Category Archives: Recruiting

New Recruiting Vendor – Intomi

Posted on by
1

One of the most unique Recruiting vendors I saw when I was at HR Tech a few weeks back was a company out France.  The name of the company is Intomi – pronounced – “In-To-Me” and they’ve come up with a product that I dare say might change Corporate Recruiting as we know it, and when I say they’ve come up with something no one else has – believe me – NO One is selling this product!

Think about what is the one thing that Corporate recruiting is missing – what is it?

No, it’s not sourcing tools – they’ve got plenty of those.

No, it’s not screening tools – that market is flooded.

No, it’s not ATS’s, or CRM’s, or branding – and you’re not going to guess this because their product is unlike anything that has ever been scene in corporate recruiting.

What Intomi does is quite simple, which makes it even that more powerful.  That’s really what every recruiting and HR vendor should be striving for – designing a product so simple that it needs no explanation – just pick it up or turn it on – and go.  Simple is difficult to do – Intomi gets this!  I’m sure it was the simplicity of their design that first drew me into their product, but it was the functionality that kept me looking at it.

In 20 years of being in the talent/HR space I’ve never seen a product that had such an immediate impact to the amount of talent that was brought into our organization, and was so cost effective at the same time.  When job boards first came out 20+ years ago – that was a big deal – and over the past 10 years social tools have really changed the game – but all of these things had one fundamental flaw – Intomi changes all of that – it eliminates the one struggle that corporate recruiting still has.

Intomi does one thing and one thing only – Intomi will immediately separate you from your competition – as you can tell I’m a huge fan!  So, what is this super simple, super powerful solution to all of your recruiting problems?

Intome forces your recruiters to physically pick up the phone and dial the number of a candidate – and won’t allow the recruiter to hang up the phone until they say at least one word. Freaking Brilliant!   This will be HR Tech’s 2013 Award winner for sure!   How does Intome do this?  Glad you asked.  They use something called metrics – which actually tracks the number of calls a recruiter makes, how long they spent on the phone and how many qualified screened candidate profiles they send on to hiring managers.  If those metrics aren’t met, the recruiter is then coached and if they are continually not met, Intome will fire them for you!  I’m just really in love with this product!

I’m not their sales person – but if you want more information on this product, then you have no idea what you’re doing in recruiting.

 

Talent is a Zero Sum Game

Posted on by
1

There is a mathematical concept called Zero-Sum, what is says is basically where one person, organization, etc. will gain, there is an equal loss by another person, organization, etc. of that exact same amount.   An example might be market share of a corporation – if GM has 17% market share of U.S. car buyers, and it gains 1%, to 18% total market share – the 1% came at the expense of their competition.  GM didn’t miraculously grow/build/birth 1% of new car buyers out of thin air. It’s a Zero-Sum game, their competition loses the exact same number of car buyers that GM gained – you rob Peter to pay Paul. 

Hiring Managers never get this!

Talent and HR Pros feel this all the time.  Hard to fill requisition, limited talent pool and the hiring managers makes you feel like you should be able to go down to the vending machine and just select C-3 and another Software Developer will fall down into your hands, ready to work! (by the way C-3 in my office is Peanut Butter M&M’s which seem to make everything better at almost any time of the day!) But it’s not that easy, right?!  Talent is a Zero-Sum game.  Now, I know my OD and Training friends will be all – “No it’s not! We can grow and build new Talent!”  Not really – not in the time I need it – which is NOW – or – YESTERDAY!  That’s my timing – it’s not 3 months or a year down the road.

That’s are main problem in Talent in 99.9% of organizations, are lack of organizational understanding of the simple concept of Zero-Sum.  If organizations really got this concept they would have robust, funded, succession planning programs that would be attempting to build future talent, to expand their internal talent pools,  but we don’t.  Less than 1% of organizations in the world really fund succession the way it needs to be funded if you want to be self sufficient in terms of talent.  Organizationally, you’re paying either way – you either pay the money up front in terms of talent attraction, or you can pay it on the backside with retention and training – so why does almost every company choose the front side of this equation?  I think most choose the talent attraction spend because we (HR/Talent/OD) have done a horrible job of working with our finance teams to come up with a plan that shows our organization there’s a better way to spend our money.  We haven’t given our leadership a better option – so we/they continue to choose to do more of the same.

