Office Manager?
Struggling to motivate and manage your people?
Finding them listless and workshy?
Want to pep up the team's performance?
Simple...
Hire the Office Linebacker
You'll never look back
Enjoy >>>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc9dIkWGVI0&feature=player_embedded
Sep 2, 2009
Are 5 minute interviews the way to go?
Life is short, certainly shorter than many interviews many of us have endured over the years.
Which is pretty much where Seth Godin is riffing at the moment (see post below) I like self-styled 'guru' Seth... a little left field, sometimes off the scale - but always thought provoking....
This most recent post of his cuts to the quick for many of us experienced in interviewing and selction.
For whilst all that competency / assessment good stuff is indeed a sound insurance policy against 'gut feel' hiring habits....
.... how many times out of 100 do we ever go against our initial assessment?
And how would we feel about widening the potential talent pool by a factor of 12 as he suggests?
It's very "twittery" I guess: "Please talk to us for 140 characters or less - and then send the next guy in on your way out please...."
It could equally be a blueprint for negotiating family gatherings and children's parties...
Blogpost: Two ways to hire (and a wrong way)
The wrong way first: interview someone for an hour. If you like them, have them interview three or four other people in your organization for an hour each.
You've invested five hours of your team's time, but really you only were looking for approval, because you'd already decided you liked the person enough to work with them for years.
All the evidence we've seen shows that this is a lousy predictor of future performance. And, let's tell the truth... if the first three people love the guy, are you really going to let the fourth, junior person veto him? Or is it just an annoying courtesy?
There are two approaches you can use as an alternative.
First, you can work with someone for months before you offer them a job. Your pool is smaller (freelancers, joint venture partners, interns) but the exposure to how they work is spectacularly different. You don't get the thrill of finding a pearl in the oyster, the "wow, I found the most incredible hire!" bragging rights. Instead, you get exactly what you expect. Organizing for this sort of hiring isn't particularly difficult, particularly in a down economy. Not surprisingly, I've had 100% success doing this.
Second, and with some controversy, you can admit that an hour interview is actually a five minute sniff test followed by 55 minutes of wasted time, multiplied by four colleagues. Tell the truth and switch to five minute interviews.
If you do five minute initial interviews, you can interview 12 times as many people for each job opening. This initial filtering takes precisely as much time as your wasted one-hour approach, but dramatically increases the chance you'll find someone you actually have good pheromone and body language connection with. After the screening, I can only encourage you to do the projects, reference checks and other serious diligence you're probably too exhausted to do after spending all those hours with one person...
This process takes a lot of work, but it definitely works. If you can interview 60 people in a day or two and then have the three best fits do projects, presentations and freelance work for you, you're way ahead of a company that interviewed only three people and fell in love with one.
Which is pretty much where Seth Godin is riffing at the moment (see post below) I like self-styled 'guru' Seth... a little left field, sometimes off the scale - but always thought provoking....
This most recent post of his cuts to the quick for many of us experienced in interviewing and selction.
For whilst all that competency / assessment good stuff is indeed a sound insurance policy against 'gut feel' hiring habits....
.... how many times out of 100 do we ever go against our initial assessment?
And how would we feel about widening the potential talent pool by a factor of 12 as he suggests?
It's very "twittery" I guess: "Please talk to us for 140 characters or less - and then send the next guy in on your way out please...."
It could equally be a blueprint for negotiating family gatherings and children's parties...
Blogpost: Two ways to hire (and a wrong way)
The wrong way first: interview someone for an hour. If you like them, have them interview three or four other people in your organization for an hour each.
You've invested five hours of your team's time, but really you only were looking for approval, because you'd already decided you liked the person enough to work with them for years.
All the evidence we've seen shows that this is a lousy predictor of future performance. And, let's tell the truth... if the first three people love the guy, are you really going to let the fourth, junior person veto him? Or is it just an annoying courtesy?
There are two approaches you can use as an alternative.
First, you can work with someone for months before you offer them a job. Your pool is smaller (freelancers, joint venture partners, interns) but the exposure to how they work is spectacularly different. You don't get the thrill of finding a pearl in the oyster, the "wow, I found the most incredible hire!" bragging rights. Instead, you get exactly what you expect. Organizing for this sort of hiring isn't particularly difficult, particularly in a down economy. Not surprisingly, I've had 100% success doing this.
