If Only They Could Hear What I Have To Say…

It’s the age old resume problem.  We’ve all had it one time or another.  When I was early in my HR career I desperately wanted to work for Nike.  I had this vision in my head that it would be such a super cool place to work, I was a huge brand advocate, Nike couldn’t have selected a better HR Pro.

I applied.  I applied, again.  I applied, again.

Nothing. Well, nothing, besides the obligatory form email telling me thanks, no thanks. Just Don’t Do It.

If only they could hear what I have to say and see my passion, there is no way they wouldn’t select me.

That was years ago, then companies like HireVue came along and changed the game.  Now any company could ‘see’ me through the use of digital interviewing.  Life was good. Too late for Nike and I to have a long successful relationship, but such is life, I had to find out how to Do It with someone else.

I thought that was it.  HR technology at its best, really no room for ‘real’ improvement, just window dressing changes from here on out.  That was until HireVue decided to hire some really, freaking, smart people that know a bunch of scientific stuff, and talk about stuff you and I wouldn’t understand.  HireVue’s scientist found out there is a level above digital interviewing.

Language and behavior analytics is the science behind what people say and how they say it.  The words they use, their expressions, their vocal infliction, etc.  Basically, you can learn 100,000 times more from this analysis, then just using a resume. HireVue launched HireVue Insights with this in mind. As I understand it the more data you collect through digital interviews, the better HireVue Insights is able to compare to top performers and make recommendations. This is really freaking cool!

HireVue beta tested Insights with one of their client partners Chipotle, which by the way just locked down Consumer Reports best burrito place! Chipotle is growing like a weed.  They’ll make 40,000 or so hires this year.  Using HireVue currently for digital interviewing, their normal digital interview to hire ratio is 10 to 1.  Since they began using HireVue Insights, that has gone to 4 to 1!  It doesn’t matter if you’re hiring 40,000 or 40, those kinds of increases will make any Talent Acquisition Pro’s Day!

I still can’t get past this idea that now candidates can actually be ‘heard’.  It’s really another game changer, when I thought the game was over being changed.  It’s the one major complaint every trench HR pro hears throughout their entire career.  I don’t get the science, it’s way over my head, and I’m fine with that.  As an HR Pro I just want the best hires, as fast as I can.  Insights just changed my world!

Just imagine if Nike would have used HireVue Insights 15 years ago to hire that mid-level HR Manager in Portland?  Right now, I would probably be having lunch with Phil Knight and Mike Jordan (I would call him Mike if I was running Nike HR, because we would be close friends!), as his right hand man, running HR for Nike.  But, No!  Nike missed out.  It’s a shame for them, I’m really good, Phil and Mike would have loved me!

 

Recruiting’s Silver Bullet

I don’t have a tattoo, but if I did it would say this:

“Pick Up The G*d Damn Phone!”

That’s it.  It would probably be one of those cool barbed wire kind of ones around my bicep, if I had biceps. Maybe I could even get it in another language so people would think it had some really deep thought or meaning.

I get asked weekly for advice on how to make ‘my’ recruiting department or shop better at recruiting.  I get asked advice on if they should have talent communities. Should they use one software, over another software.  Should they buy a LinkedIn seat or spend that money on a Facebook strategy.  I get asked if about every single tool imaginable that is sold to talent acquisition pros.

Every single Recruiting Pro I speak with wants to know the solution, the answer, the trick, to great recruiting.  Every. Single. One.

It’s not a trick, and it’s not hard.  It’s actually quite simple.  I tell them.  Then, they look at me, pause, and then they ask, “yeah, but what about…”

It’s a painful experience.  You see Talent Acquisition fails not because of the tools and processes, talent acquisition fails because the leadership in talent acquisition allows it to fail, because they want it to be something it’s not.  It’s not HR. It’s not sit at your desk and wait for magical software to deliver you magical candidates who magically want to come work for your company.

Talent Acquisition is sales. It’s about me talking you into something.  Like a car, but it’s not a car, it’s a job.  There a reasons you want the job, and reasons you don’t want the job, just like a car.  I have to convince you that you can really live with a green car, instead of a red car, because the green car is a better value or more reliable or something you’ll agree to.  Say hello to recruiting.

I know of one Silver Bullet in recruiting.  It’s as deadly today, as it was twenty years ago.  It’s called activity.  The recruiter with the most contacts will always fill more jobs over an extended period of time.  Bam!  It is that easy. And, that hard.

