Corporate Eye » Careers

The "New" Fortune List: Part 2

Cynthia — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:29:48 +0000

More observations on the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For list, 2010 . . .

A Lesson from the List: Right-sizing the Corporate Careers Site

Given the fabulous workplace at SAS (see Part 1 for details!), we can surmise that the main challenge for their recruiters really is tracking down those perfect passive candidates and luring top talent through the gates of paradise. Therefore, it’s not surprising that the SAS Careers site is truly minimal—just a (long) list of benefits and some job search tools. That’s all. No videos, testimonials, day in the life, social media. Just the opportunity to apply.

Over at Publix Super Markets, on the other hand, where many prospective employees can expect to work long hours stocking shelves or filling prescriptions, the Careers site has every conceivable bell and whistle. Publix has almost 140,000 employees compared with not quite 6,000 (U.S.) positions at SAS, and as of January 2010 they were looking for 1300 new employees, while SAS was in search of 52.

Point: In considering what is “best practice” for a corporate Careers site, we really need to look at the context. Arguably, SAS doesn’t need a state-of-the-art web presence. Publix does.

A Question about the List: Is It Still Relevant?

A few years ago, the Fortune List seemed to be investigative and informative. It offered examples of what worked in the workplace, and showed off companies that had built solid employer brands. Getting on the list was a valuable achievement, and falling off would presumably be a disgrace.

When you look at that set-up, it becomes obvious that the list is not likely to change much. There are only 100 spots, and once you’ve identified 100 companies that meet the criteria, the quota is full. New places will only open up when a listee messes up seriously, goes out of business, or gets bought up. So by now the news is not who’s on the list, but whether they rise and fall in relative rankings.

This year SAS vaulted from a respectable Twenty all the way to Numero Uno. Why? No way of knowing. Fortune doesn’t explain its rankings. But some suspect that companies figure out the secret of improving their rank and deliberately work their way up. I.e., they study the test.

This year I spotted five newcomers: McCormick, FactSet, Mercedes-Benz, LifeBridge Health Care, and DPR Construction. There are probably more, as I didn’t make an exhaustive comparison—but I’m pretty sure I recognize 90% of the companies as perennials. Given that 353 companies competed . . . the apparent conclusion would be that at least 248 competitors (2/3 of the set) fell short of whatever it would take to dislodge an incumbent.

Point: Maybe it’s time for Fortune to shake up this drill. What about categories for small, medium and large enterprises, to establish a more level playing field? What about special recognitions for innovators and most improved companies? What about breaking out the citations for listees in terms of (a) tangibles like pay and perks, and (b) intangibles like respect, fun, loyalty, etc. And what about adding a new point of view, so the Great Place to Work Institute is not the sole arbiter?

Just some thoughts . . .

"New" Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For: Part 1

Cynthia — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:18:31 +0000

The February 28^th edition of CBS’s popular Sunday Morning show led with a profile of SAS, the top shop in this year’s Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For. But the title of the story wasn’t “Workers in Paradise”—it was: “The Great American Paycheck Squeeze.”

Fortune explains the choice for first place:

SAS boasts a laundry list of benefits — high-quality [onsite] child care at $410 a month, 90% coverage of the health insurance premium, unlimited sick days, a medical center staffed by four physicians and 10 nurse practitioners (at no cost to employees), a free 66,000-square-foot fitness center and natatorium, a lending library, and a summer camp for children.

There’s more about the culture (based on “trust between our employees and the company”), the continuity of leadership, the profitability of the company, and so on. But the big deal is obviously the Edenic workplace, which also boasts 40 miles of running trails, a hair salon, three subsidized cafeterias, an onsite massage therapist (of course), and an artist-in-residence program.

So what could possibly be wrong with this picture?

As the Sunday Morning story observes: “The reality is, for more and more Americans in these recessionary times, SAS might as well be Disney World.”

There’s an inherent discontinuity in the list between what we might call the “campus” companies, where life is made easy for employees (Intel, Intuit, Genentech, Qualcomm, the list goes on) and the “shirt sleeve” companies, where employees are offered emotional reward in lieu of creature comforts. Stew Leonard’s, Build-a-Bear Workshop, Umpqua Bank and a few others compete mainly on charm—fun at work, family feeling, respect for and from management—plus health care benefits, with few other tangible perks.