Some could argue that we are currently in a less than Zero-Sum game with our employee demographics.  We have more of our population reaching retirement age, than we have potential workforce reaching the age/education/experience to replace our leaving workforce.  But, even at zero – you still see the problem we are in, it’s never ending, it’s just how do you choose to play the game.  I like thinking about our HR/Talent problems in terms of mathematics, because it gives me the feeling there are actually solutions and it’s just a matter of building the solution/process.   I think most will argue that the solution is to do all of it in combination – some attraction, some succession, some training – which I agree with, but I think the percentages of your current combination need to change if you truly want to get off the treadmill.

 

Before The Rose Ceremony – Interviewing beyond Selection

Posted on by
Reply

Join Dawn Burke and I for our October webinar (sponsored by the good folks at HireVue) – “Before the Rose Ceremony: How to Become an Employer of Choice Through Your Interview Process”, where we’ll explore the following and compare it to the meat show on the Bachelor/Bachelorette:

  1. What pre-interview, pre-phone screen features subconsciously tell a candidate that you’re different from your competitors and help you plant the initial “why you want to work here” seed
  2. The 3 things that need to be present in your initial outreach to a candidate to prevent their BS meter from exploding (aka momentum killers).
  3. 5 Key Features of the live interview process at your company that sell your culture as a Great Place to Work – regardless if you hire the candidate or not.
  4. FOT’s Top 7 Interview Questions for uncovering great info and selling the candidate on your company as an employer of choice – they won’t even realize you’re doing it (and you’ll get great info as a result).
  5. SEND IN YOUR LESS ATTRACTIVE FRIENDS TO GIVE APPROVAL! (That’s FOT in this case.)  We’ll end with a simple audit process that you can use to determine if your interview process is contributing as much as it should toward your company being viewed as a destination of choice for candidates.

Join us for “Before the Rose Ceremony” and install a couple of the interview process features we discuss, and candidates will start to view you less as the Motel 6 and more like the Ritz.  Or wherever it is that feels like an upgrade from the Motel 6.  Maybe the LaQuinta?  The W?  You tell us.  The point is when you say no to people and they still love you, you’ve arrived – just like the bachelor or the bachelorette.  We think the way you interview candidates can help you accomplish that in the recruiting process.

**This program,ORG-PROGRAM-124798, has been approved for 1.00 (General ) recertification credit hours toward PHR, SPHR and GPHR recertification through the HR Certification Institute.

REGISTER TODAY

LinkedIn’s Talent Brand Index Could be Trouble!

Posted on by
5

Ok, let’s be as transparent as possible:

1. I’m pissed at LinkedIn like a scorned girlfriend because they won’t let me buy their corporate version LinkedIn Recruiter (not that I need it – I know you can do x-ray searches or use a great product like Scavado for a fraction of the price and get the same info. – but it’s the racialist mentality of it all – “No, you can’t have it because your a bad staffing company and we only give it to good corporate recruiters) – see – scorned girlfriend.

2.  I use LinkedIn every day. Mostly to recruit employees from one company to another company, and someone pays me to do this.

3. I like using LinkedIn – solid U/I and a great recruiting tool, inexpensive.  (we call that a triple threat)

OK – On with the show!

Last week LinkedIn announced a new product at their annual Talent Connect conference, called Talent Brand Index or BrandConnect – or something like that – as you can see I wasn’t invited (which I’m actually not pissed about – I mean I’d like to go – but it’s not like the scorned girlfriend thing). Basically this is a tool/measure of how much your brand is engaged on the LinkedIn site – but it has a number of components baked into the algorithm that make this less than black and white.  I have 3 opinions of this announcement that range in 3 very different psychosis:

Pessimistic View (LinkedIn Haters)

Holy crap – this is just another way for LinkedIn to hold companies hostage over their brand!  Basically, the Talent Brand Index, if I want a higher score, forces me to encourage my employees to get on LinkedIn – the more employees I have on, the higher score I get.  Also, the more products I buy from LinkedIn, the higher my score.  I don’t want my employees to be on LinkedIn because my competition will be pimping them non-stop and I’m bound to lose some.  Plus, they keep using the words “Brand Engagement” that invariably will get confused by people as my “employee engagement” when it really has no correlation.

