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

5 Steps To Becoming the Most Liked HR Pro Ever!

Posted on by
1

The old adage “I’d rather be respected, than liked” was made up by people who didn’t have any friends!  And it’s been perpetuated for centuries by HR Pros who didn’t think it was professional to have friends in their organizations.  “I’m not their friend, Tim – I’m in HR – there is a reason we lock the doors to our department.”

I look it this a bit differently – make friends first.  That is all.  No, “then” or “after that” – just make friends.  Do you know why HR Pros don’t make friends with employees? Yes – you do – because “We don’t want to fire our friends!” or “We need to remain impartial” or “I’m stupid” (I made that last one up – which if your stupid you probably didn’t know).   The reality is, we do things attempting to stop stuff that probably will never happen.  When is the last time you truly had to fire a friend?  “Never – because I don’t have friends that work for me!” No, really, when? Most of us would say, “Never”.

The problem with not allowing yourself to be friends with non-HR employees is that you lose a major source of influence within your organization.  Also, it sucks eating at your desk everyday.  And you decrease your eventual dating pool. But, really it’s the influence!  So, here are 5 steps you can do to be more liked and make more friends at work:

1.  Stop being a know it all.  HR people act like they created Congress – everything is legal this or legal that – stop it – be normal. 99% of stuff HR thinks might happen, doesn’t happen – trying to mitigate 100% of risk in your organization makes people hate you – and it doesn’t help you do your job better.

2. Make a fool out of yourself once in a while.  You’re not that important that you have to act like Mr. Manners all the time. Having employees laugh at you, because you did something silly, foolish and/or crazy – will help them believe you might be normal.

3. Hang out with the smokers! Let’s face it smokers are cool and know everything that goes on in your organization – you want them as friends.  I don’t smoke because it’s gross, smells and will kill you – but I love hanging with smokers – especially if they have one of those voice boxes they talk about of!

4. Go out to Lunch.  Preferably not with the smokers because that isn’t appetizing at all.

5. Kiss another employee on the mouth at the office Christmas party! Kidding, just making sure you were paying attention.  Don’t do this – unless you’re really drunk and want to leave a legacy. Here’s the real #5 – Spend 50% of your time away from your desk – visiting employees and hiring managers – even the ones you don’t like.  This will change your professional life forever.

Being liked in HR is important it allows you to do your job in a much more efficient manner than when people don’t want you around.  It’s not about respect – you can have both – and given the choice of having respect and being hated, or having respect and being liked – well, let’s just say I hang out with smokers.

 

 

 

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.

 

You Want a Jerry Jones Type Owner

Posted on by
1

I’m not a fan of the Dallas Cowboys but I have to say from an HR perspective many of us our missing the boat on Jerry Jones.  Here’s the deal – you’ve got a guy who played college football, made a crap ton of money and decided he was going to buy the Dallas Cowboys.  It’s his team, he pays the bills, he is an owner unlike many NFL owners in that he actually wants to be involved and has background at a high level into the sport.

Let’s back up for a minute.  In business, most of our owners were at one point entrepreneurs/startup types that had an idea and ran with it.  They worked their butts off and became successful and while they might not be super involved in the day-to-day currently – they clearly have the ability to jump back into the mix if they had to.  In many circumstances owners are still the lifeblood of their companies – they drive revenue, they motivate, they live and die their brand.  Not bad traits to have from an owner (or anyone else working for you).

So, why do we hate on Jerry Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys?  Here are the reasons

1. We hate him because he’s wants to be involved with the business he runs?!

2. We hate him because we feel there are more qualified people to run his billion dollar investment?!

3. We hate him because he wants to be involved with every staffing decision that is made in his business?!

You know what happens when an owner steps down and let’s someone else take over operations in a majority of cases?  You get less passion for the business, you get increased entitlement, you get a decrease in knowledge and a decrease in motivation.   It’s shown time after time when original owner steps aside (it’s something I think about often in my new role – don’t let this happen!).  Jerry Jones isn’t bad for Dallas or the NFL – he’s great for it – you won’t find a person more passionate for “his” business to succeed, for “his” employees to do well, for “his” investment to pay off even greater in the future.  You know what you get when you take away “his” or “hers” –you get “yours” and “theirs” – that isn’t better – it’s worse!

