Diversity in Global Business: How Business Schools Can Prepare Future Leaders

Diversity in Global Business: How Business Schools Can Prepare Future Leaders

by Oliver Ashby | Diversity Executive

As business continues to evolve following the recession, it's becoming more and more apparent that having an international presence and acceptance of diversity are imperative. Research and labor statistics indicate a continual increase in the general recruitment of women and racial and ethnic minorities: Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that 68.3 percent of entrants into the labor force from 2006 to 2016 will be people of color and women. As such, diversity, both in terms of nationality and professional background, plays a key role in the makeup of a business school education.

By instilling in students the importance of diversity, business schools are ensuring that future leaders are confident and able to lead and succeed in every environment, be it finance in New York, consulting in Europe, manufacturing in China or startups in Latin America. After graduating, students apply their respect for diversity and global presence to their corporate culture, spreading the value of a multicultural workforce.

At London Business School, for example, the current first-year MBA class has more than 400 students, 91 percent of whom come from outside the UK., representing 62 nationalities.

By offering truly global classes, business schools can create environments where students share experiences from different parts of the world, instilling within them a well-rounded global management perspective. In light of the proliferation of global business and our increasingly flat world, this perspective is critical for future business leaders, who will see far more opportunities and requirements to work on a much more interconnected global stage. Today, companies ranging from General Mills and Deutsche Bank to The Boston Consulting Group and LexisNexis International seek employees who understand the global marketplace and bring a unique worldview to their companies. Having a diverse background is now a core quality that job candidates must exude when applying for jobs in all industries.

So, to foster collaboration and encourage diverse groups of students to work together, business schools throughout the world are putting programs in place to ensure students graduate with a holistic and diverse education. MBA study groups at London Business School, for example, are designed to combine six or seven individuals from different nationalities and backgrounds. A real-life case: One of this year's groups is composed of a banker from Brazil; a corporate development director from the U.K.; a management consultant from Italy; a captain from the U.S. Army; a financial controller from the Ukraine; and a helicopter pilot from the Middle East.

These diverse groups take a wide range of core courses together, using each other's skills to enhance their development. Often, feedback from students indicates that they gain almost as much from their fellow study group members as they do from faculty. This unique approach to encouraging diversity gives students the opportunity to work closely with peers from nationalities they may not have been familiar with before starting business school - ultimately giving students an advantage in their careers.

However, diversity isn't as simple as grouping together just anyone with different nationalities or cultural backgrounds. It's about building a team with assorted thoughts and beliefs that, when combined, will help create a more comprehensive solution to growing global business issues. By also incorporating a globally diverse faculty into the mix, business schools can ensure students are being exposed to a variety of cultures and business backgrounds during their studies. For example, at London Business School, the 99 faculty members come from more than 20 countries. The school's 30,000 alumni represent more than 100 countries - another diverse pool of resources that students are exposed to.

By giving MBA students an international experience, business schools can help prepare future business leaders for what is becoming a truly global and interconnected workplace. How are you incorporating diversity into your work? What gains have you or your organization made as a result?

[About the Author: Oliver Ashby is the business development manager for London Business School.]

Creating Leaders in a Volatile Industry

Creating Leaders in a Volatile Industry

by Frank Lloyd | Chief Learning Officer

Increased competition, stiffer regulation, globalization, shifting alliances, mergers and acquisitions, retiring baby boomers, and an increasing number of stakeholders - among other factors - mandate that energy companies have skilled leaders to thrive in today's volatile and complex industry environment. Consequently, an effective leadership development strategy is essential to survival and prosperity.

Pioneer Natural Resources, headquartered in Dallas, is a large independent oil and gas exploration and production company with operations in the U.S., South Africa and Tunisia with more than 1,900 employees.

More than five years ago, senior management at the company recognized that industry challenges would demand a new generation of leaders. They first needed to create alignment and integration within the current management group, formed from the legacy companies that came together as Pioneer. The company was formed through the 1997 merger of Parker & Parsley Petroleum Co. and MESA Inc. Then, in September 2004, Pioneer merged with Evergreen Resources Inc., creating a new core area in the Rocky Mountains that enhances Pioneer's strong foundation in North America.

The challenges of the recent global economic recession prompted the need to improve employee productivity and maintain commitment. The increasing pace of change throughout this period demanded adaptability and agility at all levels of management. As the economy strengthened, an incoming wave of talent, mainly from the millennial generation, had to be integrated into the organization. This only accelerated the requirements for skilled leadership throughout the Pioneer organization.

