HR CAPITALIST/FOT WEBINAR: Figuring Out How to Recruit Using Facebook....

Marylin Delpy: The site got twenty-two hundred hits within two hours? 
Mark Zuckerberg: Thousand. 
Marylin Delpy: I'm sorry? 
Mark Zuckerberg: Twenty-two *thousand*. 
Marylin Delpy: [to herself] Wow. 

That's a line of dialog from the movie "The Social Network", which details the rise of Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook from the campus of Harvard to its ultimate position as the leading social play in the world today.

With a little under a Billion (that's right, 1 Billion, not million) members, it's pretty obvious that most of us need to know more than we do about how to recruit using Facebook.  So, with the help of my friends at Fistful of Talent (my multi-contributor blog), we've put together a great webinar Webinar on how to recruit using Facebook.  We call it: Social Recruiting MacGyver Style! No Money, a Paperclip and Facebook – all a Real HR Pro Needs to Recruit.

Register Today by Clicking this link and completing the form…

Join your hosts (Tim Sackett and me) on February 2, 2012 for this one-hour webinar and we’ll hit you with the following Facebook-centric items:

• Where is social recruiting heading, and why do you need to care as the HR rep of your organization?
• How a 1-2 person shop can compete in social recruiting (with no money, a paper clip and Facebook…)
• Understanding the difference between Facebook Pages vs. Profiles and how it drives your Facebook recruiting strategy
• How to use rarely understood tools like Facebook Marketplace and Facebook Pay-Per-Click Ads to drive Facebook candidates to your open positions
• How to use Facebook search features to locate candidates on Facebook and contact them without looking like a stalker

Still not convinced this is worth your time?  Register today and we’ll send you a special FOT toolkit – “How to Find and Contact Candidates on Facebook without Looking Like a Stalker” once the webinar is complete.

Facebook.  The Capitalist. FOT.  MacGyver.  What could go wrong?

Register today by clicking here!!

Don't Think Googling Candidates is Fair? A Cautionary Tale...

I know, I know.  I should be concerned about Googling candidates.  After all, as many of you have pointed out to me, there are privacy issues, and dammit, what a person does elsewhere in their life shouldn't matter if they can do the job.

So, I Google anyway, and many of you disagree.  I'm a pig - I'll own it. There's just this little thing that I can't get over.  YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR KNOWING EVERYTHING YOU CAN KNOW ABOUT PEOPLE YOU BRING INTO THE COMPANY.  And if you don't know things you should, you'll suffer the consequences.  Consider this cautionary tale via a conversation I had with an executive friend at another company:

KD: Rob, what's up?

Rob: KD, you'll never believe what just happened.

KD: Educate me, brother.

Rob: We had a Controller candidate in today.  I was the last guy up to interview him, and I had a resume, but I had a couple of minutes before the interview and no time to start anything else.  So I Googled the guy...

KD: <Bracing for contact> And?...

Rob: Turns out the guy was embroiled in a Sarbanes Oxley cluster scandal at his last company. First Google entry returned when I pressed "search".  WTF?  So I march down to the guy who's running the search, and say, btw, did you bother Googling Finklestein?  The guy tells me no, and since it's a retained search, the big search firm is responsble for fully vetting, etc.  I tell my guy that he might want to Google Finklestein.  He declined, but I insisted.  So he did and within 15 seconds let out a noise like he had just been kicked in the groin by a pointy-toed country western boot.

KD: Wow.  What happened then?

Rob: The candidate was intereviewing with the CEO.  My guy calls down to see where it's at and is informed that the CEO requested another hour because it's going so well.

KD: Ouch.

Rob: The lesson my Capitalist friend?  Always Google before you buy that plane ticket for the candidate.

If I was defending the right to Google candidates in a court of law and told that story, I'd drop my microphone for dramatic effect after sharing that knowledge, like Randy Watson of the band Sexual Chocolate, leaving the stage in Coming to America.

