No, I'm not a headhunter

It seems that whenever I tell someone for the first time that I'm a recruiter, their response is typically, "So you only find people to work for your company then?" with a quizzical look on their face. It's as if the concept of 'Corporate Recruiting' is such a foreign one; that all recruiters are headhunters. Maybe part of it is that the firm I am currently with (and those that I have worked with prior) are not household names. If I had said, "I am a Recruiter at Microsoft", then maybe they would get it? For the Corporate Recruiters out there, have you ever run into this? And if so, why do you think that concept of being an internal, corporate recruiter is so misunderstood?

Nothing against headhunters, it's just not what I am. I take alot of pride in being a corporate recruiter and have always enjoyed working on the 'inside'. I tried the headhunter route very early in my career and it wasn't for me. I need to feel a part of something, something bigger than me. Even though I've changed employers about every three years or so, I've been fiercely loyal to those organizations (and still am in most cases), and often thought of myself as one of those organizations' biggest cheerleaders. It's not about putting people in jobs. It's about connecting great people with great opportunities in great organizations. It's about having a direct impact on the growth and future of an organization I am a part of. That's what I'm about. So why is it that there are some who apparently don't seem to understand that this role exists in corporate America today?

BTW, how do you like the new 'Snap' link preview I've added in. There are so many cool new blog widgets and tools out there, I just had to add this one.

R.I.M.S. Part 2

I can't give enough kudos to our Project Team for the work that they have done so far in our selection process. The research and preparation to date has been outstanding. Numerous resources were used to do the initial research. Interestingly enough, in my initial discussions with the Team, they thought that a internally-hosted client-server solution (as opposed to an externally-hosted ASP solution) would be ideal. They soon discovered however that most vendors were trending more towards the ASP model, if they hadn't abandoned client-server models all together. Pre-demo research also included office visits where Team members were able to learn the 'As-Is' and the desired situations from the key stakeholders of this technology (i.e. our recruiters).

The research was completed, we were fortunate to have sufficient funds budgeted to consider top tier vendors, and four of the best were selected to present proof-of-concept demos last week. To prepare for the demos, the vendors were provided 8 carefully-crafted scenarios that best represented the use of this technology by recruiters, candidates and hiring managers. A note on the scenarios: As carefully crafted as the scenarios were, we still underestimated what this technology could accomplish for us in a couple areas. The vendors for the most part helped us understand how automating certain processes that have been manual or Microsoft Office driven would be to our advantage.

BTW, earlier this week, Sarah listed her ATS demo pet peeves, here's a couple more:
- When you are asked to skip the 'sales pitch', please comply. A couple of our vendors insisted on giving a brief pitch anyway, and all I could think of was, "When are we getting to the product!" It's nice that you are profitable, but honestly, I care more about the demo. We will be basing our selection on the quality of your product, not how happy Wall Street is with you.

- When you are given scenarios to follow, prepare in advance and make sure you hit each item. That is what we are basing our evaluation upon. A couple vendors did quite well with this last week, where as for others, it seemed like this was the first time they had seen these scenarios. Not good.

The evaluation team for the demos consisted of the main Project Team, two additional IT staff, and four Recruiters from the field. We all assembled at our HQ in Bloomington, MN for the demos last Thursday morning. Over two days, each vendor was given three hours to run through the scenarios (research had already been done on the vendors and the technology piece was handled separately with our relevant IT staff). As the scenarios were played out, the evaluation team used a simple scoring scale to evaluate each step in each scenario, and provide an overall score at the end of each scenario. At the end of each demo, we had time to complete our scoring and answer qualitative questions. And at the end of each day, we had time to discuss the demos as a group.

Although each vendor was able to demonstrate most of our scenarios in similar fashion, there were also some clear differentiators. One of the key differentiators (and a huge issue for me) was the recruiter dashboard interface. We need our recruiters to feel completely comfortable using any system we choose, so a user-friendly dashboard will be a major factor in how we make our selection.

