Posts Tagged ‘ “Employer Brand” ’

Recruiters – What are your 3 Burning Questions?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

A month or so ago Emma and I were invited to present at the End of Year Recruitment Conference held this last week and organised by The Recruiter Network. This would be the first time we had stood up as The FIRM in a public environment and wanted to do something that was in keeping with our core values – we chose “sharing knowledge”.

There are many ways in which standards can be raised for hiring managers, recruiting practitioners working in-house and for sales people working at agencies; arguably the biggest of these is by gaining an understanding of how we all work. It is probably fair to say that very few agency staff know what it is like to work in house or what the roles and responsibilities of recruitment or HR practitioners are and the challenges they have.  There are guesses; some right, some wrong, but rarely known

With this in mind we felt a little information sharing could go a long way. If the in-house function is performing well, has the sophistication, resources, competencies and desire then the use of agencies will be eliminated in that organisation. However, I doubt very much that this model is widely adopted and that the vast majority of companies will chose to use the services of agencies for one reason or another. Let us remember though that the vast majority of companies do not have a dedicated competent in-house Rescouring teams and as such companies choose to use agencies. Hiring managers who manage their own process typically won’t have a clue how to resource properly, despite what they themselves will think and as such will tend to use an agency or worse, multiple agencies for expedience. Nothing wrong with that if it works well for all parties.

So to our presentation. The idea was to ask agencies what their Burning Questions are and discuss some of the reasons the questions needed to be asked and hopefully provide answers and insights.

1. What are the 3 Burning Questions you, as a recruitment consultant, would like to ask your customers (hiring managers)?

2. What are the 3 Burning Questions you, as a recruitment consultant, would like to ask HR or Resourcing teams at your customers or prospects?

3. What are the 3 biggest issues or frustrations you have when dealing with HR or Resourcing functions?

The questions were posted on Surveymonkey. Using Twitter and the UK Recruiter newsletter we invited agencies to ask away.

We were given a 50 minute speaking slot at the start of the conference and as such unfortunately we couldn’t discuss every question asked. Some were just too stupid anyway.  These are the ones we addressed or at least we tried to on the day. Thanks to the discussion in the room amongst the delegates we sort of ran out of time.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 1. What are the 3 Burning Questions you, as the recruitment consultant, would like to ask your customers (hiring managers)?

  • What is more important, cutting costs or finding the right candidate?
  • What would be your ideal Agency/Customer relationship?

Question 2. What are the 3 Burning Questions you, as the recruitment consultant, would like to ask HR or Resourcing teams at your customers or prospects?

  • Do you have favourite agencies/recruiters and why?
  • Why do you block access to hiring managers, even when we are a recognised and trusted partner?

Question 3. What are the 3 biggest issues or frustrations you have when dealing with HR or Resourcing functions?

  • Feedback …………or a lack of it
  • Poor job descriptions or briefings on the positions
  • Not responding to telephone calls (messages) or emails

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From many of the questions it is clear that some agencies really do want to learn in order to help their customers. It was also clear from some of the reactions in the room to the answers we were giving that agencies simply do not know nor can they comprehend the scale of some of the challenges in-house people have – there were gasps after Emma gave one example of what her teams are dealing with on a daily basis. It is also clear that many companies would do better by engaging more with their suppliers and teaching each other how to work together.  Better results for all I suspect will be realised.

I welcome further questions

I welcome further answers

If you would like to discuss any of these questions or any others that you have please let me know. My contact details can be found here.

2011
11/06
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Recruitment
The FIRM
TAGS









6 comments

Do You Want to Hire the Best Talent?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

At the beginning of 2010 I wrote a blog post called “Why would I want to work for your company?” and published it here. It must have struck a chord because I was asked to remove it because someone thought I was having a pop at them; would I do that? Being new to blogging, I duly complied. I then reposted it here in April 2011. Today it is my most visited (and I hope read) post. It is also the one that is searched for and found the most often using the words in it title. Obviously there are many that are asking the same questions.

This post is to take the subject of that post a bit further.

In that post I talked about poor employer brand and the lack of attention many companies give to promoting that brand to potential candidates, naïvely in favour of their hallowed corporate and consumer brands (which might suck by the way). Today it is all about engagement – at least some people are getting it. I’ve been banging on about networks, communities and candidate engagement since July 2006; the date I came into HR Resourcing. They didn’t really listen then, but back then I didn’t have such a loud voice.

Now it’s louder and I’m not alone either. People are listening and asking questions, hungry to learn. I go to seminars, conferences and have conversations with plenty of people who do a similar job to me and have many of the same challenges. The subject of Candidate Engagement, what it means, how important it is, the dynamics, psychology and methods of approach are all part of the discussions.

