The Recruiting Inferno

If you can't stand the fire at least appreciate the heat

  • This is Me

Tech Merger – and Talent War?

Posted by Steve on December 16, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
From today’s Bloomberg which verified what we’ve been hearing for weeks…
 
Symantec Corporation, the world’s largest maker of computer anti-virus programs, agreed to buy Veritas Software Corporation for $13.5 billion in stock to add data-storage products. It’s the second-largest software-company merger. Veritas stock will be converted into Symantec stock at a rate of 1.1242 shares of Symantec for each share of Veritas. That’s a 9.5 premium to Veritas’ closing price yesterday of $28.11.
 
This is big stuff – with Microsoft planning to sell anti-virus programs, Cisco offering security products, and Computer Associates buying both security and storage companies the landscape for technology talent is becoming hotter. Could there be a talent war on the horizon?

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Defending the Vetting Process

Posted by Steve on December 14, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
In case you’ve fallen asleep at your computer, you’ve been hearing that the White House is taking a good deal of flack for it’s vetting process. Incidentally, “vetting” is a fancy way of saying “checking a candidate’s background for nannies, arrest warrants, illegal gifts, and multiple wives.” You did hear that Bernard Kerik had a third wife that he didn’t disclose to anyone?
 
According to White House spokesperson Scott McClellan, “We do a thorough review of that candidate’s personal, professional and financial background and in that process we rely on to some degree on that candidate to provide us with all the information we need to complete that phase of the vetting process.”
 
Yikes, I wonder if the White House Undersecretary of Vetting is sleeping well at night? And is thorough a fancy word meaning “drop the ball” in DC-speak?
 
It’s only going to get better. But in the interim, can you imagine what would happen if a recruiter conducted reference checks using the same thorough approach that Mr. McClellan describes?

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Recruiting Dodgeball

Posted by Steve on December 14, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
Eventually you’ll be hit by the big bad recruiting dodgeball unless…
 
Have been thinking CRM – customer relationship management – this morning (when I should have been thinking caffeine) while working on a project for a client when I realized that many approaches towards recruiting talent are based on short term rewards: “Work for XYZ Company – we’re the best”, “We’ll bump up your salary by 15%”, “Here – take this cool pen…now can I see your resume”, etc.
 
Every strategic recruiting plan and each tactical pitch must have an associated value proposition that the talent pool or candidate can immediately relate to. When you’re developing your strategic recruiting plan, keep in mind the “What’s in it for them?” question by developing tangible value propositions for the different pools of talent where you’ll be taking a swim. Developng these VPs will probably require that you develop close working relationships with your business and functional leaders so you can answer a question such as, “Why in the blue moon would any engineer ever want to work for us?”
 
I’ll be covering more about the thinking elements of recruiting over the next few weeks. But if you haven’t done so, read John Sullivan’s excellent series on Recruiting Strategy.
 
Why take a chance at being hit by a recruiting dodgeball if you can think about where the ball may be coming from? It’s all in the planning. Whoever said that recruiting was easy?

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Recruiting SNAFU – the case of Bernie Kerik

Posted by Steve on December 13, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment

Trust me – no politics here. I thought it was a good pick – at least from the outside. Let’s look at how it came to be…

 

CEO talks to a valued friend who recommends a personal friend for a mission-critical corporate position, a position that the CEO described will lead one of the most important departments in the company. The person who has been recommended is a high visibility candidate, one who has been seen by most of the world as a can-do leader during times of turmoil.

 

The popular vote is ?clearly? on the side of in the new person. Or is it?

 

The next day what is clear is that whoever led the recruiting conducted reference checks in a less than stellar manner.

 

In the end, the CEO is left with egg on his face, wipes some of it on the face of his personal friend. The candidate is left to explain, to those who will listen, the reason for all the baggage in his doghouse and why he did not disclose this information during the vetting process. The CEO is seen walking towards the recruiter?s office.

 

So who is to blame for this fiasco? The CEO? The personal friend? The candidate? The recruiter who was appointed by the CEO?

 

Rather than point fingers (I believe that the entire process fell apart and everyone needs to be flogged with the hardcopy of the Red Book), I want get back to character. Frankly, I believe that Kerik could do the job ? although the real qualification questions would have come up during confirmation hearings -but I question his character. The nanny piece notwithstanding (we?re fighting terrorism here not bad nannies ? although it must be a serious issue if other appointees, Republican and Democrat, have been kiboshed as a result of their own nannygates) it?s the other stuff not found by the vetting process (governmental for recruiting) that bothers me more. Ooops, I forgot about the gifts; sorry, I must have brain locked on the arrest warrant; the affairs? I didn?t think anyone would care?