At the end of the second day, as a group, we listed out the positive and negative features of each system. At that point, we were all pretty much fried after two full days of presentations, but we were able to share our opinions and set a path for moving forward. That path moving forward included follow up actions with the vendors this week. We are very close now to narrowing down to a short-list of two. More on that next week.

R.I.M.S. Part 1

RIMS - Recruitment Information Management System

Last August, I wrote here about the challenges most companies face with their recruitment systems. Most organizations do indeed have a love-hate relationship with these systems, and much is written about them, including blog posts last week by Sarah and Dave. The general recognition is that all of these systems have their warts, but if implemented correctly, they should serve as powerful tools in the war for talent.

In my post last Fall, I discussed how we at my prior employer used the term RIMS to describe these systems, rather than the traditional ATS acronym. Words (and acronyms for that matter) can be powerful when used in certain situations and certain contexts. When acronym-master Gary Cluff coined the term RIMS, he did it with the view that using technology to 'track applicants' was not enough anymore for top performing recruiting organizations. RIMS represents something bigger, broader, and more useful than ATS. RIMS was an acronym that I brought to my new job, and to my surprise, was adopted almost immediately. When I got to my new firm, an RFP was underway to select a new system. The timing was perfect, and Gary should be proud, his acronym is gaining traction, if one company at a time.

In my first week on the job, I was able to meet with the recruitment system Project Team, and due to my decade-long experience as a power use with three different RIMS, they appointed me to the Project Team as an "expert" resource. I couldn’t be happier with our progress so far. The project plan has been well thought out and crafted, deep research was done, and the right people were put on the team. Experience to RIMS was a first for the IT members of the team (including a Project Manager, Business Analyst, User Experience Specialist, and QA Specialist). Selection of the right enterprise technology takes heavy due diligence, and I have been consistently amazed by the detailed, focused nature of the effort to date. The hard work of our Project Team culminated last Thursday with demos from four well known, top-tier vendors.

Part 2 will explore our process and the demos.

It's All About The Customer...

...it really is. I'm sitting on the tarmac at DFW last night for three hours waiting for our plane to be de-iced. Three hours. Normally, people in a similar situation would be getting restless, frustrated, even angry. Not on this plane though. The pilot spoke up every 15 minutes providing an update. He apologized for the delay each time and emphasized that he was doing everything possible to get us off the ground safely. I've been in similar situations a couple times before (although not for as long), but in those situations, we were only given an update if there was something new to report. This pilot understood a key component of customer service, keep the lines of communication as open as possible, even if the communication itself isn't what the customer wanted to hear.

When I think of great customer service in the Airline industry, I have typically thought about Southwest, JetBlue, probably not American. But I've been flying American quite a bit lately, and I have to say, my experiences have generally been positive. Sitting on the tarmac for 3 hours last night isn't fun for anyone, but I was comforted by the fact that the pilot sympathized with us, and that the same time, he had protocol to follow and he wanted us to be safe. That's good enough for me, and apparently was for everyone else on that flight as well. I'm feeling good about my experience with American Airlines today, they have a satisfied customer for sure.

Customer/Candidate care is a BIG issue in Recruiting today as well. Take a look at articles on ERE this last week from Calicchio, Sullivan and Wheeler. Google receives heavy press regarding complaints about their Recruitment process, so what do they do, they go hire the candidate experience master. The focus of CareerXroads Fortune 500 Career Website Whitepaper is on the candidate experience. It is an issue that I plan to focus heavy attention upon within my organization as well.

My favorite new business book, Mavericks at Work, provides great insight into those highly successful organizations that create fanatical customers with outstanding customer service and a unique experience, companies including Southwest, Starbucks, Potbelly, Commerce Bank, Cranium, etc. Seth Godin makes the point time and time again in his recent book, 'Small is the New Big', that customer service is the most important, yet most undervalued, component to successful marketing.