Now I don’t have all of the answers, none of us do, but it seems to me that there are some simple concepts to grasp.

  • Everyone is a potential employee if you get the proposition right for them
  • Not everyone is a potential applicant – some just won’t fit or have the skills you need but they are interested in what you have to say and will have opinions others will listen to
  • Everyone could be a consumer – piss a candidate off and it will cost you money
  • Talking costs nothing – tell them what THEY want to know, not what you think they do or just what you feel comfortable telling them.
  • Every employee you have has a story to tell, make sure the majority have a good one

That last point is a huge subject that covers a wide range of HR aspirations and failures. But I’m not going there today.

So how do we engage with the world and give people the information they need. In the more mature and up to date companies you’ll need to join forces with Marketing, Branding and Communications to create an environment that can be used to let everyone know what your organisation is all about. It products, its people, its ambition, its opportunities, events, initiatives, CR projects, the good news and the bad news. Get people interested in you and your company and they will be more interested. Some will even want to work for you. It takes time and effort and therefore money, but can you really afford not to? There are companies that you compete with in the quest for top talent that are doing this already.

Most Resourcing Departments don’t have someone with the title Social Engagement Manager or Candidate Engagement Specialist or similar. Why not? Mostly it’s because I’ve just thought of it myself! – far too many options available for answers on that one.

It’s a new concept; no one has any experience of it. It therefore scares those who are supposed to be in control because they can’t be and don’t have the skills and knowledge to work with it. It’s a new concept only in so far as people now see Social Media and new technology as enabler to get the job done. The concept is not new it’s been around since Man learned to speak. But with Social Technology we all see a route for a quick fix.

But don’t be fooled into believing the technology will be the complete answer; you will need to invest in the people who have the aptitude and attitude, who can use the platforms and then use them to engage.

There are platforms that are now emerging, some established like TribePad, that will actually help you with your engagement plan. They are all so new that when I thought about this blog post I searched the web using a host of different terms and search strings and all I was finding was job boards, aggregators or ATS providers. None of which seemed to offer you a platform to engage with the world and anyone who wants to engage with you properly yourselves – apart from TribePad. There are others, I know there are. I have yet to meet or find them. I welcome comments on this blog from those who offer a similar option I’d be interested. However you don’t have to use advanced platform to make a start; you can use Facebook, your own company website, Twitter, blogs as well as face-to-face events. There is so much that can be done.

Ok I’ve digressed. In my previous blog I was stating that we have to give the public more reason to want to join our companies. We need to engage with people in person, face-to-face or online we need to give them what they want with targeted or subscribed distribution of information. We have to be available, ready and willing to answer the tough questions now. It’s no longer acceptable that just because you are one of the biggest companies in the world, with one of the best brands that people will want to work for you. Why would they when you don’t engage at all or give them an idea of what it’s like, what our culture is like, what opportunities exist for them to help their careers?

Engagement is not about just giving a candidate a good experience during the interview process or the lifecycle of a job, it’s about fully embracing the concept and looking at everyone as a potential employee. They are no longer candidates, they are followers or interested parties who need to be given a reason to keep coming back to your site or platform or community. They have to want to be there, they want to experience what you are, they want to be informed and if you get it right they may also apply for the job.

2011
10/30
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Employer Branding - Bad
Employer Branding - Good
Recruitment
TAGS








2 comments

Resourcing – Why Chop Logs with a Teaspoon?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

This weekend I spent loads of time in my garden. About 4 hours on Saturday and about 3 on Sunday. It was time well spent.

I had a list of things I wanted to get done, the sun was shining, it was warm and dry, perfect weather for some hard work.

In the spring of 2010 we had six very large Ash trees felled in various parts of the grounds.  Two of the trees were easily 30 meters tall and were felled inside the garden with no way to get them up the very high steep bank through the woods and out of the garden.  I managed to get some of them cleared last year but had left the rest in piles to season where they fell.  Time to move some more; cut, split and stack them in the stables, (we don’t have horses, it’s just a giant storage shed), ready for winter use.

I’d put this particular job off for most of the summer hoping for a long hot spell to really dry the wood out.  That and the fact it was going to a long hard job and I didn’t really fancy it at all, but with cut and split logs costing in the region of £100 a tonne if purchased it made sense to use what was already ours. So to work.

With my in-ear headphones and the iPod on shuffle I just got on with it. A chainsaw and a bow saw on Saturday, an axe and hatchet on Sunday.  I was having fun, all the time the number of tree trunks and branches from around the place were being reduced to the size we could use in the house.  Whilst I was doing this I was thinking, amongst other things, about my next blog post.  Each time I latched onto a theme I just couldn’t make it work.