Optimistic View (LinkedIn Lovers)

This tool is great at showing me where I can increase my “engagement” of my brand within the product.  We trust our employees and want them to network professionally and share our brand with as many people as possible – it’s good for them, it’s good for us.  We believe we have a great place to work and increasing our brand engagement on LinkedIn will only help our recruiting efforts.  Plus, this new tool really, for the first time, gives us great insight to how people outside of our company feel and interact with our employment brand.  It’s great data!

Pragmatic View (The Middle)

If you have a “great” work environment and strong employment brand (let’s say 10% of companies) this is wonderful.  You have low turnover, high employee engagement – this will only help you recruit more folks – and more employees you have on won’t hurt you because they aren’t leaving you.  The other 90% of companies could see some impact from this – if they go out and encourage their employees to actively get on LinkedIn, in hopes of raising your Brand Index score. You have pockets that aren’t pretty and you’ll have folks that get picked off by your competition.  This will then cause you more work.  It’s not to say those people wouldn’t leave on their own – some will, regardless, but I don’t want to throw them a job fair in the lobby of our building. Reality check – most HR shops/companies don’t have the people, the money or the desire to really move the needle on increasing their “LinkedIn Brand Index” score – so this will be a non-issue for most.

Final thought –

I would like those companies who really think this is a great deal to do just 1 thing for me. Will you do that?  Today, go to your CIO and tell them you are going to have the entire Software Development team put their profiles up on LinkedIn – because you want to raise your Brand Index score.  Then let me know the results – if you still have a job, or are conscious.

 

Falling in Love with Your Job

Posted on by
Reply

Do you know what it felt like the last time you fell in love?

I mean real love?

The kind of love where you talk 42 times per day, in between text and facebook messages and feel physical pain from being apart? Ok, maybe for some of you it’s been a while – you didn’t have the texts or Facebook!  But you remember those times when you really didn’t think about anything else, or even imagine not seeing the other person the next day, hell, the next hour. Falling “in” love is one of the best parts of love – it doesn’t last that long and you never get it back.

I hear people all the time say “I love my job” and I never use to pay much attention – in fact – I’ve said it myself.  The reality is – I don’t love my job – I mean I like it a whole lot – but I love my wife, I love my kids, I love Diet Mt. Dew at 7am on a Monday morning – the important things in life.  But my job?  I’m not sure about that one.  As an HR Pro I’m suppose to work to get my employees to “love” their jobs.  Love.

Let me go all Dr. Phil on you for a second – Do you know why most relationships fail? No, it’s not the cheating. No, it’s not the drugs and/or alcohol. No, it’s not money. No, it’s not that he stop caring. No, it’s not your parents. Ok, stop it – I’ll just tell you!  Relationships fail because expectations aren’t met.  Which seems logical knowing what we know about how people fall in love, and lose their minds.  Once that calms down – the real work begins.  So, if you expect love to be the love of the first 4-6 months of a relationship – you’re going to be disappointed a whole bunch – over and over.

Jobs aren’t much different.  You get a new job and it’s usually really good!  People listen to your opinion. You seem smarter – hell – you seem better looking (primarily because people are sick of looking at their older co-workers). Everything seems better in a new job.  Then you have your 1 year anniversary and you come to find out you’re just like the other idiots you’re working with.   This is when falling in love with your job really begins – when you know about all the stuff the company hid in the closet – the past employees they think are better and smarter than you, the good old days when they made more money, etc.  Now is when you have to put some work into making it work.

I see people all the time moving around to different employers and never seeming to be satisfied.  They’re searching – not for a better job, or a better company – they’re searching for that feeling that will last.  But it never will – without them working for it.

