January 16, 2017 by Anna Peters
Contributing writer Ted Bauer
Turnover is a concern for businesses. While exact loss numbers around employees departing is hard to track, most CFOs agree that it hits the bottom line. There are obviously intangible issues with turnover, too. The remaining employees (a smaller number) have to share the same (or greater) workload, stressing them out. And certain employees are huge knowledge bases or social connectors. Losing them can strip your business of valuable resources well beyond any cost incurred hiring and training the replacement.
On top of all this, there is some belief that Millennials change jobs faster than Boomers. (Statistically, though, average U.S. job tenure is about 4.6 years — and in 1983, it was 3.5 years. So Millennials have actually gotten more loyal to companies.)
How can turnover be prevented, regardless of generation?
Let’s begin with a little science. Paul Zak is a specialist in researching oxytocin (a chemical in your brain). He gave a popular TED Talk in 2001. Oxytocin is one of the biggest drivers of trust-based relationships in humans, and more oxytocin release — which is tied to much greater happiness and less corporate turnover — tends to come from autonomy over work as opposed to increased compensation.
There’s Idea No. 1, then: focus less on compensation as a driver of behavior, and more on providing employees with autonomy over what they can do, i.e. do not micro-manage them at every turn.
The second idea is something called “The Hawthorne Effect.”
Per Wikipedia, the Hawthorne Effect is “when individuals modify or improve an aspect of their behavior in response to being observed.” This all comes from a place called Hawthorne Works (get it?) in Cicero, Illinois and some experiments done with light bulbs. If you make the room more bright — increase the light bulb, in other words — workers end up being more productive. But if you dim the light bulb again, productivity drops back to normal (or below-normal levels).
The modern application of the Hawthorne Effect, then, is that if you’re more responsive to worker needs, those workers will be more productive. Care about employees. Listen to them. Engage with them. Be supportive of them.
Too often, we think we can solve an issue like turnover or low employee morale/engagement with a new software suite. We can solve accounting issues that way, or even business process (BPO) concerns, but engagement and turnover are distinctly people issues. You solve people issues by investing in people, not technology. That’s the big takeaway here.
January 11, 2017 by Anna Peters
The 2016 Most Desirable Jobs survey has some surprising results. The Career Advisory Board (CAB), of which College Recruiter’s founder Steven Rothberg is a member, released the survey recently. Their intention is to advise employers, who increasingly find themselves in steep competition for qualified talent. The results include ideal job characteristics, most appealing work styles and what employees value at work. Employers will rejoice when they hear that they may not have to throw out their conventional wisdom.
One key finding that may surprise you: Millennials were more likely to want to work in an office every day than their older colleagues. We spoke with Alexandra Levit, business and workplace consultant and Career Advisory Board member. She gave us her interpretation of the survey results, including what surprised her, trends of the Millennial generation, the gig economy, and more. Watch our interview with Alexandra:
January 09, 2017 by Anna Peters
Contributing writer Ted Bauer
Here’s a statistic that may blow your hair back a little. Per Gallup, 82 percent of managerial hires end up being the wrong one for the company in question. Why is it so hard to be a good manager, and why do so many companies perpetuate bad management? If this 82% stat is true, but there are still companies making tons of profits each year, does bad management truly affect the bottom line?
Why is it so hard to be a good manager?
Laszlo Bock is the VP of People (commonly thought of as Human Resources) at Google. Last year, he gave an interview to UPenn’s Wharton Business School — and within the interview, he hits on a core problem of good management. In his words:
The reason you get promoted is because you’ve done good work, you’ve hit your goals, you’ve made good decisions. You’re in this job, and of course, you immediately want to make good decisions, hit your goals, move things forward. You forget that when you’re an employee you want your manager helping and giving you advice and then kind of getting out of your way.
