Category: Recruiting

We know Talent Acquisition. We can help create strategic talent acquisition plans and processes to market, source, recruit, hire, and retain top talent. This category features insights specifically on Recruiting.

  • The Best Way to Retain and Recruit Top Talent in a Post COVID Environment

    The Best Way to Retain and Recruit Top Talent in a Post COVID Environment

    I could tell before he opened the door to the car that something had gone wrong at school.  My ten-year-old gets in the car, sits down, and scowls.  I ask him what’s wrong and he doesn’t answer. I ask his sister what is wrong and she says she doesn’t know. 

    I’m afraid to have to tell him that we are now headed to do something that he does not like to do, which is to go to reading lessons.  He loves his reading teacher, but he just hates to read.  Especially when he is in a bad mood. 

    Sister goes to reading too, but for the exact opposite reason.  She loves to read, so when she goes to reading she gets to do something she likes. 

    I try to think of a way to tell him he has reading for the afternoon without World War III breaking loose. I remember a podcast by the Neuroleadership Institute that I had recently listened to about how to return to the office well. In it, it talked a lot about the value of giving people autonomy, of giving people choices. 

    So, I asked my son, “Would you like to go to reading first or second?” 

    “Second!” he says “Definitely second.”  

    I drop sister off at reading and take him home for a snack and a little break. His mood begins to change, and by the time I take to reading, he is happy.  His belly is full, he got to make a choice- a kind of choice that is usually made for him- and he was able to hit the reset button. 

    Mission accomplished.

    Can it be this simple at work? Can just giving people choices over things make a difference? The research and brain science says it sure can. 

    Take for example studies (here is one in particular) that cite workers given the autonomy (permission) to decorate their own cubicles saw up to a 25% increase in productivity. 

    COVID has exacerbated the need for autonomy at the office for two reasons 1) Many of us have tasted autonomy in work by being able to work from home (or from anywhere) and we don’t want it stripped back. Taking autonomy away activates all kinds of stress in the form of a threat response. 2) COVID created a lot of stress from uncertainty, where there weren’t a lot of choices, and people need to be able to step back from that stress. One way to do this is to allow for choices or continue to allow choices around where, when, and how work gets done.  These reasons and responses are two sides to the same coin.

    So what can you do as a leader to help cultivate autonomy at work?:

    1. Guide by principles not by mandates.  The first thing to think about is making increased autonomy a driver in your decision-making as an overarching principle of when, how, and where work gets done and then go from there. It’s not a mandate of: Everyone must work from home now! Instead, different industries and situations may govern different ways of offering autonomy, but it can be present in any workplace at any time. Going to one extreme that seems to offer autonomy may actually limit people’s choices by making a mandate based on what one segment of your workforce wants, but isn’t reflective of what all want.  Doing this actually fosters the opposite of autonomy by limiting choice and control through a one size fits all approach. Create guardrails for decision-making to allow for autonomy instead of one-way streets. 
    2. Ask people what they want.  In order to determine what autonomy might best look like at your place of work, ask people what they would like to see when it comes to having choices over their work.  Is where, when, or how the work gets done a priority for your workforce? How can you design principles that support those needs?
    3. Experiment based on the research.  Based on the global body of research out there and the research gathered from your workforce, design an experiment that increases the opportunity for choices for your employees.  Decide your hypothesis (for example: If employees are allowed to work from home or at a place of their choosing outside of the office two days per week, productivity and satisfaction will increase), then decide how you are going to measure to see if your hypothesis is correct (for example, how will you measure productivity and satisfaction if you aren’t already?). Then, run the experiment for a period of time and see what outcomes are achieved. If you have favorable results, expand the choice offerings throughout your workforce.  If not, try a different hypothesis and experiment. 
    4. Don’t be afraid to change. What may work now, may not work in the future. Be in tune and open to change by listening to your employees and having a learning mindset through experimentation. Then, don’t be afraid to change if needed to continue to foster autonomy at work. 

    Resisting the urge to command and control as a leader at work (and as a parent) pays dividends. It always has, but it is increasingly needed as leaders think about how to effectively transition after COVID in order to continue to retain and recruit top talent.  Because top talent does have choices, and they will exercise the need to have it by going elsewhere if you don’t foster autonomy at your place of work. 

    How do you and how will you foster autonomy in work? 