Then on Sunday it occurred to me.

I just spent hours reducing trees to 20cm logs to burn in an open fire.  Whilst it was most certainly hard work it had not been difficult at all, in fact it was easy.  I was methodical.  I paced myself.  It occurred to me was that I was enjoying what I was doing, I had the enthusiasm and energy to get the job done and I had the correct tools for the job.

Of course my mind linked it instantly to Resourcing and how organisations big and small don’t generally give it the priority it needs, don’t have the appetite, energy or the right tools to do it right.  To do anything right, there has to be an appetite, enthusiasm and energy to do it well and the right equipment to do it effectively and efficiently for the right results have to be available.  I could have created the same amount of fire logs with a bow saw and a regular saw and just an axe but it would have taken me so much longer and with much more effort and lots of pain.  This is a task I have done for year and love it! I know what I am doing and have the right approach, tools and technique.  Yes anyone can do it but you have to know what you are doing.  I’ve seen the damage done by poor attention to the detail and poor technique; it’s not pretty

When it comes to Resourcing the appetite comes from the leader of the organisation.  Many executives say it is a priority but few give it anything other than lip service and it tends to get marginalised because outdated attitudes to sourcing and attraction are cemented firmly in days gone by, i.e. pick the phone up and call and agency or search firm. (A bit like using a rust old and blunt hand saw).  This last sentence assumes it is recognised as an essential and specialist business function in the first place. I doubt very much that it is in the majority.  There are many companies that are happy for the hiring managers to leverage personal networks, place job adverts and engage with agencies; and for many this works well.  Whilst it doesn’t actually add any real value to the business it puts bums on seats.  Sadly for the majority of hiring managers and HR practitioners that’s all it’s about.

Equipping a Resourcing function properly is key to its success and essential to it adding far more value to the business than most people think it can.  It doesn’t start with simply giving someone the responsibility to recruit for your company.  It starts with a commitment to do it properly and to recognise that it is something that you need to invest in to allow the proper policies and procedures to be put in place and then constantly refined, retuned and modified to keep pace with a constantly changing landscape.

It also takes time to get it right for your company.  There is no overnight fix, but there can be a dramatic and identifiable improvement within a reasonably short space of time.  I’m talking within the current accounting period.

The one big mistake that many hiring managers, HRDs, HR Managers and company executives make when it comes to Resourcing is thinking it is easy and that anyone can do it.

Last year I asked an audience made up of about 100 HR management types “How many of you have personally been responsible for Rescouring someone in the last year?”

All but a few put their hands up.

Then I asked them “How many of you did that without using agencies or search firms?”  Only three hands stayed up.

I’m not sure what they thought they were doing but it wasn’t Resourcing, but it was easy.  I told them that the only thing they had proven to me was that they knew how to use a phone.  Only one or two of them had actually done the resourcing, all of the others had offloaded it to 3rd parties.    Now this is not a fault at all but simply an indication of what many think Resourcing is all about.

Recruitment, Talent Acquisition, Resourcing, Staffing – call it what you will, is not a one dimensional function and it does not follow a simple linear process that has a clear beginning and an end. To be sure that your business doesn’t suffer because of the bad hires you have made or the bad impression you have made in the market it must be given specialist continued focus and attention.  It is a front line customer and consumer facing function.  Treating it as anything else could be neglecting your responsibilities.

Providing your company with the right tools means applying the right priority to the function, finding the right people, paying them what they are worth, the right training, giving them the appropriate budget to use the appropriate technologies and platforms and give them the corporate support to ensure they are not marginalised by HR, Sales, Marketing or any other function.  Think about it!  An effective Resourcing team might speak to more people every week, selling your company to a wider audience than any other department in your organisation.  Do you really want them to be doing a bad job of it?   You get the right people with the right attitude and attributes and give them respect they will both save you money and add to your company’s bottom line.

With the right tools for the job you get a job well done, you get added benefit in terms of corporate reputation, the delivery of the right skills at the right time for the business and is done efficiently.  The best talent in the market will give you more respect and as such could well put you at the top of their list of places to work when they are ready.  And as with anything done right you will get value for your money.

I am looking for work at the moment and know from first-hand experience how bad the Resourcing/Recruitment processes are in companies if left to the HRBPs, HRDs or generalists. It’s not the individuals’ fault all of the time; it’s probably the priority given to it.  There is a simple answer – Hire me I’ll sort it out for you.  I can be contacted here

Let me just add this; if it was easy to do, why do so many of you get it so wrong all of the time?