As a manager, your whole mindset shifts. [Y]ou start saying, I gotta make sure everyone delivers. I gotta micromanage. I gotta watch things. It’s not intuitive as a manager to give people more freedom and back off. That’s one of the things we’ve discovered — that you have to limit the power of managers. Then people perform way, way better.
One of the more popular business books of the past 20 years, Marshall Goldsmith’s What Got You Here Won’t Get You There, refers to this same concept: namely, management isn’t intuitive to most people. Instead of thinking about their new direct reports as people with lives and contexts of their own, many new managers think of employees as productivity targets or KPIs. Limiting the power of managers can actually make organizations more effective, counterintuitive as that might be on face.
The other issue with bad management is training. Per research, most people receive their first managerial role at age 30. Their first managerial training, though, isn’t until age 42. Not all managerial trainings are created equal — some might potentially regress a manager — but to go over a decade between “becoming a manager” and “getting trained to be a manager” is a significant issue.
What’s the tie to the bottom line?
Tony Robbins makes an excellent point about organizations scaling in this interview with Tim Ferriss. The argument is this: at some point, a company is 2-3 people (the founders). Eventually that becomes 5, then 10, then 20, etc. Every time you add a person and another layer, the communication channels become a little bit more frayed. Managing a three-person company vs. a 3,000-person company is hugely different. Companies are often good at scaling production for their products, but scaling the culture and managerial skill sets often gets left behind.
This has consequences. According to one set of research (admittedly from a small sample size), poor leadership costs companies $144,541.30 per day. That might be the annual salary of someone in a leadership role, and their poor leadership is costing the company that amount each day. Additional research from Northwestern has shown that poor leadership, often in the form of unclear priorities and wasted time, costs organizations $15.5 million per year. By contrast, organizations with very strong management levels often double their profits.
There are many metrics people use to attempt measuring “bad management,” and one of the most common is turnover. Bad managers obviously contribute to turnover; most research across the past 30 years has indicated people tend to leave their boss, not their actual job or company. Research from Dale Carnegie Institute at the end of 2016 showed that 41 percent of North American workers planned to try for a new job in 2017. The most-cited reason? Bad management at their current job. That’s nearly half the North American work force entering a new year with one foot out the door. Consistent turnover has many negative repercussions for a company’s bottom line, and losing four of every 10 employees in a calendar year is really bad.
How can we improve managers?
There are dozens of ideas here, but Bock’s advice above makes some sense: limit their power, or shift their focus from “managing productivity” to “managing the priorities of their people.” There’s research from MIT showing that 67 percent of senior leaders can’t name the priorities of their CEO. Once you get a few levels below that, priority assignment is a large game of telephone. As a result of these unclear goals in the middle management levels, research has shown that 21.4 million managers are contributing no economic value back to their company. That’s 17 percent of the U.S. full-time work force, and close to 42 percent of all people holding managerial titles. They could be made more effective with a shift in how they’re measured and compensated.
The other improvement could come from increased training around how to work with different styles of people, how to communicate better, how to align company strategy with daily execution, and the like. One of the most common traits of companies who regularly get on the ‘Best Places To Work’ list, such as Google or Mercedes Benz, is an almost religious commitment to training and developing people. It’s hard to expect managers to improve when they’re waiting 12 years between initial promotion and initial training.
January 06, 2017 by Anna Peters
Photo from exaqueo.com
We asked a few people who attended last month’s College Recruiting Bootcamp about their takeaways. Several weeks after the event, they are still thinking about our conversations regarding relationships, data and metrics, and work culture.
Cassandra Jennings, University Relationship Manager, FDM Group: The greatest takeaway from the bootcamp experience is that no matter the industry or company, we have a shared need to connect and build campus relationships that are successful and make a difference to the bottom lines at our firms. Though technology is ever changing, students still need to connect and we need to wade through all of the external noise and help students understand who we are, what we do and how we work in an honest and down-to-earth voice.