  • To Offer or Not to Offer: Pros and Cons of Sign-on Bonuses Post Covid

    To Offer or Not to Offer: Pros and Cons of Sign-on Bonuses Post Covid

    Last week my colleague, Taylor, talked about the rise in hiring incentives that we are seeing in 2021. As of April, the national unemployment rate was 6.1%, and the rate in Alabama as of April was 3.6%, almost half of the national average. With the unemployment rate so low, employers who are now able to ramp their businesses back up post-Covid are finding it impossible to hire. So as Taylor mentioned, many are turning to offer sign-on bonuses or opportunities to win a prize such as a car in order to entice individuals to apply. It sounds great in theory, but what are the pros and cons of sign-on incentives that organizations need to consider? 

    Pros: 

    1. Sign-on bonuses get people in the door and on the clock. It’s definitely an attention-getter. Who wouldn’t like a few extra dollars in their pocket just for accepting a job? Promoting positions with a sign-on bonus is a great way to increase your application pool and find hires that may be needed just to keep your business running. 
    2. It can help you win over the competition. In the current market, employers are all fighting over the same candidates. What can you offer that the competition can’t? A higher sign-on bonus may be the tipping factor in which position a candidate applies to and/or accepts.
    3. It’s a one-time hit to your budget. Many employers are offering sign-on incentives right now because the market is so tight, and because they are trying to attract candidates away from an inflated unemployment payment. While offering a sign-on bonus may be putting a tight squeeze on many small businesses’ bank accounts, it’s a one-time hit to the financials. Once the hiring market shifts, which many predict will happen once states start eliminating the additional unemployment federal funds, employers will be able to cease the sign-on incentives and get their budgets back on track. 

    Cons: 

    1. Collect and bail. If your sign-on incentive is payable immediately upon hire, there is nothing keeping a new hire from collecting the sign-on bonus and walking away. If you defer payment until an employment period has been met (i.e. payable after 60 days of employment) that may be a deterrent to candidates if they can get an immediate payout elsewhere.
    2. Decreases employee morale. Offering sign-on incentives to new hires that weren’t available to current employees might not sit well with some. For example, you promote an employee to a shift supervisor and increase their hourly pay to $20/hour and then you hire an external candidate to fill a second shift supervisor position and pay them an hourly rate of $20/hour with a sign-on bonus of $500, how do you think that’s going to be viewed by the internal candidate you promoted? 
    3. Creates an unrealistic expectation for the future. While an employer offering a sign-on bonus views that as a one-time payment, many employees view it as a precursor of things to come. When review time comes around, they may expect an additional bonus or a pay increase equivalent to compensate them for the bonus they received the previous year. In other words, while the employer views the sign-on incentive as an “extra” many employees view it as part of a whole, including that amount when they calculate their annual salary. 

    While I’m not arguing for or against sign-on incentives, organizations need to evaluate the pros and cons when determining if it’s the right thing for the organization. While considering the option of offering sign-on incentives, organizations should also discuss how to incentivize current employees to help recruit talent. If your organization doesn’t currently offer referral bonuses, maybe that is an option to try first. The best candidates often come from current employees. 

    Is offering a sign-on incentive the right choice for your organization? 

     

  • Live from #ALSHRM21: Does Your Company Culture Attract Your Ideal Candidate?

    Live from #ALSHRM21: Does Your Company Culture Attract Your Ideal Candidate?

    The theme of the Alabama SHRM Conference and Expo for 2021 is “Embracing the Human in Human Resources” and organizational culture is a huge part of that goal. Craig Ellis, co-founder of our sister company MatchFIT, defined culture as “the unique way employers approach business and the unique way employees approach work” in his presentation Is Your Culture Attractive: What the Data Says Job Seekers are Looking for in an Organization’s Culture.

    According to Craig, 75% of candidates ask about an organization’s culture during the interview process. Unfortunately, the response too often given is a singular response. It’s the interviewer’s opinion and is based on their perspective, one that is most often very positive (or else they probably wouldn’t be an interviewer). 

    So how can organizations accurately define their culture and describe it to candidates to ensure a compatible fit? According to Craig, organizations need to ask those in the know; employees. Don’t look to leadership alone to define your organization’s culture, ask those who live it day in and day out. How they view your culture may be very different than how leadership would define your culture. Conduct employee surveys, find out why employees are voluntarily leaving your organization through exit interviews, and conduct stay interviews to find out what it is about your organization that makes people want to stay.

