Beyond the Resume and CV: is recruiting via web 2.0 that different?

BMany people in the recruiting and HR world are talking about recruitment 2.0. These people are those in that world who are totally web aware, and probably have a blog – so no wonder why I am writing about this phenomenon!

But, is recruitment web 2.0 style really any different to recruiting properly? In my personal opinion – NO!

Recruiting web 2.0 style is seen as a free flow of information between candidates and employers – there by cutting out the recruiters – where by employers find passive candidates through use of amazing tools and online social networking; while candidates find hidden opportunities in amazing employers.

Well, here’s a shock. Great companies have always hired for talent – they may not have had a position, but they do have systems which recognise talent, and they have captured it. For example, until 1998, who had ever heard of the UK Secret Service MI5 recruiting? Why did they have to do this – because the European Union in effect forced them to do it through legislation, plus not all situations required a while male Oxbridge graduate: in fact in certain situations, it was a hindrance to your future prospects of breathing. The UK Secret Service had to diversify their recruiting channels, and advertising when you are perceived as a wholly white male Oxbridge bastion can help to change potential recruit’s perceptions – they could widen the net, and get better quality candidates for new situations

What still shocks me today, is that much as though web 2.0 proponents suggest it brings freedom and a far lower cost process of recruiting to the employer, most employers still don’t use their own two greatest tools of cheapest cost recruiting and retention: their own brand, and their own workforce. The issue any recruiter has to deal with is not just skill competency of any candidate, but also social fit within an employer. Most honest recruiters will accept that even the best at this only get around 50% of placement right on the social fit measure: it is hence why the head hunters always put more than one candidate forward; while the bottom end and high street will put more than 10 forward because there’s bound to be one that fits in there somewhere! If you were employer, and were looking to expand your team of nuclear fission research scientists, where would you go to find more of them? Most employers send out an advert or pay a recruiter, where as less than 1 in 10 employers speaks to and incentives their existing people – who know the social fit of the company better than any external resource could ever – and who probably just flick through their own diary to earn a fee of less than 10% a half competent recruiter would charge. Who needs Facebook or LinkedIn when you have a workforce?

One thing web 2.0 can do is reduce the time to recruit, and the efficiency of that process. Aaron Strout, Vice President of New Media at Mzinga.com correctly points out that web 2.0 recruiting means that an employer can get a far, far better rounded view of any employee. Web 2.0 cuts out the need to contact them, bring them in and interview, and then ask for references: they have already given you the references thanks to their open social networks profiles. In fact, one of the things I have suggested to many candidates when they decide that they want to find a new job, is to firstly clean up their social networking profile, and then secondly increase that profile by changing a few key words and taking some simple actions. Hence, any candidates you do invite in for interview via a web 2.0 process search are hence more likely to have social fit, and be able to be offered a job – but I still think, that process still won’t be perfect, just better.

One thing Strout has asked his candidates to undertake for the companies new Citizen Marketer post is not to send him a CV or Resume, but to blog and socially network with him and others to get an interview. Is this a web 2.0 tactic or strategy? In this case it is not, it is a test posing as a web 2.0 cutting edge development. Simply, if you want to hire an X, you need to test during interview and assessment for the core competencies that an X would need. A Citizen Marketer apparently needs to be able to use web 2.0 tools such as social networking and blogging to satisfy Mzinga’s client’s requirements – this application process merely tests for those skills. A business acquaintance who runs a private dining catering company asks all new potential employee’s to peel a potato (its not a test about peeling potato’s, it is a test about cleanliness); while in BT and many other telecoms companies, field workers are asked to pick out certain copper cable colours from a piece of cable (it is a test of eye sight and colour blindness). They, like the blogging test set by Strout, are all just tests to test core competencies of the potential employees against a defined role.

Web 2.0 as a technology does offer more – its offers both candidates and employers the opportunity to access a wider network of opportunity: and that’s good for all, as long as you make sure your online reputation is in order first, and continually updated. Is it the answer to every HR teams recruiting question – no, probably not. For employers, using a better employment process and focusing on improvement of a talent management system will still bring the best results, which web 2.0 can bring new tools to – and that’s all folks!

Good Luck!

Remember, even in the credit crunch, there are still Births, Deaths, Marriages – and SEX!