An airline pilot made me feel good about sitting on the tarmac for three hours last night simply by sympathizing with me and assuring me that he was doing everything he could to rectify the situation. When was the last time told a candidate that they were not going to be considered further, yet still made them feel good about the outcome? No one likes to deliver 'bad news', but having the courage, resolve and discipline to do so can make all the difference in helping your customers/candidates walk away from the situation feeling OK, and potentially wanting to do business with you again and again and again.

Job Boards - Misconceptions and Realities: Part 2

OK, so my view on Job Boards have changed lately. Why? Much of it has to do with how I view the workforce today. This past year, there has been much debate about 'Active' and 'Passive' job seekers. 'Active' job seekers are the only ones that spend time on the job boards and are generally low in quality. 'Passive' job seekers are the "holy grail" and must be found at all costs as the best talent is represented there. I don't buy that, too black-and-white to me.

Instead, I prefer the way that Lou Adler segments the workforce. According to Lou, the workforce is split into four categories: Active, Less Active, Semi-Passive, and Passive. Those in the Active category need a job, are on the job boards every day, have their resumes posted there, and although good candidates can be found here, the quality overall tends to be low. Active job seekers represent about 15% of the workforce (note: the numbers that Lou uses do vary depending on industry, market, etc. So for in the NYC Public Accounting market for example, the proportion of the Active market is probably more like 5%, less than 1% during the 'busy season'.

The next, and most relevant category is the Less Active category. These people have a job and actually might be content in that job. If they visit the job boards, they do so sporadically, probably when they have had a bad day at the office, or possibly when they feel they can do better in their career than they are currently. Less Active job seekers are looking for a Better job, and represent about 15% of the workforce (again, a variable number, when the Active percentage goes down, the Less Active percentage goes up). Less Active job seekers are less likely to have their resume posted anywhere (although it could be one of those 'confidential' ones you see out there). According to Lou, quality talent is well represented in this category.

The final two categories, Semi-Passive and Passive, account for the balance of the workforce. Those in the Semi-Passive category are unlikely to ever visit a job board, you need to find them, they are not looking for you. They will make a change for a Much Better opportunity, and it is this category I believe that most refer to as 'Passive' candidates. Those in the Passive category are not open to making a change at all.

Why is this important? When you get past the Active vs. Passive myth, and segment the workforce out further (Lou's segmentation is just one of several I have seen), the true value of the Job Boards comes into play. You see that as much as one-third of the workforce uses the Job Boards, and that there is actually alot of good talent represented there. That siad, what I have come to realize is just how important well written, compelling job postings are.

The resume databases on these job boards filled with Active job seekers don't add alot of value IMO as a source of quality candidates. Quality can be found there, but you have to sort through alot to get to who you really want, and even then you are competing against the rest of the world for that talent. As mentioned earlier, there are good Active job seekers that will apply for your jobs, the key is to maximize attracting the quality candidates while discouraging unqualified candidates from applying.

But the true value is in appealing to the Less Active category. This category is what makes using the Job Boards worthwhile. There is alot of great talent to attract, but you have to know how to attract that talent better than anyone else. This is where you, the recruiter, has the most impact. Less Active job seekers tend to be more discriminating in which opportunities they choose to consider. Your opportunities need to speak to their skills and interests, deliver a compelling message, and then engage them to want to be considered for those roles. This is where most recruiting organizations fall short.

The Job Boards are to blame for not delivering on their promise of 'better candidates faster'. When all is said and done though, you the recruiter has the most impact on your success with the Boards. More on this in my next post next week.

Until then, have a happy and safe New Year!!!

Job Boards - Misconceptions and Realities: Part 1

A new year is upon us and I'm now two months into my new job. I'll be putting in a couple of days this week, organizing, reading, and thinking. One of the subjects I've been thinking alot about lately is Job Boards. I admit that I've been all over the map on this subject the past few years. 4-5 years ago, I was thriving on the big job boards as there were great candidates in my industry everywhere, applying daily for the jobs I had to fill. It wasn't a matter of finding great talent to apply, it was more of a challenge of trying to 'separate the wheat from the chaff'. I was 'Pro' Job Board all the way.

