Can we fix the broken internal hiring links? The Black Hole your employees see.

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?      Part 15

If you and your company think the current hiring and employment status quo is acceptable, you have lost the game before you ever begin.   As Lou Adler recently wrote, as amore immediate business solution regarding a Bill Gates article, “HR Recruiting – Stuck in a Time Warp” (current practices 3),

1. Stop using skills and experience-based job descriptions

2. Measure the hiring manager’s ability to attract, develop and retain top people.  If talent is #1 this should be every hiring manager’s number one performance objective.

3. Never interview more than four people for any job.  If you need to see more than four people, something is wrong.

4. Define Quality of Hire before the person’s hired.

https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130130005035-15454-bill-gates-and-is-hr-recruiting-stuck-in-a-time-warp

Thank you Lou.  I would add employers have forgotten how and why to hire.

In a recent SHRM article, “Employers, New Employees Question Hiring Decisions”, “Half of new employees surveyed reported they are experiencing buyer’s remorse after accepting a recent job offer….. And they are not alone: With one in eight (14%) new workers employed during a 12-month period having proved to be a bad hire, many employers …are questioning whether they have made wise hiring decisions, according to the study.”

Part of the reason for this uncertainty is the failure of the hiring process to paint a realistic picture of the job, department and company. Painting a rosy picture or pulling a bait-and-switch once they’re on the job will just mean you’ll fill that position again in six to 12 months.”

  

http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/staffingmanagement/Articles/Pages/Employers-Employees-Question-Hiring-Decisions.aspx

Remember “accurate” job descriptions are necessary. The hiring manager and internal recruiter must schedule a meeting time. Focus on listing what the new hire will successfully achieve in the first year before there is any discussion of candidate requirements; then list minimal technical requirements and the personal attributes needed to be successful.  

You will likely discover that there is a far wider array of backgrounds that fit your position than you did prior to the meeting. The final position description should place more emphasis on what the new hire will do versus just a laundry list of candidate requirements. In fact, make sure you are displaying the minimum requirements so you don’t exclude potential game changers from the candidate pool. 

Finally, if you use an Applicant Tracking System (ATS), the parameters, keys words and phrases must change to match these new broader minimums and expanding the parameters for skills and generational norms.  Some last thoughts on the ever present ATS:  Most ATS cannot read tables, text boxes and headers/footers! This means the Microsoft Word Templates many use to format a resume!  These will not pass through the system!   Finally, unless you manage your ATS job key words and phrases your ATS, the Talent/People/HR Departments and the Employer may be using discriminatory recruiting practices….and a leading cause of the 3 Rs (Ridiculous Recruiting Results)… a subject for another discussion.

Next:  Why do we have Ridiculous Recruiting Results (the new 3Rs)?

TRAIN, BUT TRAIN WHAT?

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?     Part 14

As Steven Pascoff, of ELI, recently wrote in his blog:
"we should choose learning content and delivery systems after answering questions along the following lines:

·      Why is learning being delivered? ….What is the most effective way to reach learners?

·      What is it that we are trying to teach: is it knowledge which is most important, or are we trying         to integrate knowledge with on the job application?

·      Do we have a “hungry audience” or one which is not especially interested in our subject matter         and possibly antagonistic to key concepts?

·      How important is it that what is taught is applied and sustained beyond initial delivery for         ongoing impact?

·      No matter what delivery method we use, what will be our strategy for keeping our learning alive         and vibrant?

http://www.eliinc.com/blog/bid/171898/Credentialing-Competency-and-MOOCs

Thank you, Steven! 

The answers to these questions bring us right back to developing, executing and implementing strategy.  Failures occur within training and development (Talent Management and Development) for the same reasons any strategy fails; lack of or poor data and input, bad or poor management, lack of buy in from the top and, above all, failure to have a positive employee culture rewarding learning in place.

People want to feel valued and recognized for contributing to, and being a valued part of, their organization People want a path ahead.   People want communication(s).  People are looking for the “whole package”.  People want to work with people they like.  People want to be treated with respect, caring and kindness, but most people want to BE valued and communicated with, not to.