 

What is your Favorite Job Board?

Funny thing happened last week.  Glassdoor sent me one of those email surveys that companies send out. You know the ones – please fill this out, it only takes 5 minutes and if you do we’ll send $5 to cure dyslexia of Whales in the Eastern Arctic.   Of course I support Whale dyslexia so I did it.  Here is the first screen shot that came up:

Glassdoor surveyNotice anything interesting about the list of ‘Job Boards’?

Yep!  You caught it – LinkedIN everyone’s favorite job board 2.0 made the list.  I can honestly say, this is the first time I’ve ever seen LinkedIN (LI) described by another vendor as a Job Board.  I think that is telling to how LI’s competition are positioning themselves to go after some of that LI cash!

Beyond LI, CareerBuilder and Monster both have been working hard to shed the old Job Board tag as well.  No one wants to be known as a Job Board any longer.  Although, job boards still have a very valuable spot within the industry.

John Sumser, wrote a piece over at HR Examiner last week that describes this evolution brilliantly:

“The future of job boards is in competition with its customers some of the time. This isn’t really new, but we’ve forgotten that the core business model is a market of competing self-interests. While it is delightful to imagine a world where all candidates know about all jobs and vice versa, the reality is more mundane.

If you are a big brand (and there are 3,000 or 4,000 of those), the existing value of the company’s market awareness covers the cost of candidate acquisition. If, on the other hand, you are one of the several million brands no one has ever heard of, you have a different problem.

That’s where job boards come in. Companies that are expert in acquiring and aggregating audiences (not data) can help employers find workers. It turns out that this is an extremely valuable communications channel.

Where big brands are becoming their own distribution channels, little brands need help reaching the people they need. Job boards are less useful in the big enterprise game and way more useful everywhere else.”

One telling miss from the list?  What about Indeed?  Aren’t they the biggest job board of them all?  Also, is The Ladders still in business?  I haven’t heard form them in 2-3 years!

Would You Pay A Candidate To Interview?

Last week I got my ass handed to me for daring to consider that those who interview with a company, should pay for interview feedback.  Not just normal interview feedback, like thanks, but no thanks, but something really good and developmental.  Most people think that idea is bad.  Interview feedback should be free.  It’s not that I really want to charge people who interview a fee to get feedback, it’s just I think we could do so much better in terms of candidate experience, but we have to get out of our current mindset to shake things up a bit.

This all leads me to the next idea (hat tip to Orrin Konheim @okonhOwp) what if companies paid interviewees for their time?

Cool, right!?

We’ve built this entire industry on shared value.  Organizations have jobs, candidates want jobs, let’s all do this for free.  What happens when the equation isn’t equal?  What if candidates didn’t want your jobs?  Could you get more people to come out an interview if you paid them?  How much would it be worth?  It’s a really cool concept to play around with, if we can get out of our box for a bit.

Let’s say you’re having a really, really hard time getting Software Developer candidates to even consider your jobs and your organization.  It’s a super tough market, and you just don’t have a sexy brand.  You also don’t have the time to build a sexy brand, you need the talent now!  How much would it take to entice great candidates to give you an hour?  $100? $500? $1,000?  What if I told you I could have your CIO interviewing 5 top Software Developers tomorrow for 5 hours for $5,000?  Would you do it?

I hear the backlash of questions and concerns already forming in your head!

– People would just take the money, but not really want the job!

– How would you know these people were serious?

– Why would you pay to have someone interview when others will for free?

– Did you get hit on your head as a child?

– This might be the dumbest idea since your idea last week.

When we think about really having a great candidate experience, shouldn’t compensation be a apart of the conversation.  For most interviews you’re asking someone to take time off work, losing salary, time off, putting themselves at risk of their employer finding out, etc.  At the very least, you would think that we might offer up some kind of compensation for their time.  I’m not talking about interview expenses, but real cold hard cash, we appreciate your time and value it!

If you started paying candidates to interview, do you think you would get and have better or worse interviews?

When you put value to something, i.e., an interview, people tend to treat it as such.  Now that interview that they might go, might not go, becomes something they have to prepare for, because, well, someone is paying me to do this.  To interview.  I’m guessing if you paid your candidates to interview, you would get a higher level of candidate, and have a higher level of success in hiring.  It’s just a theory, wish I had the recruiting budget to test it out!