To supplement its internal training and development resources, Pioneer turned to SMU Cox School of Business to build development options that would enhance Pioneer managers' abilities to coach and give feedback to their employees and equip them to meet industry challenges.

In the past, new managers were typically promoted from within on the basis of technical expertise, and they required development to effectively manage their teams, according to Doug Hull, senior director of HR and administration for Pioneer Natural Resources.

There were few opportunities for managers to attend training or programs where they could share experiences with managers and leaders from other parts of the company. There was no formal plan for leadership development or appropriate educational experience for individuals ready to be promoted to management and senior executive roles.

The company's senior leadership recognized that a leadership development program was necessary to:

a) Increase retention of quality employees.

b) Develop managers and elevate their skills.

c) Provide deeper understanding of the factors that drive the business.

d) Develop in-company and industry networks.

Forging a Strategic Partnership

In its partnership with SMU Cox, Pioneer adapted existing programs, including Competing Through People and Leading Tomorrow's Business, resulting in a multilayered group of leadership development programs designed to enable individuals to gain the skills and capabilities to meet industry challenges and to move through management levels to senior leadership.

"Pioneer and industry-specific information is used in order to address our folks to help them become better leaders, managers and businesspeople with an eye to our business," Hull said.

Now, the core program suite includes the Pioneer versions of Competing Through People and Leading Tomorrow's Business as well as Advanced Performance Management, a third course developed specifically for Pioneer. Those who attend the programs are nominated for participation by their managers. Initially, the programs were open only to managers with direct reports. Participation has since been expanded to include employees who may be supervising people in the near future to prepare them for their new roles.

Competing Through People provides an initial framework for leadership and focuses on people skills for first-level managers and those who will soon be managers with direct reports.

Participants in Advanced Performance Management, a continuation of Competing Through People, have in-depth discussions about real problems they face on the job. It prepares them to handle performance management issues and succession planning using Pioneer case studies and focuses on business skills for midlevel managers.

Leading Tomorrow's Business was developed to help experienced managers understand the financial measures that drive the business. By understanding this, upper-level managers can do a better job of managing their teams in a way that contributes to the company's overall performance. The program emphasizes business skills and managerial competencies to build a big-picture, cross-functional perspective. It is designed to give participants the knowledge, insight and skills needed to think and work cross-functionally in their organization.

Upper-level managers also participate in publicly offered seminars for senior executives in the oil and gas industry, as they benefit from peers in other firms sharing best practices. The highest-potential employees continue to be offered the opportunity to earn MBAs in SMU Cox's Executive MBA program, and additional targeted courses have been developed to meet specialized Pioneer needs.

For example, the recently added Pioneer Innovative Leadership of Tomorrow (PILOT) is a special program for new millennial employees, and the content focuses on team building and organizational culture. As a result of intergenerational understanding fostered through this program, senior Pioneer leaders have begun actively soliciting input from millennial employees on specific organizational issues.

A second PILOT program focused on financial understanding and business acumen is currently being conducted for this group of young technical professionals.

Changing behavior through management education was one of the Pioneer learning team's key objectives. Managers are asked to include in performance reviews how professional development attendees have demonstrated improved performance on the job.

Pioneer HR staff sends an electronic survey to participants following each class. Ratings for all classes consistently come in a 4.15 or above on a five-point scale. Comments have been positive and indicate participants returned to work with a more open attitude and a desire to discuss what they've learned with others. This has led to requests for additional development, as managers who attend these programs become aware of their development needs and those of their employees.

Key Takeaways

Pioneer's experience illustrates six best practices regarding partnership between an organization and a business school.

1. Clearly state the business case.

The Pioneer case for leadership development was rooted in the need to build alignment within the management team in the context of the accelerating changes in the energy industry. A clear business focus helps a school target its program development efforts.

2. Clearly define leadership competencies.

Clearly stated objectives result in an educational design that will achieve the desired outcomes.

3. Identify shared commitment.

Common commitment to a larger goal makes it easier for a firm to work with a school at all the levels needed to develop a successful program - sponsoring executives, training and development staff and program participants.

4. Establish institutional fit.

Find a partner with experience in the organization's industry. Institutional fit enables schools to access a broader range of resources for the client's benefit.

5. Access proven models and best practices.

Identifying a school's approach to leadership development helps tie a program to the client's business case and competency outcomes.

6. Establish a collaborative working relationship.

Pioneer found a school that was willing to listen and respond to its needs. Collaboration permits each organization to leverage the strengths of the other to create a program with lasting impact.

