Most large or well-recognized companies that are hiring are being inundated with resumes, and are trying to find ways to sort through the pile. The Internet has created a whole new market for job postings, and has resulted in a much larger audience.  To deal with the volume, increasingly applicants are being asked to take a personality test before they ever have any contact with the company. 
There are pros and cons to this practice, and in some cases complaints have been filed with the local commission for human rights that the tests are discriminatory.  One case was cited in an article by Eve Tahminciogle on the MSNBC Careers site.  In this Rhode Island case, CVS Caremark included questions that sent up legal red flags for the local ACLU.  The test asked applicants to agree or disagree with statements such as “People do a lot of things that make you angry”, “There’s no use having close friends; they always let you down”, “Many people cannot be trusted”, and “You are unsure of what to say when you meet someone”.   Several applicants had complained, and the local Commission found “probably cause” that the test was in fact discriminatory.  The company agreed to remove the problematic questions.

This could be the tip of an iceberg, as the growing use of these tests early in the hiring process is a relatively new area.  The perception is that some of these questions could hurt people with mental disorders, and is likened to a “medical exam”. 

Apparently the employment assessment market overall is worth $2 billion and growing.  It was estimated by one research firm that  one-third of employers are using testing for hiring and promotions.

There is strong disagreement between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the ACLU on the use of these tests.  Jeanne Goldberg, advisor for the EEOC had no problem with applicants answering non-job related questions to see if the person’s personality will do well in a particular job. 

The article on MSNBC quoted some sample questions from a McDonald’s survey.  They included “I am sometimes unkind to others”, “I often lose my patience with other”, and “I dislike having several things to do on the same day”.  Ms Goldberg from the EEOC saw no issue with this survey.

The ACLU on the other had said that a lot of these standardized tests are weeding devices, and ones without real meaning.  The spokesperson said that employers were always looking for the magic test, but they didn’t accomplish much.  The applicant’s recourse was to decide not to work for the organization.

The question remains, how do you find the best candidates for your company – not only with appropriate skills, but with a work ethic that fits with the organization?  It doesn’t seem we’ve found the perfect tool just yet.  Good luck!

Tags: applications, Employment Testing, hiring process, hiring talent, Hiring Trends, recruiting

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

Trends in compensation and benefits are moving slowly upward, according to information and research results from the Society for Human Research Management (SHRM) HR Magazine.  In addition, new grads, if they get hired, are getting better offers from new employers. 
The 2011 Benefits Study from SHRM highlights improvements in benefit offerings, but these are not going to match the types of packages offered pre-2009.  In general the plans are family-friendly, without the “perks” seen in earlier years.
 Organizations spent on average 19% of an employee’s annual salary on mandatory benefits, 19% on voluntary benefits and 11% on pay for time not worked benefits.  In order to remain competitive in the recruiting market, and to maintain employee morale, a summary of the costs and benefits offered in the organization needs to be made available to staff and new hires.

Overall results  from the Benefits Study
- Health savings accounts (HSA) are becoming more and more prevalent, while HMO plans continue to decline in popularity.
- Paid-time off plans are becoming more popular, This method of keeping track of paid absences has always been a favorite of mine, as it rewards those who need less personal time with more vacation, while allowing families to take the time they need to deal with illnesses and management of family issues.
- Over the last year, there was a slight increase in the percentage of companies offering health care premium discounts for employees who had an annual health risk assessment, participated in a weight loss program, participated in awellness program and/or had not used tobacco  products.
- Employer-sponsored retirement plans continue to shift away from defined benefit pension plans toward defined contribution retirement savings plans and Roth 401(k) savings plans. Even though the percentage of companies that offered defined contribution plans continued to increase, there was a slight decline in the percentage of companies that offered employer-matchingcontributions.
• Financial and compensation benefits have experienced considerable declines throughout the last five years. The most significant decreases were in educational assistance programs, incentive bonus plans for executives, life insurance for dependents and undergraduate educational assistance.

The following benefits experienced sharp declines: executive club memberships, legal assistance/services, mentoring programs, organization-sponsored sports teams, professional development opportunities and travel planning services.

Housing and relocation benefits have experienced significant declines over the last five years. These benefits included assistance selling previous home,
cost-of-living differential, down payment assistance, location visit assistance, mortgage assistance, rental assistance, spouse relocation assistance and temporary housing.

On the salary front, there is a slight increase in the starting salaries offered to new grads.  New hire rates are up about 2.8% from the previous year. According the the 38th Annual WorldatWork Salary Budget Survey the key findings for 2011:

• Salary budgets increased by 2.8 percent in 2011.
• Base salary increases were awarded to 88 percent of employees in 2011 vs. 86 percent in 2010, 80 percent in 2009 (all-time low) and 91 percent from 2006 to 2008.
• Across-the-board salary freezes were planned by only 3 percent of employers vs. 43 percent in 2009 and 10 percent in 2010.

“The situation where significant numbers of employees are not receiving any pay increases appears to be over for now,” said Kerry Chou, compensation practice leader at WorldatWork. “However a quick return to pre-2008 budget levels seems unlikely given the modest rate at which budgets are recovering.”

And looking for to 2012:

• Salary budgets are projected to rise by 2.9 percent in 2012.
• Based on individual performance ratings at year-end 2011, low performers can expect an average pay increase of 0.7 percent, middle performers 2.7 percent and high performers 4.0 percent.

Tags: benefits

As most economic writers will tell you, it is the small business sector in our country that adds the most jobs to our economy.  As a matter of fact large businesses (over 500 employees) have reduced the number of employees significantly in the last few years.  Thus job seekers are feeling the pinch as new business startup statistics are the lowest since the 1990s. 
An article in USA Today Small Business provided a summary from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  For the 12 months ending in March 2010 there were 505,000 new business startups – the weakest growth since the bureau started tracking this stat in the 1990s.  Other publications have tracked current trends and say the outlook is not very rosy (National Federation of Independent Business).  After steady increases through early February, the optimism index dipped for March and April of this year. 
The lack of new business is attributed by many to the lack of consumer spending.  Sales trends are down, and there is a lot of uncertainty about what is next.  Also companies are worried about what will happen in the next year in U.S. Government. 
This news impacts our unemployment issues. National unemployment statistics hover at 9%, and an article in the Financial Times said that the “basic unemployment” percent (people between jobs or permanently unemployed) may not ever get back down to the 3% level we’ve held for years.  For every “opportunity” for growth in an industry there is a balancing economic factor that may dampen that growth. One example was the optimistic view that companies might move manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. because of rising costs overseas.  The pessimistic view is that these same companies will adopt more technologies that would replace these very jobs! 
There is an interesting factor in all this news.  Technology companies (mostly small businesses) and technology jobs continue to make gains, and there are jobs going begging.  The reason – the workforce lacks the skills to fill these positions.  One article talked about the loss of jobs in the construction sector, and the need for trained workers in the healthcare industry…and these skills don’t cross over.  There are also jobs to be had in IT, and even in skilled manufacturing. 
There is no easy answer to the problem.  There is hope for the job seeker with technology or IT skills, but it will require time and patience to find the best match.  Keep hunting!

Tags: hiring process, Hiring Trends, industry news, job seeker attitudes, retraining, technical jobs

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