 

Off-shoring Your Recruiting

Posted on by
2

If you haven’t been contacted by a recruiting off-shoring company yet, put yourself into a rare segment of Talent/HR Pros.  Almost daily I receive an email or phone call – from a U.S. phone number – telling me how I can save thousands of dollars by using their services to help us recruit for our open positions.  I always find this funny since my company is a third-party recruiting company.  So, basically, they are telling me that they can save me thousands of dollars from the thousands of dollars I tell my clients we are going to save them – sounds to good to be true!

But I’m also a sucker!  Yep, I took the bait!

Here’s the deal:

  • For about $1200/month you’ll get a “Full-time Recruiter” (the price might change a little based on how many you need, volume, etc. but that’s the ballpark)
  • This “Recruiter” works Monday through Friday from 8am to 5pm EST.
  • This “Recruiter” will have a U.S. based phone number.
  • You can have contact with this recruiter via phone or email – in fact it’s encouraged.
  • This “Recruiter” is actually based in India, in a call center environment.
  • This “Recruiter” has access to the major job boards and the internet and is trained at making a basic recruiting call.
  • You can get some guarantees on how many “candidates” presented, screened, etc.
  • The “Recruiter” has an email address from your company and presents themselves as working for your company.

Here’s my reality:

  • At $1200/month I had to try it – it seemed like a small investment for some education into this off-shoring recruiting world I keep hearing about.
  • The recruiter was pleasant, a bit hard to understand, and I felt wanted to do a good job.  It also sounds like they are sitting on the busiest street corner in Mumbai! (imagine giant call center with 500 folks all on the phone at the same time – with the windows open – sitting on Time Square – that’s the sound!)
  • They basically just call off of folks they find on job boards and/or an internal database of contacts which consist of H1B candidates that need sponsorship (we had them working on some IT openings to see what they came up with)
  • In 30 days of working a JAVA Developer opening, working for a U.S. client in the Denver Metro area with a competitive wage – this off-shoring recruiting company presented zero candidates that didn’t need sponsorship and only 1 candidate overall.
  • It wasn’t an easy opening – but that’s why I gave it to them to see how this person would do.
  • After the first 3 days I got a message and a call almost daily from the Recruiter and this person’s manager asking for more orders, even though they had yet to present one candidate.  This didn’t stop. We tried at the end to give a couple more IT openings we had, that I had my internal recruiters working on to see if they would come up with different candidates – and again we got a bunch of H1B candidates.

I don’t consider this to be a total failure – the experience let me know exactly what kind of orders that an off-shoring company could handle and do well with.  Those orders would most likely be ones where you have a healthy candidate base and just don’t have the internal capacity to go through the process of screening, or you have a staff that just has a hard time picking up the phone and calling potential candidates (stop laughing – that’s most corporate HR folks – or there wouldn’t be a multi-billion dollar recruiting industry).

Would I do it again?  Probably not, although the lure of a $1200/month recruiter is very enticing – especially one that isn’t afraid of the phones, but the reality of what I got doesn’t match up with what I paid.  Now – if I had to hire for a U.S. Call center and needed someone to plow through Monster and find 50 candidates a week for us to interview – maybe that might be the key to making this thing work.

$1200 education for myself.  You don’t have to get this same education – if you are seriously considering this – call me and I’ll tell you some better options for your $1200!

 

 

What Job Hunting is Not

Posted on by
1

There is one thing I love to do each week – sit down on a Sunday morning, with most of the family still in bed, my youngest on the couch watching cartoons and me reading the Sunday paper.   It’s one of those small things in life I really like to do – my wife tells me it reminds her of her father – it probably reminds me of my father as well.  Diet Mt. Dew, Cinnamon Pop-tart and the Paper – the perfect Sunday morning.

This Sunday I actually read a column of a local writer that was really good – it was from the heart, you could tell his passion – it was about his own job search.  Job Hunting Leads to a State of Confusion – went through his most recent frustrating job search to find his current position he loves at the local paper.   It had been 20 years since he had to go through a job search, and he believed in what he had heard from the “experts” over the past 20 years on “how to get a job”.  What he found was the exact opposite – and what most of us in the profession have known all along.  You don’t get a job by having the best resume, or following the online submission process, or even answering every interview question the best – you get a job by making connections with people.  After all the science and all the technology – it still comes down to relationships and making a personal connection.