Music of the Day – In Loving Memory by Alter Bridge

Thanks for reading

2011
10/24
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Employer Branding - Bad
Employer Branding - Good
Job Hunting
Recruitment
Uncategorized
TAGS









4 comments

Things That Job Hunters Hate – #myjobhunt

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

Last week was my first week of availability; I’d forgotten how exciting job hunting can be. Yet, despite really enjoying meeting new people, the conversations that result and the relationships that evolve, job hunting is not easy. I find it both fun and fascinating and very hard work all at the same time. That’s when it’s going okay. In fact even when it is going okay it saps the energy, both physically and mentally. The concentration required is very taxing to say the least. I know I am not alone in admitting it can be very stressful and intimidating at times. But let’s face it unless you want to give everything up, you have to keep going. But can you imagine what it must be like for those who have been out of work for so long that they can’t say it’s going okay?. How stressful and confidence sapping must that be?

I had three months’ notice that my contract was definitely coming to an end and therefore I had plenty of time to get the #myjobhunt process started. I thought I had the time, but in reality when still getting stuff done in the day-job, job hunting was very very difficult, almost impossible to do aggressively yet the pace did pick up in the last two weeks. The number of contacts, referrals and interviews I had lined up was a real surprise to me. In the last week, my first week of availability I’ve had a couple of days where there were two interviews each day, each with companies new to me and in markets alien to me. All with the same challenges but with their own unique requirements to be met. I will I hope have done a good job in all, but likely as not I won’t be the preferred candidate in all of them. But I’ve been fortunate to have the opportunities to sell myself. The refreshing and mature aspect of these companies is that their HRDs are not misguided into believing that market or industry sector experience is crucial at this level. It frustrates the hell out of me when I get told “sorry you don’t have retail (or similar) experience” or “you haven’t been an HR Generalist” or as one person said to me this week “we may decide to take someone from a general HR background because they have better communication skills”. I’ll let you judge and feel free to comment.

I suspect there are many job hunters out there in the same position and not having a good time of it at the moment and it certainly doesn’t help when short-sighted hiring managers ask for irrelevancies or focus too much on what someone has done in the past, rather than looking harder at the knowledge and attributes they can bring and what they are able to do. Sadly this is all too common, the vast majority of interviewers and hiring managers simply do not know how to interview and assess someone properly. They lack the skills themselves to explore candidates’ abilities and potential. They therefore let themselves down by missing out on good people for the future development of their department and company and they let the candidate down too. And we all know the impact a bad interviewer or bad interview experience can have. Getting a consistent approach to interviews, questions and evaluations should be a top priority for every Resourcing leader and business leader – it’s not that hard to do either and depending on the size of your organisation can be rolled out very quickly too.

Ok so questionable job requirements, over ambitious wish lists and crap interviewers are some of the frustrations that we can all relate to, but there is one that I think we would all agree just isn’t acceptable yet still happens all too often. Post-interview feedback. Or the lack of feedback to be precise.

During the last three months of my contract I was pursuing a position with one particular company. A job I really liked the sound of and was very excited about. I had 5 interviews with this particular company; one with their most senior global resourcing person and another with their most senior HRD in EMEA. They were very pleasant and professional and gave me a good sense of what their plans were and what many of their company and personal business values were. Sadly I was to be disappointed on two fronts with this company. Firstly I didn’t get the job but knowing the chap that did helped me accept it with a smile. Secondly and what I was more disappointed about was the lack of feedback. I received none whatsoever. All I got was that they chose someone else. In my case I gave over 8 hours of my time (inc. travel) to attend these interviews.

It was over a month from the last interview to being told I didn’t get it, so I wasn’t surprised but given the values and the conversations I’d had I was surprised when the search firm still wasn’t able to get me any feedback. We all know this happens; it’s talked about and complained about by candidates all over the world. I would suspect that this it is the biggest complaint that candidates have.

Now I don’t write this to have a pop at that particular company. As many of you know if I was that bothered personally I’d not hesitate in naming them would I? But really you/we should all do better than this. It is not only lazy, wrong and rude it damages your personal reputation and that of your company.

In my position as recruiter looking to be recruited I am probably more relaxed about this most candidates. From a Resourcing Manager’s perspective I am appalled.

As a candidate I do have in insiders understanding of the processes involved, the expectations and the acceptance that things aren’t perfect and therefore don’t take it too personally. I could bitch and moan and complain how unfair it all is, actually I do that quite a bit, but I knew what it would be like at the outset. Job hunting is all about motivation, not getting too disappointed and being tenacious. Much of the motivation comes from being able to identify where you went wrong and be encouraged that you can improve. Not that many people are self-aware enough to know where they screwed up, so they really on the feedback of others. Receiving post-interview feedback really does help and it should matter too. From a candidates point of view it is required for learning purposes or just plain closure. From the company’s perspective it is essential to give a real and valid reason to ensure that you live up to the promises and value you spoke about in the interview.

