can wait out the recession until recruiting returns.
• Post your résumé. It’s often a good idea to test the market before layoffs get out of hand. Use sources and methods that can be successfully hidden from your current employer. If you’re risk-adverse, at least talk to some laid-off recruiters with similar expertise to get some idea of what the market is like.

Early Warning Signs

Don’t be naive or caught blind-sided. Now is the time to begin assessing the risk of potential layoffs and to determine “where you stand” in the potential layoff order.

Some possible action steps include:

• Work with finance, budgeting, and strategic planning types within your company in order to determine when and how severe the budget cuts may be. Examine previous down cycles to see what indicators were accurate “predictors” in the past. Review your own firm’s financials, 10Ks, stock price growth, sales and production forecasts, and external analyst reports to assess your firm’s stability.
• Look for early warning signs of turmoil like merger activity, scandals, pay freezes, promotion freezes, travel freezes, and purchasing freezes for nonessential items. Also view the exit of senior managers and major players as an early warning sign. Use your network within HR to see if anyone is exploring RPO outsourcing options. Be especially cognizant of any activity involving “WARN” notifications (Government mandated layoff notices), or soliciting outplacement vendors. Obviously, major cuts in requisitions or actual hiring freezes must be looked at as a possible “beginning of the end.” Finally, look at similar firms in your industry, because they might be early indicators of what is likely to happen at your firm.
• Look at your own awards, recognition, seniority, performance appraisal, customer service ratings among managers, and forced-ranking scores to estimate your own survivability. If you’re really bold, sit down with your recruiting leadership and ask what you can do to assess your position and then to improve it.

Final Thoughts

Unfortunately, I’ve known hundreds of recruiters who were forced to abandon recruiting permanently because they were either “naïve” or they waited too long to be proactive in building their job security and employability.

Like it or not, recruiter layoffs are coming. If you love recruiting as I do, take steps now to ensure that you have a long career (without interruptions) in this exciting field.

So much emphasis has been placed on prospecting or sourcing potential candidates that recruiters are not taught the basics of the sales process that follows the sourcing function. Having listened to thousands of third-party and corporate recruiters over the past 15 years, my sense is that less than 10% of recruiters understand basic sales principles.

Although the terminology may differ, the following are the critical steps to every successful sales professional or recruiting professional.

1. Developing the Relationship: This is the time that the warming-up events occur before the serious selling begins. This includes how you introduce yourself and how you begin the conversation. Candidates have stated that it’s during the first two minutes of the call that they form crucial initial impressions that influence the rest of the recruiting process.

2. Creating/Identifying the Need: Every sale involves identifying a need that the candidate is often unaware of by asking questions. This is much more than a simple collection of data. Identifying or creating the need is the most important of all selling and recruiting skills. Recruiters who are the most effective during this investigative stage are most likely to be the highest performers. Recruiters with poor investigative skills generally create candidates who ultimately do not accept the position once offered.

3. Preventing/Overcoming Objections: Although objections are inevitable in any sales process, the key for successful sales professionals/recruiters is actually preventing objections. By asking the right types of questions in step 2, many objections that would have arisen in the process are addressed before the candidate has an opportunity to bring them forth. Keep in mind that some objections are inevitable, that they are often training responses, and that most are emotional and not practical.

4. Filling the Need/Providing Benefits: Identifying the need is considered the most crucial skill in sales or recruiting; filling the need is the second-most critical step to ensuring success. Often recruiters and sales professionals alike pay little attention to step 2 and focus solely on step 4. Like many sales professionals, recruiters often focus on what is commonly known in sales language as their “product knowledge.” They have an in-depth understanding of the organization they are recruiting for, they understand every detail of the position and its function, and they completely understand the requirements of the role. Armed with all of this product knowledge, these untrained recruiters contact potential candidates and attempt to “tell” them about every benefit of the position and company they represent, never addressing the real needs of the candidate. This is a common mistake that is made by most sales professionals and is illustrated further in this article.

5. Advance/Close the Sale: In recruiting and sales, advancing the sale is the final objective throughout every step of the process. By filling the need in Step 4, you are in a position to advance the sale to the next step. In recruiting, closing is most commonly compared to presenting the offer and gaining acceptance from the candidate. At this stage recruiters often focus on the practical aspects of the offer being made: compensation, benefits, perks etc. Effective recruiters and sales professionals alike understand the importance of re-emphasizing the emotional drivers identified in Step 2 of the sales process prior to presenting the practical aspects of the solution.