Pioneer Natural Resources applied these best practices and has been able to equip managers to meet the challenges of the fast-changing energy industry.

[About the Author: Frank Lloyd is associate dean at SMU Cox School of Business, Executive Education.]

What Was the Question?

What Was the Question?

by Bea Carson | Chief Learning Officer

Questions are at the heart of what drives people to learn. But in utilizing questions as part of any team-oriented dialogue, learning and development professionals should take care to make sure the right type of questions - open-ended versus closed-ended - are being used.

To understand the difference between the results achieved by asking open-ended questions versus closed-ended ones, consider this example. When someone visiting an unfamiliar place asks a friend, "Can you tell me what I should see while I'm in your city?" the answer is most often a place or a monument of some sort. But that does not actually answer the original question. If the city native has an idea of what the person should see, the correct answer would simply be yes.

In listening carefully to conversations, it becomes clear that very rarely do people pose open-ended questions. Yet, almost always, the answer is given as if an open-ended question was asked. Additionally, the person answering tends to add many unrelated, additional comments.

Meanwhile, when someone asks a closed-ended question, he or she may actually want an open-ended answer. When someone asks, "Can you tell me what I should see while I'm in your city?" the person answering understands that the person inquiring wants to see something while he or she is there, or the question wouldn't be asked. So the questioned person bypasses the actual question and jumps right to the assumed intent of the question. Not only that, but he or she tops it off with some other useful facts about the city.

If the person inquiring really wants to know what to see in the city, why didn't he or she just ask that? Perhaps it's because before the person questioning can ask what to see, he or she must first find out whether the questioned person has the information. Yet, if the person inquiring were to ask, "What should I see?" the questioned might answer with "I don't know" if he or she didn't have any suggestions.

This is not to say that open-ended questions are inherently better. Open-ended questions have a function, as do closed-ended questions. Open-ended questions are useful when learners are exploring and gathering additional information. Closed-ended questions are great when learners are trying to narrow down the focus.

Questions and Action Learning

Action learning only has two ground rules, both based around questions:

1. One can only make a statement in response to a question.

2. The action learning coach has the authority to intervene whenever there is the opportunity for learning. In explaining the first ground rule, the coach asks the participants to work hard at only answering the question they are asked. Generally, within the first couple minutes of an action learning session, someone will ask a closed-ended question and receive a verbose response. Consider the following example:

Sam: Are 10 people involved in this project?

Chris: There's the project manager, the program director, the ... .

Action learning coach: Chris, what question are you answering?

Chris: The one Sam asked.

ALC: Which was?

Chris: Who is on the project?

ALC: Sam, what was your question?

Sam: Are there 10 people on the project?

ALC: Chris, why didn't you answer that question?

Chris: I thought the other information would be useful.

ALC: If Sam wants additional information, what will Sam do?

Chris: Sam will ask for it. But Sam may not know this is important.

ALC: How can you find out if it's important to Sam?

Chris: Ask.

Answering the Question

Many people display the tendency that Chris showed in the example above: Chris decided what would be useful to Sam, which is normal. When something is important to someone, he or she becomes intent on sharing it. The danger there is that the person will stop listening to the others in the group and start focusing on his or her own need, focusing on what he or she believes is best for the team. This lack of listening means the person doesn't really care about the input from the other team members - he or she cares more about showing off how much he or she knows about the situation. It also indicates that the person doesn't trust that the other team members are smart enough to ask the right questions. When he or she gets out of his or her own head and really listens, amazing things happen.

The first phase of any action learning session focuses on clarifying the problem at hand. The tendency of most folks is to jump to a conclusion about the problem even before the problem is fully explained. They tend to have a sense that they have to be doing something to be productive at work, and taking time to understand the problem slows them down entirely too much.

People should take the time to listen to how they phrase questions. They should ask themselves, "Am I asking for the information I am seeking or using closed-ended questions?" Next, they should listen to how they answer questions and ask themselves, "Am I answering the question I was asked or expounding on it? In conversations, am I really listening to the other person or am I thinking about the brilliant tidbits I can use to show off how smart I am? Am I in my own head during conversations, or am I truly part of the conversation? What is it that makes me part of the conversation? What helps me get out of my own head so I can be an inquisitive participant in the conversation?" Such self-analysis ensures a team is having a productive dialogue.

[About the Author: Bea Carson is an action learning coach and organizational development expert.]

