BYO…

A funny thing happened, on the way to and from the Forum.

The Forum, in this case, being the SourceCon Facebook page (it’s excellent, by the by, and you should join up if you haven’t already – I’m assuming that you enjoy things like that, since you’re on a blog like this – if you’re not, or you just need a break from it all, I recommend this).

So, still with me? Great. As a reward, I’ll give you something fun at the end.

And who doesn’t like fun? I mean, beyond this guy?

party-pooper

So, anyways.

The thing.

Big long thread, started by the fabulous Stacey Donovan Zapar (I’m linking to her company, because you should hire her if you can). She was presenting to some muckety-mucks around talent acquisition technology recommendations, and wanted to verify her assumptions with a bunch of people she respects (and me), as well as look for innovative ideas from said same group.

Really great chat came out of it.  Long and the short of it is: there are lot of options you could recommend a firm buy into. Maybe, even, too many. Certainly, a lot of them compete (that’s natural), and there are also noticeable gaps (did I mention I have ideas for a suite or products and/ or features? Yes. Yes, I do.) In fact, it seems like there are a ton of apps/ tools in certain segments of the “solution continuum” (TM!), with some areas that are just sucking void. That’s all a side note, btw – let’s focus on what’s available.

So, you want to recommend solutions to your boss/ client/ mom, whatever. You chat them up (if you’re reading this from the UK, no, not that kind of chatting up, I just mentioned your mum for the love of Pete). You get an idea what their long-term goals are, wish lists, maybe where they vacation, etc. You tie that into more short term strategic goals, and then tie that back into tactical wins (also, if you tied their vacation into all of that, you have won them as a client for life). Then, you say, “Ta-da! Buy this combo of Entelo/ TalentBin/ Gild/ Dice OpenWeb/ CareerBuilder Recruiter Edge, LinkedIn/ Monster/ freaking Xing!, and blah blah blah, and give it to your 100 sourcers, and you’ll be a hero!”

Only… maybe not. What if, instead, some of those sourcers loved the combo. Say, maybe 2 of them. Because that’s about what you’ll get. Amongst the rest, you’ll get some who are happy with TalentBin, but man there are others going “WTF, I love _Enetelo_, man!” Maybe you’ve got hard-core nerds goin “LinkedIn is for also-rans. I want to build a Sovren-based sourcing instance, and scour the deep Web… and gimme the AIRS search bar!”

There will also be 8 who hate everything you do. There. Just. Will. Be. They happen to relate to this guy.

party-pooper

So, you can’t please them all. Unless you can (except for those last  8 – they suck).

My idea, small one, is that we can riff off of the BYOD movement. Or, maybe the better way to look at it is, we can riff off of what smart engineering leaders have known for years: geeks are hard to please. Technical geeks are even harder to please. More to the point, they’re probably smart enough that there’s a reason they’re so hard to please.

They want to use the tools that fit them. So, when they hire them, they ask what sort of dev tools they need, what sort of machine. Because they are smart, and they know how to succeed.

I think it’s the same with sourcers and recruiters. Just because one of your top people is a whiz at cracking LinkedIn like a walnut, and has a freakishly high InMail response rate (I believe LinkedIn rates anything over 15% as freakishly high these days, but I may be off), doesn’t mean that their neighbor will. In fact, their neighbor may be phenomenal at inhaling data via, say, that Sovren-driven tool they home built, and all they need is a license. Or, maybe they’re well known in the Stack Overflow community, and need to use that tool to win.

What. Freaking. Evs. It’s all good. Let them have their cake, and let them eat it.

Here’s the play. You get a rough budget idea, based on last year, for tools. Maybe you make some cases for exceptions, but you can start with that baseline. Survey your team – do it via  Google Form to make it stupidly easy. Just ask: what tools work for you? Which ones did you never use this year, and if you lost them, would you come and yell at us? Why in the world would you do that, are you one of those freaking bottom 8’s??

