In June of 2013, LinkedIn announced that they have more than 225 million members in over 200 countries. It is hard to find a professional now who does not have a LinkedIn account and roughly 40% of LinkedIn users log on at least once a day. LinkedIn exists as a social network to connect the workforce, share content, endorse coworkers and find jobs.
Many active job seekers use social networks like LinkedIn to find jobs on a personal level, and one can see many talent acquisition professionals using these same networks and tools, to source “passive” candidates on a professional level. A passive candidate is a qualified individual who may not be actively seeking new employment opportunities but would be interested for the right job. It stands to reason though, that if one asked any coworker if they would be willing to do the same job for more money, better benefits or improved work/life balance, the answer would be yes. The reality is almost everyone is open to the idea of a new job; they are just open to or engaged to that idea at various degrees.
Can you: (1) tap your head, (2) pat your stomach, (3) make a circular motion with your right foot, and (4) blow a bubble with bubble gum at the same time?
Stop reading this article for a moment… try it.
Yeah, me either. Complete and abject failure. I can do 2 of 4 and occasionally 3 of 4… but never… never as in never never all 4 at the same time.
This past summer (defined as 6/1 to 9/1) I gave myself a sabbatical from social media (defined as blogging, podcasting, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram and Pinterest). My biggest lesson from being “away” from social media… the concept of multitasking is both a lie (that we tell ourselves, others and we allow others to tell us) and it isn’t all that effective.
Recently, yet another coworker of mine got engaged. In this case, I mean in the romantic, let’s plan a wedding sense, but I’m sure at least a few of you HR pros thought first of employee engagement. In my current environment, both employee engagement and romantic engagement are hot topics - something to discuss and maybe aspire to, and something that seems out of reach for those that don’t have it.
Being a boss has never been easy, but in the last few years it seems to have gotten even harder. Today, we ask our leaders to be a combination of paradoxes: decisive but thoughtful; change managers but status quo protectors; honest but diplomatic.
In my previous blog, I discussed that before embarking on a Candidate Relationship Management (CRM) initiative, it is best to segment your jobs; identify rules of engagement (i.e. who, when and how CRM will be used) and finally develop metrics for success. In this blog, I shall share examples of how CRM may be used in talent acquisition.
Employee referrals: Study after study has proven that the most cost effective method of sourcing is employee referral. CRM may be used to capture and engage employee and executive referrals.
Effective new hire onboarding will be critical for employee retention and engagement in the future as demographic shifts significantly alter the talent landscape. America’s 80 million Baby Boomers will be succeeded in their roles by a cohort (Generation X) that is half their size, intensifying the competition among employers for top talent.
There are volumes of literature about the topic of leadership and what things make a great leader. Some claim domain expertise and direct style feedback is most important, while others prefer positive reinforcement and downplay developmental areas. By the time you are done reading all of the ways to “be a great leader” you have a list of 50+ characteristics that you “must” exhibit, not to mention a pounding headache. To say the least, this process – and the body of information gleaned from it- is overwhelming and hugely ineffective.
The interview process for professional jobs may never be perfected. It is dependent on the organization, the role, the hiring manager, the recruiter, and the candidate. The process is regulated to control illegal bias and new ideas on how to assess seem to crop up daily.
And people still make hiring mistakes.
There are a lot of reasons why. And these vary by employer. Many managers feel that in a one hour discussion they can learn everything they need to know that wasn’t on the resume. They believe they have a keen intuition and can read people well enough to make the call based on that meeting.
They can, undoubtedly, form an opinion. And many times, it will be correct, or at least sufficiently correct. But every once in a while, the process fails, and a hire that once had everyone smiling and giving a big “thumbs up” turns out to be someone they regret hiring.
I am always interested in reading about leadership and selection issues from a different perspective. As in any field, HR can become an echo chamber of the same ideas without generating much new thought. With that in mind, I was fascinated by this article about interviewing and cultural fit. Don’t be scared off because it’s from an academic journal of sociology. The writing is straightforward and you don’t need to be a sociologist to follow it.
A search of respected blogs and periodicals about leadership reveals a largely cohesive group of characteristics that most experts agree a person should possess if they want to gain recognition as a great leader. For example, most agree that leaders must have vision. They must communicate clearly and often. They must admit their faults, delegate, share the glory, and relate to their employees on a personal level.
If you haven’t read any global Chief Executive Officer (CEO) studies, then I encourage you to do so…quickly. As you take a gander, you will quickly see that there is a lot of agreement between what these studies are saying even if each study is trying to be unique in the terminology they use. So the most recent Duke Corporate Education 2013 CEO study came to my attention in last couple of weeks. In it the researchers sought to understand that within the unpredictable business environment that has become the “new normal,” what are the challenges that CEOs face in dealing with this environment.
Most women are aware that even in today’s “progressive” world, the presence of females in upper management is rather scarce compared to males. Study after study proves that having more women in these key leadership roles makes companies more productive and successful. Some have even concluded that women are better leaders than men. This naturally leaves many asking “Why not?” Why aren’t there more female leaders in leadership roles? Why do women hold only 4.6% of the CEO positions in Fortune 1000 companies?
What is the first word that comes to mind when you look at the picture to the left? I won’t give it away yet, but I think it’s safe to say that most people, and specifically workplace employees, experience this with relative frequency.
I really don’t know when it happened, but it’s now August and the hazy days of summer are almost over. Excuse me?! Once I move past the initial outrage and sadness, it’s helpful for me to consider all the positive things that the end of summer means: cooler temperatures, Labor Day weekend, and – excuse the innate nerdiness – the start of a new school year. (Oh yes, I’m one of those people).
Training is an important part of Human Capital strategy, and can be used to bring new workers up-to-speed, improve performance, prepare employees for advancement, or enhance leadership effectiveness. Whether the training delivers on its promise, however, depends on how employees answer two critical questions once they are back on the job: “Can I use what I just learned?” and “Will I?”
Slowly disappearing are the days of gut feel as to which programs HR should support. Upper management is now demanding proof of connecting HR activities to business value. As an HR leader, what do you do? I will provide a short demonstration of how to strategically determine which HR activities make a difference. Yes, I recognize that some activities will always be supported for regulatory compliance but what about the rest? Here are two examples.
In many cases, assessments (including role plays) are used only when measuring competencies in external candidates. In my experience, companies are much less likely to use these kinds of tools with talent already in their organization.
If you are in sales, it is likely that you have been using some sort of CRM for almost two decades. In the Talent Acquisition market, this concept is fairly new. Candidate Relationship Management is not a “shiny thing,” but it can make recruitment more efficient and effective - if used wisely.
Before embarking on a CRM initiative, it is wise to identify job segments for which you want to use CRM. Ideal use of CRM is to pipeline for hard to fill, niche jobs, or jobs which, based on your workforce planning, will be created in the future. Some organizations prefer to use CRM for all job segments to manage passive candidates.
Despite the efforts devoted to developing strategies to attract candidates for potential skill gaps and talent shortages, some organizations fall short when it comes to making the most of the skills and experiences already present in their workforce.
Do your supervisors and managers pigeon hole employees into the specific roles they were hired for, over-manage, under-delegate and in the guise of protecting employees from themselves, assume the burden of delivering information on a need to know basis?
In their research report entitled Global Human Capital Trends 2013, Deloitte surveyed over 1,300 human resources executives from 59 countries. Among the research findings released earlier this year was that 55% of global human capital leaders report problems with their leadership pipeline as one of the three most critical obstacles to growth. A specific area of concern is not having enough leaders that can individually and collaboratively operate across different environments and adapt to change and uncertainty.