There’s also a discontinuity between companies where many people might work and those where few need apply. SAS actually did grow jobs last year, by a modest 2%. But the people they hire are for the most part already selected out of the general population by high skill levels. And many of the more applicant-accessible companies on the list had negative job growth, ranging from -2% to more than -20%. Across the board, from FedEx to Zappos, CarMax to Men’s Wearhouse, the job news for non-geniuses was not good.

So who grew? Biggest increases were at the Scooter Store (up 51%) and Smucker’s (up 44%). The “why” at Scooter Store seems obvious, given the aging population and the general decline in fitness. As for Smucker’s . . . well, sales have increased 58% since their acquisition of Folger’s in 2008, so effectively they bought a bunch of new jobs. And coffee has turned out to be a great space for expansion, since decreases in disposable income have driven coffee drinkers to brew at home. On the flip side, job growth at Starbucks was -27%.

More analysis, and some lessons from the list, in Part 2.

The Definitive "Definitive Guide" to HR Blogging

Cynthia — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:29:04 +0000

Many thanks to Standout Jobs and Talent Synchronicity for A Definitive Guide to Corporate HR Blogging by Ben Yoskovitz and Susan Burns. If you haven’t downloaded a copy of this excellent ebook—do so, ASAP. For those who need some persuasion, here’s a speedy overview plus a few highlights . . .

The authors provide a guide to the guide, previewing “what you’ll learn”:

Why blogging is important to your success
How to develop the case for blogging
How to get management approval
How to handle bad news and negative criticism
How to start a blog – the technology, definitions, and more
How to write a blog – editorial calendars, story ideas, research
How to build traffic – linking, social media, commenting, etc.
How to go beyond blogging – Twitter, social networks

There’s good coverage on each of those topics—and in fact, this ebook offers both a great overview and a sturdy set of how-to steps for anyone interested in blogging, HR or not. In addition to all the basics (with examples and links to information resources), there are in-depth explorations of corporate blogging challenges, with advice on how to establish blogging policies, how to work across the enterprise, and how blogging can generate quality leads.

Here are five of my favorite quotes.

1. From “Why Blog?”: The key is to think of blogging as a long-term, evolving strategic initiative. Blogging won’t help you fill a position instantly. But it will help you expand your reach and build a community of people (readers, job seekers, etc.) that’s interested in you and your company.

2. From “Getting Management Approval to Blog”: If management can’t recognize the value of blogging you’ve got bigger problems, because that means management doesn’t understand the value of strategic recruiting and inbound marketing.

3. From “Post Topics”: Job seekers want the inside scoop on your company. They want to collect as much information as possible before deciding whether your company is the right fit. The more you can do to open your doors and provide that sneak peek inside, the better.

4. From “Staying Motivated”: It is very important to stay motivated and keep your blog updated regularly. That’s why an editorial calendar can be so helpful for advanced planning. And that’s also why having multiple authors or even guest bloggers can help a great deal.

5. From “10 HR Blogging Best Practices”: Be personable, authentic and real. Job seekers and candidates don’t want corporate-speak and buzzwords. They want information and dialogue with real people about real issues and stories.

With Twitter so much in the forefront of social media hype, it may seem like blogging is old hat. But more often than not, the two forms need each other. Blogging provides an opportunity to present information and ideas in more depth—and also to establish a personal voice or group viewpoint. Tweeting, in turn, can support and enliven the blog.

Thinking of developing a blog? Start with this ebook. Have a blog? Read it for a refresher and reminder. Don’t see blogging anywhere on your radar? The Definitive Guide will convince you to give the idea some serious consideration.

The February Wrap-up

Cynthia — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:19:56 +0000

Continuing the 2010 tradition, some updates and short takes for last month:

Following up on the meeting detailed in Confused about .jobs Job Boards? . . . reports (sort of) about the event were summarized by John Zappe in this post on ere.net. It certainly doesn’t clear anything up, but if by chance you’ve followed the saga thus far, it’s a must read.

If you are new to the topic, however, you can just jump directly to the Recently Breaking News. In the nick of time for this wrap-up, Zappe posted an update that reveals a new turn of events. To wit: Direct Employers has taken down all the controversial .jobs sites (which were in beta but scheduled to launch this month) for “enhancements.”