It’s tough times now, and it is going to be even tougher times ahead in 2009 – I think we are close enough now for me to be able to write that. Many people are losing their jobs, and those who are unemployed can’t find jobs – so what hope is there?

Last week, there was a lot of bad economic data either side of the Atlantic, even after Barack Obama became President elect:

• Car sales down a record 26% to a 20 year low. The big three are hurting, and GM has said it will run out of cash in early 2009
• House sales down a further 20%, effectively now down 48% in the UK from just two years ago
• Retail sales down 12%
• Unemployment at five year highs, and heading higher

But please note – although the figures are DOWN, they are not ZERO. Why is this? Let’s take a simple scenario:

Young man on a rare night out that he can afford meets a young lady, takes her back to his place and ….. nine months later, after getting married and buying a family car, they welcome a child. His apartment now won’t suit their needs, and nor will hers, so they need a house. Houses require mortgages, and after doing a deal with both fathers on a 20% deposit, he needs a better job to pay for it while she will do some part-time work from home for the next 12months – or perhaps she employs a nanny? The house needs decorating…

One thing that is always constant, whether we like it or not, is the fact we are time-limited biological life forms on this earth. You can check this out by reading your local BDM column – it might be shrinking a bit now in the M section, but B and D are still at pretty much the same level they were last year.

These life forms are also emotional, made up of complex calculations and mixtures of chemicals which play a huge part in the micro-second calculations we each make to stay alive on this planet – including the answer to the immortal question of time, life and the universe of “do you want fries with that?”

This is because every one of them needs energy, and hence has to eat, drink, sleep – you can check this one out at the local supermarket: I still see people buying food. And every so often, because no man can be an island from his fellow man – and certainly no lady can resist the odd bit of male company, accepting that shirt doesn’t match his trousers – we all need to get merry with a few other people out there.

And every so often, when people on the odd occasion make a single mistake, they need new cars. And even if they don’t know they need a new one, the old one is also time limited through a form chemical interaction between iron and oxygen which is as old as the earth itself.

So, why are the economic figures not zero? Because life carries on – check BDM, check the supermarket, check that the sun goes up and down, and the moon comes out: life carries on.

So if life carries on, are people still being hired – Ah, YES! Why – do I have to explain BDM again? And now your question is – and how do I make myself one of those people?

Honestly, its simple – and here’s the answer: realise who you are, what your skills are, what you like and could do even if it means doing something different from what you are doing now; and then get a PLAN and IMPLENT IT.

If you have a plan and a goal, and the gumption to stick to it, something inside you picks up and wham – you ace the interview. If you don’t have a plan or know what you want to do, then you need the world’s largest economic boom to stand a chance of being employed at all.

And the amazing thing is – you don’t need to be great to get employed right now, just focused and resultantly enthusiastic; about the job, and the employer:

• If you just did 15minutes of investigation of the employer you are about to apply for a job to, your chances of getting the job would rise by 25%
• If you rang to enquire about the job before applying, your chances would rise by 50%
• And if you re-read the night before just the stuff you printed off of the computer before the day of the interview, and prepared six questions about the employer and the job, your chances of getting the job would rise by 100%.

You have just trebled your chance of getting employed, and all it took was an economic down turn to learn how to do.

Still, even now that I have told you that, I bet there’s a 66% chance you won’t change and hence do it. I know that, because I do read the BDM column and I am still interviewing candidates on a weekly basis – and both tell me that probable outcome.

So, stop reading and take some action – life is still going on, people are still getting hired.

Good Luck!

What Percentage of Job Opportunities Are Listed Online?

Steve asks: What Percentage of Job Opportunities Are Listed Online? I was asked this question in a session recently in my role as the President of PerfectJob Software, "What percentage of jobs are listed on the online job boards." I gave an answer, but wasn't comfortable that I really knew. So I went and did a little research, and I'm actually now less sure I really know. What do you think?

In answer:
I will answer from a UK perspective, as that is the data I know best.

It is difficult to get whole of market data. You can count vacancies at online job boards and newspapers, but little data exists for internal hires outside that issued by a publicly listed company when it makes a required financial announcement.

From the 2005 Office of National Statistics triennial employment survey, there were 650,000 vacancies in a workforce of 28million, with 30million possible active posts - ie: the UK was under resourced, and resultantly wage rates were rising. This would suggest an average job turnover rate of 46 years!