As Dr. Tony Miller recently said in a LinkedIn comment, “Published research [over many decades] shows that talented employee’s main reason for leaving is because of lack of recognition. This is because they are taken for granted by line management. How to improve this?  Get…. managers to spend more time with them, when they have done a great job say so - it’s so easy, but not for many managers. It’s rare talented people leave just for more pay - another myth busted.”

Susan R. Meisinger said in A Lesson on Generational Differences,”let’s make sure we’re not …lose[ing] sight of a critical point: workers of all generations have much more in common.”; and, “All generations rank "opportunities to use skills/abilities as an important aspect of job satisfaction. Employees of all ages care about job security, and compensation and pay [and communication].”

http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/view/story.jhtml?id=534354994

In case you haven't read the SHRM 2012 Employee Job Satisfaction and Engagement report and some statistics in conflict with many other studied, you can have all 88 pages of it here:

http://www.shrm.org/LegalIssues/StateandLocalResources/StateandLocalStatutesandRegulations/Documents/12-0537%202012_JobSatisfaction_FNL_online.pdf

Next:  Can we fix the broken internal hiring links…. The Black Hole your employees see?

Can the Gaps in the Employer - Employee Perception be closed?

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?     Part 13

I am re-posting this as a way of re-setting the stage for the rest of "Strategy Doesn't Matter?". The next installment, "Train, but Train What", will follow next week.

A previously quoted Forbes talent retention article, by Mike Myatt, echoed a great number of past surveys and studies:

“When examining the talent at any organization look at the culture, not the rhetoric – look at the results, not the commentary about potential despite some of the delusional perspective in the corner office, when we interview their employees, here’s what they tell us:

·      More than 30% believe they’ll be working someplace else inside of 12 months. 

·      More than 40% don’t respect the person they report to.

·      More than 50% say they have different values than their employer.

·      More than 60% don’t feel their career goals are aligned with the plans their employers have for them.

·      More than 70% don’t feel appreciated or valued by their employer.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2012/12/13/10-reasons-your-top-talent-will-leave-you/

Mike Myatt also said,
“How can we resolve these gaps in perception?

·      Thorough communication and manager training!

·        Even the best intended HR programs (and strategy) fall flat without proper communication.

·        Often times our employees aren’t fully aware of all the organization is doing for them or how much the organization is spending on programs.

·         Moreover, all the communication in the world won’t offset a [poor and/or] poorly informed manager.

·         Managers need to be trained not only on understanding and evangelizing (advertising) the company message, but also on bringing concerns back to HR so employee issues can be addressed.”

The first step in forming a successful strategy is knowing, not assuming.  Investigate and gather the

facts. A strategy vision without implementation knowledge and communication is doomed. A

strategy anchored in knowledge, faithfully executed and communicated will become the new cultural

norm. 

What is your current norm?

Next:  Train, but train what?

Can the Employee – Employer Disconnect be Solved?

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?       Part 12

It is all about being disconnected from what you and your organization think, believe or want to believe and what actually exists within your company or organization.  A June 2012 white paper on a Kenexa survey (an IBM RPO Company), produced these results: 

Engaged
69 percent of employers believe employees are engaged, while only 34 percent of employees claim to be. Engagement means different things to different people. For employers, engagement can be represented by employee productivity, attendance and development. For employees, engagement may be more about feelings than actions.

Recommend Us!
81 percent of HR professionals think employees would recommend the organization to a friend. Only 38 percent actually would. If your employees aren’t fully engaged, they might consider leaving the organization. Bringing a friend into an organization that you aren’t fully engaged with might affect a personal relationship—a risk many aren’t willing to take.

Fair Benefits
71 percent of HR professionals think the organization has fair benefits while only 48 percent of employees agree with this statement. Communication is key for employees to understand their benefits package and how much the organization spends on their benefits, particularly when it comes to health care. Employees might only notice when they pay more out of pocket for benefits, when in reality both employees and employers are sharing a growing cost.