Wait – sorry – deep breath.

Anywhooo, you get the idea. Find out what’s working for your teams, and why. Force rank their requests a bit, do a bit of follow up to confirm your suspicions, run some of this past Compliance/ IT/ leadership, etc, and then once you have a sense for what’s possible, set up the tools. Communicate with people that, yes, Virginina, there is a Santa Claus, and he just got you your GitHub account, and he’s gonna give you some IT support to set up that cool Sovren tool you keep rambling about.

It’s a bit more work on the front end – you’ll either need a good agency of record (there are several, like HireClix, TMP, etc), or the bandwidth to do a bit of extra negotiating up from, since it means more vendors/ contracts/ invoices to manage, but… less people yelling. Better sourcing. Good metrics a-go-go.

Also, put aside some money in your budget, for when you make new hires, and let them know “Hey – we get it. You want flexibility. This year, we have contracts with this menu of vendors, with these tools on offer. You don’t get them all, unless you want us to start taking it out of your pay, but you can select up to $xx amount from the menu, place your order, and the kitchen will get to work cooking it up for you.”

If you’re a sourcer, reading this, think about how that would feel. No more: “You get a Recruiter seat, and you get to post to Monster.” More: “We want you to succeed. How can we best invest in you?”

If you hire sourcers, imagine being able to use that in your pitch? Or, better yet, imagine your competition being able to, when you can’t?

Well. Unless they’re the ones who don’t like anything. We all know what to do with them.

Alright, thus endeth the ramblin’, and I do remember I promised you something fun. I happen to like this, today.

Ta…

Archimedes Moves Me

 

 

Here’s the thing: I believe experience can change us. That we’re just lumps of rock, and time is the wind, the water, washing over us. We are eroded as we go. I chose to control my shaping, as much as I could, early in my career. Not the minutia, the fine lines, but the broader strokes. To seize the wind and the water, and point it’s power at sections of me that I wanted to change. If I was shy, stuttered, talked too fast, and had a hard time talking, wrote poetry and read sci-fi? I was going to go into a role with that required me to be chatty, charismatic, etc: recruitment. Full commission. No draw. No food if I failed.

That’s the origin story – there’s tons of stupid detail behind that, and we can talk over beers about it someday, but I want to move forward and justify both my blog title, and my career. Because I stuck with it. I made this happen, and I’m proud of that.

I still talk way too fast. I still love sci fi. I’m still shy (I have managed to mask that last bit beautifully, but know this, when we’re talking, that I’m not 100% sure you give a crap – you’re still the coach, and I’m that kid you just kind hadda deal with). But… I found a lever. And I want to change the world. Because that’s important, in life. I don’t want to die without making change. My legacy will not be “he was that nice, quiet kid who wrote poem, wonder what ever happened to him…” No. Since I’m not a person of faith, my view is that this is my one shot, and I want it to count. To move the world.

Nothing major…

Archimedes once wrote: “give me a lever long enough, and I will move the world”. I can get behind that. I need a lever, before I go.

The economy matters – goods, commerce, food, all of it. It’s the engine. It impacts how we eat, sleep, grow, meet, date, survive. Affect the economy? That’s a lever. But… how?

Recruitment. Mother-effing-recruitment. Think about it: the economy is about money. The transfer of goods, via symbols. The way to collect those symbols is via a job (yes, yes: “welfare, blah blah blah” – fuck you, by the way: study after study shows that most people want to work, it’s just part of our DNA). Jobs bring us money, we spend money, the wheel is lubricated, etc etc. If you can impact the speed at which people get hired, their carer arc, job satisfaction, etc, you are greasing the wheel. And, on the other side of the table, the faster companies can hire the right people (that last bit is huge, and making mistakes there is always why companies fail), the better they can grow, hire more, etc. It’s that whole virtuous circle thing.