A more likely level for employee job turnover is around 5years in the average job, making 6million vacancies per annum. Of those, at the time around 1million were posted online (including companies own job board), while 1.5million were in newpapers and print media: today local newspaper advertising is still equal or greater in volume than online, purely from the fact that not every company has a website. The other 3.5million could be split at around 3million internally filled vacancies; and around 500,000 are never posted - about the scale of the head hunter market.

The old recruiters theory was that about one third of vacancies were known (ie - advertisied), one third could be spotted (ie - internal); and one third were secret. This data seems to support that old adage to an extent, accepting the volume of data one has access to these days thanks to the internet.

I think as the market develops further, we will see a greater volume in online jobs boards - its cheaper and it widens the net from a geographic and skill view point. But not every vacancy will ever be online. It doesn't need to be, when at least one of your potential successors should already be sat in your own team if you are doing - if you are doing your own job correctly.

The more interesting question for the online jobs sector is - how many employees are now online, and can be given a quiet tap on a shoulder to increase the size of the passive candidate market? I don't think advertising of the vacancy then is the question, but finding of the talent. Any increase in employee turnover/resultant reduction in average time in job will be far more fiscally damaging to employers than the potential gains of cheaper costs of hiring.

If the CV/Resume is a sales document, then it surely must be OK to lie?

The hardest thing for any new or returning job applicant (also called a candidate), to recognise, is the strange world we recruitment people live in – that is both recruiters and HR professionals.

Firstly, we talk a strange language – a simple one, but a strange one. We also live in a world of words, but have cold and often formal handshakes – it’s a legislative thing, and we have to be equal in our manner to be neutral in our recommendations to the hiring manager. As a result, we are often the most liberal and open minded types, and horribly PC in our work. On the downside, we are a scheming bunch of so-and-so’s, so that when we talk to you on the phone or meet you for an interview, we regularly throw what to you seem like curved balls to annoy you and get you upset (Note: yep, that is the purpose on some occasions, but certainly not always – we are human being who are just trying to get at the real you and your potential.)

One early aspect all job seekers must pick up on, is that the CV/Resume is a sales document, and NOT a school-like list of everything you have ever done or achieved.

Now, many don’t relate sales with the truth. They think sales means that if they were a character actor, it would mean slipping on a 110% polyester suit, a pair of plastic brogues, and a silk tie; then getting in a far too flash car with chrome wheels, driving to a second hand car lot and lying their heads off.

So, here is why a CV/Resume is a sales document, and the type of sales document it is. Imagine you are a hiring manager, and you need a new member of staff. You approach the HR manager, and they ask you for a description (in the trade, that’s called a Job Description). Much as though you majored in art in college, you can’t draw to save your life – so the only way to describe the job is to create a 3D template in which the ideal candidate will fit.

Please note that I didn’t use the word mould, because moulds are like templates in many aspects but one – you pour liquids in which then set into a mould, while templates judge fit around solid shaped objects.

Hence, think of you and your skills (with evidence of delivery along a track record, we call those Competencies), as a lump of stone. You could carve that stone in many ways to many shapes, but if you just stand back a foot or two (the role of the mentor or coach), there are some clear and obvious things into which you could carve it. Now, it would be great if the employer gave you the applicant the template they were using, but they don’t – they give you an advert, which is like a pour quality paper version of a steel template. The CV/Resume hence takes the basic stone (you), and the basic paper template, and added with a few trade tricks carves the stone to fit the paper template.

In the employers mind, if you can’t fit the paper advert and its wide tolerances, you won’t fit the final steel Job Description – and if they really wanted a granite finish over an alabaster, well forget it!

You may think: well hang on, all I have to do is add a few bits and pieces here, and carve out a bit more there, and I will get an interview. Possibly is the answer. But those attached pieces and the incorrect carving of the stone will stick out like blue-tac added after thoughts to the classic Venus de Milo in interview.

What about the under qualified? Not enough stone in the right places to fill the template shape. And what about over qualified? Well, from the employers view point, they will be questioning the wasted stone lying around the carved result.

So the CV/Resume takes hard facts – the stone – and turns them into a shape which fits the adverts template. You can’t take things and add them because they will stick out; and you can’t understate competencies just to make you look like a better fit – the question will be why?

