Tags on Employment and Recruitment Reviews - hiring |
Three ways to tell if your selection system is too complicatedby Bruce Watt, PhD, Managing Director, DDI Australia Does your selection system need a serious dose of complexity reduction? If your system is overly complicated it can lead to a loss of focus, wasted time and, ultimately, a big headache. Selection systems consist of the tools and processes that we use to hire and/ or promote people throughout all levels of an organisation but over time these systems can grow into increasingly complex arrangements that incorporate the legacies of prior systems. Alongside the accumulation of prior processes is the fact that each new hiring manager tends to install a new process in an attempt to please stakeholders. Add to this the adoption of ‘best practice’ models and you can end up with too many ‘practices’ and no clear plan about how talent acquisition fits with the talent management strategy. There are three particular areas that drive unnecessary complexity. Wasted effort in these areas leads to increased costs and time with no improvement in quality of hire. However, if addressed properly, you could save countless hours of wasted effort. 1. Too many competencies are included in the selection process If a job has 15 competencies in the success profile, does the selection process need to assess all 15 competencies? One way to streamline a hiring process quickly is to reduce the number of competencies measured. When competencies do not differentiate job candidates because all candidates score at a satisfactory level; or when all new hires will be trained in a particular competency, there is less need to include the competency in the hiring process. While consistency is critical there is no hard and fast rule for including all competencies from a success profile. Include only those competencies that are critical, that differentiate job candidates and that are more difficult to train. By reducing the overall number of competencies included, you can reduce the amount of administration time for assessments and interviews and increase the amount of time you focus on critical competencies. 2. Too many hiring managers want to do their own thing Whether it is asking their own interview questions, insisting on using their favourite test or requiring a panel interview when all others conduct individual interviews, hiring managers who have their own unique way of vetting candidates can cause complexity overload. Customising processes means that electronic management systems don’t do their job – the applicant tracking system is driven by manual rather than automated management and recruiters must learn and accommodate the individual quirks and idiosyncrasies of different hiring managers. By defining the hiring process to include consistent steps, candidate knock-out points, specific assessments that are sanctioned (and validated), a target number of interviews and how final hiring decisions will be made make for a much more efficient system. Allow hiring managers to configure their process by suggesting recommendations for the candidate sourcing strategy, picking their own interview questions or by choosing who to include in the interview process (within the boundaries of the selection system design). 3. There is no clear agreement on standards for candidate performance How often do you get one of these responses when discussing candidate performance? “I liked the candidate, but there is something that just doesn’t seem right and it doesn’t really fit for my job opening.” “I know the cut-off on the assessment is 75%, but I really need someone that scores at the 80% level.” “I really liked this candidate and he/she is perfect, but I want to see what else is out there.” These comments can drive the best recruiters crazy. Some hiring managers believe that there are so many people looking for work that you should be able to find the absolutely ideal person for them. It is important to ensure hiring managers understand the processes involved in the hiring procedure to open their eyes to the business implications of their decisions. Increasing understanding about trainable and non-trainable aspects of the success profile as well as what is available in terms of on-boarding and early career development options for new employees will help hiring managers make decisions about when and who to hire. Lastly, quantifying for hiring managers the cost of their decisions in terms of time and money is also important. Like any good business plan, a Talent Acquisition (TA) Road Map will guide effort and keep the recruitment team focused. The roadmap should cover what’s in the selection system (and possibly what’s out), what TA stands for (driving values and core processes), and the customer/stakeholder service scorecard (to set expectations with hiring managers, recruiters and candidates) as a starting