Wrong Company, Right Interview

If you’re in the staffing game enough, you’re bound to have strange stuff happen to you.  I’ve had employees die on the job.  I’ve had employees go postal.  I’ve had employees get caught doing almost everything imaginable, but this past week I got a first!  I like firsts. Firsts are like little HR and Talent trophies you get to show off to your HR and Talent peers when you’re out after work sharing war stories!

It seemed like a normal Thursday.  Phones buzzing, recruiters cruitin’, interviews, offers, no-shows.  Call comes in from a client, “Hey, Bill never showed for his interview!” Ugh, I hate no-shows!  In good job times, no-shows increase at alarming rate.  Candidate gets ‘sold’ on a job, then they get buyers remorse and decide instead of being an adult, they’ll just burn a bridge.  We give Bill a call to see why he hates us so.  Bill answers! (that doesn’t usually happen with no-shows, you just have to yell at their voice mail and belittle to a recording) “Bill, I just got a call from InfoGenTech what the hell!  You no-showed. Please tell me one of your kids is seriously injured!”

Then a funny, first time thing, happened.

Bill says, “Well, I went on the interview, but went to the wrong company!”  What!?  Didn’t the wrong company tell you,”Hey dude, you’re stupid and at the wrong company!”  Nope, they didn’t.  This is the D! (Detroit for all you none “D’ers'”!) This company said, “What position are you supposed to interview for?”  Bill goes, “for aprogrammer position”.  Wrong company front desk person, knowing they also need programmers, quickly calls HR and explains Bill’s situation.  Bill gets on the spot interview with wrong company.  Bill never gets the chance to make it to our client’s interview.

Score one for the D.  The war for talent is alive and well in Detroit!

I’ve had candidates get lost and not be able to find where they are going for interviews.  I’ve had candidates show up at wrong locations.  I’ve never had a candidate go to the wrong location and get stolen by the company!

When people ask me how Michigan is doing, how Detroit is doing, I’ll give them this story.  We are so short on talent, we steal interviews.

Recruiting in the D.  Silicon Valley can kiss our ass!

Corporate Recruiters Don’t Fear Agency Recruiters

Do you believe the title?  It’s common belief, in most Talent and HR circles, that most corporate recruiters fear agency recruiters.  Go ahead and argue if you would like, but it seems a little silly.

The reality is, true recruiting professionals don’t fear amateurs.

It’s like a really great professional Photographer.  They charge money because they offer something someone is willing to pay for.  Professional photographers don’t fear the mom at the soccer game with her $2,000 dollar camera and $5,000 dollar lens.  Who cares that you have the equipment, if you don’t know how to use it!?  Pros don’t fear amateurs.

So, if you are a really good corporate recruiter who knows how to really recruit, agency recruiters don’t scare you, because you know your stuff!  That’s the problem, though, right?  The reason so many people feel the title of this post is true is because we all know so many corporate recruiters, who really don’t know how to recruit.  They aren’t pros, they’re amateurs.  Amateurs fear professionals when it comes to meeting head to head in competition.

The best professionals love it when a talented amateur tries to play at their level.  These types of individuals help to push both parties to do the best work they can.  Or, at least, they should!  A great agency recruiter, should push an average corporate recruiter to want to get better.  An amateur agency recruiter will starve, that’s why you only see amateurs in the agency ranks for a very short period of time.  If they aren’t good, they don’t eat! That is why on average, agency recruiters tend to have more recruiting skills than corporate recruiters.  Agency folks aren’t full salary. How they are compensated forces them to have better skills, on average.

So, how do corporate recruiters ensure they become professionals?  Well, I love Malcom Gladwell, so I’ll steal a little of his 10,000 hour concept.  You must make yourself a true recruiting professional!  You need to invest time and development in yourself, in the recruiting industry, to become a pro.   That means as a corporate recruiter, you focus on recruiting, not becoming an HR Pros. What?!  Most corporate recruiters are corporate recruiters because that’s their path to get into a straight HR position.  Their endgame is not recruiting, it’s HR.  That’s a problem, because they are not fully vested into the recruiting game.  This is an amateur move.

Your reality is, those who get promoted are usually professional at something.  Become a great recruiting pro and the powers-that-be will take notice, and you’ll find yourself in positions you never thought possible.  True professionals don’t worry about promotions, they worry about becoming a better pro at their craft.