Although these 5 steps are critical to the success of every recruiter, most focus and are trained only on steps 1, 4, and 5, skipping the most important step: Identifying the Need.

Recruiters like to tell about the great position, company, and opportunity that they currently have without having asked any questions to identify the needs of the potential candidate. This “telling” versus “selling” approach continues to be prevalent among the majority of recruiting organizations, minimizing the benefits of sourcing tools, branding, and recruiting technology available today.

The profile of today’s recruiter must also change. An effective recruiter should be seen as a sales professional who exemplifies the ability to develop candidate relationships, identify candidate needs, overcome or prevent objections, fill the candidate’s needs, and advance the sales process. Recruiters need to be given the appropriate training to move from “telling” about their opportunity to “selling” their opportunity.

There is no formal body in recruiting that “codifies” the established practices. In this article, I am attempting to help resolve that problem by compiling a list (from my 35-plus years of experience in the field) that can serve as a foundation for your actions.

Of course, principles are guidelines to point you in the right direction. Remember to vary your direction depending on your business situation and global location.

20 Principles of Recruiting and Talent Management

The following is a list of 20 principles, laws, or guidelines to help you design and implement effective recruiting strategies and approaches:

1. A well-defined strategy. The foundation of any recruiting effort is a clearly defined and communicated strategy that illustrates the brand message, target candidates, primary sources, and most-effective closing approaches (the who, what, when, and how). Poorly defined or communicated strategy elements results in wasted resources and weak hires. In addition, the best strategies have the capability of “shifting” as the economy and the demand for candidates change.
2. Pipeline approach. The most effective recruiting approach is to build a steady stream of applicants (a pipeline). In order to build a continuous “talent pipeline,” use a “pre-need” approach that includes workforce planning, branding, continuous sourcing, and onboarding.
3. Competitive. The most effective recruiting approaches are compared against and are clearly superior to those of a firm’s talent competitors. Because competitors will quickly copy your most effective approaches, a continuous side-by-side assessment of “yours versus theirs” is necessary. A sub-principle applies to candidates: because the very best are always in high demand, if you don’t have to literally “fight” for a candidate, in most cases, you do not have the best candidate in the field.
4. Employment branding. The approach with the highest impact and the only long-term recruiting strategy is employment branding, the process of building your external image as an excellent place to work. By proactively making it easy for potential applicants to read, hear, or see the factors that make working at your firm exciting, you can dramatically increase the number and quality of your applicants over a long period.
5. Global. For jobs that require top talent, the process must have a global recruiting capability. This is because the very best talent is unlikely to live within commuting distance of your job.
6. Target employed “non-lookers.” The best recruiting processes are designed to identify and successfully hire currently employed top performers. This means that the process needs the capability of identifying and convincing employed individuals who work at your competitors and may not be actively looking for a position. Unfortunately, most corporate recruiting approaches are designed to attract “active” candidates.
7. Speed. Making fast hiring decisions is essential whenever a candidate in high demand decides to make a job switch. Top candidates must be hired using “their” decision timetable. Research shows that top candidates are off the market in less than half of the normal corporate time to fill.
8. Sourcing is critical. If you don’t utilize sources that attract a high percentage of top performers, it is unlikely you will make a quality hire. After employment branding, effective sourcing is the most critical element of the recruiting process. Generally, the most effective source is employee referrals. Other effective but under-used sources include recruiting at professional events and contests. Using ineffective sources means that you must spend inordinate amounts of time and money on candidate screening in order to avoid a weak hire. The source that is used must be shift, depending on the type of candidate required for that position. Unfortunately, many recruiters use the same exact sourcing scheme for every job.
9. Data-based decisions. Base decisions on sources, screening tools, and which individual to hire on facts and data, not emotion or even common practices. Making decisions based on objective data helps eliminate biases and causes the recruiting process to produce more consistent, reliable, and high-quality results. It’s also true that in a fast-changing world, “what works” changes quickly so recruiting practices become obsolete quickly. Unfortunately, rather than being a small part of recruiting decisions, emotions and “it’s the way we’ve always done it” tend to dominate corporate decision-making.