There’s more detail, and more back story. But that’s the gist of it.

Also out recently is this AP story, which presents a sunnier version of the .jobs story, largely in the context of profiling Bill Warren. Reading all these items together, it’s tempting to think there has been a collision of good intentions, ambitious goals, poor communications, questionable decisions, and changing times. But of course it’s the outcome that will ultimately define “what happened.”

In the meantime, here’s one more thought about Employment Happiness. It’s assumed today that there’s a quantifiable value to having happy employees: lower turnover, better employer brand, higher productivity, etc. But that’s a revlatively recent point of view. Were the people making Model Ts happy in the workplace? The gray-flannel-suited men of mid-century Manhattan? The drug-enabled workaholics of the zoom-zoom 80s?

It’s arguable that corporate America as we know it was built by unhappy people—and since things haven’t been going too well in the economy since the idea of worker happiness became popular . . . maybe there’s food for thought.

This last item is a bit out of order, since posts about the new Fortune 100 Best Places to Work list will be coming up in March. But I wanted to get in a couple of small discoveries from the list that didn’t fit into the future posts:

The law firm of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe has instituted a non-partner track, offering long-term opportunities for lawyers who don’t want to work 100+ hours a week on their way to the partner suite. Now that’s a good idea.
Six of the 100 companies on the list were touted as having “no lay-offs, ever.” But Mercedes Benz was the only one where voluntary pay-cuts for CEO and execs were mentioned among the cost-saving measures.

Don’t forget: In the U.S., Employee Recognition Day is the first Friday of March. Check out some good recognition ideas for that day or any other.

(Many thanks to rvacapinta for sharing the kitchen counter still life. You can see a fabulous Friday Night Dinner unfold on his Flickr page—highlighted by an entrée of seared scallops with a cauliflower purée in a walnut vinaigrette with orange caramelized chicory.)

No Related Post

Three Keys to Creating a Great Candidate Experience

Cynthia — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:15:38 +0000

A Closer Look at the Candidate Experience drew a comment from Gerry Crispin (one of the masterminds at CareerXroads) that has made me give a little more thought to this topic. His point:

Firms will increasingly be able to measure the link from an improved candidate experience to higher engagement as employee and (surprise) better company performance. Then we’ll see some light escaping the black hole.

This is really important. If companies recognize a significant business (i.e., dollar) value in treating candidates decently, they will be more likely to make an effort in this direction. So establishing the link between a great applicant/candidate experience and great employee performance can help put this topic on the corporate radar.

It might also be helpful to super-simplify the steps required for process improvement . There can be a lot of touchpoints and moving parts involved in the candidate experience—but there are really only three rules for making the experience great.

Communicate
Communicate
Communicate

Can’t get much simpler than that. But as always, the challenge is in the details . . .

First, communicate on the corporate Careers site. Really communicate. Go beyond PR fluff and pretty pictures–include substantive information, and plenty of it. Be transparent. (This 2009 post on transparency is worth revisiting.) And make social media communications meaningful, instead of just trolling for passive candidates.

Second, communicate with every single applicant. Every one. Consistently and sincerely. Impossible? No! Even if the communication is just an automated email, it can be nicely worded and can even be informative and helpful to the candidate. Above all—try to close every candidate interaction with a communication: an acknowledgement (“thanks for applying”), an update (“we’ll be scheduling interviews later this month”), a kindly rejection (“we really appreciate your application, but”), an interview invitation (“we look forward to meeting you”), a courtesy note (“thanks so much for your time to interview”), a sincere rejection (“although we really enjoyed meeting you”), or an offer (“we are so excited”).

And third . . . communicate during the interview itself, and during other personal interactions. Whoever talks with the candidate should have something to say–they should be knowledgeable about the position and about the company and about the candidate. (Reading the resume before meeting the candidate should be a minimum requirement.)

That may sound like a lot of “extra” work—but for many companies, it may be mainly a shift of priorities. Once they start looking at the process from a human connection perspective, there may be a lot of obvious opportunities to tweak for improvement.

More ideas: Interesting background view from Paul Dodd and Sarah Welstead at head2head. A Gen Y take from blogger/strategist Sarah White. A good example from Best Buy Canada Ltd. And a thoughtful prediction from Claudia Faust at Improved Experience.