    Once you have collected data and used it to help define your organization’s culture, you can better determine who your ideal candidate is and what it is about your culture that would attract that candidate? What does your ideal candidate care about in an organization’s culture? If you have a culture that is exacting and procedural, meaning the organization values structure and diligence, a candidate that values a relaxed, informal culture won’t be a good fit for your organization. If you find that you’re interviewing candidates that you feel are your ideal but they turn down your offer, don’t be afraid to ask them why they have chosen not to come work for you. While you may not be able to convince them that it’s a good fit for both them and you, the data you collect can help you to close the gaps in how you present your cultural values to candidates and what values you seek in candidates. 

    According to Craig, an important part of the process is to “take the time to articulate your culture and share that with employees and leadership.” Ensure that everyone is on the same page and can communicate your culture in a consistent way. 

    How do you define your organization’s culture to candidates and is it making them want to sign on or sending them running for the hills?  

  • Innovations in #CareerAdvice and Recruiting

    Innovations in #CareerAdvice and Recruiting

    Unemployment rates in Alabama are slowly falling and are on track to reach numbers from the pre-pandemic job boom. In the Huntsville/Madison area, there are more jobs than there are people to fill them. As a result of a volatile job market and the workplace changes in the last year, recruiters are working through some innovative ideas for 2021.

    Would you be surprised to learn that videos with the hashtag #careeradvice have reached over 80 million views since the start of 2021? TikTok has evolved into a recruiting marketplace, where job seekers and potential employers connect in a creative way. Businesses are turning to TikTok for brand visibility and as a way to reach a broader candidate pool. 

    Organizations are also working internally to redesign jobs to be more adaptable and allow for built-in upskilling and cross-training. According to a Deloitte study, “41% of executives said that building workforce capability through upskilling, reskilling, and mobility is one of the most important actions they are taking to transform work”. Looking for some resources for upskilling and reskilling? Here are three:  

    Forbes – Why Employee Upskilling And Reskilling Is So Important Right Now

    theHRDIRECTOR – Why Upskilling and Reskilling is essential to business survival

    Indeed – Upskilling Your Employees: A Guide for Managers

    We see these two questions as critical components of innovation for recruiters and organizations this year: 

    • How can we introduce new brand visibility and recruiting strategies to reach a larger candidate pool?
    • How can we reimagine our organization chart, job descriptions, and talent management strategies to build in upskilling and reskilling? 

     

    We are currently working with an organization that found itself with fewer applicants and a low applicant-to-hire ratio. We looked closely at the hiring process, we looked at job descriptions, we looked at hiring best practices in the local market, and only then did we start to ask these same questions above. 

    You can get started now by mapping out your current strategy, reach, and impact. What’s working? What worked pre-pandemic, but doesn’t work now? How can you and your team innovate recruiting practices? Dig deep, then take the leap!

  • Stop Selling When Interviewing Candidates

    Stop Selling When Interviewing Candidates

    When I was a recruiter, interviews started off with a little overview of the organization.  I’d tell them a little bit about what it was like to work for our company and also cover information about how the interview and hiring process worked before launching into questions.  

    I often had the chance to sit with hiring managers interviewing candidates as well.   The difference in how the hiring manager handled the first part of the interview related to information about the company was always interesting.  Some said very little if anything about the organization or their department and/or team, while others gave a dissertation on it all.  Some bragged and bragged about how great it was to work at our company, others gave the good, the bad, and the ugly about what the work and the environment was like. 

    Turns out, there is a way to do this and a way not to if you want to hire the right candidates.   According to research by Jennifer Carson Mar and Dan Cable on the effects of selling on interviewers’ judgements,  it’s not so much on how the candidate portrays him or herself in the interview, it’s about how the interviewer portrays himself or herself and the organization. 

    Amy Cuddy describes the findings of the study well in her book Presence

    “The more the interviewers were focused on attracting candidates, that is the more they wanted to be liked, the less accurate they were at selecting candidates that would do well after being hired in terms of performance, good citizenship, and core values fit. 

    The takeaway is this.  Focus less on the impression you are making on others and more on the impression you are making on yourself. The later serves the former.” 

    So, if you want to hire people who will perform well, get along well, and share the values your organization espouses, stop selling, and be authentic. 

    I wonder if the implications of this study extend to other areas of HR?  When do we need to sell and when do we not? 

    When do you turn on your selling style and turn it off at work? 

     

    Like this post, you may also like: 

    3 Reasons to Make Realistic Job Previews a Part of Your Hiring Process