May, 1997
CAN YOU BELIEVE IT? White-collar workers receive or send an average of 178 messages a day and are interrupted by their associates at least three times an hour, according to a new survey by the Institute for the Future / Gallup Organization.
With so many messages and message-senders vying for attention, it's easy to spend the day responding to them - or at least taking evasive action. True priorities, meanwhile, languish in the to-do pile, waiting for an hour or two of uninterrupted calm.
Hiring is no exception. People are your most important product - in fact, they design, produce and sell your products - yet today's hiring need becomes the project one hopes to get started on tomorrow. Or perhaps the day, week or month after that.
It may be too late to eliminate the information overload that afflicts most workplaces, but there are ways to keep hiring from becoming one of its victims.
Why Time Spent Now Saves Time Later
A common complaint from hiring authorities is that recruiters send them the wrong people. A common complaint from recruiters is that hiring authorities ask them to find the wrong people. Both complaints arise when expectations are poorly defined and no common understanding exists.
The position itself may be inadequately described. The make-or-break actions expected of the next incumbent may be largely unarticulated. The internal environment in which the person must flourish may bear little resemblance to the adjectives and nouns used to describe the perfect candidate (e.g., the company seeks an "aggressive self-starter," when in reality decisions are made by committee and carried out by teams). Or, perhaps, the company's expectations are out of sync with the compensation it hopes to pay.
While there is something to be said for using triangulation to zero in a weapon, during the hiring process it results in a hail of candidates who mainly miss the mark.
It may take an hour or two up-front for the hiring manager and the human resources representative to identify all pertinent job requirements and zero in on the desired candidate profile. It may take an additional hour or two of further discussion with an outside search consultant. Yet these hours can save days of costly interviews with the wrong stuff.
Examine Your Urgency and Commitment
Skilled search consultants have been known to ask their clients a variation on the following sentence: "If I have three highly qualified candidates to present to you by the first Monday in June, may I assume we can complete the initial round of interviews by June 13?"
This is a test.
Those who pass say something like the following: "If you can find them yet this month, why wait till June?"
Some clients, on the other hand, begin to back-pedal - mumbling about scheduling conflicts, vacations, budgets and all the time it takes to obtain Corporate's approval of any position opening.
Those who make a living conducting executive search test continually for the urgency and commitment that their clients demonstrate, knowing that little happens when these traits are missing.
Since speculative searches generally lead to blind alleys and waste the time of client and recruiter alike, it's best not to engage in them. Save your bullets for the critical position openings which must be filled - and for which budgets are available and approvals have been obtained.
Fire the Interview Panel?
There are a few key positions in any organization that have a wide span of control or an extensive series of relationships with other functions. The critical nature of these positions may require the participation of a number of key individuals in the interview process.
Probably ninety percent of the time, however, there are only three persons who need to be concerned with the search process. These are the person ("hiring manager") to whom the position reports, the hiring manager's boss and the human resources representative.
In some organizations, nonetheless, policy or tradition dictates the creation of interview panels, often consisting of six, seven or eight people. No one individual has the authority to hire, but all have the right to veto. This "safety in numbers" approach can lead to the selection of bland individuals whose basic skill was that they offended no one. It can also waste time two ways - through countless delays in interview dates resulting from panel members' conflicting schedules, and through further delays as vetoes kill perfectly sound candidates. ("His tie was a little too flashy for my taste.")
Companies or business units attracted to large interview panels might well find it useful to justify the presence of each panel member, "firing" those who serve little purpose. Where a legitimate purpose is served, the organization might clarify that purpose with the panel member.
For example, the corporate communications division of a large chemical company always had the company's assistant secretary, a lawyer, interview candidates for its managerial positions. The theory was that public relations people had to work effectively with the company's lawyers on the annual report and other matters. The assistant secretary, by contrast, assumed his hour was a get-acquainted meeting, and he was always careful to comment favorably on any candidate.
Coping with a Sellers' Market
Five years ago, there were more good candidates than there were jobs. Today, there are more good jobs than there are qualified candidates to fill them. As a result, companies now find themselves competing in a sellers' market for top talent.
There are a number of reasons for the change - including low unemployment, employees' increasing focus on job security and quality-of-life issues, and the re-emergence in forward-looking companies of long-term incentive plans that create "golden handcuffs" for their best people.
In this kind of environment, it's dangerous to toy with people you'd like to hire.
First, they need to be convinced that the benefits of changing jobs outweigh the risks. Most companies, of course, like to present an image of themselves as cutting-edge organizations that make prompt decisions and take decisive action. A candidate who interviews such a company begins testing whether words speak louder than actions. If the interviewing and hiring process proceeds with great dispatch, the company moves up a notch in the candidate's mind. If, conversely, the process becomes subject to countless delays and the position description undergoes endless evolution, what is the candidate likely to conclude?
Second, understand what it's going to take to get the person or people you need. Professional search consultants, who operate in the real world every day, can be of considerable help in designing the kind of package that is competitive with other potential offers - and that will keep the candidate whole in terms of benefits, bonus, deferred compensation, stock options, etc. that he or she will have to leave behind.
Last but not least, show an interest in the candidate's special needs, such as spousal re-employment, identifying the best local school (perhaps for a child with a learning disability) or convincing a reluctant family that the new community is not a culture and sports backwater. Here again, the professional search consultant can be of assistance by probing for concerns that the candidate may not have raised directly.
Indeed, good people are hard to find these days. When you do, act with alacrity - before they go somewhere else, or simply decide to remain where they are.
If you work in a large, multi-unit organization, others – including the corporate Human Resources and MIS Departments – might appreciate copies of this issue. These can be ordered from your Sanford Rose Associates search consultant.
©1999 SRA International, Inc. All rights reserved, including electronic reproduction or alteration. This SRA Update is published for the clients of Sanford Rose Associates.