From the other side of the fence, the Resourcing Managers’, don’t you realise the damage you are doing to you own personal reputation let alone the feelings a candidate might have towards your company as a result of not taking 15 mins to provide feedback to someone? If you don’t I am sure your CEO would like to have a word. If you don’t then I’d gladly spend time explaining why and help you improve your approach and processes.

In the last month or so countless people have ask me how my quest has been going. On every occasion I reply “it’s going okay”. Never good, never great and never poorly, just okay. And it will always be just okay until I sign on the dotted line; then it will be great. There could come a time when I want to describe it as poor, maybe if I’ve been turned down or had bad feedback. But until any of those times actually happen, it will be okay. This is good.

So, job hunters, but strong and keep going, think about how you can improve as you go through the experience.
Employers be honest and fair and respect the candidates – you have to be better because as with last year many of you are not as good at hiring as you think you are.

thanks for reading

Music of the Day; As I Am by Dream Theater

2011
10/10
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
#myjobhunt
Job Hunting
Recruitment
TAGS







2 comments

Include or Engage – Dont They Mean the Same Thing?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

Last Friday there were a lot of Tweets using the #HFCHAT – this stands for HireFriday Chat and takes place online surprisingly on Fridays. I confess I’ve not paid too much attention to it so cannot offer any thoughts, however on Friday last week there were a number or tweets using the hashtag that seemed to follow a theme.

One in particular from Steve Levy @levyrecruits caught my eye

@levyrecruits Companies and Recruiters: I know you’re reading this… STOP RECRUITING TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE; find ways to include them #hfchat

This got me thinking.

Was this referring to the linear CV sifting process or was it talking about community and engagement? Could apply to both.

Let quickly look at the former first.

The problem that many in-house teams or HR generalists face is the lack time and the lack of engagement. The teams either don’t have the resources to afford the time or they are not afforded the time by the hiring managers to fully understand what it is they need. Very few in-house recruiters are given the opportunity to actively partner and engage at a business level with their hiring managers. There could be many reasons for this; managers not respecting what recruiting function could do if engaged properly, recruiters not having the commercial awareness to be anything other than transactional, HR Managers and BP’s marginalising the recruiting function and operating in a culture of elitism, where only they have access to the hiring manager community. There are I suspect a few more valid reasons. None acceptable to me, but valid nonetheless. All of these are common and familiar. None of them help the company or its ability to identify good talent from amongst the dozens, maybe hundreds of applications received for each position. And none of them help the candidate community get to know about the company.

Companies can be spoiled by the volume of applications received per vacancy, the vast majority of which are irrelevant. Irrelevant applications are received all of the time; because of wishful thinking or belief that they can genuinely do the job, stupidity or because of a lack of information provided by the company. Whatever the reason for the application, relevant or otherwise the overburdened recruiter will typically follow a linear process. At this stage they are looking to exclude people in order to identify those they want to include. Even once they have spent the time to create a decent long list they have their minds focused on finding perfect fits or best fits and therefore look to include only those that fit the predefined criteria and to exclude those that clearly don’t. It’s a process of elimination until they arrive a suitable shortlist of candidates that are worthy of further time, consideration and interview. It happens this way, it has always happened this way and it will always continue to happen this way.

But what happens if the shortlist doesn’t contain that many people or that they don’t have the “perfect fit” attributes required as briefed? How many companies and their leaders and their recruiters have the time, maturity and sense, as well as the understanding of the business function they are recruiting for, to look at what transferable skills the candidates might have and how they can be applied to the role being recruited for? Very few I would suspect. Could this be the point that Steve was making in his tweet?

If we replace the use of the word “include”, in Steve’s Tweet with “engage” we address the latter thought above and move closer to where both candidates and companies will gain greatest value and benefit.

Recruiting teams must be allowed to partner with the business if they want to become anything other than administrators. In order to add value to the business they need to understand it. Understanding the business and the functions of the individual business unit therein is the first step in transitioning a recruiting team away from being an administrative support function to one that is a valuable extension to it. It will give the individual recruiters the knowledge and confidence to engage properly with a target candidate community/group/pool and proactively identify suitable people. It will give them the opportunity to sell through conversation and inclusion and be able to speak with authority and knowledge. Not possible when kept at arms-length

I agree whole heartedly with Steve in respect that we shouldn’t be sitting back waiting for the applications to arrive in our inbox or ATS and then select through a process of elimination based on buzz word matching or like-for-like experience matching we need to look at all attributes, if that is what he meant.