point. Advanced TA will include a strategic TA analytics framework and will provide tight (explicit) links to the business and downstream talent management processes – starting with on-boarding. Significant business impact attributed to the selection system implementation is the desired outcome. Elegant simplicity is the way to achieve it. Have you veered off your talent acquisition road map to a land of selection complexity? Visit www.ddiworld.com to learn more about how you can leverage selection tools to streamline your processes. View post: Tags: Acquisition, competencies, complexity, countless, hiring, issues, Legacies, manager, Models, process, reduction Good Recruiters, Bad Recruiters, Jedi Mind Tricks and Influence…Hiring really should be easier than it is. Company wants to hire, person wants job, sign some paperwork, done. Get the right person with the skills in the role, in the shortest possible time, for the least cost. Simple. But it’s not easy. In some cases, in fact, it’s pretty darn hard. Like most processes, if people weren’t involved, it would be a slam dunk. People add complexity to the process in which a recruiter influences a hiring team and an individual to come to agreement on what is, for all parties, a very big decision, while handling the dynamics of culture, market, internal politics, institutional history, etc. You could go all Jedi on them (“these are not the programmers you are looking for”), but if your Jedi training stinks, you better know how to influence people. Bad recruiters aren’t Jedis, can’t influence anyone and just end up making excuses. Anti-Jedi. When I read Dr. Daniel Crosby’s recent article, The Psychology of Influence , on the MonsterThinking blog, I found myself nodding in agreement. Crosby lays out six “weapons of influence,” which serve as a roadmap for recruiters who want to do more than sit around complaining about their “stupid hiring managers.” Go read the article to learn about the weapons, but here’s a snapshot and my take on how a recruiter might use them: Scarcity — Know what talent makes money and drives the business, then use that language when presenting candidates: “Tom, I think you should talk with candidate Bill, because his background in thermodynamics might be a nice complement to your team as you work on the whizzer banger project for 2012.” Reciprocity —Help others, and they will want to help you. “Larry, we won’t hire your son as an intern reporting to you, but I’ll connect him with five recruiters I know in the market to talk to him about potential opportunities.” Social Proof —Show off a little: “Tom, I just spent time with Sally’s group reviewing the business plan for the next 3 quarters, so I have a good feel for what staffing resources they’ll need to hit their goals. Do you have time to meet, so I make sure to resource your needs appropriately? Yep, Tuesday at 9 works fine.” Commitment and Consistency —hiring managers love processes they help create, especially if the initial investment is small. Brainstorm with the hiring manager five questions to ask every candidate. Get her involved in design, and the buy-in will follow. Liking —According to Crosby, “play up similarities and minimize differences when attempting to persuade.” Don’t play the sleazy sales guy “reading the room” when you enter an office, but you need a connection. Find one. Authority —Communicate up well. Let leadership know what road blocks are in front of you. Don’t tattle, but leverage the business leaders to remove barriers to adding great talent. As I have written before, slapping résumés around, pounding out the calls and throwing it against the wall is by itself a very active but totally flawed plan. Great talent pros still make the calls and work the numbers, but then they also find a way to leverage Crosby’s influence weapons to drive the process. They add and refine organizational capability, which is not at all easy, but critical. Editor's Note – R.J. Morris is a staffing/talent acquisition director for McCarthy Building Companies based out of STL. Like many others in the FOT clan, he's a sports nut who can endlessly draw the parallels between athletes, sports and the talent management game. I know, I know, as if we needed more of that. That aside, he's got two master's degrees and more than a dozen years under his belt as an HR practitioner including as an HRD focused on staffing for McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. Originally posted here:
Tags: article, complement, daniel, hiring, influence, institutional, people, politics, recruiter, result, Scarcity, social, thermodynamics Climate change – stealing from Peter to give to PaulIs it just me or is this entire climate change thing an absolute joke? Based on the way that the tax is going to work, my understanding is that the government will need to hire hundreds of new public servants to administer the $10.5 billion of grants which will be paid under the proposed climate plan. What’s ironic, is that this new funding is going to occur on the back of the savings by putting a freeze on existing public hiring intentions. So on the one hand, jobs will slip from existing services so that we can use the savings to redistribute funds through this new scheme which will also result in a need for hiring more people. My question basically is this. Will this entire scheme actually do anything positive from an economic perspective? I dont understand it. On the one hand, jobs will be made to pay people from cash saved by not hiring others who were working in government based jobs that were needed but are now not needed because we want to save more money so that we can create a new industry that will allow us to make more jobs? Is it as simple as that or am I just an idiot that is beyond the capacity to comprehend this? In short, is this tax a good thing for job seekers or not? I simply cannot work it out? Tags: based, carbon, change, climate, corporation, entire, existing, gillard, going, government, hiring, investment, million, needed, onesteal, people, peter, relnofollow, singapore, stealing, surprise Design & Build RecruitmentDesign & Build Recruitment Tags: alert, alike, Architecture, australian, browse, build, Construction, consulting, contact, create, design, designed, doing, employers, Engineering, finding, hiring, international, Jobseekers, leader, Legal, login, market, markets, member, password, powered, recognised, recruitment agencies, Register, right, search, sector, Sectors, sitemap, specialists, starter, support, thing, Timesheets SANSEGO: The Job LotteryWhat a huge difference loving a job has on one’s psyche! Also yesterday at work, there were several interviews with people for the open position due to the co-worker’s unexpected passing. At lunch, I had asked the human resources lady how many … And the hiring process defied everything I heard people ( job seekers and the government employees at the state employment office) say: December is the worst month to find a job ; its easier to find a job when you have a job ; … Read more: Tags: employees, employment, hiring, human, Industry Chat, job, lunch, office, open, position, process, Psyche, result, worker Scared of Losing Talent? Circle the Wagons! (But We Still See You in There…)A few months back, FOT’s resident incentive and rewards guru, Paul Hebert , penned a great piece called ‘HR Plays Too Much Defense’ . It was a great take on how, in many HR organizations, the default position of risk avoidance, protection, and even fear detracts from the function’s potential and ability to enact positive and relevant change in the enterprise. Click the link and take a few minutes to re-read the post. It’s cool, I can hang here while you digest Paul’s take. I was thinking about Paul’s piece as I talked to a friend of mine recently, a corporate recruiter for a Fortune 500 type company, who expressed some concerns about how recently a number of hiring managers she supports had reported a dramatic surge in poaching activity by recruiters from industry and regional competitors, with a marked increase in the last several months. And sure enough, for a variety of reasons, these corporate ‘raiding parties’ had started to do some damage, picking off a few key executives here, a few solid and experienced performers there. The situation was starting to get really worrisome, my recruiter friend lamented, and some immediate responses to these attacks were now being implemented. That’s cool, I thought, my mind jumping to the Sean Connery line from ‘The Untouchables’ – “He pulls a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue! That's the Chicago way, and that's how you get Capone!” So, I asked this: What are you doing to strike back? Again, I was fully expecting to hear something about staking out the bar where the competitor’s top sales reps hang out, squatting on rival firm’s Foursquare locations, and buying up some sponsored ads for the ‘Jobs at Competitor Name’ Google searches. And quite honestly, even those tactics are pretty lame, but at least they are ‘playing offense.’ Well, my recruiter friend replied, they are taking some pretty strong action. First, they made all of their sales reps make their LinkedIn profiles and connections private. They didn’t want their staff to be easily found and connected to by other recruiters, as well as their connections mined. Next, they had IT block all incoming email messages from the domains of their main competitors. They couldn't have rival recruiters emailing their people directly, after all. And last, they took their partial social media blocking policy at work and extended it to more sites and networks. Sure, they still let folks, some folks, onto LinkedIn, but that is about it. Taking those few steps, in their opinion, would help in slowing down, if not stopping, the exodus of good people to their enemies. Interesting, I replied. They had it all figured out. Once the rival recruiters saw their emails bouncing back from their mail server, surely they’d pretty much give up, right? And if all of a sudden, their LinkedIn search results for their people start coming up a bit less rich than before, well, I am sure they, of course, would just slink off, head down, cyber-defeated in a low-stakes, pathetic game of corporate jousting. And the full social media ban? I am sure none of their people actually use social media at home, or on their personal smartphones. Good thinking about the block, that will effectively erase them from the savvy sourcers out there. In the American Old West, as the settlers moved further into Native American territory, they frequently were fearful for their safety from raiding parties of all sorts. They adopted a defensive tactic known as ‘Circling the Wagons’ , which entailed arraying their covered wagons in a complete circle, and placing their prized possessions and people in the center. The idea being that by assuming this posture they could better see and ward off any attacks. Sometimes this strategy was successful, sometimes not so much. But the thing is, today, if you try the modern version of circling the wagons around your talent, the rest of us can still see inside, and unlike in the old west, you can’t really do much to protect your possessions and people all that much. You can try and circle the wagons, cower in the middle, and hope your ‘enemies’ don’t find your valuables. Or you can, as my friend Paul suggested, take the offense. It is up to you pardner. Giddy up! Editor's Note - Steve Boese is fondly known to many as the HR Technology blogger. By day, he is an HR Technology Consultant and part-time instructor at the Rochester Institute of Technology . That's right, he's educating some of HR's future, folks. How's that for literally shaping the future of HR? Steve can also be found hosting the HR Happy Hour on Thursdays at 8PM ET … you know, where a bunch of HR pros get together and call in to talk about HR stuff. Sounds like a real happy time… yep. Okay then… Link:
Tags: change, dramatic, hiring, minutes, Morgue, recruiter, recruiters, recruiting, relevant, result, steve boese, Untouchables, war for talent Top 5 ways to make a lasting impression in interviewsDear JobsBlog: I really want to work in the technology industry, but never seem to make it past the interview stage. How do I make a lasting impression in an interview? – Desperately Seeking Recognition Dear Desperately Seeking: This is a really great question. Tags: hiring, impression, industry, Industry Chat, interview, lasting, managers, result, stage, technology How to show recruiters that you’re a creative problem solverI’ve noticed a trend over the last months: hiring managers are seeking “creative thinking” or “creative problem solving” as the top abstract skill among job candidates. Of course, hiring managers still need technical talent who are adept communicators, but – beyond that – creative problem solving is the skill for which everyone is searching. We can all agree that creative problems solving skills sound important, but, on deeper examination, many candidates are unsure of how to actually define the term. So, what exactly is “creative problem solving?” Creative problem solving is also known as lateral thinking, creative thinking, out-of-the-box thinking, imaginative thinking or a dozen other synonymous names. Bottom line: it is the ability to understand that a solution does not always come from a “logical” lock-step advance from point A to point B. Creative problem solving recognizes that the solution might require an entire shift in thinking or process or materials before the outcome will be achieved. Creative problem solvers do not see dead ends as a failure, but view them as a need to adjust their course and keep utilizing a Tags: communicators, creative, hiring, Industry Chat, job, managers, problem, problems, result, thinking How hiring mistakes are madeFor those of us who follow the AFL version of football in this country, you couldn’t help but know that last week, perennial bad boy Brendan Fevola was in trouble, yet again. Fevola is alleged to have exposed himself to a Brisbane mother at a Club Family Day. Fevola’s club, the Brisbane Lions, responding by indefinitely suspending its star forward and asking the police to investigate the Read the rest here:
Tags: Afl, brisbane, fevola, hiring, Industry Chat, referees/references, result, trust/credibility Dear Recruiters…Stop Ignoring Your CandidatesOkay, everyone…Pop Quiz! You are recruiting on an open position. You source a candidate, screen him, have him chat with the hiring manager and decide to fly him in for an interview with the team. After a long day of interviews, it is determined that this candidate will not get the job. What do you do? A) Let him know that you will not be offering and offer him some feedback on his interviews. B) Tell him that he did very well, but another candidate was stronger. C) Send a quick e-mail saying the position has been filled. Best of luck in your search. D) Nothing. I will accept A, B, and begrudgingly, even C. But, if you picked D, you just failed Professor Pankow's Probing Pop Quiz. I know we've covered this topic at FOT in the past. But, I feel like I have heard multiple stories from candidates recently about how they've gone through an entire recruiting process and heard nothing in the end. Zilch. Nada. If you are a recruiter that frequently leaves candidates hanging, I would like to hear from you in the comments. Why do you do this? What makes this okay either professionally or morally? I am not talking about a response for every candidate that applies. I mean, if you are a high volume recruiter, it's not realistic that you are going to send an e-mail to hundreds of people. But, don't you feel you owe some kind of explanation to the people you've spoken to? People who have taken time out of their days and often days off of work to interview with your company? My guess is that reasoning for this comes down to one of two things. Either the recruiter doesn't like giving bad news or they are too busy to reach out. Here are my suggestions for both. If you don't like giving bad news, try to take remember that this is not about you; it's about the candidate. Giving them the news, even if it's bad, at least gives them closure. They know that they shouldn't wait on pins and needles for this opportunity to come to them. They can move on and know they tried their best. Most people express gratitude when I call them with the bad news. Of course, it doesn't make their day. But, at least they know that we cared enough as a company to let them know where they stand. Time, I can sympathize with a little more. We're all busy. But, try to consider it part of the process. Just like you need to block time for the phone screen, just like you need to block time to deliver an offer, block time to break the news. It can be as quick and easy as a form e-mail. A phone call is better and more personal, but if time is really the issue, just hit send on a pre-constructed mail. When I am pressed for time, I will often shoot out such an e-mail with an offer to schedule some time if they want further feedback. Feedback doesn't need to take longer than 10 minutes. Maybe even less. “Hi… you didn't get the job. We're moving forward with a candidate that had a stronger background in mud-wrestling. Sorry to bring bad news. Do you have any questions?” That's it. It's quick and it's easy. Move along to other things. I'm sorry to rehash old wounds with topics already explored. But, come on, people. We work in Human Resources. We're supposed to know how to deal with people. The Golden Rule is important in recruiting as well as life. Treat candidates as you wish to be treated. And, stop ignoring them. Editor's Note - Jason Pankow is a Senior Recruiter for Microsoft’s Xbox LIVE and Xbox Software groups. Jason supports the Interactive Entertainment Business at Microsoft, bringing in technical, as well as creative, talent to Redmond. Look him up on Xbox Live, where he'll ring you up for a triple-double as Steve Nash on NBA 2K8 or kick it old-school via a 7-digit score on Galaga … Here is the original post: “Please note – this post was scraped from the original site as indicated above in the “read more about this article URL” and is in no way reflects the views, opinions or values of the team at Review Recruiter. More specifically, Review Recruiter is in no way connected with, associated with or involved with the original author or the original authors content. If you are interested in reading more about this article, please visit the original authors site as mentioned above.” Tags: Fly, hiring, Industry Chat, jason pankow, job, manager, offer process, open, Pankow, pop, position, quiz, recruiting, result Blog post: Two traits every successful recruiter should haveFrom either side of the hiring desk, the habits to make a successful recruiter who in turn keeps employer clients happy and employed candidates satisfied really do just come down to two things… Read the original here: Tags: either-side, employer-clients, habits, hiring, successful-recruiter, the-habits, the-hiring, turn-keeps Now Hiring 32 Professionals: All Agencies welcome to submit candidates**Conditions apply Sounds fabulous, doesn’t it? Surely it can’t be true? But it is! There really is a hiring boom in one organisation, in contrast to the hiring hibernation occurring almost everywhere else in the recruitment forest. And you don’t have to have ANY previous relationship with the company to submit candidates. Surely this is too good to be true? So what’s the