Just Google people.  Decide how you bring it up later.

Should You Hire People Based on Puzzles, Riddles and Other Trendy Tricks?

You've seen the questions.  How much wood would a woodchuck code if a woodchuck could sling code?

Or some S*## like that.

Google and some other trendy companies are famous for having riddles and complicated brainteasers as a part of their hiring process.  The theory goes that the answer is less important than the thought process behind how a candidate articulates his/her answer.

I'm immediately thinking of a scenario where a kid who has 2 years of jujitsu at the local strip mall squares up on someone, then the other kid kicks him in the groin.  What's the point?

Here's some reason from another source in the tech world - 37signals:

"I’ve rarely heard a kind word about the parlor tricks of programmer hiring, but I’ve heard plenty of scorn. There’s certainly a minority of puzzle solvers who love to get their fancy tickled like this, but I sure wasn’t one of them and neither have most programmers I’ve met.

I’ve known fabulous programmers flame out in the quizzing cage and terrible ones excel. So unless you’re specifically hiring someone to design you the next sorting algorithm, making them do so on the white board is a poor gauge of future success.

The only reliable gauge I’ve found for future programmer success is looking at real code they’ve written, talking through bigger picture issues, and, if all that is swell, trying them out for size."

Interesting take.  Everyone knows candidates who can interview their ass off, only to struggle in the role.  So you need more tools, and the puzzle/braintease is one of those.  But the 37signals post is really pointing to an area that most of us never ask for.

Let me see some work product you did in your last job.  Let's dissect that project for an hour.  If you're not exhausted mentally after you break that down, you've probably accepted glittering generalities in the answers that sound great, but don't mean anything.

Or you could ask them how many manhole covers there are in San Jose.  Your choice.

Why I'm In This Game...

Capitalist Note:  I'm posting this story again as I reflect at the end of the year.  I heard again from the candidate below and while he missed his record year from 2010, he again went over the million dollar mark in 2011 and blew out the previous record by 40-45%.  Great hires make you feel good.  Here's to a fast start to 2012 for all of us...

Some days suck.  Lots of days suck, as a matter of fact, but you've got to keep it in perspective... I got an email yesterday that gave me that perspective.

Why do I do what I do?  For the payoff, my friends.  What type of payoff, you ask?  For me, it's the payoff that says I was part of getting something right that lots of others would struggle to see.

Case in point - I got an email yesterday from an Account Executive I was involved in hiring a while back.  While the AE had some background in sales, he had no industry experience and would have been considered a risky hire by most.   The AE in question shot me a note of thanks yesterday, saying that not only did he reach quota for the year, but he blew up the prior all-time high by about 50% (my math, not his).  The quota all the AE's had repeatedly bitched about (A million dollars?  There's no way an AE at this company can get that...NO WAY!!) had been achieved by a mere mortal.

A mere mortal with off the charts persistence and the skin of a rhino.

He emailed me to say thanks for giving him the chance to prove in to the role.  At the time he was interviewing, we had a change in sales leadership, so he was in a state of flux for about 3-4 weeks.  The dude called me every day for three weeks to check in.  I told him I was fine with him checking in, and he continued to do it - EVERY DAY.  Lots of days I didn't pick up.  He kept calling.  He wanted the job, and the behavior was exactly what we needed in the role.

The new VP of Sales started in his role.  I pushed the candidate to him and told him about the behavioral traits.  I gave him a nickname so the VP of Sales would have an emotional attachment.  That nickname was "floorburn", because I told my Sales leader that on a team of 10, there was room for an experiment with no industry experience, and this candidate was that guy:  a guy who might not have the pedigree, but would out-hustle and out-work those around him.  The VP of Sales smiled and said he'd take the interview even though the background wasn't what he really desired.  

He came back from the interview and made an offer.

My candidate accepted in under 1 second.  The rest, as they say is history.

Looking back, I didn't do anything special. I valued and pitched what could make the AE great, but the special traits were his, not mine.  I kept an open mind and made a placement that made a difference. That's my job, and I'm OK at it.