10. Build a recruiting culture. The most effective approaches build a corporate-wide “cultural of recruiting” where every manager and employee is a recruiter. Because of their continuous contact and interaction with outside talent, everyone must play an important supplemental role in identifying talent and in spreading the employment brand. The most effective recruiting strategies convince employees to be 24/7 talent scouts, making every employee a recruiter.
11. A candidate-centric approach. Focus the process on the candidate’s needs, their job selection criteria, and the candidate experience. A significant part of recruiting is “selling” the candidate on applying for and accepting the job. At least in part, recruiting must follow the customer relationship management (CRM) and the sales and marketing models. Often, the number-one reason why candidates reject job offers is the way that they were treated during the hiring process. It’s also important to note that candidates may be current or future customers, so treating them poorly can directly impact future revenue.
12. Prioritize jobs and targets. Effective recruiting processes maximize resource utilization by identifying and focusing on the positions with the highest business impact. That generally means revenue-producing and revenue-impact jobs, as well as jobs in high margin and rapid growth business units. The process should also target high-impact individuals known as top performers, innovators, and gamechangers.
13. Managers are the delivery system. Although corporate recruiting designs the process, managers “deliver” and execute a significant part of that process. As a result, hiring managers must understand its elements and support its precise execution. You must effectively demonstrate to individual hiring managers that they will suffer whenever a bad or “butts in chairs” hire is made. Therefore, recruiting must make a strong business case to individual hiring managers that convinces them of the importance of executing the process precisely. The most effective way of influencing hiring managers is by converting recruiting results into their dollar impact on that individual manager’s revenue and profit.
14. Diversity. An effective recruiting process must include enough variation and personalization to meet the unique needs of diverse individuals from around the world. Diversity and inclusiveness are becoming not just legal terms but critical components in building global sales.
15. Selling applicants. The very best recruiting processes builds “relationships” with potential applicants over time in order to increase their level of trust and interest. Unfortunately, no amount of benefits or job features will be convincing to high-demand applicants without this level of trust. Because all candidate-screening processes have flaws, stretching out the assessment process over time allows you to learn more about the candidate and decrease the chances of making a bad hire. The best approaches are designed to take advantage of the fact that a target candidate’s willingness to consider a new job changes quite rapidly, as a result of changes in their own job and organization.
16. Technology. The best processes rely heavily on technology and the Web in all aspects of the recruiting process. Technology can improve screening, increased hiring speed, cut costs, and provide the firm with the capability of hiring globally.
17. Integration. Recruiting processes must be integrated with other HR processes. Those recruiting processes that operate independently rather than in unison with other HR functions like relocation and compensation will produce diminished results.
18. Talent shortages. Although industries often face talent shortages, individual firms can actually have a surplus of candidates if they have a strong employment brand, a great referral program, and a candidate-friendly hiring approach. For example, handsome movie stars seldom have difficulty getting “dates” even when the average “Joe” can’t find a single one. Talent shortages are relative and depend on your image and what you have to offer.
19. Remote work options. Offering candidates remote work options dramatically increases the candidate pool. Firms that have the capability of managing candidates who work from remote locations have a distinct competitive advantage. They can attract the top performer who doesn’t live in the area, who desires working at home, or who isn’t willing to make a long commute.
20. Metrics and rewards impact recruiting. Every aspect of recruiting improves dramatically when managers and employees are measured, recognized, and rewarded for their contribution to recruiting. By convincing senior management and HR to place metrics and rewards on key aspects of recruiting, you send a clear message about its importance.

Final Thoughts

Almost every business function has come to realize that if you want consistency and excellent results, you must clearly define the rules of the game. There are, of course, exceptions and perhaps even additions that can be made to the principles outlined above.

But, after working with recruiters and recruiting managers from hundreds of companies, I found that these guidelines will give you a pretty good idea of the essential laws of recruiting and where to focus your efforts if you want superior recruiting results.

Before we get to the future, a little history is in order. As part of the marketing for my retained executive search practice in the mid-1990s, I did consulting for dozens of mid-size companies through TEC (The Executive Committee) and YPO (Young Presidents Organization).