The 3 Places You’re Going in your Career

Posted on by
Reply

You know that Career Path you’re currently on – I want to tell you to not get so concerned and uptight about where it’s going because the reality is – it will only go in 3 directions.  I was talking with a young HR pro last week and this person was super concerned about his career path – you know the concern – “I need to be an executive by 35 or my life is a failure” – and he was looking to me for advice.  So, I gave him my career path advice – get fired a couple of times and have your Mom promote you to President! Seems easy enough, I don’t know what all the concern is about.

The reality is – you have only 3 places you will go in your career path:

1. You’ll stay in position (No Move)

2. You’ll get promoted (Move Up)

3. You’ll get fired (Move you don’t want)

Someone might be thinking –  wait – you can have lateral movement or be demoted.  Demotion is being fired, you just couldn’t take the hint and leave.  Lateral move I consider staying in position or no move – all you did was change the color of your office, it’s the same thing.

I’ve gotten to the point in my career where I talk to younger people – just starting out in their career and I say stupid stuff like- “Ugh, these GenY and Millenials don’t get it – you have to put in your time and prove yourself – they’ve done nothing, but think they deserve to move up”.  Right? You say this stuff to don’t you!  Then I remember – I had the same freaking stupid goals – I wanted to be a VP by 35 or somehow I’d consider my life to be a failure (It didn’t happen until I was 38 – and by the time I got it – it no longer seemed important!).  Generations haven’t changed – young people have always want to move up faster than they should and believe they can handle it.

I envy people who have stayed in the same position for 20-30-40 years – COMPLETELY – envy.  To be satisfied with where you are at – not feel that need to push up or out – to chase something that in the end is meaningless – that is a feeling I don’t know – but would like to.   You know – HR Pros/Leaders contribute to this issue – we tell people they are on a career path, we feel the need to show them a career path – we make people feel like if they aren’t “chasing” their career path or climbing the ladder they are somehow less than others.  They aren’t.

 

HR, Meet Your Replacement

Posted on by
Reply

It’s name is Baxter – it costs $22,000 –

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Baxter, though, sits on a gurney and can be set down safely just about anywhere on a factory floor. Its eyes are on a swiveling computer screen and greet any worker who approaches. To teach Baxter a job, a human simply grabs its arms, simulates the desired task, and presses a button to set the pattern.

Another idea behind Baxter is that it will be upgradable. The company plans to update Baxter’s software for free every few months, enabling more complex behaviors such as two-handed manipulation. Early next year, Rethink will also release a set of programming instructions so developers can come up with their own tasks and attachments for the machine.”

Think your new iPhone 5 is cool – just wait until this dude takes over your job.

“But wait, Tim – a Robot could not do my job in HR!”  It can if all you do is transactional stuff…and it will probably have a better attitude.  Plus, at $4/hr true cost over a 3 year period – what do I have to lose!

What are you doing right now – today – in your organization to add value?  Better start doing something – Baxter is coming.

HR Needs to be more like Tuna

Posted on by
Reply

When is the last time you had a Tuna fish sandwich?  It’s been a while for me, because I’m the only one in my family who likes it – but growing up I had Tuna weekly.  I mean it’s the Chicken of the Sea!  Slate recently had an article that made me remember my Tuna days:

Why did Americans fall for tuna? Because it’s cheap and bland. Most of the tuna consumed in 19th-century America was imported in cans from France and served to European guests at upscale East Coast restaurants. Mainstream Americans considered the fish too gamey, until a cannery in San Pedro Bay, Calif., figured out that the steamed white meat of albacore tuna has very little flavor if you drain the fish’s own oil and can the meat with olive or cottonseed oil instead. The company began marketing the product as a chicken alternative in 1907. It distributed thousands of free recipe booklets, which contained mostly classic chicken or canned salmon recipes with tuna as a substitute. Americans found that tuna’s flavor was hardly noticeable in the right sauce, and sales began to rise. The tuna revolution really took off, however, during World War I. European countries, and eventually the American government, bought the inexpensive canned fish to feed the troops.

You feel smarter don’t you!?  Don’t tell me you didn’t learn anything today!

So, the big question is what does Tuna have to do with HR?  Only a question I would ask!