But being involved in that kind of story and getting that email from the AE?  Priceless.  That's why I'm in the game.

One million dollars in recurring revenue.  Many said it couldn't be done.  A non-traditional candidate nicknamed "floorburn" delivered it.

Keep an open mind out there.

Albert Pujols and the Art of the Counter-Offer: It All Comes Down to Replacement Cost for the Same Performance...

I'm from Missouri and a St. Louis pro sports fan.  In case you missed it, Cardinal great (pro baseball) Albert Pujols has left the Cardinals at the age of 32, signing a 10 year deal worth $254 Million with the Los Angeles Angels.

The reaction out of St. Louis is disappointment, but with a hat tip toward the realization that matching that offer would have been a suckers play.

It's a much different reaction than what happened in Cleveland when Lebron James opted to "take his talents to South Beach".  The reaction should be different, because the situations are dramatically different.

It all comes down to replacement cost, your brand and the profitability line.

Lebron James was a mega-star in a superstar-driven league.  The Cleveland Cavaliers couldn't replace him if he left.  Cleveland as a sports town is a wasteland, a place where no free agent wants to dwell.  Lose Lebron in Cleveland, you're not getting back to the top.  Ever.

The Cardinal franchise is something entirely different.  Lots of world championships before Pujols arrived.  A great baseballl town and region where veterans want to play to bask in fan support all summer long.

Baseball is a sport where you need 20 contributors, and no one player can domineer the action - unlike basketball.

What would you do if Ed in Accounting told you he wouldn't be back in 2012 unless you gave him a 3 year deal giving him a annual 60% bump in comp?

Hit the bricks, Ed.  You're replaceable.

What about Stan, your top sales pro?  He's not coming back in 2012 unless you double his total comp and guarantee it for 4 years.  He's a great revenue producer, careful....

You've got 4 other reps that are near quota.  Stan's great, but you lose money on that comp structure.  Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out, Stan.

Countering the star comes down to 3 things:

1.  What's the total comp point where the revenue/performance the star provides goes into the red?

2.  How strong is your organization?  Can you recruit good talent in to replace the star?  Is your brand good enough where others want to work for you?

3.  Is there anyone else that can come close to doing what the star does?

Cleveland had no other options, thus the total freak out when Lebron left.  St. Louis is pretty quiet in comparson the day after Albert took his talents to SoCal.

Is your organization like the Cavs or Cardinal nation?

Ask The HR Capitalist: How Do I Get the Money I Want During the Offer Process?

A question older than time.  Cavemen once wondered how to get more food and fire for themselves and the mob they called a family back at the home cave.   The tradition continues:

"Kris, 

I just completed the interview process and am eagerly awaiting a a job offer. I have a question regarding how this process works from the HR perspective. At my current position my salary has been stagnant over the last three years due to economy, not performance. How can I approach this offer, so I can negotiate the highest salary possible, while not coming off as a money hungry ingrate."

 

I will folllow up with you next week to discuss my progress.

 

Thank you again,

Ricky

----------------------------

Hi Ricky - 

A lot of what you can expect at this point in the offer process depends on what's happened before you got to the offer.  Did the recruiter/manager/HR pro do any of the following things?

 

-Ask you in detail your current salary?

-Ask you what it would take from that point for you to make a move?

-Give you a number range in which a prospective offer would likely come in at, and ask you to commit to whether you would accept an offer in that range?

If they did all of that, you don't have a lot of wiggle room.  You've been closed by an effective negotiator before you started negotiating.   However, if none of this happened, you've got wiggle room galore.  If none of the above happened, you can take the offer and counter offer by saying, "I really want to work for you and your company.  In order to feel great about the move I'm making, I need $xx,xxx.  Can you help me get there or close to that?".  

Important ending to that - ask for help.  Don't be a ##$ or be stiff as a board.