 

Character matters and hopefully the events surrounding Bernie Kerik will cause all CEOs and their recruiters to pause and think about how the job is not just the sum of its parts.

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

You have enough gray matter!

Posted by Steve on December 1, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
While at the gym Wednesday evening, I was in the middle of another set of leg presses when I overheard a young woman, in that classic Lawn Guyland, New Yawk voice, blurt to her friend, an equally 26-year old Lawn Guyland guy, “I just can’t save any money. I pay my credit cawds, buy gas for my cawh, go out pawtying – and my Dad yells at me for not saving any money!”
 
Had to stop the set – I was laughing too loud. Been there, done that.
 
When they walked by – still apoplectic over their inability to save money – I asked them, “Do you have 401k’s at work?” They both answered in the affirmative. Then I asked them, “Do you go out partying with your friends on Friday evenings?” (no, I didn’t say pawtying)
 
Again, affirmative answers from both. Now the fun begins. “How much do you spend every Friday night out?” “$150 to $250”, replied the guy. I thought to myself, “Houston, we may have a problem.” The young woman responded, “About $50 to $60.”
 
“Oh”, I said, “You let guys like Joe buy you drinks, right?” They both smiled and rolled their eyes.
 
“What if every on Monday morning you write a check to yourself in the amount of money that you spent going out on Friday night and deposited it into your 401k – do you know how much you’ll have saved up in just 10 years?” Lost deer in the lights look – until I told them the answer.
 
“Do you think you can do that?” In responding they looked like bobbleheads.
 
Sourcing candidates is no different…What if you didn’t have use of the Internet or job boards? How would you go about sourcing talent? It’s all about changing your perspective and viewing situations “laterally.” Use all the gray matter in your head; never say “I can’t” and never give up.

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Best Practices or a Cause for Concern?

Posted by Steve on November 30, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
Whereas some EREans take offense to all the Group emails associated with Shally’s flowchart, Russ’ Googling, Jennie’s giggling, or Barry’s surveying (add your favorite ad infinitum thread here) – and I suspect most of the banal dialogue between people (which I am clearly not a part of – yeah, right) – I use all the threads as gauges for the future (and of the present) state of affairs of our profession.
 
As a result of so many asking for Shally’s flowchart (it brings to mind the post-Thanksgiving reports of people arriving for 3:30 AM store openings and front-page pictures of shoppers being trampled by others in search of $300 computers or 50% off the Britney Spears Guide to Wedded Bliss), all the questions regarding Googling, and the astronomic success of Ask Maureen (notice how I have withheld The Art of War thread), I’m beginning to get an uneasy almost queasy feeling.
 
I’m concerned about a profession grounded in the dependence on tools versus the ability to think strategically. You know the adage one becomes so good at using a hammer everything begins to look like a nail? That’s what recruiting is becoming – the reliance on techniques and tools over strategic thinking and content knowledge. Whatever became of strategic planning before the search? Sure you cobble together a job description, some target companies, and a few websites on which to post the job but what I’m talking about is how your targets really think and act – what drives them, where they go for emotional and intellectual replenishment, etc.
 
If you really read the threads, you’ll probably come to the realization that many recruiters Google for resumes before they’ve profiled their target; it’s like choosing window treatments before the architect has designed the house. Boolean searching has become for many recruiters one of only two arrows in the quiver of recruiting weapons (the other is the reliance on job boards). Buzzwords have become the recruiter’s Cliff Notes and Google has become the report on which one’s knowledge is graded. This doesn’t necessarily spell doom for the profession but it does cover-up what I see is the superficiality of the recruiter’s knowledge about the job and the target candidate and for some reason, the propensity to leap before they look.
 
Look at all the threads asking for help – nearly all responses send the person to job posting websites. That’s ludicrous because most employees are NOT looking for jobs and are NOT posting their resumes. You have to think and act like them if you want to find them. But getting into their heads requires a level of content or industry knowledge that many recruiters have not yet developed. It’s like buying a gun and ammunition because you want to protect yourself – but before you know which gun you should buy, how to shoot it, and how to take care of it.
 
It’s not that Googling or posting on job boards or asking for the same flowchart that everyone else wants is a bad thing (it’s not…although a vision of lemmings does come to mind) but it masks the real challenges to recruiting. If your goal is to uncover that one secret resume that everyone else has somehow missed, forget it – someone’s most likely been there already.
 