By including and fully engaging with recruiter the hiring managers equip them to properly represent their department, function and job to the world. It also enables them to confidently engage with targeted or open communities, whether they are online or offline. In doing so employers and potential employees have the opportunity to come together to explore each other without commitment or obligation. I would suspect that good people will be identified or at least stand out much easier and at the same time many of the irrelevant applications will be eliminated.

There are two things then we need to get better at – well there are many but in the context of this post – we need to be better equipped and willing to identify transferable skills and think about what we can teach and what we can learn from a hire. We also need to be more open and transparent and fully engage with our internal customer community to enable us to engage with their potential candidate communities.

The discussions that can result in transparency and engagement could lead anywhere. Why miss that opportunity?

2011
08/23
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Business
Recruitment
TAGS






2 comments

Will You (We) Ever Change? – #myjobhunt week 3

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

I’ve not had the opportunity to write too much about #myjobhunt over the last couple of weeks – to be honest I haven’t had much inclination.

Last year I was on gardening leave and not required to get up a prescribed time. Nor did I have anything other than job hunting to do each day. I did seem to get a ridiculous number of chores that seemed to spring up from nowhere. The sun was even shining then. This year I have a job to do, a job that I enjoy so my priority is to that job. I also have to admit part of me has been in denial over the last month, hoping and to a certain extent certain I would get a reprieve and get a last minute extension to my contract. Alas this was a bit foolish on my part. The reality of the situation is that my boss on the first day had told me that it was unlikely to last more than a year. I knew the parameters and in September 2010 I was prepared for that.

What I wasn’t prepared for was the scope and scale of the job ahead of me and how much needed to be done. Nor was I prepared for the team in which I would work. I was soon thinking of myself in terms of a long term employee and lost sight of the end point. Wishfully thinking that I would be made a permanent employee.

So when informed at the end of June that it was almost certainly coming to an end I was more than a little disappointed; even that’s an understatement. Yet the day came when we had to tell everyone. It made it very real at that point.

In the last post regarding #myjobhunt 2011 I mentioned that I had already started interviewing and at that time I was quite advanced with one company. There were a few other opportunities that I had started but only the one that had moved. This one job is very interesting to me on so many fronts. It ticks many boxes for me. You can therefore imagine how I felt with a limited pipeline of opportunities and a job I was excited about after 4 interviews, to be told that they were not going to be making a decision for another couple of weeks because they had two other people to interview.

Or maybe you can’t.

I had to admit that since the last interview on the previous Friday I’d felt that I didn’t perform well in the interviews, there were plenty of gaps or things I should done better or differently, maybe. As such my initial reaction was one of rejection. I clearly hadn’t done enough to give them a reason not to interview others. But thinking about it over the weekend and putting myself in the position of Hiring Manager I had to admit that interviewing all of the potentially suitable candidates makes perfect sense. So whilst still disappointed I started this last week not feeling rejected.

However this delay, as well as the fact that everyone now knows I will be leaving at the end of Sept spurred me into action.

I had a few calls with agencies and search companies with very predictable results. “oh sorry that job has gone” or “we’ll call you back” or “you don’t have enough experience” – One or two of which WILL be mentioned in a blog post once I have secured a job, so if you work for an agency and I have spoken with you this last 2 weeks and you think you may have been a touch misleading or up your own arse, you have a little while to make amends before I name and shame you.

Two weeks ago I’d received a referral from a friend in The FIRM which I followed up immediately. I further followed it up this week and have been rewarded with an interview soon. I also applied directly for another role last week, followed it up this and also now have an interview. Both of these interviews are with the companies directly, which is pleasing. Progress.

One disappointment however is a role applied for two weeks ago via a company’s career site. The job was posted by a member of The FIRM and therefore I expected a bit of either professionalism or courtesy. Sadly no response has been received to date. This week I also connected with her on LinkedIn and sent her a direct email. Still no response. Again I will be blogging about it and them once I have a job.

You (We) must do better. Recruiters or agency staff are constantly getting criticised for poor responses and lack of engagement which they all seem to want to defend. Yet my experience tells me that you (we ) don’t have a leg to stand on. WE have got to do better. One thing that it seems I need to scream loudly is that if I apply to you for a job don’t ignore me. Not only am I applying for a job that if successful could see me as your boss, but it is rude. I am not a serial applicant and every job I apply for is relevant and appropriate to me and my experience and competencies.

Rant over. I feel more positive now because I am making a real effort. I have clearly stated that I am interested in one particular job, however a delay, as any, gives me the opportunity to have my head turned by others. I am ignoring the doubts, or at least trying to and getting on with giving myself that “choice” I wrote about last year. If fortune favours me and the other candidates don’t impress or fall short and they want me, then I will have to decide at that time. Right now however I don’t have a choice and need to surge forward.

Tomorrow is another day, thankfully the last day of the week before a weekend and a recharge.

