Ben Eubanks, from Upstart HR did a quick audio review of a book called "Red Flags: How to Spot Frenemies, Underminers, and Toxic People in Your Life" on a recent HR Happy Hour Podcast and did so through the lens of a HR practitioner (although this is not an HR book).
Ben raises some interesting thoughts and got me pondering. I'l quote some of his review below.
1.
"We all know the advice we shouldn't go shopping when you're hungry so why are we looking for employees to solve problems only when we really get desperate?"
Interesting point. Being in HR I've seen plenty of cases where managers are trying to fill gaps in their team and lose track of time. It can be very easy to overlook how much time a recruitment process can take up. One has to consider evaluating business needs, advertising, shortlisting, synchronising with panel members and applicants for interviews, debriefing and discussions on suitability and negotiation with the preferred applicant. After all that you may have to wait another 4 weeks before they can walk in the door ready to work.
I appreciate sometimes we are sprung with a termination or resignation and time is never a luxury however it got me thinking; how many managers have crisis plans for their team if they suddenly lose a critical FTE or two?
2.
If you want to know about someone at a deeper level the book discusses the FLAG acronym and Ben considers these a useful tool to help build questions around in recruitment.
Focus - What do they focus on?
Lifestyle - What are their lifestyle choices?
Association - What are the types of associations they make with other people?
Goals - Consider the goals people have.
For me these are the elements that can separate a good candidate from a star candidate. People that tick these boxes well are the candidates that take a professional and personal pride in building their brand and will be able to sell themselves articulately beyond the confines of the role. Who do they network with? How do they build their skills? How have they built their career progression around adding value to organisations?
I would imagine elements of this could be drawn out through psychometric screening and others through interviewing and seeing who can bring the 'answer plus' responses.
3.
"The worst people aren't the ones that look bad right away. We naturally shrink back from those kind of people. The worst ones are the ones that look great just before they attack you behind your back."
Not sure if I agree with Ben's take on this one. In the personal, social context in which this was written I can see the point however in the workplace context (unless your talking about the 'corporate psychopath') I would argue employees with fundamental flaws tend to filter themselves out easily with good recruitment processes.
I'll take it then that this quote is pointing to poor recruitment practice. I.e not having behavioral questions, not identifying STAR answers, not following up on matters of concern and not investing the time needed to actually identify a great candidate.
I'll put extra emphasis on the last point there. I've run into recruiting managers that are happy to spend a surprisingly small amount of time on selecting the best candidate. I'm talking a single 45 minute interview, no phone discussion and no second round.
I like to point to the example of a business plan to highlight my concern with this approach. Lets assume someone wanted to propose a project that would cost approximately $300,000 and run for 4 years. I would expect a robust plan, discussion and evaluation of tenders before making the call. No right minded manager would sign off after 45 mins of thought.
However when it comes to employing someone on a 75k salary, who may well stay with the organisation for 4 years, the view the value of the recruitment process for some can be dramatically less. And lets not forget, unlike a faulty product, you can't just ask for a refund!
Showing posts with label recruitment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label recruitment. Show all posts
Sunday, July 12, 2015
Monday, May 18, 2015
Active Talent Management
I had the opportunity to speak with a Talent Acquisition Partner with one of the Big Four (banking) recently and got some interesting insights into best practice human capital acquisition and development.
The main item I got out of the discussion was that turning what some organisations do passively into an active and planned process can bring a wealth of benefits. By active and planned I am referring to not simply considering these items at recruitment time but having these as ongoing processes that exist alongside other business functions.
Below are some thoughts:
There's a difference between simply stating the values and ticking a box to having a conscious criteria in order to identify and select talent that displays them. Talk to senior leaders to unpack what the core values mean to them - you might be surprised. In any case it's important that the business is consistent in its understanding when it builds culture around a values piece.
I was listening to a podcast this morning on HR Examiner where Jason Averbook (thought leader and CEO of The Marcus Buckingham Company) referred to engagement specifically driving performance. Here he was talking about measuring engagement however in relation to my point here - if a company's values are a true representation and platform from which the company culture grows; then one should be able to successfully identify talent that will engage with those values.
A natural progression from the point above. What does the manager need tactically and strategically in order for this role add further value to the team and the organisation? When a vacancy arises, this is an excellent opportunity to move things around with greater ease than you can with an incumbent already in the role. However going back to my point on being active around talent - this shouldn't only be considered when a vacancy arises. It can involve development plans for current employees.
Through a manager considering their human capital strategy, they can paint a better picture of what talent they have now and what that needs to look like 12 - 24 months down the line. With that knowledge a talent professional can then integrate that into their function when screening, providing gap analysis support, advertising to candidates etc (Whatever their touch point in the function happens to be).
3. Build a talent pool both internally and externally.
Expressions of interest for non-live roles can be a useful way to assess the market both internally and externally in the organisation. Just make sure that you are honest and upfront about the process however so you don't unwittingly mislead external candidates or internal employees.
Having a talent pool internally allows you to identify high performers and act on development opportunities within an organisation. If we take a hypothetical example, let's say Manager A is has an upcoming project and you know Employee B (situated elsewhere) is keen to develop in this area and has relevant, transferable skills. This could be a great opportunity for development via a secondment across the business however it may not have eventuated if systems were not in place to identify and capitalise on it.
Sure Manager A would have solved the issue one way or another but it may have come at the expense of an internal development opportunity. Let's not forget that this can also foster cross pollination of skills within the business.