A Brand Called You

A Brand Called You

by Valerie Pelan | Diversity Executive

Imagine this. A woman, Tania, expected to receive the manager position for a customer project team. She finds out from her peers that someone from another group is being strongly considered for the position. Tania can't believe it; she's been working with this customer for six months. She received rave reviews on her leadership and collaboration. It doesn't make sense. The other person doesn't know anything about that customer. She wonders, "Why are they considering someone else for my job?"

Tania reacts quickly to influence key decision makers before they decide. She holds meetings to position herself as the best choice for the manager role, actively self-promoting her knowledge, expertise and effectiveness with this customer. She relays information about her track record of successes, and after several meetings, Tania receives the coveted manager position.

Thinking, "Wow, that was close!" when the dust settles, she asks herself, "What could I have done differently to inform the key people about my accomplishments with that customer?" How could another person have gotten in the running for her new position without being on that project team?

In the book In Search of Excellence, author Tom Peters talks about the benefits of empowering decision makers at multiple levels of a company, and in a 1997 Fast Company article, "The Brand Called You," he announced the arrival of the personal brand. In the article, he said, "You are a brand. You are in charge of your brand. There is no single path to success. There is no one right way to create the brand called 'You.' Accept this; start today or else!"

Branding, Not Bragging

Women in the workplace need to use their personal brands strategically to increase their visibility and to position themselves for future assignments. That means doing self-promotion, an essential skill for effective career advancement and management. The biggest misconception about self-promotion is that it's bragging. Bragging or overexaggeration about skills and accomplishments isn't smart. It will eventually backfire if a woman cannot produce the results she has aggressively stated. Instead, women should think of self-promotion as taking credit for their good work. Self-promotion uses the personal brand as a way for women to get the word out about their strengths and unique capabilities.

Women should watch and learn from peers and managers who use self-promotion well in order to increase their own career options. What do successful peers say about their triumphs? Do they use their personal brand statements to tell how they achieved results with limited resources or to explain how they contributed to the success of a team? Women need to keep the playing field competitive by self-promoting and using their personal brand statements to talk about their accomplishments and skills.

Effective careers are built on three factors: interest, possessing necessary knowledge and competencies for effective performance, and taking advantage of available opportunities. A personal brand supports all three. Opportunities are often created with preparation and self-confidence, whereas competent performance without assertive self-promotion creates a recognition vacuum. Women need to take credit for their contributions because if they do not, someone else less deserving will. Leaders should encourage women to actively participate in discussions and tell people what they are working on. Women who sit in their offices and think their work speaks for itself are missing career opportunities to self-promote, influence and network. One question that can act as a litmus test for a personal brand is: "Can a woman say that people anticipate meeting her having heard about her good work before they meet?"

In the current business environment, most managers feel the weight of e-mail saturation and meeting overload as well as conflicting agendas, changing expectations and leadership challenges. No one can expect their managers to get the word out about them. Women, in particular, need to realize it is important to self-promote and not expect others to do it for them. Discussions about career management include the Fallacy of Recognition and the Fallacy of Reward. In a nutshell, these mean that people are accountable for their own careers. Competent work needs assertive self-promotion if women want to stand out from their peers. Further, public recognition and financial reward often go hand in hand.

Making It Happen

Active self-promotion at team meetings and purposeful networking across the organization and outside the company are key activities. Successful networking is a career booster. Women can maximize their rewards by promoting themselves as good managers or corporate navigators. For example, a female manager, Sherry, had three different leaders in one year due to organizational realignments. A proactive approach to the situation was critical, so she met with each of them and used her personal brand statement in the meetings to help keep her career plan on track despite company reorganizations. She knew she'd done the right thing because when she looked at her male peers, they were all huddling together trying to figure out their next move.

Diversity executives, coaches and other leaders may be asked, "How does a personal brand support my career plan?" Essentially, women need to close any confidence gaps with positive information about their strengths and capabilities. To obtain a promotion or that key career move, leaders need to believe that a woman will be successful in that position. Also, sometimes women have an uphill battle making sure people know they are serious about their careers. A personal branding statement can eclipse these situations by helping women manage other people's perceptions.

Women need to think of their personal brands like a sales elevator speech; it's all about the value and in-demand skills they can provide. Women should pepper their brand statements with examples of unique skills, strengths and results they have achieved. Consider the following verbiage: thrives in times of organizational change; exceeded sales goals for two consecutive years; makes decisions on complex projects; collaborates across the organization; creates new, different, workable solutions; motivates others to achieve; articulates a vision or a strategy; connects the dots; works well during ambiguity. These are skills that are transferable to the next position or project. Women have to get out of their offices and network using a well-crafted statement.