A sage teacher, in scolding my 5th/6th class, screamed at us, “Do you believe that that thinking causes mind pollution?” An unerring reliance on tools and techniques can easily mask shortcomings in strategic and outside-the-box thinking. However, if you learn to ask the questions that will enable you truly understand the way the ideal candidate thinks and acts, what motivates them, what activities they’re most likely to be involved with, even what websites they visit for fun – and continue to augment your content knowledge rather than bolster your buzzwords, you’ll find the talent.

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Character?

Posted by Steve on November 19, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment

re:Biting the hand that feeds you, I told you that character matters.

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Biting the hand that feeds you

Posted by Steve on November 19, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
Seems as if the ERE Police finally made an arresting discovery on Networking Blvd and revoked the license of a Group’s driver. Apparently someone forgot to pay their $150 registration fee for each job.
 
Can’t blame the ERE Police for their actions – the Groups thing has really taken off – as a result, our community will soon have its first member with 1,000 network contacts…ask Maureen for details on this one – and I guess a few recruiters forgot that public servants like David, Jim, David, Scott, and Kevin do like to be paid for their services.
 
Recruiter never take short cuts, right?

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Who's Your Daddy?

Posted by Steve on November 18, 2004
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment
Figures that the one CEO who has been bit by the recruiting bug is New York Yankees Principal Owner, George Steinbrenner. Pictures of George and Boston Red Sox flaky pitcher Pedro Martinez have been plastered all over New York newspapers. I’ll bet George even tied the lobster bib when they met for dinner in Florida.
 
Still, can you imagine how far recruiting would be elevated if more CEOs assisted in the recruiting of top talent? Bet recruiters would have to really do their homework before recommending a t�te � t�te between a must-have recruit and the company CEO.
 
But then again perhaps this is what is needed to really raise the bar of recruiting…

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

The Case for Character

Posted by Steve on November 16, 2004
Posted in: Careers, Character, Military, Uncategorized. 2 Comments

NOTE: This was the very first blog post on ERE. Ancient stuff, eh?

Sometimes I think there are really only two questions that recruiters need to ask – sorry Lou, two, not one: The first is just an amalgam of all variants of behavioral interviewing (yes, this is where Lou Adler gets a shameless plug for his single, greatest interview question of all time). But to master the one question really requires an in-depth understanding of everything about the job.

Since so many recruiters just aren’t up-to-speed in terms of content – I mean, who has the time to really learn, for example, finance when all you really need are the buzzwords to conduct an effective interview, right? ;) – most recruiters might just as well ask a simple “Yes or No” question, something like this:

“Look, let’s cut to the chase – this position is for a CFO of a multibillion dollar multinational. You’ve read the job description so here’s my question: Have you been the CFO of a multibillion dollar multinational corporation where you’ve increased profits as measured by EVA by at least 15% annually over the past three years without putting the company under SEC scrutiny? Now before you say yes, if you haven’t and you lie, then you’ll be fired without any severance and your reputation will be smeared from here to the end of the earth. Now, what is your answer?”

Perhaps is conjures up thoughts of the bridge scene from “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” (What is your quest?). In reality, it is a simple binary – “Yes or No” – that might take about two minutes to ask and answer. If done correctly, for most it is about as effective as a battery of highly targeted behavioral questions (which ultimately get at the same result – assessing whether the candidate can perform the job as described). Since so many recruiters and hiring managers do a less than stellar job at behavioral interviewing – incidentally, this is the greatest opportunity for improvement in our profession; and this opportunity for improvement is part content knowledge, part learning how to effectively drill down – heck, most might as well just ask a “Yes or No” question and move on to a far more difficult trait to assess Character.

Cicero, the Roman Empire-era philosopher believed that “Within the character of the citizen lies the welfare of the nation.” To paraphrase Cicero, within the character of the employee lies the greatness of the company. Recruiters need to understand how this applies to their company or client and then come up with specific ways to assess character in the same way they focus on work-related behaviors.  Because at the end of the day, it is those who are of exemplary character who will create the most value for a company.

Specific ways? How about a business ethics question related to a specific event or series of events that took place in your organization? Something with many levels, potential traps, dead ends, etc. You’ll have to do your homework for this one folks – talking to C-levels, hiring managers, direct reports, suppliers, et. al. – and you may get some funny looks, but when you start talking about why employees really fail to make the grade, once you get past the “Well, they just couldn’t do the job” excuse and dig deep, the reason they failed was most likely character-based.