Second, and with some controversy, you can admit that an hour interview is actually a five minute sniff test followed by 55 minutes of wasted time, multiplied by four colleagues. Tell the truth and switch to five minute interviews.
If you do five minute initial interviews, you can interview 12 times as many people for each job opening. This initial filtering takes precisely as much time as your wasted one-hour approach, but dramatically increases the chance you'll find someone you actually have good pheromone and body language connection with. After the screening, I can only encourage you to do the projects, reference checks and other serious diligence you're probably too exhausted to do after spending all those hours with one person...
This process takes a lot of work, but it definitely works. If you can interview 60 people in a day or two and then have the three best fits do projects, presentations and freelance work for you, you're way ahead of a company that interviewed only three people and fell in love with one.
Aug 21, 2009
The ultimate management role model....
Yes - in this of all weeks - it's big Freddie!
You can read all your Jim Collins, Tom Peters & co.. but it seems the heart of a lion matched with the thirst of a dry-throated fish is the way to go to be a great leader...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8209072.stm
Very much my kind of role model I have to say....
You can read all your Jim Collins, Tom Peters & co.. but it seems the heart of a lion matched with the thirst of a dry-throated fish is the way to go to be a great leader...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8209072.stm
Very much my kind of role model I have to say....
Aug 10, 2009
Hey Presto - we're all suddenly "engaged" ....
A 20% rise in engagement levels in a year - heyy, everyone's become like.. totally.. like enlightened maan.
Well maybe not, for engaged - read more grateful, less likely to be surfing amazon & ebay at lunchtime - and scared to death by the monthly unemployment figures.
I'd say that's not so much engagement as understandable pragmatism in the face of tough times.
For all those employers relying on the downturn to tackle the engagement challenge .. look out when the market turns properly and the talent squeeze starts to hurt...
Madam ZaZa predicts tears and heartbreak, as the 'engaged' jilt hitherto soul mates for new and more exciting relationships...
Here's the original source material from HR magazine:
Seven out of ten employees feel engaged in their job now, compared to 50% in November 2008, according to Best Companies.
The engagement firm set out to find how employees were feeling about the recession and discovered 33% did not feel worried about the downturn and did not think their performance had been affected - down from 38% in November.
Three in ten employers are grateful to have a job compared to two in ten back in November 2008, the survey relealed.
But in order to be more engaged, men and women both agree the things that need to change in their workplace, but order them differently.
For men it is more money (59%), more interesting work (36%) and recognition for a job well done (33%), while for women it is more money (57%), recognition (42%) and more interesting work (35%).
Jonathan Austin, CEO and founder of Best Companies, said: "With the fear of redundancy ever-present and the cost of living creeping up, money is more of a motivator for people than it might have been before. But for those organisations that do not have the luxury of digging deep into their pockets there are plenty of other ways to incentivise staff, such as flexible working which our data indicates has a significant impact on engagement levels and simply saying thank you and recognising employees' efforts can really boost morale."
Well maybe not, for engaged - read more grateful, less likely to be surfing amazon & ebay at lunchtime - and scared to death by the monthly unemployment figures.
I'd say that's not so much engagement as understandable pragmatism in the face of tough times.
For all those employers relying on the downturn to tackle the engagement challenge .. look out when the market turns properly and the talent squeeze starts to hurt...
Madam ZaZa predicts tears and heartbreak, as the 'engaged' jilt hitherto soul mates for new and more exciting relationships...
Here's the original source material from HR magazine:
Seven out of ten employees feel engaged in their job now, compared to 50% in November 2008, according to Best Companies.
The engagement firm set out to find how employees were feeling about the recession and discovered 33% did not feel worried about the downturn and did not think their performance had been affected - down from 38% in November.
Three in ten employers are grateful to have a job compared to two in ten back in November 2008, the survey relealed.
But in order to be more engaged, men and women both agree the things that need to change in their workplace, but order them differently.
For men it is more money (59%), more interesting work (36%) and recognition for a job well done (33%), while for women it is more money (57%), recognition (42%) and more interesting work (35%).