catch? You bet there’s a Here is the original post: Tags: atlassian, clients, hiring, hiring-boom, one-organisation, Recruitment Agencies, recruitment trends, sounds, the-catch, the-recruitment, too-good How to Ask For More Money Without Thowing Someone in a Rage in the Offer Process…TRUE STORY : The editor of this blog doesn't think it fits the FOT vibe when I write from the candidate's perspective. I actually agree with her on that point most of the time… REALITY : I'm the crazy founder who still has total access, so I'm taking the chance that JLee may get a court injunction against me and revoke access by sharing the following story from my cell phone yesterday. Here's the story. Friend of KD calls around noon. Good news, she's found the perfect gig and will soon be leaving her current employer. The Challenge: The offer was for about 10K less than she wanted to make the move. I, perhaps like you, get the questions like this one from friends all the time. The question here is pretty simple – ” KD, what can I do to get the offer up without making them angry and losing the job I want?” Of course, qualifying questions are necessary to give the right advice in this case. Here's what I found out as I questioned her. The whole process was handled by the hiring manager until the offer, which was handled by HR (never let HR make offers people, it ruins credibility. Make your hiring managers make the offer. Be on a silent line with them, whatever you need to do to help them grow). HR calls and makes the offer and proceeds to tell Janet that the number is capped and that's as high as they can go. Earlier in the process, Janet gave the hiring manager the number she needed and the hiring manager indicated that number wouldn't be a problem. The job is in the 100K range. So far, so good from the candidate's perspective. The person making the offer wasn't involved in the manager saying “no problem”. No one on the employer side tried to leverage Janet on money early in the process. Advantage Janet. Here's what I told her she needed to do: 1. Call back and intro in an assumptive close kind of way , “I'm looking forward to joining the team” (let's them know you want to join, doesn't make the negotiation hardcore). 2. Thank them for the offer, then contrast the offer with your current situation to explain the gap (which reminds them a strong option is to stay in your current position). Wordtrack: “Here's where I'm at with the offer. When Bob and I talked in the process, I told him I was at 110K, and he told me that wouldn't be a problem. I like the opportunity with you a lot, but in order to make a move I need to earn where I'm at now. Can you get me to the point where I don't have to take a step backward? 3. Don't talk after that . Put the pressure on them to respond and even if they can't fix it on the spot, let them tell you they'll look into it. If the answer is no, you still have the Bob angle to go towards. Lots of details and forks in the road here based on what happens next, but the general keys are this. 1. You have to ask , 2. You have to ask in a way that doesn't make you seem like a cold-blooded jerk (make them want to help you), 3. You have to have some logic regarding why you want more . Just wanting more isn't enough. Everyone wants more.? 4. Some unspoken leverage is nice . Can you stay in your job? That's enough… If you're currently negotiating with me or negotiate with me in the future, don't use these word tracks. I've got the ninja antidote to these word tracks, and chances are we had this conversation in a lot more detail a long time before the offer stage. I offer this to my friends as a friend. I consider you one of those. If you're a talent pro, hit me in the comments with what I did wrong or missed… Read more: Tags: 100k Range, advice, Cell Phone, Court Injunction, credibility, Early Advantage, explain-the-gap, friends, gig, hiring, Hiring Manager, hiring-managers, Injunction Against, job, makes-the-offer, manager, money, number, offer, opportunity, perspective, Proceeds, process, Rage, Taking The Chance, Time Reality, True Story, until-the-offer, Vibe 10 things we hate about recruitment companies « Even It Up!You have outlined many of the problems and failings with employment agencies , but there are many more: The job of recruitment agent is one of the few which requires no Qualifications at all (and no experience in the industry being recruited … HR division or Hiring managers, should these people be known. The clients have a policy in place that prevents this avenue from being used by contractors. If you want the job they are offering you have to use a recruitment agency . … Read the original here: Tags: avenue, being-recruited, being-used, hiring, industry, problems, qualifications, the-industry, the-problems |
(c) Copyright - Easternmark Pty, Ltd.
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use Policy