Most of the people in my industry are clueless about how important they are in this equation. And, to be fair: a some of them are terrible at it. There’s a whole ‘nother blog post coming on that.

I think I get it – and it’s why, despite my wandering eye for a career as dime-store poet, I stay in the game: I’m holding that lever. What I’m doing effing matters. There are hardly any other careers out there that have this level of impact. Each time I make a positive change to my profession, it means somebody’s job search got better. They found work faster. Their kids are less hungry, they’re less stressed out, they’re reinvesting in the economy via Wegmans, funding the PTA, flying the friendly skies again, etc etc. They’re tickling the economy. And, my work powered that – it mattered. And, at an enterprise level, working with huge brands, it really matters. It scales. By being active in my industry, the blog, my speaking engagements (huge irony there), etc etc, I move my industry. The lever moves, and the world moves with it.

I will always be that kid who didn’t get picked – but screw that: I decided to captain my own fate. I found a lever, and I’m am putting my weight on it. I encourage you to do the same…

Dating Your HR Technology Vendor

Next week, I get the great opportunity to sit on a panel at HR Tech, hosted by my friend/ industry legend George LaRocque. The title is “Selecting the ‘Right’ HR Technology Solution Provider”, and it’s all about exactly what it says it’s about: how to pick partners.

Note that keyword: partners. When you’re evaluating software, the culture of the firms you’re looking at matters (and, unless it’s an absolutely innovative solution, there’s going to be a plural, and – yes – you should look at several of them before you buy). Think of it like… dating. Not to be a cynic (fine, that’s a lie, since that’s my default position), but the very best you’re going to get from a suitor comes at the beginning – the first date. They’re trying to make the best impression they can – and, it all goes downhill from there. Before you know it, you’re farting in front of each other, the door-holding tends to drop off, flowers turn into “I grabbed you a doughnut, too – what, you’re on a diet? Cool, more for me!”, you’re farting in front of each other even more often (Dutch Oven becomes a horrible, horrible morning game), etc etc.

So, if that first date/ tech demo is awful… consider the red flag at least partially raised.

tumblr_inline_minm0cnohz1qz4rgp (1)

So, with software providers – pay attention to their approach, from the beginning. It matters. And, pay attention to how they treat you, throughout the process. Then, take the worst of that behavior, give it an X multiplier, and there you have it: a decent prediction of how they’re going to treat you after you sign the deal.

It’s not always pretty. You owe it to yourself to think long and hard about how much you actually want to date this vendor – are they so much better in… implementation? Is their data-set that big? Performance that much of a deal closer? Do you trust them with your security, with support, with meeting your parents? (Okay, that last one may never happen – and probably shouldn’t, as I think about it). Anyways: caveat emptor, hinc sequitur exin (or something like that – my high school Latin is so rusty it’s basically a pile of orange dust by now).

Oh, and I’m a-gonna close with a rant. Not gonna name names (rhymes with “fuse”…), but got a random email from a sales rep just now – someone I’ve never spoken to before, about a service I’ve never expressed interest in. So: not gauging my interest. No building rapport. Nope, just… an assumption that I’d be so interested in meeting some random VP of theirs, that I’d schedule a meeting during the conference, just days before it begins, since hey my dance card never fills weeks before a conference, nope, I’m just that fugly.

Because, yeah – wait… no flowers? Not even a doughnut? Just start right off with leaving the bathroom door open? And what’s that smell…

“Hi Martin – I wanted to see if you’re headed to Las Vegas for the HR tech conference next week. If so, would you be interested in speaking with our VP while you’re in town?

Scheduling time is quick and easy – feel free to check availability here.”

When Women Self-Select Out of the Hiring Process

I was having a cup of coffee the other day (those of you who know me, recognize this as code for: basically every moment of every day), when my wife asked me for some help applying for a job she’d seen in our childrens school district. Since I’m a geek around recruiting, job descriptions, etc, I got into it. The description – “.8 Technology Integrator” (gotta love a compelling job title, way to market the sexy on this one, Newburyport), seemed pretty straightforward, and a good match for her skills and experience.

