Ok, on the one hand social media is creating havoc in the workplace.  On the other hand, it is the latest job recruiting tool for professional recruiters.  An article in the Wall Street Journal talks about recruiters and the sites they turn to when “trolling” for candidates. 

In recent history Monster.com was a major player.  There was a fee for employers to post their jobs online.  Then things started changing.  Craig’s List was one place where jobs started appearing.  Then companies developed their own accounts on LinkedIn, touted  as a professional site for networking.  There they posted jobs and participated in discussion groups related to their businesses.  LinkedIn developed a hiring solutions segment with tools to help recruiters in their search.   The site has a reputation for having a comprehensive resume database, and is a go-to site for executive talent.

Now..we have Facebook entering the market.  Companies have also developed accounts on these sites, and post jobs and videos of current employees on the site.  There is much discussion among the various website companies as well as recruiting professionals about using this tool.  On the one hand, LinkedIn execs said that users regarded LinkedIn as their professional life, and Facebook as personal.  In their focus groups, job candidates were sharply averse to being contacted through Facebook for jobs.  On the other hand, Monster.com execs acknowledged that the Facebook recruiting platform is growing rapidly.  Their company has launched their own Facebook append it has grown to 800,000 users in a couple of months.

Right now all the players are seeing an increase in activity and revenues.  The future, however, seems to be in the social networking arena, with more and more companies adding those skills to their recruiting departments.  As individuals spend more time on the social networks, the recruiting power of these sites can only grow.  One reason Facebook is a target for the recruiters is that individuals spend a lot more time on the site, and one company found that candidates are 50% more likely to apply for positions found through Facebook than other means.

The result of all this discussion seems to be that both companies and job seekers are going to have to spend some time developing their skills in using the social network sites.  Just what we all need – more lessons to learn!  Good hunting, all of you.

Tags: applications, Facebook, hiring talent, Hiring Trends, job application, job seeker, recruiters, social network

Studies show that high-performing executives add millions of dollars to their firms’ bottom lines. Here is an overview of the executive search process and some recommendations for success. 
The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) wrote a report on the recruiting process for executives based on surveys conducted with member companies.  One of the main points of the report was the need for preparation as you begin to search.  If you have clear goals for the position you are much more effective in the search and in the candidate evaluation part of the hiring process.  It also helps combat the tendency to hire someone “like yourself” or just because you are comfortable with them. 

So, one of the main requirements for success was understanding your business as it exists and what type of leadership you need for the future.  For example a startup company is going to need a leader who is comfortable “working without a net” in that they will be establishing processes and building a team as they progress.  In a more established business, the candidate will need to be able to work within the goals and processes already established and to be able to motivate the team to work within these goals, as well as looking for new opportunities for growth.  Finally a company in a rapidly changing market will need a good strategic planner to keep the company in the game and growing.

Once the company has defined their leadership needs, then they need to look at the types of managerial skills the job will require.  The SHRM report defined three broad sets of skills, technical, interpersonal and conceptual.  The perception is that technical skills are most important at the middle management level; interpersonal skills are important at all levels, and conceptual skills are important at the executive level.  A more recent approach added another factor – business acumen – to the mix, and there are many different opinions on which skills are most important. 

Within these broad categories each company can define specific factors that are important for their organization.  Once that is done, building a job listing, interview questions and a set of criteria to evaluate the candidates becomes easier and more effective. 

Successful hiring of executive talent is one way companies can survive and beat their competition.  In the market today there is a lot of talent that can help your company be successful.  Good luck!

Tags: change management, Executive jobs, hiring talent, recruiting

Performance reviews are not fun for either the employee or the reviewer, but in the past were viewed as a necessary evil of working in an organization.  The fact is, however, that they are not a requirement except in the case of some governmental or union employees.  The other fact is that they take an enormous amount of time and create lots of stress for everyone.  So why do them?
An article in Legal Section of the Society for Human Resource Management site brings up some interesting points.  The April article by Judith Droz Keyes discusses both the reasons for and the pitfalls of performance reviews.
The formal review system was developed predominantly as a defense against discrimination lawsuits in the 50’s and 60’s, to justify terminations and disciplinary actions.  They were also supposed to serve as an honest and accurate assessment of an employee’s job performance relative to the employer’s standards and, to the performance of the team.  They were intended to motivate the employee to achieve great things and improve the morale of the company. 
The problems with these evaluations are many.  First and foremost, most supervisors are not good at reviewing their staff, and tend to avoid confrontation.  Therefore the employee may have been reprimanded in some way during the year, and at review time will get a satisfactory rating, so as not to cause waves.  In other cases, the language used in the review is not clear – saying “I would like to see” rather than “this job requires”.  In addition, most supervisors are not held accountable for the quality of their review process, so there is no consequence, until the employee is let go and a lawsuit is file.
That brings up the second problem.  Many times the review process is designed more as a career path management tool than a disciplinary tool and so problems with employees may not be accurately documented in the process.  Then, when an employee files a “wrongful termination” suit, they cite their years of positive reviews as evidence.  Sadly this means that the supervisor must now always look at the process as a potential legal pitfall rather than a helpful tool for management.
Yet another problem with the process is the lack of timeliness of the feedback.  Management should be addressing problems or achievements as they occur, rather than waiting a prescribed amount of time to give praise or criticism.  As a supervisor I had to keep careful notes during the year to avoid the “feeling of the moment” – the employee had just done something to irritate me that might affect my attitude during the review.
Finally (though there are probably more issues I haven’t thought of) there is the legal side of employment which says you need to be careful about commenting on things such as “professional attitude”, excessive absences, or cases where there is a conflict with the supervisor.  Any comments must be weighed against the protected rights of the individual employee, which tends to lead to a very bland review.  It is very difficult to deal with an employee with serious health issues when their position is vital to the organization and slows down the whole business process.  A supervisor must be very careful to comment in language that addresses the goals of the company and how they are not being met…or some other cleaver way to discuss the problem.
So if not performance reviews, what?  As mentioned earlier, timely addressing of the issue, either positive or negative, is much more useful for both employer and employee.  Record of these discussions need to be documented just as in a review, especially when compensation is tied to performance.  In place of a review, a “career plan” showing goals for the employee to work toward would be much more useful.  The goals should be developed through mutual input and allow the employee to show how they would like to grow in the business. 
Whether you are a manager or part of the staff in an organization, it is a challenge to keep dialogue open and keep everyone on the same page.  Good luck!