Further, personal branding requires that women take an honest look at what they can achieve. Women should use "I" when speaking about themselves to build credibility and accountability. In the following example, the word "I" begins a positive and assertive statement and tells others why the woman has a competitive edge:

"Did you know that I'm working on project X? Our team of eight is making good headway identifying obstacles and designing plans to overcome them. My role is instrumental in the development of a new process to replace the outdated one. I have enjoyed working closely with the customer's team. We will have a solution and complete this phase of the project under budget and right on time."

Personal branding statements can emphasize needs a person can fulfill and position a person as available and ready to be engaged or eager to learn something new and challenging. The key is to be consistent with messages. Women need to decide what strengths they will promote and what will move their careers forward in the direction they want. Here is an example of a brand statement for a woman who wants to move back to an area where she excelled:

"Did you know that I worked in the controller's group for eight years before I took the job in product management? I was advised to round out my career and do a rotation in the product side of the company. I am looking forward to getting back to the numbers side of the company. I love working with budgets, monthly trends and forecasts. I value the experience I have had in this group, but I think it's time to move back to the financial side of the business. Who do you think I need to connect with to make that happen?"

Another way women can brand themselves is to use tag lines. These tag lines summarize skills in memorable phrases such as: stays with it until it gets done; creativity that produces results; on-time, accurate financial analysis; or creates options where options did not exist.

The Personal Branding Plan

There are the four steps women can take to design a personal branding plan:

Step 1:

Write out statements that differentiate. Include key points that demonstrate unique skills or areas of expertise.

Step 2:

Check for consistency between brand statement and career opportunities. Are there opportunities in the desired area? Update career plans and ensure they are realistic.

Step 3:

Develop action steps to get the word out. Who does the woman need to talk to, meet with and network with?

Step 4:

Start using the branding plan in many situations. A woman should connect with people inside and outside her organization and design a networking plan with a realistic timeline.

Networking is all about connections. Effective networking can enhance a woman's reputation and increase her exposure. Information should flow to influential people and provide the connection points to enable career opportunities. When a woman networks, she should use her personal brand as word-of-mouth advertising and as a way to connect. Consider the following example of a personal branding statement that quickly states the person's strengths and engages the other person to share their own information to cement the connection and establish a networking relationship:

"I am the manager of the X team. I focus on meeting sales goals and customer requirements. I've found that by setting expectations and measurable goals in the beginning, the sales team can move forward with a more focused plan. What works for you?"

A woman needs a personal brand statement to tell people she is a winner. She should adopt a mindset that is assertive, project a positive attitude and communicate effectively.

Coke or Pepsi?

Consumers choose between brands in the marketplace through a complex process involving objective reason and subjective emotion. A similar process unfolds every day in the workplace. John or Susan? Tim or Maria? Statistics reveal that John and Tim are selected more than Susan or Maria in most workplaces, especially at the senior levels. Supervisors point to objective assessments, but their subjective connections to personal brands influence their decisions as much, if not more, than the assessments. Fair? Maybe not. Reality? Yes.

While organizations work to reduce institutional bias, women can be empowered to undertake individual personal branding strategies that maximize their success in spite of bias. Research tells us that men and women approach the process of branding themselves quite differently. If the majority of the leaders and powerful voices in an organization are male, the model for success tends to be male. This allows men the freedom to focus on creating individualized personal brands while constraining women to conform to a make model of success before they can create their personal brands.

So what can diversity executives do to prime their organizations and empower women? First, introduce personal brands into the organizational lexicon as inclusive models of individual success, and use them as formal and informal developmental tools. Then, implement the "C" Your Brand model of personal branding as a tool to integrate branding into professional development.

'C' Your Brand: Control, Communicate and Calibrate

1. Control the brand.

Control is using your power to direct or determine an outcome. Branding is a dynamic and forward-facing process; a woman has to brand herself for where she wants to go, not for where she is today. Control starts by identifying daily behaviors needed to drive desired outcomes.

Once outcomes are articulated, she - and her supervisors - should list the characteristics and behaviors most likely to be identified with people who have achieved those outcomes. Since this list may look and feel masculine, she should sort the criteria to adopt what feels comfortable, tweak what can be tweaked and add her own touches where possible. The focus for this step is to identify the outcomes and craft a personal brand that attracts support for movement toward those outcomes.

