Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Talent Acquisition 2009: On the Other Hand . . .

Talent Acquisition 2009: On the Other Hand . . .


Big 3

This is the third post considering Aberdeen’s recent report, Talent Acquisition Strategies 2009: Cutting through the Clutter and Proactively Managing Quality Candidates,  and the goal is to drill down on a couple of aspects.  Starting off, here’s an essential assumption of the report, based on the drivers defined by respondents:

More companies are competing for the same skills or competencies, but are doing so from a pool of quality candidates that has not grown in proportion to the overall pool of available labor.

That really is an interesting proposition.  I interpret it to mean that (as a simple example) if there were 100 candidates for Job X in 2005, 20 were really top drawer, and if there are 500 candidates for Job X today, fewer than 100 of them would be excellent.  And whereas 10 companies were competing for the top 20 folks in 2005, 20 companies (let’s say) might be going after the fewer-than-100 great catches in 2009.

The seriousness of this problem would depend on the actual shrinkage of the high-quality pool, and the actual increase of the competing-companies quotient.  Let’s say it’s half and twice:  50 of 500 candidates are highly desirable, and 20 companies are competing for them.

This brings up a big question:  Why are there fewer excellent candidates?  The obvious answer would be that the best folks are holding onto their jobs and the candidate pool is filling up with the least successful employees.  And that would make the hunt for passive candidates even more urgent.

But there might also be additional explanations for the presumed decline in candidate quality.  One might be that expectations are rising—so an excellent 2005 candidate would be considered merely adequate today.  That might flow from tighter budgets and increasing scrutiny of new-hire performance, creating pressure to maximize the value of every hire.

Another explanation might be that (incredibly enough) high-value workers are leaving the corporate playing field for entrepreneurial opportunities and even non-profits.  Reverse immigration could also be a factor, along with a retirement differential effect, in which the better-off boomers leave the workforce while the less successful have to remain.

So what does all this argue in terms of online recruitment?  For one thing, this may be a good time for companies to reassess their expectations to make sure “good” candidates are not overlooked while everyone searches for the elusive “best” candidates.  And for another—companies need to be increasingly creative in their recruiting if they want to entice the reluctant and attract the excellent.

The Aberdeen report seems to emphasize a by-the-numbers approach, in which the Best in Class are all doing all the same “right” things.  But sometimes coloring outside the lines is a good way to break away from the pack.

One last contrarian thought.  Aberdeen’s report focuses on strategy, tactics, and tools.  All good.  But there’s something else worth considering.   In How to Harness Instinct and Intuition to Make Better Business and Career Decisions, CIO notes that “When CIOs discuss the worst candidates they’ve ever hired for jobs, as they often do in CIO.com’s  Hiring Manager Interviews series, their hiring mistakes almost always come down to this: I didn’t trust my gut. The CIO knows deep down that the candidate isn’t right for the position or the IT organization, ignores his instincts and hires the individual anyway.”

Check out the CIO story for some interesting ideas about why the gut-check is an indispensable aspect of successful decision-making.


(Thanks to pastaboysleeps for the BIG Number 3.)

Talent Acquisition 2009: Considering the Aberdeen Group Report


Big 1

A new report from the Aberdeen Group researchers–Talent Acquisition Strategies 2009: Cutting through the Clutter and Proactively Managing Quality Candidates—offers much to think about.  In fact, there’s so much thought provocation that I’m going to walk through the topics in three posts, looking at some aspects of the Aberdeen findings and exploring some contrary/complementary ideas.

First, the background.  The Aberdeen study, conducted between June and August, 2009, examines “the use, the experiences, and the intentions of more than 420 enterprises regarding their talent acquisition initiatives.”  The largest percentage of respondents (36%) were HR managers, with directors coming in next (23%), and CEOs/VPs totaling 17%.  Industries were represented fairly evenly, but a whopping 73% of responding companies were from North America, with Asia and Europe dividing 23%, and everywhere else providing just a sprinkle.  About a third of responding companies were “small,” with annual revenues of $50 million or less, and fewer than 500 employees, with roughly another third mid-sized, and 27% humongous (billion-dollar plus, more than 5,000 employees).

Second, fair warning.  If you want to view the whole report, you have until October 31 to access it via free registration.  After that it becomes content for sale.  (You can’t save or copy it, by the way, but you can print all or selected pages.)  Quick note:  Research reports have become quite expensive, which increases the value of the Aberdeen approach.  In their model, sponsors underwrite access to reports for a limited time—and that means you have to pay attention to what’s available when–so you have to pay attention to Aberdeen.  Rather clever . . .