As with last year I have received the most amazing amount of support and help from my friends online and offline, some of whom are in the same position as me and possibly looking at the same jobs – I am still happy to share with them too, unless of course I am in an advanced situation with a prospective employer. Good luck to everyone and please let me know if I can be of help.

2011
08/19
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
#myjobhunt
Job Hunting
Recruitment
TAGS







7 comments

Why would I want to work for your company?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

“Why would I want to work for your company?” and “What is in it for me?” are two questions, we as recruiters very rarely hear from candidates and yet both of them are top of the list of questions that candidates need to ask, should ask and probably subconsciously consider when job hunting.

We ALL do it without exception when we are looking for a job and must remember to consider these same questions as a prospective employer and ask ourselves “why would someone want to work for us” and “what would they get out of it?”

A professional recruiter is tasked with promoting their employer, its values and the career opportunities it has the potential to provide to people, yet so many recruiters, HR Directors and Managers as well as hiring managers and shamefully executives too, take it for granted that if a brand or company is big enough in its space (whether that is locally, nationally or globally) it will be a magnet for candidates. Seriously though it is a common mistake that so many people (companies) make, and it can be fatal as far as candidate engagement goes. If you are a recruiter or if you are a hiring manager and fail to provide a candidate with a compelling reason to join your company they just won’t!

A good indicator about how well you are “selling” the company or giving candidates the right level of information and incentive is to look at the number of rejected offers you get and the number of people who leave your organisation voluntarily within their first year of employment. Statistics will vary dept. by dept. and company to company, but if is higher than 10% I suggest that you need to look at how well you are selling yourself and your company.

There could be any number of points that candidates might find compelling and they’re likely to be different from candidate to candidate. Earnings Potential, Team, Challenge, Office Environment, Career Stability, Career Progression……..the list goes on. They are all very personal to the candidate and each will play a part in his or her decision process. Add to them the corporate employer brand, your place in the market and you have a big big story to create.

Unless the time and effort is invested to make the candidate feel important by finding out what is important to them you won’t be able to help them make the right choice. If you have found the right person, one you and others in the hiring process know will add value, you have an obligation to give them all of the information they want, as well as information you think they should know so that they can choose you.

There is no point in just assuming because you have a job to offer and a decent salary it will be enough to get a decision in your favour. Similarly, just because you have a great product or service doesn’t mean that you have a reputation of any kind, good or bad as an employer. You have to sell the benefit and value and what it could mean to each person. Do not take anything for granted.

2011
04/04
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Business
Employer Branding - Good
Recruitment
TAGS






1 comment

Recruitment Fraud – Action Needed?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

A week or so ago there was a topic that was posted on The FIRM’s discussion forum that was quite alarming. One of the members, an in-house UK based recruitment manager at a large company had flagged the issue of Recruitment Fraud.

I suspect that label could cover a multitude of sins, some very minor that we might experience every day and some major. This one falls into the latter category. It would appear that criminal gangs have been targeting the jobs market to collect personal information about people. In many of these cases it appears that the perpetrators of such fraud are creating spoof corporate websites and enticing people to apply for jobs through them. Of course the ‘candidates’ think they are applying for legitimate jobs at well known global companies In doing so, the targeted members of the public are asked to provide a range of personal information that would be relevant to a job application, but being given to a criminal company puts them at serious risk.

These fraudsters have also claimed to be able to arrange visas including travel and accommodation, couriers, legal advice or other services. The perpetrators can get quite clever providing alternate contact info for another spoof department or transferring calls. All with the objective of convincing the ‘applicant’ of their legitimacy and to con them into supplying personal information and money in the belief that a legitimate visa will be issued.

In addition the fraudsters have been known to send what appears to be real job offers to these ‘applicants’. In a recent situation one company actually had people turn up to start work. As you can imagine this caused a lot of frustration and disappointment to all involved.

It seems that it is all very convincing with many overseas workers looking to migrate being targeted at potentially great expense to them.

Many companies including RBS, British Airways and Shell ( only did a very brief search) are now putting notices on their corporate careers sites to inform people of how they advertise and the processes they follow during a formal recruitment lifecycle. There is of course no indication that they have been targeted or if they are just acting ahead of the game.

This is a serious issue and thought it wise to raise awareness of the issue to a wider audience and to suggest that everyone starts to think of a page or statement that we can put on their corporate careers web site. Not only are the individuals victims of this but so would your company be if this happened to you or them. It would damage your reputation and the level of trust people have in your corporate, customer/consumer and employer brands.