Along with the challenges of messaging, we also need to keep an eye on meaningful metrics to help us communicate the importance of university relations and the positive impact it makes on the business.
We are a few weeks away from the bootcamp and I’m still thinking about how our company, FDM Group can convey our brand on campus in a meaningful way. We hired more than 600 students in 2016 and anticipate that our campus recruitment numbers will increase exponentially this year as our business continues to grow in North America. This is an exciting time at our firm and we need students to understand that this is a great opportunity to get valuable work experience and a great place to launch a career with us. Continue Reading
January 04, 2017 by Anna Peters
“Women are less likely to receive the first critical promotion to manager—so far fewer end up on the path to leadership—and are less likely to be hired into more senior positions.”
That ton of bricks comes from the Women in the Workplace report, released last fall by LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Company. What is getting in women’s ways? Does bias against women managers tell the whole tale? Or is something else going on?
That women fall behind so early in their careers should be a wake-up call to female college students. Seniors, who will be entering the workplace soon, should especially take notice. For years, young women have made up more than half of the college student population (and as high as 60% at private schools). The Pew Research Center reports that 71% of recent female high school grads turn their ambition to college. Compare that to 61% of recent male high school grads. Once they’re in college, women continue to outperform men. They earn better grades and graduate with more honors than men. It would be easy for today’s driven, hard-working young women to believe that inequality is something only their mothers had to deal with. Unfortunately, the real world is different than college.
“There are multiple factors that contribute to entry-level women being behind men at first chance of promotion,” says Simma Lieberman at The Inclusionist.
Many women need a boost in confidence
“Many women have internalized messages from media and have bought into other people’s bias about women’s abilities and careers,” says Lieberman. “They have not learned to negotiate or ask for what they want. I’m still surprised by how many women still believe that by working “hard” they will be discovered, that it’s not okay to promote yourself to managers, and they have to “wait their turn” to get promoted.”
You can’t take rejection personally
If an employer hires someone else, women need to stop seeing this rejection as personal and permanent. Liebrman continues, “Women need to learn how to separate getting turned down for a promotion or not being chosen for a project, from other parts of their life. There is a tendency to give up after one try which holds them back, rather than find out why they didn’t get a promotion and to let that cloud their ambitions and settle.”
Bias still exists
Women in the Workplace finds real biases out there. Women may need to work on their negotiation skills, but that doesn’t explain the whole pay gap. The report finds that “Women who negotiate for a promotion or compensation increase are 30% more likely than men who negotiate to receive feedback that they are ‘bossy,’ ‘too aggressive,’ or ‘intimidating.'” Our implicit biases persuade us to believe that men are more suited for leadership. That first promotion to manager is just the beginning. The STEM fields are especially male-dominated, which can make it particularly challenging for women to be taken seriously.
It’s hard to blame young women who ask why they should be the ones to change. Lieberman advises women to be “flexible and develop tools to show their talent and be recognized. Lack of confidence is not a trait that should be continued.” Women who want to become managers should be aware of how the cards are stacked, seek advice from senior women, and keep working hard.
December 23, 2016 by Anna Peters
Congratulations to the 50 winners of the Candidate Experience Awards! Among the winners is Fiat Chrysler Automotive. This is what they have to say on their website what it’s like to work there.
It’s a dynamic, challenging climate we work in. To stay ahead in the automotive industry, you need to embrace change, cherish competition and think bigger. BOLDER. And that’s what we expect from every member of the FCA team, in every role. It takes a nimble company to compete in the global marketplace and, today, our products are sold in more than 120 countries around the world. You’ll find FCA a fast-paced work environment—one that will keep you challenged and growing from day one.
You’ll work with people who exemplify the entrepreneurial spirit, act with integrity and are accountable for delivering what they promise. We’ll make sure you have the chance to prove yourself right from the start, and ongoing opportunities to make an impact. We are a meritocracy. How far and how fast you grow in your career is yours to own. You’ll get the freedom to think for yourself, the encouragement to share your ideas and the rewards to make it worth your while.