2. Communicate the brand.

Control the brand, then communicate it frequently and consistently. Daily behaviors build the brand, and seeking opportunities to express the brand is an individual strategy to sell it. This is where organizational inclusion efforts can buttress women's individual efforts; as women build their brands, the organizational culture needs to shift to accept personal brands that don't fit historical models of success.

3. Calibrate the brand.

Calibrating a brand is about controlling the brand and knowing when a change of direction is necessary in order to stay the course. The process of personal branding should include feedback intake and processing systems that allow women to differentiate between resistance to organizational change and sincere constructive feedback about their personal brands. Brands need to be consistently calibrated in order to stay relevant and be effective, but again, the calibration of women's brands needs to introduce different models of success.

So will it be Coke or Pepsi? Nike or Reebok? Inclusion or business as usual? Viewing inclusion through a branding lens creates an opportunity to see how our connections to people - emotional, personal and subjective - influence our decisions and how women can use branding as a tool for empowerment, individualization and professional success. When empowered and encouraged to create a strong personal brand, a woman can control her professional journey and use her power to direct her own career.

[About the Author: Valerie Pelan, President and founder of Integrated Focus, is a certified Executive and Leadership coach. Her 20 plus years management experience at AT&T and EDS gives her a unique perspective on the challenges facing leaders and their teams in today's diverse and global marketplace.]

Four Hiring Tips to Help You Select the Right Talent

Four Hiring Tips to Help You Select the Right Talent

by Robert Hosking | Talent Management

An increasing number of companies are looking to add personnel in 2011 in response to more favorable economic conditions and growing business demands. But even companies in hiring mode continue to operate with caution to ensure they invest wisely in personnel who fit well with the organization and can hit the ground running.

Every manager knows it can be hard to separate qualified candidates from those who do not meet the job requirements. Finding the right talent for organizational needs requires managers to read between the lines when reviewing resumes.

Following are a few red flags to watch out for:

1. Unexplained employment gaps:

Many talented professionals have been out of work through no fault of their own because of the recent recession. So don't dismiss job candidates from consideration just because they are unemployed. But do proceed cautiously if an applicant has a history of job hopping that predates the downturn, or if the person has not explained significant gaps in his or her work history.

2. An overabundance of buzzwords:

It's not uncommon to encounter resumes that are littered with business buzzwords such as "optimize," "leverage" and the like. But take these terms with a grain of salt. Do these phrases truly provide insight into a job seeker's ability? Can you determine exactly what he or she accomplished in a previous role? The answer to both questions is likely no.

Instead, focus on individuals who can communicate their contributions in a clear, straightforward manner. Better yet, single out applicants who quantify their achievements to show the impact their actions had.

3. A laundry list of job duties:

Virtually all job seekers provide a few details about their previous roles so potential employers understand the range of their responsibilities. But be wary of candidates who include long, drawn-out lists of their former duties. This could be a sign that they are trying to fill space or cover up for a lack of notable achievements.

During your review, keep an eye out for individuals who describe how they helped a previous employer save money or increase efficiencies. Also, look for a history of advancement in a past role or details about how they changed a job for the better.

4. Vague descriptions of skills and experience:

While it's difficult to accurately determine someone's level of expertise based solely on their resume, be cautious of candidates who claim to be familiar with a certain technology or to have knowledge of a particular business process. These terms paint an unclear picture of a person's proficiency. For instance, an applicant who says she has experience with a computer program may have used it every day - or only twice in several years. When screening resumes, look instead for potential hires who offer specifics about their skills and experience.

None of the red flags above is reason alone to dismiss a job seeker from consideration, but if a resume raises several of these concerns, managers may want to think twice before requesting an interview with the candidate.

Another point to bear in mind is that some job applicants are simply not as skilled as others when it comes to summarizing their qualifications. In select cases, it may be worth conducting a brief telephone interview with an applicant who could hold promise in order to clear up questions about the person's resume.

Managers are likely to encounter many resumes that appear perfect at first glance, but a stringent examination of the application is an important step in determining which job candidates are too good to be true - or too good to miss.

[About the Author: Robert Hosking is executive director of OfficeTeam, a staffing service specializing in the temporary placement of highly skilled administrative and office support professionals.]

Sending Employee Overseas? What to Know Before Bidding Them Adieu

Sending Employees Overseas? What to Know Before Bidding Them Adieu

by Bettina Chang | Talent Management

Despite the economic downturn, many companies have shown they are committed to sending employees on international assignments. But the manner in which they determine candidate suitability and structure international assignments could spell the difference between success and failure.