Third, a strategy.  The report is rather complex in its organization, and it uses a sort of proprietary framework for analysis.  So it is not what I would call an “easy read.”  If you do read it, try going through first with a focus on the raw data and second with an eye on the interpretations and advice.  Make notes, use a highlighter, etc.—in short, treat it like a school assignment.   This could be a worthwhile effort if the report is used to: (a) organize thinking about issues/opportunities in the identification and management of candidates, and (b) review gaps and accomplishments in your own organization.

Fourth (and finally), a preview.  For the next post, I’ll get out my decoder ring and highlight some important points in the report.  After that, I’ll offer a mildly contrarian response to some aspects of the report.


(Thanks to the bbp for opening the door with Number 1.)

How to be a Useful Expert

I recently invited Josh Hanagarne, World’s Strongest Librarian, to write a guest post for us. Josh is the twitchy giant behind World’s Strongest Librarian, a blog about living with Tourette’s Syndrome, book recommendations, buying pants when you’re 6’8”, old-time strongman training, kettlebells, and much more. Please subscribe to Josh’s RSS Updates to stay in touch.

Over to you, Josh…

How To Be A Useful Expert

Ancient Japanese Proverb

Too many boatmen will run the boat up to the top of the mountain

different-directions

Nothing is more useful than an expert.  Nothing is more useless than an expert that nobody can benefit from.

We turn to experts for answers because they’ve paid their dues to acquire bodies of knowledge that most people don’t have.  Their talents and vision are often needed to Get Things Done.  But I’ve seen groups of experts that have no idea how to work with other people.  When projects need collaborators to be successful, this can be a disaster.  If nobody else can benefit from your talents, what is your expertise really worth? 

I’ve seen this over and over in two worlds: Academics and Business

Academics

The world of academics is full of insecure, brilliant people with multiple PhDs.  Some of them have very big egos and very short fuses.  I’ve seen some very nasty arguments between geniuses about whose realm is more important and should receive more of the money. 

But I get it.  I really do.  If you have paid your dues and reached the top of your niche, it can sting when someone refuses to acknowledge your greatness and majesty. 

Not to be too obvious, but have noticed that not everyone shares the same passion?  You’ve never seen a sadder argument than a botanist trying to convince a literary theorist that botany is the Ultimate Academic Discipline.  Once things are nearing the point of blows being exchanged, the likelihood of productive partnering in the future becomes unlikely.

Whether either one of those fields is important, I’ll leave to you. 

The Private Sector

The Private Sector is no different.  Various CEOs, department heads, and top dogs from all walks of the business can develop a tendency to believe their own specialty is the most important.  Everyone has vanity, ego, and insecurities somewhere inside of them.  That’s one of the costs of being alive. 

But what happens when there is a project to work on and everyone wants to be in charge?  Sometimes you can’t afford to say, “Well, we’re all just fallible humans.  Of course we’re fighting and howling about this!  Please pass me the boxing gloves.”  

How A Cliche becomes A Cliche

I’m not a big fan of acronyms and I like superficial “Rah Rah” corporate-speak even less.  But hidden inside every cliche is something true.  Have you ever heard of TEAM, aka “Together everyone achieves more?”

Don’t roll your eyes just yet if you can help it.  It’s not the fault of the phrase that it’s been spouted around for so long that nobody can hear it without retching.  It is true that the right team can get more done than any of the single players can do alone.

A Simple But Not Simplistic Example

Suppose a corporation wants to start a website.  After the website is built, someone up high hears that these blog things are pretty sweet and now they want a blog for the corporate website.  The person at the top selects the eight department heads and says, “Get a blog going and fill it with content.  Make it work and make it work for us.” 

Now let’s go out on a limb and assume that those eight department heads don’t agree on everything 100% of the time.  How will they figure out what will go on the blog?  Whose department gets the most exposure?  How often?  Who is the best writer?  Who is the worst writer?  Does everyone believe that a blog is actually a good idea?  Does everyone agree on the reasons for why the blog exists? 

There are questions that need to be asked at the beginning of any collaborative effort. 

They don’t always get asked and then–sometimes the best you can do is try to get your mouth guard in before the punching starts.

So What’s The Answer?

People like to feel good about what they know and what they can do.  I’ve never met anyone who does not enjoy the chance to display their own skills and talents. In this example, the useful expert is the one who has something to offer to the project–not the expert who feels the need to constantly remind everyone of how many degrees they have and how much money their talents have made them. 