Only you know the vibe from the company who you're talking to, so proceed, but know this - no one gets more who doesn't ask for more.  It's rare that a company will pull an offer for you countering, but also know this - if you ask for more and say you need it, you're going to look weak by simply accepting if they hold steady at what they originally offered.  But you can always do that.

Get a talking track that sounds like you similar to what I've outlined if the recruiter/manager hasn't pre-qualified you via the bullets I laid out above.  Be natural and ask for something, knowing that you'll accept the mid-point between the offer and your counter.

Good luck Ricky-Bobby.  Remember, if you ain't first, you're last.

Why I Like Candidates Who Have Worked In Hell...

Dateline: Interstate 20, en-route from Birmingham to Atlanta.

Spotted:  Sign for the Exit to Anniston/Oxford.

Memory Triggered:  When a credible candidate has worked in an absolute hell-hole where no one likes them, their organization or what they represent, guess what?  They're probably going to kick #$$ in your company, because your piddly little troubles and drama actually look appealing to them.   They're battle tested. They've been in the depths of hell, and your company's not hell - it's just El Paso in the summer.

Background: I used to be a Regional VP for Charter Communications, a major cable company that was founded by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.  No one likes the cable company, and for candidates who have to work in jobs interacting with the public in a cable company, they need to prepare for....the venom.  Wearing the company shirt in the grocery store?  You're going to hear about the unburied cable drop or the terrible service story.  Comes with the territory.

It just so happened that I had to hire a peer on the leadership team to be our Director of Government Relations (PR, city councils, etc.).  After a long search, I found our candidate - a guy who had actually been the PR director for a chemical weapons incinerator in Anniston, AL.  Think about that for a second - a facility near a heavily populated area that was charged with destroying a stockpile of chemical weapons over time.  If a small cloud comes out of that facility, it probably kills 1,000 people.  In your backyard.  My candidate's job was to tell everyone it was going to work out.  To position the potential death facility as a jobs creator.

Wow.  Anyway, the selling point of the candidate during the process was that "if I can take the heat required to calm people down related to mustard gas and other crazy weapons that do god knows what in their backyard, I can probably calm people down about cable".

Working in hell creates transferable skills.  And if you see a yellow cloud emerge from the factory, please get in your car and turn on the air conditioner.  That should take care of it.

DOWNLOAD: The 7 Biggest Lies in Recruiting (And how to use them for good, not evil)...

White lies, tall tales, and whoppers. We've all had a hand in stretching the truth from time to time. Think the world of recruiting doesn't have lies? Think about these statements: "We've decided to go in a different direction." "We believe in work/life balance." "Social media will change everything in recruiting." Um, yeah...

It's not that recruiters set out to lie, but we're trapped by a nasty cocktail of tradition, risk management and doing what's easy and expected. As a result, your average American recruiter is an enabler of a recruiting process that's built on a consistent set of fabrications. Kind of like the Demi Moore/Ashton Kutcher marriage.

We're going to tell you how to turn those lies to your advantage. I did a whitepaper over at Kinetix (my company) called "Stop the Spin! The 7 Biggest Lies in Recruiting", which includes the following:

1. A breakdown of the biggest lies as told in recruiting today. We gave you three of them above. There's more. Tell us what we missed and we'll update our list of lies. Maybe we'll even create a lie-wiki.

2. How you can use those lies to make your recruiting brand look great. Everyone's using the same lies to some  extent. We think you can stand out in the crowd by...wait for it...telling the truth like the friend who always shoots straight. We'll tell you how, lie by lie.

3. A primer on how Pearl Jam, The Steve Miller Band and Public Enemy illustrate the lies. Let's have some fun by figuring out how Eddie Vedder and Flavor Flav would coach the average American recruiter. 

So, what's it going to be? Are you going to embrace the truth while building a stronger recruiting brand and candidate experience, or continue to look like everyone else?