Organizations are finding ways to cut costs in policy provisions, assignment types and program administration, and talent management is crucial to many aspects of international assignments, according to the results of a 2010 study by KPMG, an audit, tax and advisory firm.

The survey of about 500 organizations showed various reasons for sending employees abroad, explained Achim Mossmann, managing director of global mobility advisory services at KPMG.

"Specifically during the ongoing recession, companies broaden their overseas market because they lost business in the United States or western Europe," Mossmann said. "They want to broaden their client base and also take advantage of the resources."

The most important factor for talent managers is that global assignments are useful recruitment tools. Generation Y continues to view the opportunity for international assignments as a driving force behind employer choice, he explained.

However, because international assignments can be so expensive, talent managers must make a detailed assessment of who is qualified and well-suited to going abroad. Mossmann recommends using suitability assessment tools from service providers that specialize in these cases.

"Based on a set of criteria and questions, it can determine the intercultural suitability, not only in general, but they can compare specifically to the country that the employee potentially will go to," Mossmann said. "Most successful companies [use the service providers], but not all. Less than 20 percent use them. That's an area where companies could do better and be more successful."

For companies that conduct their own interviews, Mossmann recommend they take place in the home country and the host country. An assignee needs to have a level of curiosity and ability to deal with ambiguity in addition to the technical qualifications for the assignment.

Cultural differences are an essential factor, and a talent manager should assess how the assignee responds to cultural features specific to the host country. An example of cultural perceptions would be time and punctuality. In some countries, being late is an insult to colleagues and being on time is a virtue. In other countries, time is more fluid and punctuality is not emphasized. An assignee should be made aware of these cultural norms and assessed for suitability and adaptability to them.

Because the size and scope of global assignment programs is increasing at many companies, the administration of these programs has become more difficult. Forty-five percent of respondents to the KPMG survey report that they outsource parts of their international assignment programs. Outsourcing could be the answer for some companies, but not all.

Organizations with intricate global assignment programs that are idiosyncratic may find that administration needs to be in-house, Mossmann explained. On the other hand, when an organization has moved HR toward a strategic business partner role, it may find it is helpful to outsource the transactional work of administering program assignees to a service provider.

"[Using a service provider] allows us to focus on aspects like talent management, assessment, repatriation, finding the right position for somebody who will be returning," Mossmann said. "There is nothing worse than investing $1 million in somebody [to go overseas], then they come back home, are disappointed with the relocation, and six months later they start with your competition. Then your competition benefits from the experience that the international assignee gained overseas."

Other ways to cut costs while maximizing the return on investment of global assignments include using technology to improve communication and providing localized coaching and mentoring.

Organizations are increasingly incorporating global mobility departments with the talent management department to facilitate communication and improve the administration of international assignees.

"If you send people on international assignments because of personnel development, then you want to make sure there's a connection [between the two departments]," Mossmann said. "The combination between talent management and global mobility is on top of a lot of people's minds in the industry."

[About the Author: Bettina Chang is an editorial intern at Talent Management magazine.]

Making Cost Reductions Stick

Making Cost Reductions Stick

by Brian Klapper | Chief Learning Officer

Maintaining a healthy organization is similar to nurturing a healthy rose bush. To reach its potential, a rose must be given adequate food, fertilizer, insecticide, water and proper trimming.

If a gardener needs to reduce costs, he or she might cut back on the amount of fertilizer, water and insecticide given to the rose. The immediate cost savings would be apparent, and the rose would likely survive but probably not prosper over the next several growing seasons. If the gardener's financial situation improved, he or she would likely restore the food, fertilizer and insecticide to prior levels, and the rose's health would likely be restored. Similarly, many companies treat cost reduction as a one-time program driven by the need to achieve short-term profit objectives. More often than not, such sporadic cost-cutting activity is reversed once financial pressure is relieved and rarely results in lasting changes to the company's cost structure.

In the short term, it is not difficult to generate 10 percent savings. Implementing travel restrictions, migrating from weekly to biweekly payroll and surgically reducing head count are common approaches to rapid cost savings. These savings tend to be short-lived once the cost reduction program has ended. As enthusiasm for cost cutting wanes, these somewhat indiscriminate cuts will seep back into the organization and, in the worst case, potentially stunt future growth.