Maybe that’s the question to ask when a group of competent, smart, but potentially-at-odds people get together to collaborate:

What is everyone good at?  How can each person’s talent be included?  Of course, if you’re putting together a corporate blog for a media conglomerate and someone raises their hand and says, “I’m an elite botanist, give me the reins and I can totally do this!”…

Cooler heads do have their place and should also be given the chance to prevail at times. 

Thanks, Josh!

Posts, Links and Photos: What Your Social Networks Say About YOU!

Right now, think:  What’s your latest Twitter entry? What was the last photo you uploaded on your Facebook page? Can you remember or do you have to go and check really quick? Are you nervous or confident about the things you said there?

Social networking is wonderful (in my opinion), but I also notice that it is not without its set of problems in misconceptions. For instance, a lot of people think that social networking platforms are a free-for-all. They think that they can write anything, post anything and even link to anything, even inappropriate or offensive material. Now while there are certain circles that have their own culture and personalities, what should you as a corporation or a business owner do to ensure that your platforms are professional but approachable?

What’s the Purpose?

I personally tend to use the Facebook platform as a socially-connected forum to keep up with the latest events in my locale, upload photos and keep tabs on my tween-ager! That’s about 30% of what I use it for. The remaining percentage, I use for networking with other writing professionals on leads and talking with my editors and contacts that are my other writing/consulting clients.

I use Twitter for the full 140-character networking that it was intended for, but not as much as I do Facebook. I love to read my following/followers links and find information on business topics of interest and more leads. For both platforms though, I’m careful about what I post, when I post it, what I say on the post and consider who’s reading the post. No, I won’t post details about my children, i.e., what schools they attend, their birth dates, ages, etc., nor would I post details about my married life or my husband. Who really wants to know about those things anyway?

But, do all users give the same consideration to this?

Game Rules

There are some ground rules to practicing etiquette in social networking that are both spoken and non-spoken, but many businesses and individuals often do not practice these rules when they are on these social sites. Not only can this be embarrassing and damaging to your online image, but could also be a deterrent in your business goals, or any potential business and any future business dealings with other company’s and clients.

If your corporation wants to utilize and maximize the use of social networking, they should carefully choose the representative who will speak on their site, their blogs and any social networking platforms where they may be. And, not only the company’s representatives, but also employees and freelancers that are associated with the company. In other words, be careful of the way your corporation is portrayed on the social platforms.

Your Company’s Image

What people do on their personal time is definitely their business, without a doubt. Where they go, who they’re with and what they do is their business. But it becomes a company’s business when that individual/employee/representative affect the company’s reputation by posting innappropriate posts, uploading compromising photos or even linking to questionable or irrelevant sites. What does that say about your company?

The point of social networking for businesses is to drive traffic, make connections and gain a following for your company. Social networking is driven by the individuals who are a part of the company and who represent the company online. Make sure that your followers are getting quality and appropriate material.

What can you do to ensure that your company is represented accurately in the social circles?

An A+ for… Oops! No, wait–


KPMG Magazine

KPMG–a “mature” company that has reinvented its employer image with admirable panache–won the 2008 ERE award for Best Corporate Careers Site.  One of the practices they received praise for: “Weekly Web design and content refresh meetings ensure that the site content is always fresh.”

So I thought it would be interesting to see how things are going there a year later.  The main Careers site looks nice enough—though it seems a little overstuffed.  But actually I didn’t spend much time there, because a link labeled “Global careers magazine” caught my eye.  Several of my recent posts have addressed aspects of global recruiting, and there will be more, so I zipped over for a look.

And I loved the top page (which illustrates this post) right away.  The dramatic iceberg image captures attention for a strong message:  “Inspired to act.”  Focusing on sustainability as a corporate priority sets a great tone.

Scroll down, and there’s a rich array of content:

KPMG Magazine 2

There’s even a podcast on preparing for an interview.  Nice!

I was just about to enthuse about this excellent example of corporate communication when I noticed the line “Careers Magazine August 2009.”  I’m writing this at the beginning of October, so there’s a definite freshness gap.  Also—a promise broken.  Either it’s a monthly magazine, or it’s not.  (If it’s meant to be a bi-monthly magazine, the dateline should really say August/September; and besides, the section right below it is headed “Jobs of the Month”.)