It's interesting stuff, so if you want to read more, go get the whitepaper here (registration required). Not a sales pitch, just interesting reading and a great way to think about the lies when you hear them - and you hear them every...single...day.  I wrote it, so if you like what you get here, you'll like the whitepaper...

If you find registration for content personally appalling, I don't even know who you are anymore.... Just kidding, just email me or hit me in the comments if you're hiding from the authorities and are naturally suspicious, and I'll send you the PDF...

"We Would Love You to Apply".... Now Killing Talent Acquisition at an Industry Battleship Near You...

I was having a conversation with a high potential candidate last week, and she proceeded to tell me about a recent connection with a recruiter.  This candidate is bored, and "gettable" for the right company that can help her interrupt the career pattern she's in.  

She's reached the expiration date of her shelf life in her current gig.  She either reinvents herself at her current company (made difficult by layers above her and a lot of specialization in her shop) or she moves on.   The expiration date sounds like it was 2 months ago.

The candidate's not an active candidate yet, but she gets calls.  She recently returned a call from a big local company and had a nice conversation with a recruiter - a phone interview.

At the end of the call, which had gone well, the recruiter proceeded to say seven words that are like poison for a high potential candidate.

"We would love for you to apply"...

Here's what goes through the high potential candidate's mind when she hears those words from a big company with lots of red tape.  "Really?  You called me and I just gave you 30-45 minutes of my day.  All you have for me at the end of the call, with your interest level high, is "we would love for you to apply"?

I know, I know.  You're a big company, and you've been instructed that you have to follow the process.  Lawsuits on the radar screen.  Definition of an applicant is important.  Shiz has to happen before you can move to the next step.  All valid points.

But, what's not valid is the laziness of your recruiters in how they deliver that message.  "We would love for you to apply" takes the high potential candidate back to feeling average.  Back to feeling like your company is average.  And your recruiter says it so much and is so used to average talent wanting so desperately to work for your big company brand.... that they say it to the stars - the talent you really, really want.

And the stars, being stars, expect better treatment.  So they walk.  They never apply.

The right response at the moment of truth for your recruiters?  An explanation of why the process is what it is.  An acknowledgement to the stars that the whole thing is crazy.  An offer to help any way you can as a recruiter, and a promise to expedite once the candidate does "apply".

Anything to make them feel something other than normal when you say those seven words.

Big companies with lots of red tape - I'm talking to you.  You know who you are.  You can be better than that.

Non-Competes: You're a Sucker If You Don't Think They Apply To HR

So you locked down your sales team and the techies who drive the value of your intellectual property (IP) with a solid, enforcable non-compete executed at the time of hire.  Sure they balk and complain, but you get most of those signed.  Congrads, smart move.

What's that?  You're glad you don't have to do the same with your HR team?  Really?  You don't have your HR Managers, Director and VPs and all your recruiters locked in to a non-compete?

You're either a sucker or rationalizing to avoid the conflict.  Of course, your top HR talent and anyone who recruits should have to sign a fair non-compete.

Think about it - we're talking a narrowly drawn non-compete.  Your top HR team members (I say manager and up) and anyone who recruits should have to sign one.  We're not preventing them from working by signing the non-complete, we're simply agreeing that they won't take all the training, contacts and candidates that they've cultivated during their time with you to your most direct competitors.

A narrowly drawn non-complete doesn't mean HR pros can't find work.  If fact, the HR game is one of the best in terms of its talent being able to cross industries and work.  That "career portability" means your HR team can sign a non-complete that's properly drawn (example - we're a software company and you can't go to work for another software company in our city/industry or that recruits developers proficent in the same programming language as our company) and find work pretty easily if they're talented in the HR game.

Why wouldn't you ask them to sign a fair non-compete?  Because you either don't think they're talented enough to get the same job with your top industry competitor, or you don't want the drama of walking them through it and requiring it.

Either scenario sounds dicey to me.  

Draft the non-compete and put it in front of them.  Explain the narrow parameters and require them to sign it.  You'll be happy you did somewhere down the line.