When I moved from Telecom back into the world of government contracting in 2003, my view on job boards quickly changed course. The job market in the gov't contracting sector was radically different, and job boards were not nearly as effective. I saw the same candidates on any of the major and/niche job boards day-after-day. I learned to rely on more on strategies to attract less-active/semi-passive candidates such as employee referral and other networking techniques. Job Boards still provided a trickle of quality candidates, but as a source the Boards were unreliable at best. I had gone from 'Pro' to 'Anti' very quickly.

As much as I was moving away from using Job Boards, I was still hearing the demand from colleagues for more access to more job boards, more resume databases, thinking that 'More' was the answer. The Job Boards had effectively sold 'More' as the answer to the Corporate Recruiting world over the past decade, and that is a promise that has largely gone unfulfilled. The Job Boards created a model where 'post it and they will come' was the mantra, whereas the reality is much more 'post and pray'. As I watched my colleagues continue to struggle with the Job Boards, my view of the Boards as a source continued to sour.

At my current employer, I am hearing a variety of views from those in our recruiting organization as to their opinions of the Job Boards, ranging from those who want more access to more Job Boards to those who have almost wrote them off completely. I am a centrist in my thinking, and believe that the answer to most questions typically lies somewhere between the extremes. The more that I have thought about the value of the Boards in today's recruiting environment, the more that my view of the Job Boards has begun to change, from that of having 'written them off', to gaining a better understanding their true value in the recruiting source spectrum.

Although Job Boards will likely never provide a sizable yield of quality candidates as a source, there are still good candidates to be found there. Overall, I have come to realize that it doesn't concern me as much where the candidate came from, whether they were 'active' or 'passive', I only care if they are a 'quality' candidate or not. Relying on the Job Boards as a key component to your recruiting strategy won't get you what you need, but dismissing them as a source does not help you either.

In my next post, we will explore some of the current misconceptions about job boards in greater detail, and in future posts, I plan to explore further how Job Boards can be a more effective part of your recruiting strategy.

First, Become a Tipping Point Maverick To Be Great In a Flat World

I’ve been a big business-book reader of late, learning how to Break the Rules, then go from Good To Great, why the World Is Flat, and how Tipping Points create epidemics. Each of these books have been fascinating reads, and all have implications on talent acquisition. I was even inspired to write an article on ERE this summer while reading one of these books.

In my new role, I am consumed by the need for us to A) differentiate ourselves, and B) achieve greatness in our recruiting capabilities. Earlier this year at the ERExpo in San Diego, I saw Bill Taylor, founding editor of Fast Company Magazine, speak about what great organizations did to differentiate themselves from the competition and succeed in markets where everyone else was failing. Much of what he spoke about that morning has stuck with me, so much so that today I finally went out and bought his newest book, ‘Mavericks at Work’.

My new employer has significant competitive challenges when it comes to talent acquisition in our industry. To succeed, I need to know what our competition is doing, not to model and replicate, but to exceed and differentiate. It’s not going to be reasonable for us to build similar talent acquisition models to compete, so we need to find other ways.

Over lunch, I read the introduction to ‘Mavericks’ and a couple quotes hit me right away as being a dead-on match for how we need to think and operate moving forward, including:

“You can’t do big things as a competitor if you’re content with doing things
only a little better than the competition”

“The strong take from the weak”, according to Hall-of-Fame basketball coach Pete Carril, “but the smart take from the strong”.

We are just getting started here. To attract, engage and hire great talent in our industry, we need to find smart ways to do recruit much better than the competition with the resources we have available. The good news is that we have a great employment value proposition, we have clear differentiators, we are growth oriented, we are focused on being the best in our market-niche, and we are open-minded. So the proper mindset appears to be in place. I’m excited about where this might lead, so stay tuned for more on what will come from us as we build for the future. More on the book as well. Can't wait to read more!