The combination of the popular “Despicable Me” movies and the Christmas season made me think about who in the recruiting process should get “a lump of coal” in their stockings for their naughty behavior. Obviously any list like this that identifies problem-causers involves some generalizations, because there are always some individual exceptions. However, in any field there are individuals who hold certain job titles that all-too-often remind me of the lead character Gru in the Despicable Me movies.
Those who qualify for the Despicable Me label on my list include recruiters, other individuals who impact recruiting, and even a few recruiting tools. I’d like to open what I hope is a continuing discussion with my personal “Despicable Me top 10+ list”. The list is broken into two categories: recruiters and those who contribute to the recruiting effort.
You May Be a Despicable Me Recruiter If You Are … keep reading…
Data analytics are getting more important. Companies are using data to better understand and improve their customer relationships, operational, business, and workforce outcomes, and competitive positioning.
This is no different for HR and even more specifically talent acquisition. Quality of hire is the critical decision-support metric that can help HR and hiring leaders determine if they are bringing the right workforce into your organizations to drive business results.
To add to my article on hire quality, I put together this video. keep reading…
There are two fundamental issues with the current quality of hire measures: the timing of the assessment and the definition itself as it relates to mid-senior level hiring.
For these more senior hires, it’s astonishing to observe that companies wait for six months or more to take a retrospective look at how well they have performed, and then define this as the “quality of hire.” What if the quality of hire turned out to be poor? keep reading…
I’ve been espousing the need for predictive metrics in HR for over 20 years, so I am pleased that more talent leaders are now beginning to realize their value. Unfortunately, most of what is written on the subject tends to be very general and instead what is really needed are some how-tos and some implementation tips.
In my first article on the subject, I covered the benefits of predictive metrics and the need to add actionable components, so that predictive metrics drive action and actually improve people-management decisions. In this article I will outline those actionable components and highlight the specific areas where you might need predictive metrics. keep reading…
Every leader wants to know what is the “next big thing” in talent management? Well in my book, it is the forward-looking talent management approach known as predictive analytics. If you are unfamiliar with the term, predictive analytics are simply a set of decision-making metrics or statistics that alert or warn decision-makers about upcoming problems and opportunities in talent areas like recruiting and retention. Predictive analytics are clearly superior to traditional HR metrics, which simply tell you what happened last year.
What happened last year is unlikely to be an accurate indicator of what will likely happen this or next year. For example, last year with high unemployment rates and a weak economy, turnover rates were low. But it would be a fatal assumption to assume that those low turnover rates would continue in an improving economy.
Without Action, Big Data Is a Big Waste keep reading…
Many in business and most in talent management fail to realize that as soon as you open your mouth, it’s immediately obvious to almost all leaders and executives whether you are “strategic” and “know the business.”
If you have ever been a CEO or senior executive (as I have), you already know that strategic individuals use a completely different language than the tactical “doers” who populate the lower levels of the organization. If you are satisfied with being a tactical person, that’s okay, but if you expect to get promoted and to quickly take a leadership position in management, at some point you have to learn how to think and talk strategically.
Talking strategically means using language from each of the seven strategic business “dialects.” These dialects or components of strategic speech can be labeled as…
- Dollars to show impact
- Corporate goals focused
- Knowing with data
- Building a competitive advantage
- Being forward-looking
- Being customer focused
- Emphasizing innovation
I will highlight the focus of each of these dialects, as well as the key strategic words to use under each of them in order to come across as strategic. keep reading…
College recruiting has been in the doldrums during most of the economic downturn, and as a result there have been few strategic changes in it, even though the rest of the recruiting function has undergone major shifts during the downturn. And just in case you haven’t seen it yourself, I am predicting that college recruiting demand is about to explode and the competition will soon reach previous “war for college talent” levels.
This resurgence of interest in college hires is due to a reviving economy but also because of the urgent need in a VUCA world for employees who are creative, innovative, fast-moving and who are comfortable with new technology.
If you are one of the corporate talent leaders who want to get and stay ahead of the competition, the time is ripe for re-examining your college program to see what needs to be done to update it. Start with the college recruiting staff. Make sure that it is staffed with data-driven, experienced recruiting professionals prepared for real change, rather than simply enthusiastic young people whose primary qualification is that they themselves are recent college grads. I’ve put together a list of the top 10 categories of strategic change that could literally propel your program into dominance. They are listed with the most impactful strategic changes appearing first.
Action Steps to Win “the War for College Talent” in 2014 keep reading…
If I hear one more speech about how HR needs to be strategic, I may lose it. Of course, we all want and need to make a difference, get noticed, and help our companies be successful. I’m not trying to suggest that we avoid the idea of thinking strategically, but there is only one true way to be strategic when in front of business leadership: show them the money!