Maybe there’s a more current issue that goes to subscribers?  I’ve joined the subscription list, and will update if/when something new appears.  But I have to report in the meantime that registering to receive this publication was not a positive experience.  The registration process itself was okay, but in order to sign up for the Global Careers Magazine I had to sleuth through a list of 25 (yes, really) publications, such as “Audit committee insights” and “Chemical issues monitor.”  Although the available items cover a range of types (magazines, e-updates, newsletters) and focus on a wide variety of industries, they are arranged alphabetically instead of being grouped by some sort of helpful logic.

These may seem like small items, and it’s unlikely that an out-of-date online magazine and an unwieldy subscription list will offend or even annoy most visitors.  But details like these leave an impression.  Did no one have time to publish a September issue of the magazine?  Why not?  Are they all overworked, has staff been cut back, has global hiring been put on hold?  I think these questions might cross many minds.

And the thing is . . . KPMG didn’t even actually have to publish a new magazine!  They could just have removed the word “August” from the page, and that would have fixed the problem, at least for most visitors.  Which makes me even more convinced that no one at the company is taking ownership.

So this is basically another opportunity to remark on the importance of (a) paying attention to the state of the website—and (b) watching out for those subtle, unintentional messages that can creep in while everyone is busy with something else.

Stop Trying To Hold Back The Ocean

Ever wondered if you’re truly making the most of the resources available to you?

I recently invited Zack Grossbart, who is expert in telecommuting and works with high-tech companies to help them create strong teams that span continents (see The One Minute Commute) to write a post for us.

zack grossbartZack has been working with and coaching remote teams at organizations like JP Morgan, 3M, Nortel, Hewlett Packard, and the United States Navy since 2001. He has served as a consultant to numerous Fortune 500 companies and is a consulting engineer for the Novell Compliance Management Platform.

Zack began loading DOS from a floppy disk when he was five years old. He began working professionally with computers when he was 15 and started his first software company when he was 16. He has also been an IT administrator and a member of an advertising firm. Zack lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts, about a mile from Harvard University.

Over to you Zack…

Stop Trying To Hold Back The Ocean: Harness The Writing Talent In Your Company

In the old days the marketing department was the public face of your company. Your sales team talked to customers, your channel team talked to partners, and your marketing department talked to everyone. Marketing departments were judged by their ability to control the message and stop leaks.

water overflowing dam

The perfect example of the old way is Apple’s marketing department. They released what they wanted when they wanted and not before. When Steve Jobs unveiled the iPod reporters had been lured into the room with only the knowledge that Apple was releasing something and it wasn’t a computer. Today even Apple is springing leaks.

Companies all over are trying to plug up the little leaks in their corporate messaging while the roaring ocean of Twitter, Facebook, and personal blogs overwhelms them. They need to stop holding back the leaks and start seeing the world differently.

A few facts

Fact 1. You have writers in places you’ve never looked. Bob from Accounting has a blog about model trains. Sherry from Engineering manages a community of scrap-bookers. Your company is full of writers.

Fact 2. Bob and Sherry are scared to write about your company. There have been too many bad stories about employees who were sacked for complaining about their jobs online. Most blogging tutorials advise you to never mention your company and most companies have strict rules about it.

Fact 3. Bob and Sherry are passionate about their jobs. They work hard, know your products inside and out, and like them enough to keep working to make them better.

Put these three facts together and you have people who want to write about your company and can’t do it.

Stop plugging the leaks and build a dam

You can’t stop the ocean. Your people will keep writing so direct them. Your marketing department must change from being the sole providers of content to mentoring other writers. Focus the power of those writers like water through a dam.

Step 1. Find your writers. Ask around the office and see who has a blog. Use Google to search for your employees and see what they’re saying online. Look for the ones who write consistently and well.

Step 2. Create a place for them to write. You might create a single corporate blog, an employee blog section, or just organize their existing blogs.

Step 3. Guide your writers. Pair them up with someone from your marketing department who can guide them about what content you want and help them review and edit their work.

Step 4. Enable them. Google famously gave everyone 10 percent of their time to work on special projects. Give your writers four hours a week to write.

Step 5. Incent them. By the word, by the article, or on a bonus plan, pay your writers for doing the extra work.

Step 6. Get out of the way. Move roadblocks out of your writers’ way. If the legal department needs to review everything then take care of it for your writers. Make it easy for them to write.

Harness your ocean of writers to generate market power for your company. Let them talk about you, show your customers what an exciting company you are and where you need to improve. Your people really are passionate about your company, and passion sells.

Thanks Zack!