Jonathan Austin, CEO and founder of Best Companies, said: "With the fear of redundancy ever-present and the cost of living creeping up, money is more of a motivator for people than it might have been before. But for those organisations that do not have the luxury of digging deep into their pockets there are plenty of other ways to incentivise staff, such as flexible working which our data indicates has a significant impact on engagement levels and simply saying thank you and recognising employees' efforts can really boost morale."
Jun 23, 2009
Social media helps jobseekers says new research...
Online Social Networks Boost Opportunities for Young Job Seekers
London, 18 June 2009 - A third of employers now use social networking sites to connect with potential recruits meaning it's not what you know but how you promote yourself on Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn that counts.
Research by global recruitment consultants Harvey Nash and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) reveals that, in a bid to boost traditional recruitment methods and reach out to a wider pool of talent, social networks are increasingly becoming a mainstream recruitment tool.
Half of employers believe that if candidates invest time in developing a strong online brand using social networks and networking online, they are more likely to be hired.
Almost a quarter of employers routinely use sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn as part of their recruitment processes. Fifteen per cent said they would miss key new recruits if they didn't tap into to social networks.
Matthew Garratt, HR Manager for figleaves.com said:
"At figleaves.com social network sites like LinkedIn and Facebook have become absolutely critical in finding new hires. Not only do they give us access to people who we might not find elsewhere, but they are also an excellent way to understand more about the candidate beyond just their CV. Certainly for figleaves.com, job seekers who have a strong online presence do stand out from the crowd, and we would encourage more people to invest in their online 'brand'."
However, young jobseekers could be missing out on certain opportunities by failing to pick up on this trend. Although 92 per cent of online 18-24 year olds are registered on a social networking site, just one in 10 (12%) agreed they currently use these sites to get job leads or make useful career contacts.
Commenting on the potential of social networking in a tough jobs market, social networking expert, Dan Rutherford, said:
"Employers are increasingly looking for new recruits who have a strong online brand."
"A good place to start is with your Facebook profile. Use it as a personal ad detailing your skills and qualifications. You could even post your CV in hope that it catches the eye of a prospective employer. Now it's time to start working your profile. Nobody will see your CV unless you point them in the right direction. You can do this by searching interest groups and joining any that match your skills or experience. It can be a great way of making useful contacts and networking within relevant fields."
"Twitter is another great way of networking and keeping track of employers that are actively recruiting. Lots of employers post job openings on Twitter and by letting your followers know your employment situation they might be able to pass on job leads that you weren't aware of."
Rob Grimsey, Strategic Development Director of Harvey Nash, said: "As UK employers continue to face difficulties recruiting, it's staggering that 44% of employers think social networking will only become important in the future. What they need to realise is professional networking has already begun and is here to stay; just ask the one-third of employers who are successfully doing it right now."
"While real-world networking and traditional job services remain invaluable, web savvy job seekers should act now to gain the competitive edge as online networking helps jobseekers stay well connected and get career-informed"
"Peer-to-peer relationships, nurtured online and offline, are at the heart of the 'new' recruitment experience. It is essential for job seekers to wisen up to how employers are looking for candidates in order to remain competitive."
How job searchers can use their online profile to attract employers:
- If you decide to use Facebook for professional networking, take a close look at your profile and decide what you want business contacts or prospective employers to see - and what you don't!
- Sign-up to Linked-In if you haven't already
- Track potential employers and recruitment consultancies on Twitter
- Don't leave a blank or incomplete profile. A full profile gives people the best opportunity to get to know you.
- Post content relevant to your job search but limit the photos you post.
- Network strategically - connect to people who can help with your job search.
- Think about joining interest groups which fit your field of interest.
- Finally, don't limit activity to online social networks. It's useful to speak to recruitment agencies with expertise in your local labour market. You can also view Britain's largest database of job vacancies at www.direct.gov.uk/backtowork to see who's recruiting in your area.
Notes to Editors
1. Polling of 1,224 young people, across Great Britain, aged 18-24 years on their attitudes towards social networking was carried out online by YouGov between 22nd and 26th May 2009 combined with a joint DWP and Harvey Nash online survey of 208 employers across Great Britain between 22nd and 29th May 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)