The next time you start feeling yourself pushed by an agency recruiter, don’t curse them for what they do, embrace them for what they push you to become — a better recruiter.

 

Tattoo Hiring

A tattoo is basically forever.

I know, I know, you can get them removed by laser now. But most people don’t go into a tattoo proposition thinking I can’t wait to pay a couple of thousand dollars to get this removed! It’s permanent baby. Like a Sharpie, but better!

Most organizations do Tattoo Hiring.  They believe we are going to hire this person forever.  In fact, go ahead and tattoo the logo on their butt while their in orientation.   But the life cycle of most hires is similar to that of your tattoo you got on Spring Break back in 2001.

Tattoo Hires:

1. Day 1 – it’s a little painful, but your so excited to have the person on board.

2. First couple of weeks – pain has gone away, still doesn’t look right, but you can tell you’re going to love them. And you keep showing the new hire to everyone you see, that has yet to see them.

3. Years 1-3 – Tattoo Hire is awesome. You’re proud of your tattoo hire. People comment on what a great hire.  You couldn’t be more proud of your tattoo hire!

4. Somewhere past year 3 – the first Tattoo Hire went so well, what the heck, time for another Tattoo Hire!  This time we’ll go bigger and better!

5. Into Tattoo Hire #2’s first year – you begin to notice your original Tattoo Hire doesn’t look as good anymore. Isn’t performing as well. You think it might be time to change your original Tattoo Hire.  While Tattoo Hire #2 is more awesome than you can imagine!

6. Time to remove Tattoo Hire #1 – You’ve finally made the decision, Tattoo Hire #1 has to go. It’s going to cost you thousands of dollars to remove, but Tattoo Hire #1 just isn’t what you want anymore.

That’s alright you’ve got Tattoo Hire #2!  I mean what could go wrong, a Tattoo Hire is forever, right?

Organizations that hire with a Tattoo philosophy are bound to fail.  It’s not that you can’t expect, or want, employees to stay with you their entire career.  You can.  The problem we face is when we don’t set up our organizations to support forever hires.  The new tattoo always looks better, because it is usually more defined and brighter and you put more thought into it.  An employee is no different.  You can’t let a more tenured employee fade.  You must keep them vibrant and up to date.  Or, many times you will spend a ton of money replacing them.

 

Evolving Just In Time Talent

If you’re in the talent/recruitment game you are well aware it’s a Just In Time (JIT) game.  Has been that way since we were called the Personnel Dept. and will be that way for the foreseeable future.  Executives and hiring managers hate this about recruitment.  They think we should have this ‘pipeline’ of great candidates waiting to come into our organizations the moment we lose someone, or have a need to add additional talent.  But, we all know that while in theory that sounds really nice, it’s not reality.

There is a faction that tries to sell that this can happen, through things like talent communities, etc. Again, the reality is this is these types of things are just a show for our organizations, they really don’t do what our hiring managers are desiring.  Having a pipeline of candidates, who have yet to be screened, interviewed and offered (i.e., your talent community) is still just JIT talent.  Maybe a little quicker, but still far short of expectations from hiring managers.

So, how to you get On Demand Talent?

Eventually, we are going to see companies take a page from the contracting talent world and they are going to ‘bench’ their next hires.  In contracting great talent gets ‘benched’ in between their projects.  They actually get paid not to work, but be ready for the next major project they’ll be working on.  Could be a week, could be a month.  Corporate benching will be slightly different. Let me give you a peak of how corporations will eventually evolve JIT Talent to meet the expectations of their executive teams and hiring managers:

1. Active sourcing of top talent, even when they don’t have an opening.

2. Full screen, interview process and selection decision of this talent, even without an opening.

3. Contractual offer and benching bonus to be the next hire for a certain position.

What does all that mean?

Let’s say you have a group of Engineers.  You know at some point, based on your annual metrics over the last 10 years, you will lose an engineer to turnover within the next 12 months.  It’s critical that when you lose that engineer you have a replacement quickly, but the current cycle time of sourcing, interviewing and accepting is taking 8-12 weeks for your critical skill set.  Sound familiar?  Your hiring managers expectation is you’ll have someone in 2 weeks.  Which is impossible in your current process.

An On Demand Talent model would have you, without an actual opening, go through your full engineering search. Find that person who is right for you and extend them a hiring contract for the next available opening in the next 12 months. For accepting this ‘spot’ on your depth chart, you will pay this candidate a bonus.  Could be a one time bonus, could be a monthly bonus.  In the mean time, they continue to work at their current position and company, and wait.  When they get the call, contractually they have two weeks to give notice and start.