Here, we don’t look at the product we produce as simply a car or a truck or a minivan. These are truly labors of love. To us, every design, every piece of engineering, every new technology that makes up our offering represent opportunities to innovate…explore…invent. You can apply yourself in ways you never imagined at FCA. The energy is dynamic.
We may be independent thinkers, but we’re a team at FCA, committed to treating everyone with dignity and fairness. We’ll expect you to bring—and voice—your point of view. You’ll work with people from different countries, different backgrounds and different disciplines who offer totally different perspectives. And we know that embracing our differences makes us stronger, more innovative and more in tune with the needs of our global client base.
As a responsible corporate citizen, we invest in our communities…help build a safe, sustainable environment for future generations…and encourage and promote the workforce of the future through education programs. We’re also committed to our team members. We respect each other’s roles and support each other’s growth.
December 21, 2016 by Anna Peters
The mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation. If you are interested a government internship, especially related to economics, investing or the stock market, consider the SEC. We heard from Temeka Thompson, the Recruitment Outreach Program Manager at SEC. She shared about how they hire and utilize interns.
Sometimes interns are seen as performing grunt work only. What’s the attitude at Securities and Exchange about interns?
Temeka Thompson: Interns are considered valued contributors and perform a wide array of duties and responsibilities while on their internship. Legal students conduct research/fact finding, prepare briefs and memorandums for high profile cases. Business students can find themselves leading marketing campaigns, auditing and investigating programs for effectiveness. Our managers who utilize student programs believe this is an excellent opportunity to fill entry level mission needs with fresh, energetic talent, whom they highly enjoy collaborating alongside.
How do you identify the stronger candidates? What are the metrics you might use?
TT: In addition to reviewing the completed application, the resume with any financial services or legal experience is key. One of the oldest; yet tried and true methods of identifying great interns is face to face interviewing or even now, virtual interviewing. Applicants who have the ability to address behavioral questions, have a history of taking the initiative and eagerness to learn and contribute are the interns that typically succeed and are in a better position to compete for full-time positions upon graduation.
How do you convert strong interns into full-time employees?
TT: The process is organic. Internships are working interviews and the interns who exhibit the ability to produce, takes pride in their work products and the mission of the SEC and perform really well are in a better position to compete for full-time opportunities. 3Ls/Judicial Law Clerks (current & pending)/Legal Fellows can apply to our Chairs Attorney Honors program (a highly competitive and prestigious entry level attorney hiring program) and our Business Students have the opportunity to apply to any Pathways or full-time opportunity that best fits their skill sets.
(Big thank you to the SEC for hosting the College Recruiting bootcamp this month!)
December 20, 2016 by Anna Peters
Contributing writer Ted Bauer
There is a lot of talk about artificial intelligence in recruiting. Here’s something most people probably don’t know: artificial intelligence actually debuted at a conference at Dartmouth University in 1956. Yep, 11 years after the end of WW2, AI was already on the scene. At the time, there was a lot of optimism. Some people at the conference believed robots and AI machines would be doing the work of humans by the mid-1970s. Of course, that didn’t happen. Instead, funding dried up and we began a period called “The AI Winter”. That ostensibly lasted into the 2000s, when IBM’s Watson peaked a lot of interest in artificial intelligence again.
Now we’re at an interesting place. Like PCs in the early 1980s or the Internet in the early 1990s, artificial intelligence is “out there” and people know about it. There’s anxiety around artificial intelligence and what it means for the very nature of the work many of us do. However, I believe it will be a rising tide that will “lift all boats.” Here’s how AI might impact the recruiting industry going forward.