OK, so now that you know what a CV/Resume is, what is a Cover Letter? Think of the Cover Letter as a set of high lights, which with warmth light up the carved stone. They show the employer that the key issues of their requirements are met, and that they should proceed with the process of trying fit with the template. Hence, if you don’t attach a Cover Letter, then really it’s like turning the lights out on your job application.

Next, we can cover interview technique as a dance – I told you recruitment was a strange world!

Why do companies not follow-up after conducting an interview?

Ari asks: Why do companies not follow-up after conducting an interview? I notice a job ad, pitch myself to the employer, am asked to come in to their office for an interview, meet with senior managers, and am told I will receive a follow-up call or email in x number of days. Time passes without a response. I wait another week for good measure and call/email my interviewer or their assistant to inquire and 9 times out of 10 I never receive a response. I can cite numerous examples of this corporate behavior and I don't understand why. If *I* pitch *you* and you respond to me, that indicates I exhibit enough interest to warrant an hour out of your schedule to meet with me. Then you don't respond. I don't get it. On the extreme, I was invited to meet with a firm last year THREE TIMES and was never told the outcome nor was responded to when I asked for a status. Thoughts?

In answer:
Simply, its horribly unprofessional on behalf of the hiring company. Under EU law, there could be a case for legal duress, so most HR managers are on top of this. But in North America and other parts of the world where there is not so much focus on HR and Human Rights law, then such incidents can be common.

A professional would always close out - how ever badly the interview went, and even if it was clearly obvious to all in the room at the time that it was a "Don't call us, we'll call you" opportunity. Plus, a candidate deserves feedback on an interview, and how they can improve/apply more relevantly next time.

I would change your approach in one area, and review your performance in another. Firstly, the way you describe this situation it seems to be happening very often - so if after the stated time period you have heard nothing, go back with "Look, I am assuming I haven't got the position, but would appreciate your feed back on my application and interview performance." That's a far, far softer approach than a "have I got the job or not" question, and would allow even a wholly negative reaction to be delivered.

Secondly, I would review your choice of posts applied for, or your interview performance. Ask a friend before you apply for any new positions to check your application through for errors; if they think its appropriate and OK, then its probably your interview experience which needs a bit of buffing, so again ask a friend who has been a hiring manager to give you a mock interview, or take some training. Once you have learnt the skills, the situation should not repeat.

Good Luck!

What is the best answer when responding to salary requirements for a job?

Barbara asks: This is really puzzling to me as I know what I am worth, I know my work ethic and I know what I need to survive. It is a bit uncomfortable when applying for a position and they request salary requirement. I always put a large enough range stating I am willing to discuss the salary as it is negotiable yet, nothing happens. When asked during the interview what my present salary is, I don't like to say as I am asking more, $5-$10K more than I am making. I took close to $5K less at the job I am at now because I needed a job. Any suggestions on what to do?

In answer:
I just talked a very good friend through this one, so happy to help!

First step - set a minimum on a budget you know you can live off of. Don't apply for jobs where the package is less than that.

Secondly, you will be asked your currently salary at some point - so be honest with the recruiter, and at the point where the employer is considering a job offer ONLY IF THEY ASK! To no one else and no sooner. If your requirements are greater than your current salary, say why you are moving and why your requirements are greater.

Each job is worth X to each employer/market, and that salary range and some package details should be included in the advert - if it is not, ask the question before any form of formalised interview. Where you get a bland answer, don't go any further with the application - to make sure it meets your minimum. Also, undertake some research into similar jobs with different employers - get a feel for what the market price is, and hence know that:

(a) what your minimum is achievable
(b) what the employer is offering is reasonable - ie you are not under paid

In the interview, when asked the question, now simply say: "Well, it is above the minimum I require for my life style, and the stated range seems reasonable but low when compared to the market. I am looking for a whole package, and that from what has been stated to me seems that we can reach an agreement." And then stop! If they ask what the numbers are, just repeat their own advert or as stated in telephone call numbers back to them, and again says "...and that from what has been stated to me seems that we can reach an agreement." If they press again, say "Look, I think we can reach an agreement if the level is as stated, but I would have to review the whole offer that includes salary as part of a package in a written contract form before I could make a final decision."

This way you don't state a number, but are saying that you like them, and if they like you and make you an offer in their stated range, you would highly consider it. In others words, for the sake of saying a number you don't exclude yourself from an offer letter, and show willing but not soft.