In interviewing for character and when using developed business scenarios, consider some of the following questions (tailor them anyway you want):

  • How do you define character?
  • What values are the most important ones to you as you make daily business decisions?
  • How do you think your company defines values and values training?
  • What are some of the values highlighted in your work?
  • To what extent do you feel that your values have been consistent with your employer’s values?
  • How do you incorporate character development into interactions with your subordinates?
  • How do you handle situations in which peers hold conflicting values or express values contrary to what you believe are the norms of your employer?
  • What skills do employees need to possess to be able to determine viable alternatives, hold options up to critical examination, and develop strong rationales for their positions as they solve problems and make decisions?
  • In what ways should employees and their bosses demonstrate care and concern for each other?
  • How often and in what context are values-oriented issues discussed in your business meetings?
  • To what extent have your peers been aware of their role in transmitting values to employees?

What criteria should be used to assess the success of a company’s character training program? According to these criteria, how successful are your company’s character training efforts? What would make them more effective?

Character is a rather arcane concept because it means so many things to different people. But assessing character as it relates to one’s organization is the first step in promoting the Daffodil Principle. Ever plant daffodils? Know what happens the next bloom? There are more daffodils – and the bloom is stronger. What recruiter wouldn’t want to be part of a success like this? Rhetorical question, right?

Here’s why you should seriously consider assessing character…

Last Monday I attended the funeral of a United States Marine killed ten days ago in Iraq – I know, well knew, him and his brother (“oddly” enough, also a Marine as was their Dad and Grandfather). Matt Lynch was a Duke grad who when asked by his Dad what his plans are now that he’s entering the “real world” responded by saying, “Dad, the Marine Corps, of course.” He went to Marine Officer Candidate School, then IOC, then E/2/5 and the 1/5 – at one point, he was stationed in a place called Karma (it was a good omen). After his second tour in Iraq, he had the option of going home; instead, learning that his old and intact 2/5 was headed back to Iraq, he chose to go back saying, “They are my guys, I’m going.”

Matt was killed on October 30, 2004, the victim of a roadside bomb. Even in death, character prospers according to the Daffodil Principle.

After the funeral, many of us assembled at a local restaurant, told stories, and yes, hoisted many a toast in the late soldier’s honor. What was clear to me – aside from the buzzing in my head (for the record, Marines can put away adult beverages at an alarming rate), was how so very much alike each Marine was – especially as it pertained to character.

Now I’m not talking about the four guys I spent hours with – every Marine I met this day was of exemplary character – seriously, the kind of person every Mother and Father wants to meet. And commitment – each of these Marines would put their life ahead of each other. Absolutely amazing – how did the USMC recruiters do such an exemplary job in selecting people who were so in tune with the Marine way? Sure Marines are “made” but there has to be something in there to work with. So how do the Marines select on the basis of character? I’ll touch upon this in a very near future post.

Again, I believe that character really does matter. What do you think?

0.000000 0.000000

Share the Inferno's Fire...

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
Like Loading...

Posts navigation

Newer Entries →
  • Enter your email address to follow #RI and receive notifications of new posts by email

    Join 358 other subscribers
  • 140

    Tweets by LevyRecruits
  • New Fires

    • Dear Isaac
    • Keeping or Doing: The TA Leader
    • Candidate Experience Metrics That Make Sense
    • Anatomy of a Rejection Letter
    • TA Musings
  • Old Fires

  • Post Categories

  • Tags

    #HFchat #InternPro #JobHuntChat #NYSHRM14 9-11 AI artificial-intelligence ATS BabyBoomers Baby Boomers begging blogtalkradio Boomerangs Bruce Lee Bullhorn Reach Careers CEO Change Christmas commuting Conference cover letters Culture Culture Fit douchebag emails employee engagement Entrepreneurism entrepreneurs Ethics Exit Interviews FauxLinkedIn GenX GenY hr Incentive interview Interviewing job Job Descriptions Job Search jobseeker jobseekers Leadership LinkedIn metrics Millennials Mission MTM phishing poetry recruiter recruiters Recruiting Recruiting Association Referral resume scam SnapChat snark Social Media sourcing Spam staffing strategy stupid jobseeker tricks subway talent-acquisition technical technology Tweetup Twitter Values Venture Capital Water
Blog at WordPress.com.
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • The Recruiting Inferno
    • Join 358 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Recruiting Inferno
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d