Tags: change management, employee feedback, employee morale, job seeker attitudes, performance management, team building

Recruiting firms and companies themselves are noticing that talent poaching, especially in the technology industry, is becoming a big issue this year and will be in the future.  Talent poaching means one company snags a competitor’s talent with the lure of hirer salaries or other perks.  Bloomberg Businessweek reported recently that poaching in tech companies is an epidemic.  Firms use email or LinkedIn to contact passive candidates.   Bottom line is this can affect YOUR company’s future plans significantly.

First let’s look at why.  The economy is reportedly recovering, and sections of the technology industry are part of that recovery.  Computer hardware and software, as well as renewable energy businesses are planning for growth.  Meanwhile, the pool of qualified talent in science, engineering and math skills is not going to be able to meet our predicted demands.  Companies also need experienced leadership to take them to the next level.  Logically hiring managers will look at the existing workforce to try to fill those gaps. 

An even bigger issue is that most organizations aren’t prepared to address this threat.  How can you prevent your top talent from leaving for what they perceive as greener pastures?  The first step is to take a good look at which of your employees might be a target for poaching.  Then look at what your company can do to avert the threat. 

In the current economic climate, giving folks a raise isn’t always an option, but money isn’t always the answer.  As long as the compensation is competitive in the industry, there are other things that might encourage loyalty to the current employer. 
It sounds like a broken record, but flexible work hours is one of the things employees really appreciate.  One candidate I know is wanting to make a change, but the thought of losing 4 weeks vacation a  year and flexible work hours holds him back. 

Another possibility is to assign your star performers to exciting and stimulating projects.  A challenging, interesting assignment can be as satisfying as a raise for some. 

There is always to option of asking employees to sign noncompete agreements or other legally binding contracts, but that’s not always a morale builder, and has to be carefully crafted.  High tech companies with a lot of research going on may be an instance where this is important. 

In the end, your successful and talented staff are an asset to protect as you plan for your own growth and success.  Include them in any strategic planning as you go!

Tags: change management, employee morale, Hiring Trends, industry news, recruiting

There was an interesting story on CBS Sunday Morning on April 3 concerning unemployment among baby boomers.  They opened the story at a Florida job fair where there were 2000 applicants, many of which looked closer to retirement age.  The premise was that people over 50 are having a hard time getting hired if they have been laid off. 
Here are some interesting statistics:  people over 50 are actually less likely to be laid off, but those who are struggle to find new opportunities.  Laid –off workers 34 or younger have a 36% chance of finding a new job within a year, according to the story.  For those in their 50’s or older it is only 24%.  For job seekers over 62 the number is even lower. 
There was a survey done by a Texas A&M professor in which over 4000 fictitious resumes were sent out in response to job ads, using high school graduation dates from the late ‘50’s to 1986.  The survey found that employers were 40% more likely to go for the younger applicants. 
That’s a real problem because more and more boomer are continuing to work as their retirement nest egg shrinks.  These people are a new underclass that could end up being a huge burden on the government.  Many are finding jobs well below their skill levels, which also affects their ability to save. Some are giving up all together and using unemployment benefits as they can – or finding other ways to get by.
Why the differences?  There is a perception that older workers will cost more, that their benefits will cost more, and that they are more demanding in their jobs.  There is also the idea that folks slow down with age, even though this older generation is a lot more healthy and energetic than those in the past.  Ultimately many employers are opting for “young and cheap” versus mature and experienced. 
So – my question is, is this really true for high tech companies?  It seems that technology companies, especially new ones, need experienced professionals to help them grow and be successful.  In the searches on our job site, nmtechjobs.org, many of the opportunities say “experience preferred”.  True, there is a choice between a newly graduated PhD with no experience and the latest info vs. a veteran who knows the ropes.  Also true that the more cutting edge tech companies have products so new that there aren’t likely to be very many with appropriate experience for the technology.  In the end, the industry does value and need its experienced workers.  Good luck!

Tags: hiring process, hiring talent, Hiring Trends, job seeker, recruiting