From the article:

Work skills did not translate to job-landing skills.

The concept seemed counter-intuitive to me. In fact, it went against what I thought I’d learned about job hunting in my news-gathering days. Then, history of punctuality, dependability and going the extra mile were immensely important. Writing and communication skills couldn’t be emphasized enough.

I’d written the tips many times. Now all I had to do was make a compelling case to potential employers. I couldn’t have been more off base…

My work history appeared secondary and the interview process came off as impersonal…

Interview panels seemed weirdly focused on themselves…

Interviewers seemed strangely uninterested in seeing my work…”

Sound familiar?  It’s what we put candidates through, it’s what we force our hiring managers to do – impersonal, weird, strange.

Job hunting, when you have to be hunting (i.e., I don’t have a job and need one), sucks!

Job hunting is not fun.

Job hunting is not exciting.

Job hunting is not life affirming.

As HR/Talent Pros we tend to forget this little fact.  The fact that the people we are interviewing and putting through our “process” are in the most stressful part of their life.  It’s hard to be your best, when you’re most stressed.  Less hoops and more helps are probably needed.  Something for me to think about the next time I’m interviewing someone.

 

Dream Gigantic

Posted on by
Reply

I love this.

I don’t do this enough – I don’t count myself as a dreamer – but I encourage my children to do this.  I want them to be the MLB Shortstop, the famous Fashion Designer and world renowned Environmentalist.  They have Gigantic dreams – I will do everything I can in my power to help them reach those dreams.  I won’t be the parent who tells them they are unrealistic.  I won’t be the parent to tell them they are farfetched.  I will not be the parent to tell them that their dream is out of reach.

I have a career that has taught me to be pragmatic.  I’ve seen the best and worst of people – sometimes all in the same day. When people ask me for career advice I give them the safe answer, because I know the reality of life – their dreams are longshots – most people are not willing to come close to the effort they need to exert to reach their dreams – so I give them options I think they are willing to work for – which are less than Gigantic.

Every day I have to consciously turn this off as I drive home.  You see the reason we have dreams is because we have a belief that there is something more, something better.  Dreams can be Gigantic – and you reach them through Gigantic effort.

The End of Men

Posted on by
Reply

I don’t really consider myself a “Man’s-Man” – I love to fish, go to college football games and I’ll watch back-to-back ESPN SportsCenters that are the exact same episode likes it’s brand new material – but I don’t hunt, I can arrange flowers better than my wife and musical theater is something I look forward to.  Probably more metro than macho – at least from a Midwest standpoint – I’m not Manhattan Metro – I’m more Milwaukee Metro.  I have 3 sons – so the topic of males is something I tend to study – I want to raise my boys to be successful men – in work, in life and in love.  That is no easy task in today’s American society.

Hanna Rosin recently released the new book, The End of Men: And the Rising of Women, which looks at how society over the past 50 years has slowly but surely shifted to a point where women have begun to move ahead of men in almost every measure.  This isn’t a feminist look at the topic, it’s a data driven look – and in many ways to blows away much of our traditional views on gender in our society.  From a Time article on the book:

“changes in the world economy have dramatically shifted gender roles. Women have adapted more skillfully to the new socioeconomic landscape by doggedly pursuing self-improvement opportunities, rebranding as the economy requires it, and above all possessing the kind of 21st century work attributes — such as strong communication skills, collaborative leadership and flexibility — that are nudging out the brawny, stuck-in-amber guys. Rock steadiness, long a cherished masculine trait, turns out to be about as useful in our fleet-footed economy as a flint arrowhead. Life favors the adapters, and it turns out they’re more likely to be women.”

Our educational system has been pushed to include girls so much over the past 50 years – that we’ve done a right ditch-left ditch that now has forgotten how to teach boys. Forbes also had a recent article on the subject that highlighted the book Why Boys Fail: Saving Our Sons from an Educational System that is Leaving Them Behind:
  • Schools have in effect become microcosms of the larger economy. Richard Whitmire, author of Why Boys Fail, summarizes the trend this way: “The world has gotten more verbal, boys haven’t.”
  • Beyond straight verbal skills, boys tend to get tripped up by what researchers call “non-cognitive skills” meaning the ability to focus, organize yourself, and stay out of trouble….
  • In the late 1990s, educators acted on the correct assumption that all jobs now require more sophisticated writing. Cops now need advanced degrees and practice in communication skills; factory workers are expected to be able to fill out elaborate orders. Society expects most workers to have college-level literacy, even if their day-to-day jobs do not really require it.