You meet the expectation of your organization, you have succession ready to go, you just created a better talent demand system.  Yes, it costs money.  But, so does having an opening in your organization for two to three to six months, while projects sit idle.

What do you think?  Blow holes in my theory of On Demand Talent in the comments.

 

I Mostly Work For Free

I’m an agency headhunter.  I love this Dilbert comic, it makes me laugh:

Dilbert Headhunter

 

The reality is, headhunting, recruiting, etc. can be a very lucrative job. Like most sales jobs, yes it’s a sales job, if you’re any good, you can make really good money. If you’re not good, you starve.

The truth about headhunting is I’m usually working for free.   I don’t blame my clients for this.  I completely know the deal going in, and if I ‘decide’ to work for free, I’ve made the conscious decision to do it.

Most people don’t know that about this profession.  That 90% of their time is spent working for free.  It’s why so many people leave agency recruiting to go to corporate recruiting.  The jobs are virtually the same, except on the corporate side you get paid each day.  You don’t get paid as well, but you get paid.  On the agency side, you rarely get paid, but if you’re good, those pay days are big.

Those in the industry will read this and think, “well, Tim, you must not be good at what you do, because I would never work for free!”  They feel like they have clients who would never asked them to do that, or they ‘qualify’ each opening before they do would take on the assignment.  Others will say, “that’s why I only work ‘retained’ search”.

Our reality, agency headhunters, is that everyday we are working on something for free.  My best clients will ask me, beg me, for help on a certain position.  We’ll work our butts off getting them great talent.  Then, we’ll get the call, “Hey, Tim, the resumes are great! We decided to go another direction. Thanks, though, we’ll definitely call the next time we have a need!”

Yep, you just worked for free.

The cool thing about a recovery economy is that the leverage of being able to go out and find more great clients is right there.  Clients who won’t want you to work for free.  Who will value the work you do for free, and not want to take advantage of that.  I feel for my brothers and sisters in the headhunting game.  Working for free never feels good, but you smile, you thank them for the opportunity, and we do what we do.

Hopefully, today, that isn’t working for free.

 

 

Social Recruiting + Infinity

For those who don’t know, I do this little presentation called Social Recruiting MacGyver Style.  I’m doing it in a couple weeks for a thousand HR Pros in Michigan.  I have some fun with it, and poke fun at some of the things we do in our industry with Social Recruiting.  From questions I get, at that presentation, I came up with this concept:

Social Recruiting + Infinity = Bad Recruiting

Here’s the math logic.

How many followers do you in your full social stream? Think all Twitter followers, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook Page followers, etc. Everyone who could possibly be in your network that you could potentially connect with to source.  Big number, right?  Mine is probably in the millions.  The impresses my teenage sons, but that’s about all the ‘klout’ I get from it.

In this social age of recruiting, for the first time, most of us come face to face with the opportunity of limitless.  Social recruiting gives us access, seemingly, to an endless array of candidates.  No one else can handle limitless.  A hospital has a limit on patients. Restaurants have a limit on patrons.  Most things in life have limits.  In recruiting, we have a limit to how many open requisitions we can handle.

But in the social recruiting world, the pursuit of infinity has become that goal.

The question I have to ask those who embarking into this world of social recruiting is, what price are you will pay for this pursuit?

It’s a question most recruiters don’t even consider when they start down the social recruiting path.  When your recruiting pool is ‘everyone’, it changes the way you work. That what social recruiting tends to be like.   Most begin believing they have a new ‘pond’ to fish in, and find out that pond is an ocean, an ocean where you see fish everywhere, but can see the fish you want to catch.

The corollary of infinity (an endless amount of candidates) is zero (so many candidates you can’t even find one).

Social recruiting works really well the smaller you target, not the bigger.  Why is this important to you?  Let’s go back to the math.  We get caught up in the numbers.  The number of followers. The number of people who ‘like’ us. The number of people who click.  When those numbers are worthless, if they are not the people you want.

Social recruiting is not about more numbers.  It’s about using tools to uncover a very specific skill set you are looking for, and networking with that skill set.  Rifle versus shotgun.  Unfortunately, most recruiters start by trying to connect with everyone and anyone and find no one.