Tuna did for itself, what HR needs to do for itself – build a reputation within your organization – a positive reputation!  Tuna didn’t go out and say we are the best and brightest – come find out what we can do for you.  Tuna went to the consumer and said – you know what – we are cheap, but we taste alright and we can show you how you can make us taste better, and once you use us – you’ll find out you’ll want to use us even more because we are a better value then all those other fish in the sea!

See what I did there – I compared what you do internally in HR to the history of Tuna – I’m losing my mind.

Too often in our organizations we don’t make it easy for our organizations to work with us – we don’t show them how – we just assume they will know how to work with us.  But the reality is, they have no real concept of what HR is capable of, what you’re capable of, until you show them.  How do you show them?  Go spend time with them and find out what they need (not what you can deliver) then figure out the recipe to what they need – a little bit of HR, a little bit of marketing, and little bit of arm twisting and BAM – they’re using you and liking it!

Yep – HR needs to be more like Tuna!

Strategic Napping

Posted on by
5

You guys know I’m always on the outlook for things that will make my recruiters more productive – the constant beatings have proven only to be successful in the short-term!  So, when I read the NY Times article Rethinking Sleeping I was a bit, but hopeful, that maybe science has come up with something that won’t cost me more money.  I’ve always been envious of folks that only need 4-6 hours of sleep per night and seem fresh as a daisy – I’m also skeptical since I think most people lie about how much sleep they get and not on the high side.  Most people I run into wear their lack of sleep like a badge of honor – “I only sleep 4 hours per night!” – so you go to bed when? Midnight? And get up at 4am?  Really?!? Reeaallly!!!??? Come on – I’m calling bullshit.  It’s just like the people who tell you they work 80 hours per week – No you don’t – you can’t count your 1 hour each way commute time and checking email on your iPhone as you sit on the toilet before you go to bed – that doesn’t count!

I’m a 7 hour per night kind of sleeper – I go to bed at 11:30 pm – alarm goes off at 6:30am – I’m a no snooze alarm person, wants it goes off, I’m up.  Now on the weekends that changes up a bit – its usually anywhere from midnight to 2am watching movie in bed time until however long I can force myself to stay in bed in the morning which is usually 9am at the latest – again it’s probably a rough 7-9, maybe 9 hours on Saturday and Sunday.  Now, I could say I only sleep 4 hours – because let’s face it – I’m 40ish – around 2-4am I’m up, peeing – thank you old age.  My grandmother is a true 4 hour a sleep person – she is 83 and I think it pisses her off that she actually has to go to bed – I think she would prefer to just keep drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes at the kitchen table all night – but alas, she forces herself to go to bed.  I’m completely envious of her telling me stories of how she is up at 4am, and has to force herself to stay in bed that long!  I keep waiting for those genetics to kick in – can you imagine how much you could get done by only sleeping 4 hours!

‘They’ tell us we should get 8 hours of sleep a night.  We assume that means 8 hours in a row- but new research is showing us that maybe 8 hours in a row isn’t what is really needed to be most productive.  From the NY Times article:

This, despite the fact that a number of recent studies suggest that any deep sleep — whether in an eight-hour block or a 30-minute nap — primes our brains to function at a higher level, letting us come up with better ideas, find solutions to puzzles more quickly, identify patterns faster and recall information more accurately. In a NASA-financed study, for example, a team of researchers led by David F. Dinges, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, found that letting subjects nap for as little as 24 minutes improved their cognitive performance…

Gradual acceptance of the notion that sequential sleep hours are not essential for high-level job performance has led to increased workplace tolerance for napping and other alternate daily schedules.  Employees at Google, for instance, are offered the chance to nap at work because the company believes it may increase productivity.

Here is what I know – taking a nap at work in America, in 99% of our organizations, is going to be looked at as a sign something is wrong with you – unfortunately. We haven’t opened enough minds yet to make this acceptable behavior.  Do I think taking a strategic nap during the day has merit – I do – but would your employees be willing to take an extra hour nap and then work until 6pm?  Doubtful, right?  There in lies that balance issue – if you sleep during work hours, work hours get expanded – and you have to be willing to push your concept of family balance out to the extra time you’ll have not sleeping later at night or early in the morning – that is a big jump in perception for our society right now.