The primary focus of this work was the development of a strategic hiring plan that allowed companies to move from a loose entrepreneurial business to a more sustainable and well-run growing company. Pulling this off always required the CEO/founder to relinquish a major portion of his authority, the addition of a number of critical senior managers, and the implementation of scalable business processes for all core functions. As part of this, the independent free-wheelers had to either leave or join the team.

There is an obvious parallel here with how some corporate recruiting departments have transitioned into top-performing and highly productive business functions and others haven’t. Some more history: in the mid-1990s, corporate recruiting departments came into being. This started with the hiring of a few contract recruiters followed by expansion into full departments and the hiring of specialized sourcers and end-to-end recruiters. The goal at the time was to build an in-house search capability in order to reduce what seemed an enormous amount spent on external search fees.

The promise of the Internet was the catalyst for this, with the idea that candidate quality would increase, not suffer. On this measure it doesn’t seem like too many companies succeeded. Just one example: on a recent webinar (February 2008), I asked the 200+ attendees to describe their current major hiring challenges.

Following are some of the big ones. How many of these ring true for you?

1. Not enough quality candidates
2. Hiring managers not responsive
3. Getting top candidates just interested in interviewing is becoming more difficult
4. Compensation never seems to be enough
5. Too many unqualified candidates
6. Counter-offers being accepted at an increasing rate
7. Offers turned down more frequently
8. Trouble getting candidates to relocate
9. Advertising results are hit or miss
10. Technology hasn’t helped improve productivity

Surprisingly, these are the same challenges recruiters faced during the dot-com boom and bust, the pre-Internet days, the Clinton years, the Bush One years, and the Reagan years. Despite all of the technological advances, actual recruiting results have changed very little in the 30 or so years I’ve been in the recruiting industry.

Yet in the same time span, launching complex products from the idea phase to market has improved five to tenfold, distribution systems have evolved from hoping your product would arrive within a week or two to tracking its exact position anywhere in the world, and knowing a company’s current financial performance has gone from having to wait two to three weeks after the close of a month to real time.

In comparison, corporate recruiting seems to be stuck in a time warp. For a variety of reasons it’s still run as an entrepreneurial organization that hasn’t yet evolved into a well-functioning, predictable, and scalable business process.

Here are some of the stumbling blocks:

1. Lack of an end-to-end perspective. Hiring top performers requires the active engagement of sourcers, recruiters, hiring managers, and everyone on the interviewing team. Rarely does this team agree on actual job needs nor do they screen, interview, and evaluate candidates the same way. Each recruiter and sourcer does his or her own thing and even if a few are good, the lack of overall consistency prevents scalability. Some offers are professionally made, others are via an email or informal call. Collectively this results in too many unqualified candidates being seen, overlooking or incorrectly evaluating some fine people with many of the best opting-out somewhere along the way for preventable reasons. Common practices like this rank pretty low on the scale of efficiency when compared to a systematic business process. (Recruiting process articles.)
2. Little hiring manager accountability. No matter how effective a company’s recruiting and sourcing efforts are, it’s still up to the hiring manager to make the decision. So if you don’t get your hiring managers and everyone on the hiring team involved in interviewing, assessing, impressing, and recruiting, you’re building a bridge to nowhere. While many companies have gotten better on the front-end, the back-end is still problematic. The symptoms here are obvious: lack of understanding of real job needs, inability to accurately assess competency, overselling, under-listening, lack of preparation, lack of interest, using the lack-of-time excuse, under-whelmed candidates, and high-potential candidates turned away for superficial or emotional reasons. From what I’ve seen, about 20% of all managers understand the importance of hiring top talent and will put in the extra effort needed to pull it off. Another 20% will put in the effort with some urging, and another 20% require lots of guidance and enforcement. I’m not so sure the other 40% will ever get it right. Until hiring managers are totally committed to the concept that “hiring top talent is #1″ it will be an uphill battle. (Hiring manager articles.)
3. Technology not effectively utilized. Actually the ATS (applicant tracking system) vendors like Taleo and Kenexa, etc., are more than qualified to develop technology that dramatically increases recruiter and hiring manager productivity. The problem is not with the vendors, it’s with the buyers: the HR and recruiting leadership community. Most are very unsophisticated when it comes to understanding and using technology. Lack of guidance on the buyer’s side has caused the vendors to expend too much effort on solving the wrong problems. This is why technology is five years behind where it should be. One minor example: candidates should not still be using pull-down menus to search for jobs. Lack of progress on the technology front is why vendors like Jobs2Web.com and Indeed.com are needed to overcome existing inadequacies in most current systems. Recruiters exacerbate the problem by fighting, rather than embracing technology. Despite current flaws, existing technology can improve productivity when used properly. (Recruiting technology articles.)
4. Inadequate or inappropriate training. Just about every sales person selling a professional product or service must take and pass some type of formal training program. About 10 years ago, I was helping a major yellow page publisher hire sales people and learned that their entry-level telephone reps (a $25 thousand per year job) had to take three weeks of formal training just to learn how to take renewals. A complex system or service sale involving needs analysis and customized pricing requires significantly more training. Sales training is commonplace even when hiring experienced sales people selling similar products. Yet for recruiting, which involves career counseling, job analysis, the ability to accurately screen and assess people, market and competitive analysis, and the use of professional negotiating and closing techniques, companies leave the process to the discretion of each person hired. (Hiring manager and recruiting training articles.)
5. A weak or non-existent workforce planning process. A workforce plan is to recruiting as a sales plan is to sales as a product plan is to manufacturing and as a profit plan is to finance. In our most recent annual survey completed in December 2007, only 26% of the over 700 respondents indicated their companies used a sophisticated rolling forecast of hiring needs. A formal workforce planning process is a foundational step in making hiring top talent a systematic and scalable business process. This hiring forecast provides a means to effectively allocate recruiting resources. As I learned from my earlier consulting days, lack of effective planning and forecasting was one of the core reasons entrepreneurial companies had difficulty managing their growth. (More on workforce planning.)
6. Lack of effective leadership. While the above are important points to consider, the root cause of the problem is lack of leadership and direction at the HR and recruiting-management level. Someone always needs to take charge, champion the idea, create the vision and implement the solution. This requires the ability to secure and maintain executive-level commitment, the tenacity to implement complex cross-functional change despite resistance, and an understanding of the importance of strong scalable business processes, especially in the area of hiring top talent. Strong leadership is the one common characteristic I’ve observed in those companies that have successfully converted the idea that hiring top talent is not just a vision statement, but a repeatable, predictable, and scalable business process. (More on leadership.)

While implementing a business process for hiring top talent is no simple task, it’s less challenging than implementing an ERP system like SAP, or setting up a world-wide distribution system or merging two new companies together. If hiring top talent truly is a company’s #1 strategic objective, it should also be more important.

Please forgive me. You already know me…by proxy, in the very least.

From the pages of Us Weekly (the generality implied in this paragon of journalism’s very name) to the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership (which, unlike the former, sadly discounts the impact of celebrities eating salad on the collective psyche of the nation), I’ve been psychologically deconstructed and catalogued more extensively than any personage in the annals of history. I am the subject of hundreds of articles, dozens of books, and won Time magazine’s “Man of the Year” for 2006. Not bad for someone barely old enough to rent a car.

You see, I am a millennial, or a member of Generation Y, or whatever else you want to label me. It doesn’t really matter; those of us born from 1978 to 1995, the accepted range for the above categorizations, almost unilaterally ignore such labels (I’ll refer to my generation as “millennials” for the sake of this article, but only because it sounds kind of cool, like an army of androids in some sci-fi flick).

This doesn’t seem to stop the world from trying. Corporations, in their nonstop quest to attract top talent, are among the worst offenders. Many of us feel like Michael Douglas in Fatal Attraction: You want us bad, which is kind of flattering, but recently, it’s gotten out of hand and is kind of creepy.

Any effort to study my generation en masse and pin down our inner workings misses the point entirely. In fact, we share a single commonality. And here, presented to you, is the key to understanding millennials: We have no collective identity. There you go. None. Our only shared motivation is, at its heart, to be unique. Try to lump us into a convenient group, and you’ve already failed at the single most important thing to us: the retention of our identity as individuals.

You’d never know that from the volumes written about how to attract and retain top millennial performers, recent college graduates, and professional up-and-comers. Here, we are painted in the broadest brushstrokes possible, and recruiters and corporations are widely tailoring their messages and redoubling their efforts to position themselves as “cutting edge” and “cool” places to work.