5. As a side point on Graduates - Look beyond just the grades.
Finally, an as an aside to the flow above... this is something I assumed however it was nice to hear it from another professional in the field. Graduates are interesting because they often (due to their very nature) don't have the same amount of work experience to build off when justifying their competence. Given this, a natural point to turn to can be academic grades.
Is academic ability important? Certainly. However academic grades are one dimension of picking a successful candidate and shouldn't come at the expense of the correct values and culture fit. A disengaged employee is a disengaged employee regardless of their Distinction average.
Graduates are an investment an organisation wants to make over the long term - which would explain why so many graduate processes are particularly rigorous!
The main item I got out of the discussion was that turning what some organisations do passively into an active and planned process can bring a wealth of benefits. By active and planned I am referring to not simply considering these items at recruitment time but having these as ongoing processes that exist alongside other business functions.
Below are some thoughts:
1. Understand and (know how to) seek out the company values.
I was listening to a podcast this morning on HR Examiner where Jason Averbook (thought leader and CEO of The Marcus Buckingham Company) referred to engagement specifically driving performance. Here he was talking about measuring engagement however in relation to my point here - if a company's values are a true representation and platform from which the company culture grows; then one should be able to successfully identify talent that will engage with those values.
2. Understand and assess managers' needs.
Through a manager considering their human capital strategy, they can paint a better picture of what talent they have now and what that needs to look like 12 - 24 months down the line. With that knowledge a talent professional can then integrate that into their function when screening, providing gap analysis support, advertising to candidates etc (Whatever their touch point in the function happens to be).
3. Build a talent pool both internally and externally.
Expressions of interest for non-live roles can be a useful way to assess the market both internally and externally in the organisation. Just make sure that you are honest and upfront about the process however so you don't unwittingly mislead external candidates or internal employees.
Having a talent pool internally allows you to identify high performers and act on development opportunities within an organisation. If we take a hypothetical example, let's say Manager A is has an upcoming project and you know Employee B (situated elsewhere) is keen to develop in this area and has relevant, transferable skills. This could be a great opportunity for development via a secondment across the business however it may not have eventuated if systems were not in place to identify and capitalise on it.
Sure Manager A would have solved the issue one way or another but it may have come at the expense of an internal development opportunity. Let's not forget that this can also foster cross pollination of skills within the business.
5. As a side point on Graduates - Look beyond just the grades.
Finally, an as an aside to the flow above... this is something I assumed however it was nice to hear it from another professional in the field. Graduates are interesting because they often (due to their very nature) don't have the same amount of work experience to build off when justifying their competence. Given this, a natural point to turn to can be academic grades.
Is academic ability important? Certainly. However academic grades are one dimension of picking a successful candidate and shouldn't come at the expense of the correct values and culture fit. A disengaged employee is a disengaged employee regardless of their Distinction average.
Graduates are an investment an organisation wants to make over the long term - which would explain why so many graduate processes are particularly rigorous!
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Thoughts about recruitment
I'd like to discuss some points raised during a discussion about recruitment during a group HR meeting.
There were interesting comments made about things to consider when changing recruitment strategies or simply engaging in large scale acquisitions. For instance:
1. When acquiring a new business unit always take into account the culture of the business. This point seems obvious in retrospect however the culture of a business or even micro cultures within a business can come secondary when discussions of market share and profitability are on the table. Will a new acquisition align with your processes? procedures? Is it a culture based around a small office environment? A culture may share the same values but work strikingly different in achieving those values through day to day processes.
2. A positive of centralised recruitment is if the recruitment team is familiar with a ride range of business areas with in the organisation they are more likely to cross recruit throughout the organisation. When recruitment is decentralised it will be more specialised however each recruitment team will be less familiar with the needs of each other team.
3. Are business units seeking quality or simply trying to fill a quantity? Businesses in high turn over environments may be doing the latter. That being said high turnover environments may not have the resources to invest in quality recruitment or it may simply not be cost effective because of the fact.
4. At the end of the day the psychological contract is between the manager and the employee not HR and the employee. What this means is what is easier for HR in terms of recruitment may not nessecarily be easier for the mangers dealing with the employee on a daily basis. That being said recruitment processes and procedures should be in the best interests of the managers as they hold the psychological contract and will hold a stronger influence on the employee's experience.
There were interesting comments made about things to consider when changing recruitment strategies or simply engaging in large scale acquisitions. For instance:
1. When acquiring a new business unit always take into account the culture of the business. This point seems obvious in retrospect however the culture of a business or even micro cultures within a business can come secondary when discussions of market share and profitability are on the table. Will a new acquisition align with your processes? procedures? Is it a culture based around a small office environment? A culture may share the same values but work strikingly different in achieving those values through day to day processes.
2. A positive of centralised recruitment is if the recruitment team is familiar with a ride range of business areas with in the organisation they are more likely to cross recruit throughout the organisation. When recruitment is decentralised it will be more specialised however each recruitment team will be less familiar with the needs of each other team.
3. Are business units seeking quality or simply trying to fill a quantity? Businesses in high turn over environments may be doing the latter. That being said high turnover environments may not have the resources to invest in quality recruitment or it may simply not be cost effective because of the fact.
4. At the end of the day the psychological contract is between the manager and the employee not HR and the employee. What this means is what is easier for HR in terms of recruitment may not nessecarily be easier for the mangers dealing with the employee on a daily basis. That being said recruitment processes and procedures should be in the best interests of the managers as they hold the psychological contract and will hold a stronger influence on the employee's experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)