Here’s where it gets interesting – here’s how a man generally sees things:

“There are 8 required skills. She has 6 of them down cold, one is easy to reboot (Mass teaching license, her’s is lapsed, but so what?), and one she can get done with a bit of time. Granted, the last one’s important – an Instructional Tech Specialist license, but she’s done enough homework on how to get it, and has enough relevant work experience that it shouldn’t be a big deal. On top of that, even if it rules her out for this exact position, the role’s open, and somebody somewhere is saying ‘I can’t keep working 60+ hours a week, at this point, I’ll take someone who can at least do part of the work, I’m desperate’.

Cool – they’re definitely going to at least want to talk with her, and it never hurts to try no matter what. At least her name will be in front of them, in case something else comes up. [Insert cliches about missing every shot you don’t take, foot in the door, something about eagles taking flight, yadda yadda]”

Here’s how my wife, and many women, see this (I know she does, because when I said basically the same thing I wrote above, to her, she gave me this response):

“Holy crap, I only meet 6 of the requirements, they’re never going to want to talk to me. I’m not going to apply.”

You may have noticed a slight… difference, in our perspective. Women seem to self-select out very early in the hiring process. Heck, they don’t even really start the process. It seems to be powered by the confidence piece that Sheryl Sandberg talks about in Lean In.

This haunts me (quoted from an excelent Atlantic article by Katty Kay and Claire Shipman):

“Hewlett-Packard discovered several years ago, when it was trying to figure out how to get more women into top management positions. A review of personnel records found that women working at HP applied for a promotion only when they believed they met 100 percent of the qualifications listed for the job. Men were happy to apply when they thought they could meet 60 percent of the job requirements.”

Now, admittedly, some of what I’m writing about is anecdotal – and, Curt Rice has a critical critique of the HP piece on his blog (he writes on gender equality, etc, and is very much a white hat) – so take it as this: not hard and fast data. But… personal experience, research that begins to back it up, very little that opposes that data, and my experience working with job applicants seems to bear the theory out. It’s an issue, and we need to understand it.

So, here’s the thing: if you do, in fact, do this, opting out before you even opt it: stop it. (Heck, if you’re a man and you do this, stop it, too). Stop selling yourself short. I know there’s a ton behind this, that our society has been programming you since the get-go (eff you, Mattel!) to think of yourselves as somehow not as strong, not as lucky, not as… men. And that’s probably one of the stinkiest piles I’ve come across in a long time. Each and every one of you has one shot in life, just like the men you know. Each and every one of you is not defined by gender, but by who you are, and what you chose. Chose to apply for that job, if you fall somewhere in the ballpark (within some level of reason: that degree in writing poetry – yes, that’s a thing I did – means my dreams of applying for a role as a rocket scientist are likely shot, but it does mean I’m not shy about thinking I’d make a hell of a ad copywriter if I ever decided to walk that path).

Cliche inserting time: you miss every shot you don’t take, and there’s no penalty for taking the shot. Go forth, and conquer. Yadda yadda.

This Is Why Candidate’s Won’t Talk to You (Us)

Hi. Familiar subject, so please indulge me.

A few months ago, a recruiter texted me with an opportunity, one for which I was (and will always be) wildly unqualified for. I led them along for awhile – just because I was bored, and wanted to see how far it would go, but never lied. They just kept texting and texting. The whole thing ended when I texted that I tended to go into high pitched giggles when stressed in a phone interview, and how could they help me? That killed it.

Ruby1 Ruby3 Ruby4 Ruby5

Or, maybe it killed it. Because they did it again, a week later.

What brought it to mind, were the following inmails from Robert Half. It’s insane. I’m a recruiter, with a degree in poetry. I am in no way qualified to handle anyone’s money. No.

RH3

RH2

RH1

I just wish it would stop.