 

So, what does all this mean?  I’m not naive – I know men in executive leadership roles still dominate and in most segments in our country/world we still have major pay disparity – but these differences are changing at a historic pace and experts believe one day soon (by looking at college graduate projections) women will flip this upside down.  I wonder how many HR Shops are starting to put together diversity groups of white males – my guess would be zero.  I do believe that one day before my career in HR is over – HR shops will have to address an issue that involves “Developing Males” – seems almost laughable to write down.  Corporations having to be concerned about encouraging and developing male leaders seems like something I would never have to worry about in our society – it was always the “natural” way – until it wasn’t.

3 Reasons Talent Communities are NOT the Future of Employment

Posted on by
6

I know a lot of really smart, brilliant people who espouse that Talent Communities are the second coming of Christ, in regards to employment and recruiting.  Business Week even had a recent article where they called “Talent Hives” (I guess their version of “Talent Communities” – the future of employment – which means this concept is now hitting main stream and soon you’ll see June the HR Manager down at the local Tool & Die Shop trying to set up her talent community.  Here’s more from Business Week:

“These are communities of people interested in an employer (whether because they’re job hunting themselves, or just curious, or because they’re fans of the product or service the organization produces) and willing to be in two-way touch with that employer over time. (For the simplest example of a Talent Hive, think of a Facebook (FB) company page or a LinkedIn (LNKD) group). Talent Hives are popular because they’re easy to set up, and because the two-way and group communication makes it easy for companies to learn more about potential job applicants (including people who are currently working for their competitors) even when they don’t have open positions.”

Great theoretical concept.  But I think theory and practice don’t always align because the real world steps in an kicks it in and kicks them both to the curb.  Here’s 3 reasons I don’t see Talent Communities as the Future of Employment:

1. Reality – Talent Communities are established by you and ran by you (the HR/Recruitment Dept.) – that’s means you need to deliver content, sometimes unique, definitely engaging. Very few people, in HR worlds, have the skill/ability to do this.  You can shop this out, at a cost – a cost of not only money but also authenticity – there goes that community feel.  And, by the way, you’re doing this for a benefit you may, or may not, get in the future when you have an opening you believe you might have.  How many organizations are really going to do this long term? It’s a small percentage, congregated into smaller specialty industries – with really big budgets – to make it sustainable.

2. Logistics – Talent Communities assume “Talent” – that talented people you would want to hire will voluntarily want to join your content driven community and interact.  That’s a huge assumption! Gigantic!  First, you (yes, you – who else will do it) needs to go out and find the great talent that you someday want to work at your company and engage them to be apart of your community.  I don’t know about you – but 99.9% of the HR/Talent Pros I know don’t have the capacity to make this happen – either through time or skill.

3. WIFM (What’s In It For Me) – Talent Communities don’t deliver enough WIFM.  Talented people get this – they are fooled by your “Community” which isn’t really a community but a holding pen for potential future candidates and you have to know they know this. This means someone who ops into your community gets the deal – I want to work at your place – so I’m going to engage with you – and you will engage with me – and one day you’ll hire me – and you’ll use that number to justify how great Talent Communities are so I can keep this job as Talent Community Manager and justify my $50K+ salary.  How’s that work for you?

Let’s face it – I don’t know much – but I think I know a little about recruitment – and to me Talent Communities seem to be a lot of smoke and mirrors and well it’s easier/safer than just picking up the phone and finding/calling the talent you want (which is dirty and evil for some reason).  I know some folks have some great examples of Talent Communities working – good for them – I hope they keep working for them.  I guess this message goes out to the HR majority – it isn’t as easy as it might sound.  Before jumping in with both feet – make sure it’s right for you.