This strategy allows for the inevitable "job description creep" in interview of "Oh, we didn't realise you had that skill, so may be we could use that/deploy it" which means you end up doing a bigger job for less pay. It could also mean you play one part of the package later against another - OK, not as much base but better OTE; a better car; more healthcare, etc.

Only you know what's the right salary and package for you, but there are good ways around getting job offers and possibly employed without falling into the pit of stating a number.

Good Luck!
.............................................
Ian,

You are an angel! I thank you so much for going through all you did to help me secure a good response. Please extend my sincere thanks to your friend, I appreciate all your help.

Regards,

Barbara

Why are candidates asked to "list main weaknesses"?

Jane asks: Why are candidates asked to "list main weaknesses"? The question itself is intimidating, instantly puts people on the defensive, and encourages people to lie. Has anybody ever revealed a serious weakness in response to the "weaknesses" question, that was hidden throughout the rest of the interview? It seems that asking people "What are you most proud of" gets more or less the same info - what people struggle with most is usually their weakness - but keeps the tone positive.

In answer:
The question is not meant to be intimidating or place the candidate on the offensive. The question is to assess how honest or self-aware the candidate is of their weeknesses or improvement needs. When asked this most people try to be genuine and it is the type of question that can make you think. Whatever the answer you will gain insight into how the person thinks and that can only be helpful in the assessment process.

Firstly, it allows the interviewer to discover additional weaknesses either in the weakness itself or in the way the weakness is conveyed to the interviewer. So it is not just the weakness itself that is an issue, but how this is conveyed: ie - is it done professionally or reframed appropriately, etc.? This can help the interviews understand who socially aware and groomed a candidate is. Second, it also give the interviewer some insight into how the candidate thinks about his/her weaknesses. What do they consider a weakness? Why do they consider it a weakness?

The candidate who responds "none" is not being honest with the interviewer or themselves. The way most people will answer this question is to turn it into a positive, for example "I'm a perfectionist, I need to review all the details and ensure what I am presenting is the best". This is a way to put a positive twist (which most interviewers are aware of), a good interviewer will dig deeper to determine if this gets in the way of doing their job.

How do I align myself with a recruiter or firm to best market my skills?

Milton asks: How do I align myself with a recruiter or firm to best market my skills? As the casualty of the economic downturn in the technology sector, I have found myself on the job market. I'm actually excited at the prospect of changing fields, and want to continue using my strengths as a talent developer, coach and strategist for organizational design. There appear to be a lot of recruiters in my market, and it is a daunting task to know where to begin. Are there any thoughts, advice or real-life experiences that anyone can share to help me find clarity?

In answer:
You need a strategy which encapsulates the ability to be found. Now that's not hard, but the question is - do you know what you want to do next (in terms of skills development or extension), and do you know what the market needs?

Start with talking to a few friends who have recently (in the past 12months ideally), found new jobs, and ask how they did it? More often than not, employees are now being found more directly by employers over indirectly via recruiters; but employers now use third party vetting services (ie - fixed fee recruiters who check applicants out), so the process has not really changed just shifted. Your friends should be able to recommend both employers, resume and job finding sites, and reliable recruiters they trust - and those are your three routes to being found and hence employed.

A good recruiter, who focuses on your sector (that's always rule one) should:
- be honest about you, your skills and ambitions
- say where they think you could be best employed: which might not fit with your view, but at least hear them out - they get paid to do this daily
- be honest about the opportunities they have on their books that fit your skills: the norm is to say "Yes, we have a job that will exactly suit you" but the honest one's will be honest and give it as it is
- be able to tell you how much their company and they individually will gte paid: avoid any who take a fee from the employer up front of more than 20%
- re write your CV/Resume
- be communicative in terms of progress of opportunity
- be wanting and able to meet you at least once during the process!

And finally through the whole process, you should once they place you be able to keep in contact and know when you are looking for your next post be able to go back to a professional.

If you work with a recruiter alongside doing your own direct tactical applications to employers, be sure to keep that activity focused in the same market area (ie - IT/electronics), and be communicative. Try not to register with more than one recruiter, and NEVER go direct to the employers they tell you they know and will put you forward on - you'll lose the job, is the outcome!

Good recruiters know the market, can asses you and will work with you to get a job; and its not all their effort and you just sit back, work with them. A good recruiter should be able to get you placed better, quicker if the job is done right.

Good Luck!