Advance these programs with caution, because many of us see this as transparent pandering, and it is more likely to turn us off than actually interest us. We don’t want to sit at the kiddy table, and the more a recruiting message focuses on how an organization nurtures and grows young talent, or is “hip” to what millennial candidates want (stated or unstated), it often has an unwanted side effect.

By and large, thought leadership is correct in assuming that we do not want to pay our dues and have an unearned sense of entitlement. By differentiating us at the attraction/interview process from our prospective colleagues, or by even having these programs in existence, the message we hear is less “we understand your wants and needs” and more “there are enough people your age here to justify these initiatives, and there’s a regimented program in place that is likely to strip you of much of your autonomy and individualism.”

In the recruitment process, the onus should be placed not on how the corporation has shifted its practices and values to reflect the presumed values of millennials, but rather on spelling out how that candidate’s unique experiences and talents would tangibly contribute to the organization, and how the position itself helps the larger organization function. You better make it about us, not you, in the interview process, and by that I mean your value proposition is no longer, “what can the company do for you” but rather, “here’s what you can do to make the company better.” We’re not opposed to hard work, as long as we understand how our little “siloed” tasks serve a greater purpose and are going to be recognized.

Make sure that your recruiting message is focused on immediate learning and development opportunities in the role that the candidate is interviewing for, i.e., the ability to acquire new and in-demand skill sets. By setting forth a codified and regimental career path or touting career mapping (a selling point for many top organizations), the intended message is often heard by the candidate as “no matter how bright you are, no matter how much you exceed expectations, there’s an entrenched system for advancement and we don’t make exceptions.”

No matter what the advancement path in your company looks like, informal recognition and the ability to contribute beyond the narrow dictates of a job description are more effective value propositions to us than long-term rewards. Raised in an age of downsizing and restructuring (terms many of us have learned from our parents the hard way), millennials expect no true loyalty from corporations, and we expect that companies implicitly desire none from us.

The most effective value proposition to the millennial candidate isn’t selling the organization, it’s selling the perception of the role’s prestige against the marketplace. In other words, the best way to attract the millennial worker is by positioning how the role will look on a resume when the candidate is ready to move on. We have no realistic expectation that we will have long tenures in our jobs; we expect to change companies and roles, and to do this often.

The key, then, is not separation but, rather, inclusion. The only reason we act differently is that you are treating us differently. Starting out on a career is still the first rite of true adulthood and independence for a huge majority of us, so we expect to be treated as adults. And, reports of us as spoiled, arrogant brats have been greatly exaggerated. The much maligned “helicopter parent,” for instance, is my favorite anecdote and is well consigned to the dustbin of urban legends, with a place next to alligators breeding in the sewer system.

Think about when you were graduating college. This much has not changed: We want to distance ourselves from our parents as much as possible, and we are mortified at the very thought of their involvement in our professional lives. Our parents are not “The Greatest Generation.” Our parents, instead, transformed ABBA into pop icons. They voluntarily went to discos and drove us around in station wagons with wood-paneled interiors. In other words, we don’t give much credence to their tastes. The job search is no exception to this rule.

So, we’re really not a separate species after all, and, like Britney Spears (who is still a better musician than any member of ABBA), are unworthy of the attention heaped upon us in correlation to our accomplishments. But feel free to continue.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent the views of Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. nor any of its employees or agents.

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”

This past quarter, I conducted two senior-level management searches. Each one stands out as a shining example of what to do and what not to do. Understanding the differences can double your monthly placement rate in about half the time. Before reading the details, you should benchmark your own recruiting skills using this 10-Factor Recruiter diagnostic assessment to get a sense of what it takes to be a great recruiter.

Here’s a quick summary of what happened. One of the searches was for a director-level technical position for an industrial products company. This is the one I didn’t conduct too well. I had to present seven candidates, and the client would only see four of them. My normally accurate assessments were suspect, and I didn’t have a great deal of confidence in representing either the job to the candidates or the candidates to the client. Making matters worse, it was a long and difficult close with compensation being the primary discussion point. We got very few referrals on the search, and it took about 90 days from beginning to end.