AI is already here in recruiting
One example of today’s cutting edge recruiting AI is an application developed by HiringSolved. They call it RAI — pronounced Ray — for “Recruiting Artificial Intelligence.” The project is about six years old and still being perfected. Its execution is similar to a chatbot. You can say something to RAI like, “I need to find 20 project managers in the accounting sector within 50 miles of Boston,” and — much like you might tell Siri to turn on Pandora — it will begin to comb through resources and find you those project managers.
You could also use clarifying questions, such as “What does Microsoft call product engineers?” Continue Reading
December 16, 2016 by Anna Peters
College Recruiter is introducing a new regular blog feature, “Q & A with the Experts”. In this monthly feature we will draw insight from experts in talent acquisition and HR. For today’s post, we spoke with Loreli Wilson, Manager of Diversity and Inclusion Programs at Veterans United Home Loans; Saïd Radhouani, Co-founder at Nextal; and Steven Rothberg, founder and President of College Recruiter. We asked Loreli, Saïd and Steven about the connection between college recruitment, and Diversity and Inclusion.
What do you think is the importance of college recruitment to diversifying the workplace?
Saïd Radhouani: Universities are great channels to bring new diverse talents into organizations and promote a diversified workplace. Both local and immigrants students form a big pool of diverse talents. They may differ greatly in terms of language, culture, religion, or color; yet ultimately study toward the same goals. These talents are already diverse and know how to perform in a diversified environment. College recruitment is a big enabler to diversify the workplace.
Loreli Wilson: Colleges and universities are a great source for smart, passionate, and innovative applicants from marginalized communities. It’s a smart move to align with those institutions to engage students and cultivate our workforce by our own specifications.
What are best practices for recruiting a diversity of college students?
Saïd Radhouani: If diversity is part of your organization’s priorities, you should empower some individuals to serve as diversity advocates. They can promote and keep diversity goals active during the recruitment process. These advocates should include college recruitment into their plans. A few best practices they can suggest to the recruitment team include: Continue Reading
December 14, 2016 by Anna Peters
The same tools that save recruiters time often make the application process feel robotic and cold, at least from the job seeker’s point of view. As you work to woo people into your company, it would be a bad idea to turn them off. You can use time-saving technology and still be respectful and applicant-centric.
Your employer brand will suffer if you don’t take steps to be respectful.
Any negativity that a candidate experiences can go viral. Your employer brand doesn’t just depend on the culture you create for current employees. The experience you create for potential employees, including everyone who never gets an interview, is also part of your company brand. Recruiters may groan at having to sift through 500 resumes for a single position, but that’s a gold mine for branding. That resume stack represents a captive audience. Unlike your passive followers on social media who you wish would just click “like” occasionally, those job applicants are eagerly waiting to hear from you.
Recruitment skills are like sales skills, so recruiters: sell your brand and your company’s experience. Don’t overlook how important your own customer service skills are. Your candidates are your customers.
Don’t risk losing the top candidates
When you treat candidates like a herd of cattle, think about who you are losing. Employers large and small consistently place soft skills at the top of their wish list. Those skills include integrity, dependability, communication, and ability to work with others. A candidate with high integrity will drop out of the race quickly if they sense that a recruiter doesn’t regard them as worth more than a few seconds of their time. If you lose integrity from your pool, what do you have left?
Juli Smith, President of The Smith Consulting Group, agrees that the lack of respect for candidates has consequences. “It can be very devastating to hear nothing. Even bad news can be taken better than radio silence for days or weeks.” Candidates may have gotten used to being treated insignificantly during the job search, but that doesn’t mean they’ll put up with it for much longer. As companies start to figure out how to treat them better, you don’t want to be the last company standing with a humorless, disrespectful and overly-automated job application process.
A few little tweaks can make a difference
Like other great salespeople, good recruiters know how to read people. Let your recruiters bring their own humanness to the process. Don’t stifle their instincts to be respectful by automating every step of the way. If they truly have no time to insert a human touch along the way, then ask the most jovial member of your team to come up with better automated responses to candidates. Compare these two auto-emails: Continue Reading