Compensation
53 percent of HR professionals think they provide fair compensation compared to only 30 percent of employees. After a few years of tight budgets, organizations are starting to give reasonable increases, but not yet at pre-recession levels. Focus on key employees to ensure top talent is compensated fairly. 

Retention
83 percent of HR professionals think their employees plan to stay for the next year.  [Only] 41 percent of employees agree with this statement. With engagement low and belief that compensation and benefits aren’t fair, it should come as no surprise that employees aren’t committed to their organization. Moreover, through the recession, many employees stayed with their organization out of a need for security. Now that organizations are hiring again, loyalty starts to waver.

http://www.kenexa.com/Portals/0/Downloads/Employee%20Attitudes%20and%20Engagement.pdf

Note:  Making certain you are paying competitive wages means 50% of the companies are paying more and you’ll only be average.  As Chuck Csizmar covers in Compensation Café, “Competitive Pay Is Not Enough”.

Next: Can the gaps in the employer – employee perception be closed?

Can we change how Human Resources is perceived?

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?      Part 11

As part of a culture change a first step in re-connecting the workforce/employees with the employer is personalizing their value and worth as individually and collectively unique as possible.  Anyone and everyone is a human… a homo sapien.   To emphasize the personal, Human Resource/Human Capital functions must become People and Talent functions.  Many comment a name change doesn’t change the function….but the HR function needs to become more pro-people in order to make the most of our Talent assets by making the workforce a positive pro-company/organization force.  To think HR business as usual is OK is like the ostrich who thinks they can’t be seen by sticking their head in the sand.

In fact, by using People and/or Talent Resources or People or Talent Capital, we would better describe our people as the assets they really are and we purport them to be, rather than “humans”.  We are way past due for a culture change within HR!  This applies equally to SHRM and many other current professional HR organizations.  We are all PEOPLE, individual persons, and People are our Talent!

More modern People and Talent organizations use these more descriptive, friendlier and people oriented terms versus human(s).  Most larger and progressive organizations tend to use Talent when talking about recruiting as Talent Acquisition or separate the two into management and leadership acquisition and (people) recruitment when it is applied to more repetitive hiring.  Under Talent Management is Talent Acquisition, coupled to Training and Development within Centers of Excellence or a company University, and some sort of Succession Planning and Management and/or Leadership Development.  However, many if not most progressive companies still use “Human Resources” as a description of location processing paperwork, hires, new hire orientations, discipline, performance, firing, etc. 

In general Human Resources functions within these types of larger organizations do the valuable and required nuts and bolts work we depend on in our day to day employee business dealings.  Why not name them for what they do - People Services Department? This also means instead of a Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) we will have a Chief People Officer (CPO), Chief Talent Officer (CTO) or Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), a combined title.  This should extend throughout the department:  VP of People or Talent, Director of People or Talent, People Manager, etc

According to Joyce L. Gioia’s, “What Will Human Resources Look Like in the ….Future?” , HR will be responsible for the candidate and employee experience.

http://www.workforce.com/article/20130403/DEAR_WORKFORCE/130409988/what-will-human-resources-look-like-in-the-near-future

Many companies have already arrived and currently accomplish this task.  Engaging and training people for the employee experience has become or will our most critical duty.   I believe re-naming and re-titling the functions to accurately describe what we do and who we personally support and value, individually and collectively, is an essential first step!

Next:  Can the employee - employer disconnect be solved?

Why Do Stuck Wages Affect Business Growth?

Your Corporate Strategy:  It Just Doesn’t Matter?      Part 9

I believe there is a direct correlation between the prior list of 9 reliable major reports/statistics and employee dissatisfaction, disengagement and anger with employers.  I also believe there is a direct correlation between the lack of private sector growth, profits and, consequently, job growth.  I believe we will find the same 70-90% of employers who are in violation of DOL and employment laws are the very same employers whose employees are unengaged, dissatisfied and angry.  At 70 - 90% non-compliance how could they not be?