Many of you will be aware of this, but if not I hope it helps

2011
03/10
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Business
Employer Branding - Bad
Employer Branding - Good
Recruitment
TAGS












5 comments

Is Measuring the Cost of Hire sufficient to prove Effectiveness?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]
As every in house recruiter knows there is a priority to reduce the cost of hire. If you don’t then you should. Many of the initiatives that flow through the corporate landscape are justified before or after by the forecasted or realised cost savings; whether it is creation of a PSL, a new ATS, increased head count to reduce use of agencies or to reduce time to hire etc., it all comes down to RIO.

There are those in house recruiting structures that strive for a perfect direct souring model; one that is motivated by the business need to reduce agency and search dependency and therefore the cost of hire. There is nothing wrong with that at all and for many would be a sound justification.

But what about considerations given to the quality of hire? Have you given thought to how much it would cost you to make a Bad Hire? Estimates vary on this one from a few months of Total Cost to Company (TCC) to 3 years. TCC is salary plus bonus plus Fringe Costs (in a sales environment add in commission guarantees well). The reason it can be so high is not only the cost of the original hire and the wasted salary to that person, but the cost of the replacement, the lack of productivity the poor hire contributed and then the training and ramp up time of the replacement hire.

If your poor hire is also potentially one of your consumers then the impact of the poor hire could run into millions of lost revenue over the lifetimes of that person and their extended family. It is a stretch I know, but a risk easily calculated. Another impact will be the detrimental impact to the Employer Brand of your company. Now I appreciate that Employer Brand is promoted, protected and impacted on so many levels but the experience a candidate has or employee has (regardless of how long they stay with the company)will without doubt influence other people’s perception of your company as a place to work as part of their career aspirations.

What might be the impact if the poor hire was a senior member of management or in a high profile position? Wouldn’t that have an adverse impact on the reputation of the organisation not only from its customer but its investors as well?

With these thoughts in mind, is a focus on the reduction in the unit cost per hire a real indicator of improvement and gained efficiencies? Shouldn’t we be looking at the seemingly unquantifiable ‘Quality of Hire’ and promotion of or impact to ‘Employer Brand’? Both tend to get overlooked outside of the recruiting teams, possibly because the benefits can only be measured over a longer period.

Focusing on the Candidate Experience and the Quality of Hire, obviously with an eye on the costs are key considerations for me because they offer potentially massive long terms gains for the business as well as the reputation of my teams, whereas the cost of hire is typically a short term metric relative to the past or current fiscal period.

So is Measuring the Cost of Hire sufficient to prove Effectiveness? I would say No. What do you think?

A work in progress and interesting to hear thoughts on this, especially what areas can positively affect the Candidate Experience, Employer Branding and Quality for hire?

Social Media, yes;
Employee Engagement, yes;
Referral Programs, yes

– what else?

2011
02/13
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Employer Branding - Bad
Employer Branding - Good
Recruitment
TAGS





5 comments

What does the Recruitment Industry Compete on?

[tweetmeme source=”GaryFranklin”]

In a departure from #myjobhunt blog series

Recently I was asked “What do you think are the key factors that the recruitment industry competes on?”

My Answer:

You have to think about what you are competing for. Are agencies and search firms competing for the potential candidates or are they competing for the actual deal with the customer? They should have both in mind always.

Of course if competing for the candidates you have to be able to present yourself as credible and effective. An agency has to present itself as knowing the market as well as the ins and outs of the customer they are representing to the candidate, without the hard sell. They have to know all there is to know to ensure that the candidate has sufficient information to determine if the job and company is suitable. Also armed with the customer knowledge the agency recruiter will be able to determine accurately if a candidate can be turned into a credible applicant in front of the customer.

Competing at the customer level we look for agencies or suppliers that will be able to represent our brand, our company and the position we are recruiting for as if they work for us; much like a sales channel does for products. If a search firm or agency can show they have the ability to understand our business, our processes and our culture then they will be equipped to sell our proposition to each candidate and be of greater service and thus value to all parties.

To compete we all have to be in the position to represent ourselves to each other and meet the expectations of all involved. If as a customer I respect the agency or search firm – and more importantly the person I am dealing with – I will invest the time to educate them and equip them to better represent me. In doing so the agency or search firm will be armed to earn the trust of the candidate. The candidate will have confidence that they will be represented to the customer and the customer will have the confidence that their brand is in safe hands. The customer will appreciate that candidates from that particular source will be thoroughly vetted and closest to the mark.

So answer to the question; the industry competes on knowledge and credibility……………oh yeah, for the poorly managed in-house PSL structures its all about price and not quality of service and the poorly equipped agencies all compete on speed of service rather than quality.

I welcome thoughts and comments on this one please

2010
09/10
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Employer Branding - Bad
End-to-End Recruitment Lifecycle Management
Recruitment
TAGS


















Leave a comment