The other search was a slam dunk. It was for a director-level project manager position for an alternative energy company. In this case, three candidates were presented, all were seen, all were considered strong, and the company hired one within 45 days. Our assessments were dead-on across all job factors. Making matters better, we had two strong backups in addition to the three candidates, and both were referrals. While the compensation issues were not insignificant, the short- and long-term career opportunity overwhelmed the other two jobs the final candidate was considering.

There are some valuable lessons to be learned here. There are a number of factors worth considering that resulted in a 200% increase in productivity (half the number of candidates in half the time). Here are the ones that made the difference:

• Understanding Real Job Needs. Although I prepared a performance profile for the technical job, it was a battle with the hiring manager (vice president level) all the way. He was insistent on a certain level of skills, experience, and industry background, and it was difficult to get him to change his point of view. The vice president of operations leading the project manager search was a different breed entirely. He quickly accepted the idea of emphasizing critical results and performance objectives as superior selection criteria rather than qualifications. Part of this was that he wanted to hire the best person doing comparable work, and he knew he would be able to find some all-stars outside of the emerging alternative energy industry.
• Becoming a Partner with the Hiring Manager on the Search. I was pushed onto the vice president for the technical job by the vice president of human resources. While a very competent person, he was old-school and he found using Performance-based Hiring to be inconsistent with his old-line management style. Although we got along, it was more obligatory than sincere. The vice president of operations for the alternative energy company sought me out through referrals and wanted to use new techniques to find top performers. We hit it off right away. This alone helped communications and understanding. After preparing the performance profile, he knew I understood the job, and trust and openness instantly jumped up a notch.
• Understanding the Market. I did my homework for the alternative energy company. Within a few days, I knew the players, the competition, how the industry was financed, and the short- and long-term market opportunities. On the other hand, the comparable market evaluation I prepared for the technical industrial products job was superficial at best, reflecting a minimal understanding of the industry jargon. Knowing the industry from a macro standpoint really helps when sourcing and assessing candidates, presenting the opportunity, and getting referrals. When you don’t know what you’re talking about, recruiters come across as a desperate car sales representative rather than an objective career consultant.
• Conducting a Performance-Based Assessment. As you know, I advocate the idea of digging deep into a candidate’s accomplishments (performance-based interviewing) and comparing these to the performance objectives described in the performance profile. The purpose of this is multi-fold. First, to assess competency and motivation. Second, to identify gaps in the candidate’s background that can be presented as stretch opportunities if an offer is ultimately made. If you don’t know the job, you have nothing to benchmark the candidate against. This compromises the assessment and precludes the idea of recruiting on anything other than hot air and promises. Not only do you have little confidence when presenting your candidates to your client, you’re also pretty inept when negotiating an offer. All you have then is compensation as a bargaining chip. So, even though I conducted the same interview for all of the candidates for both searches, I had far less insight and even less credibility with those candidates for the job I didn’t understand as well.
• Sourcing Active Candidates. As long as they can be easily found and are well-written, ads can attract the attention of top people who look on a casual and infrequent basis. With a little research, we found some great niche sites to post a compelling project manager ad. The title was something like “A Billion is a Lot of Green Project Manager Dollars.” It worked. We found a few strong candidates plus garnered a few quality referrals. While the technical director ad was interesting, we had less information and less desire to get creative. The results were satisfactory, but not stellar.
• Sourcing Passive Candidates. Don’t pick up the phone and call a single passive candidate if you don’t understand real job needs as well as have a great understanding of the market. For one thing, without a great voice-mail message packed with insight and some salient facts, few people will return your call. Even those hungry enough to call you back will quickly recognize your lack of knowledge and confidence. While I didn’t actually do the cold calling, our sourcers spent about one-third the time getting the first group of 20 prospects for the project manager search. Within a few days, we had candidates we could present. FYI: We found all but one of the initial prospects on ZoomInfo and LinkedIn.
• Networking and Generating Referrals. If you been to one of our training sessions, you know we spend a great deal of time teaching recruiters how to get great referrals from everyone. While there is much technique involved, if you don’t know the job and market, you come across as both insincere and superficial. It’s difficult to get strong referrals if you can’t build relationships, and it’s more difficult to build relationships if the person called doesn’t trust you. We expect to get 2-3 referrals on every cold call to a passive candida