Until we HR, talent acquisition, and talent management professionals have the tools and know-how needed to directly quantify the economic impact of our efforts to hire people who will perform effectively, it will be hard for us to be truly strategic and triumph in our quest to be taken seriously by the C suite. While there is no doubt that the tools used to predict which applicants will be the best performers provide an important contribution, the only way to gain insight into the value of these tools is to tie their effectiveness directly to financial metrics of job performance. Unfortunately, this has proven to be a major challenge.
Below is a short list of the major roadblocks to HR (specifically talent acquisition and talent management) being truly strategic when it comes to measuring the economic impact of the hiring process. Since the value of the hiring process hinges on the ability to show the impact on the bottom line through the people who are contributing to it, these issues all center around problems related to translating insight about workplace performance into financial metrics. This is a data problem and thus it is no surprise that all of these roadblocks are related to the data used to measure job performance. These issues include: keep reading…
Recruiting is full of practices that seem to last forever. Unfortunately, many practices endure for years despite the fact that they add no value to the hiring process. I call these well-established practices “sacred cows” because many lon-gtime recruiters and hiring managers vigorously defend them even though both company and academic data shows that they should be discarded.
The need to identify and then kill these sacred cows was reinforced recently by some compelling research data revealed by Google’s head of HR, Laszlo Bock. For example, extensive data from Google demonstrated that five extremely common recruiting practices (brainteaser interview questions, unstructured interviews, student GPAs or test scores, and conducting more than four interviews) all had zero or minimal value for successfully predicting the on-the-job performance of candidates. But despite this hard data, practices like brainteaser interview questions will likely continue for years.
Recruiting Has a Long, Checkered History of Silliness keep reading…
If you’re going to measure and perhaps reward individual hiring managers for excellence, you will need to work with a sample of them to determine which output metrics are strategic, effective, and easy to measure.
Here are 23 possible scorecard measures as a starting point for that discussion. Note: the highest-impact factors are listed first in each of the four categories.
Category I — High business impact measures to consider keep reading…
How to develop a recruiter scorecard for assessing individual corporate recruiter performance
Champions insist that you keep score. If you understand that concept, you will ensure that in addition to function-wide metrics, you will supplement them with a scorecard for assessing the performance of each individual recruiter. Everyone knows that corporations are measurement crazy, so I have found that by not measuring something (in this case recruiters), you are inadvertently sending a message to executives and employees that whatever you are doing is not strategic or even important (because if it was, we would measure it).
So unless you want to purposely send a message that “having top performing recruiters doesn’t matter,” you have no choice but to develop an individual recruiter scorecard. In order to do that effectively, you first need to understand the foundation design principles for individual scorecards and then you must select the actual measures that you will use in your scorecard. In part one, I introduced the concept and provided three examples of what a scorecard might look like. In this part two, I will cover the design details and a list of the measure to consider for your scorecard. keep reading…
A study by Deloitte estimates that companies will spend more than $4 billion annually on talent management technology this year. Because the HR technology industry is …
- Dominated by a handful of large players such as Taleo/Oracle, Kenexa/IBM, and Success Factors/SAP
- Also heavily represented by hundreds of smaller specialty tech companies who are agile and focused on growth, most of whom have been in business less than 10 years
- And changing rapidly changing in response to technological innovations (such as mobile computing and the cloud) as well as evolving reporting/compliance requirements
… buying decisions can be extremely complex.
At talentRISE, we are all too often contacted by clients who have made a less-than-optimal technology purchasing decision and are now seeking a post-purchase “fix.” So, in this post, we want to share a few “lessons learned” to help others seeking to replace or upgrade current systems — whether an ATS, a comprehensive talent management system, or an HR Management System make the best buying decision possible and avoid buyers’ remorse. keep reading…
About a month ago, I was at ERE and a session caught my attention: “A Framework for Improving and Measuring Quality of Hire.” I was delighted. Would talent management be ready for it? Would this be the turning point for the profession? My skepticism has been high; over 10 years ago I wrote one of the first, if not the first report on quality of hire when I was leading Taleo Research, and more recently we organized a roundtable with leading organizations from the Bay Area, but did not see much progress in between. Are we at a crossroads, at the tipping point? Are we at that place when finally talent acquisition will see themselves as more than just filling requirements? keep reading…
Informatica, the company for which I work, deals in big data challenges every day. It’s what we do — help customers turn their data into actionable business insights. When I took the helm as VP of global talent acquisition I was surprised to learn that the data within the talent acquisition function was not up to the standards Informatica lives by. Clearly, talent acquisition was not seeing the huge competitive advantage that data could bring — at least not the way sales, marketing, and research were viewing it. And that, to me, seemed like a major problem, but also a terrific opportunity!
This is the story of how Informatica Talent Acquisition became data-centric and used that centricity to our advantage to fix the problem. keep reading…
Futurestep has quietly been developing a tool called “Foresight” it will be rolling out to its clients, a dashboard meant to make heads and tails out of the recruiting information global companies have stored in their many databases.