If even 70% of employers are in violation of employment laws (let alone 90%), how could one possibly assume their company wasn’t one of them?  Surprisingly, almost all ignorantly do!!  Remember, ignorance is never a legitimate legal defense, and bad policies resulting in violation of employment laws are never legally defensible. –John Hagen   The ongoing and accumulating pro-employee Federal and civil rulings, fines, judgments and awards is fast becoming the employer’s worst nightmare!

As I quoted Mike Myatt previously, “So, for all those employers who [think they] have everything under control, you better start re-evaluating.”

This lack of company growth and profits, coupled with a company’s anti-employee, internally disconnected, counter-productive work environments (and probably illegal practices), directly contributes to the majority of unengaged, dissatisfied and angry employees.  Business is experiencing lackluster growth due to the inability of the unemployed to find a decent job and the currently employed to see real wage growth and/or get ahead.  Instead people are falling further behind because of inflation, lack of real wage growth and the ability to get ahead while companies and shareholders push for greater productivity, greater profits and higher executive pay and bonuses.  All this while costs and prices continue rising, real wage growth is non-existent and positive employee relations, perks, benefits and reasons for staying have evaporated.

Of course this premise assumes the company’s products or services depend on sales to working people for its revenue stream.  Most of us know this to be true.  Even companies depending on business to business (B2B) sales are most likely affected by the same lack of consumer spending from their customers. 

Our workers are our and your customers, not some nameless shadowy group.  They do the work in our companies which in turn allows them to buy our products and services.  Employment downsizing, streamlining and multi-functioning that cripples maximum effectiveness, lack of coherent hiring practices and poisonous management as a primary cost control point for increasing profit and/or shareholder return results in a reduction in  your buying (customer) base.  This becomes a negative sum game where there is only one winner - the survivor!!!  This is a business model failure!!!  

Once again, in these times of slow recovery, how can any business , or our country afford…. $2 Trillion in employment churn and training……when the waste, wasted effort and negative impact to the bottom line can be changed?

Next:  Are HUMAN RESOURCE(S) and HUMAN CAPITAL - demeaning terms?

Are “Human Resource(s)” and “Human Capital” demeaning terms?

Strategy Doesn’t Matter?   Part 10

These terms replaced “Personnel” and stuck.  We describe great people, a great person, a great group of people, a people person, a talented person, a talented group or talented group of people. We don’t say they are a great human (human being sometimes), great humans, great group of humans, a human person, a talented human, talented humans or a talented group of humans. 

There are over 6 Billion humans on this planet.   To endow our people and teams with the collective “human” title, while technically accurate, is definitely not individualized, unique or warm.  To me it describes a sheep view of people and those charged with their activity.  This perception is also how many view the HR function, including many in top leadership positions.  As Steve Jobs is quoted, “I’ve never met one of you who didn’t suck. I’ve never known an HR person who had anything but a mediocre mentality.”

Ouch!! However, Jobs was never one to sugar coat his thoughts.  Whatever genius you ascribe to Steve Jobs, the Apple brand changed the personal communications world.  His vision, focus, timing and user friendly products put Apple at the top of the heap.  He drove Apple to become what it is today.  Vision, artistry, focus, forced labor and relentless competitiveness and determination were the hallmarks of the Apple innovation. 

Not many people’s vision has had such a profound impact on life in such a short period of time.  It is no wonder his view of HR was so degrading.  That was his personality.  Since HR/People and Talent operations must deal with the ever growing maze of regulatory requirements and organizational issue, most daily routine functions must have paled in comparison to the Steve Job’s Apple product's vision. 

However, Jobs found a Chief Talent Officer he approved of and hired….Daniel Walker, now CTO at JC Penney under CEO, Ron Johnson, although not for much longer I presume.   He must have found someone who was the opposite of his stated HR views.  Although Apple was/is at the leading edge of change (the fringe and not mainstream) in how Human Resources fundamentally works, how it is organized and how it impacts an organization…and profits, they are not alone, just not main stream. 

Is being a part of main stream HR part of the problem?

Next:  Can we change the perceived Human Resource Focus?