Futurestep (a recruitment outsourcing company owned by Korn/Ferry) started thinking about this about a year ago, and has had an internal technology team working on it. It’s “high-end, graphical, display analytics,” Bill Sebra says.
Sebra is Futurestep’s North America president. He says the company’s global clients wanted more data — more real-time data. You may have “the people in China running something different from the folks in North America” when it comes to HR software, he says. “If you’re the chief talent officer, it becomes very difficult.” This challenge can be multiplied if you’re a company with, say 8-10 different firms you bought, all around the world. keep reading…
During the newly reinvigorated and exciting ERE conference, two attendees posed related but powerful questions to me. The first was “What advanced topics should be on the agenda of recruiting leaders at elite firms?” Or as another put it “What should Google be planning to do next in recruiting?”
At least to me, future agenda items are an important topic. Because after visiting well over 100 firms, I have found a dramatic difference between the agenda items that are found on 95% of the firms (cost per hire, ATS issues, req loads, etc.) and the truly advanced subjects that only elite recruiting firms like Google, DaVita, Sodexo, etc. would even attempt to tackle.
So if you have the responsibility for setting agendas or recruiting goals, here is my list of truly advanced recruiting topics that elite leaders would find compelling but that most others would simply find to be out of their reach. If you want to be among the elite, you should select a handful for implementation. However, even if you are currently overwhelmed by your current agenda, you might still find them to be interesting reading.
25 Advanced Recruiting Topics for Bold Corporate Recruiting Leaders keep reading…
About a year ago, I was participating in a series of team meetings when I noticed that one question kept resurfacing: “How can we demonstrate the value of talent acquisition?” While the discussion moved to other topics, this question remained unanswered.
Cost, quality, and speed have underpinned the value proposition of the talent acquisition function for many years. It has been defined by metrics such as productivity, process and channel efficiency, full/sub-cycle time, and the results of satisfaction surveys. Yet, it has become clearer to me that value in talent acquisition is no longer being adequately communicated and translated to our customer base. We need a new way to demonstrate value beyond the walls of our own function. We need to better articulate how and why talent acquisition contributes to the overall worth of the organizations we work for.
Here, I make my case for a new kind of value mapping that centers around talent acquisition first and foremost. Value mapping talent acquisition can deliver better results, with more focused associated costs and impactful communication.
Value: A Simple Definition keep reading…
While confusion seems to reign among recruiting leaders on how to build effective sourcing strategies, Donna Quintal at Sears Holdings Corporation has been able to craft a powerful set of analytics over the past few years to help predict where hiring will occur before the requisitions appear and what sorts of candidate communities should be cultivated to meet expected needs.
What Donna has done anyone can do — she started small, made a business case for what she did, and because of her practical and business-focused approach was able to get additional resources and expand the usefulness of her analytics.
It is not necessary to have sophisticated analytic tools or exceptional expertise. These are useful, but they are not necessary to get started. Even simple data can be powerful, and is often more useful in the beginning because it is easier to see the connection between the data and the results that business leaders respect.
Donna started with simple tools — just an Excel spreadsheet and Survey Monkey. She gathered basic data from surveys created in Survey Monkey. She gathered data about the needs and issues the hiring managers had, especially from areas where there were problems. Once she had this data, she was able to look for common issues and target areas for improvement. This was then shared with recruiters and HR for action.
I have laid out a simple model of how you could begin to set up a sourcing strategy that is both effective and that does not require great expertise. keep reading…
HR should be every company’s ‘killer app.’ What could possibly be more important than who gets hired…” — Jack Welch, ex-CEO of GE
I wish more CEOs and their respective CFOs agreed with the statement above. The companies that do follow this mantra seem to prosper (GE, Google, Facebook, Mayo Clinic, Starbucks, and others that invest in hiring and developing talent.) Quality hires impact a company’s ability to execute its mission, reach its milestones, be profitable and ultimately increase shareholder value.
I’m going to talk here about how to measure this quality. keep reading…
Google has the only HR function on the planet that is managed based on “people analytics”
Larry Page — the CEO
If you haven’t seen it in the news, after its stock price broke the $800 barrier, Google moved into the No. 3 position among the most valuable firms in the world. Google is clearly the youngest firm among the leaders; it has surprisingly been less than a decade since Google’s IPO.
Most on the top 20 market cap list could be accurately described as “old school,” because most can attribute their success to being nearly half a century old, having a long established product brand, or through great acquisitions. Google’s market success can instead be attributed to what can only be labeled as extraordinary people management practices that result from its use of “people analytics.”
Continuous Innovation Requires a New Kind of People Management
The extraordinary marketplace success of Google (and Apple, which is No. 1 on the list) is beginning to force many business leaders to take notice and to come to the realization that there is now a new path to corporate greatness. keep reading…