Stuck in the Cost-Cutting Cycle

So why are so many companies, particularly those seeking to permanently redefine their cost position, stuck in a never-ending cost-cutting cycle? First, cost is a financial measure that is ephemeral. Costs fluctuate tremendously over short periods of time, and it is often in response to an external stimulus that companies shift their attention to costs. Since costs are financial rather than operational measures, they can easily be trimmed, slashed or eliminated with the stroke of a pen. But as easily as they can be reduced, they can reappear. And they often do, generally within 12 to 18 months.

Second, many cost reduction programs begin with senior management setting cost reduction goals with specific dollar targets on how much they are looking to save (e.g., reduce costs across the department by 10 percent). Management will initiate these types of across-the-board cuts that don't differentiate between those that add value or destroy it. In addition, the implementation of the program is generally left to line managers to determine how these targets will be achieved. Although the "how much" is clearly defined, the subjectivity of the "how" can lead the company into suboptimal and unsustainable positions. While management-led directives usually deliver cost reduction quickly, they tend to be reactive, myopic and, as such, short-lived.

Third, many companies utilize a bottom-up, detailed analysis across all departments in order to identify cost reduction opportunities. This approach is essentially a combination of a suggestion box with a cost-benefit analysis. This approach is effective in generating a list of opportunities, but it generally takes time to vet potential solutions, their impact on the organization and their viability. As with the other two approaches, this approach does not address the systemic reasons for costs, making it difficult to sustain savings.

For example, a global telecommunications company's initiatives to reduce manufacturing and product costs were led at the plant level without input or customer insights from sales and marketing teams. The manufacturing leaders of the cost reduction effort nearly caused several products to become defective because they did not know how customers used the products. Consequently, the effort led to the loss of accounts and market share.

While there's no silver bullet to ensure cost management programs stick, a successful approach has three primary themes: focus on waste, not cost; get the right people involved; and make sure the approach is woven into the organization's fabric, rather than treated as an episodic exercise.

Focus on Waste, Not Cost

In closing the cost "gap," never look at costs. Rather, focus on eliminating waste, defined as any activity that does not directly or indirectly add value to the customer base. What is the difference? For starters, waste elimination is generally worth up to 10 times the value of cost reduction. Between 70 and 80 percent of organizational activity does not add value to the ultimate customer. The opportunity to radically eliminate massive amounts of waste in nearly every organization is staggering. And the primary benefit - the culture of a pruned organization across all dimensions - is vastly improved over that of the old organization and does not allow the waste to reappear.

This is not a Lean, Six Sigma or total quality management approach. Quite the contrary, waste elimination is strategic and asks the critical question: How does, or how should, the organization add value to its customers? The first step is to perform a strategy audit to determine the company's plans over the next 12 to 36 months. Included in the audit is a detailed analysis to identify the projected customer base, what it values and how it wants to be served. From there, review the end-to-end business to identify and eliminate non-value-added activities, relationships and policies.

For an activity to be value-added, it must meet the following three criteria:

a) The activity must result in a change in the form or function of the product or service.

b) The customer must want and be willing to pay for the result of the activity.

c) It is the first time that the activity occurs in the process.

So how could this work in practice? In 1997, Bank of America embarked on an enterprisewide mandate to eliminate waste throughout the organization. It constructed a learning laboratory that taught front-line bank associates how to identify and systematically eliminate waste. Following their experience in the lab, waste elimination teams consisting of five to seven front-line associates formed as cross-functional teams of experts. The teams were each given stretch goals to build operational pilots within 90 days that improved the customer experience while eliminating waste throughout the organization.

Following the learning laboratory, teams designed and executed customer surveys. They surveyed 50 key customers and asked them questions, including what they required from the process, how they measured requirements and to what extent the process delivered the expected value. By the end of the week, the teams formed a statement of focus that summarized and prioritized the survey results.

Also during week one, the teams mapped and analyzed their operations. Each operation was initially mapped at the macro level. The macro steps were classified into one of three categories: value-added, non-value-added but essential in the operating environment and non-value-added rework. In the lab, the teams learned that an activity was considered value-added if it met three criteria:

a) It was a change in form or function.

b) The client was willing to pay for the output.

c) It was the first time the activity occurred.

The teams also learned the definition of rework: any time work is reviewed, replaced or corrected, any time the workflow moves backward from the intended direction, and any time work is performed more than once.

When the teams applied the definition of value-added to their processes, they determined that, on average, only 10 to 15 percent of activities met the three criteria. Additionally, 65 percent of the activities were rework, and the remaining 20 percent of activities were non-value-added but essential to the current workflow.

The teams then performed root cause analysis to determine why operations were comprised of 85 percent non-value-added activities. Following the analysis, the teams selected the most likely hypotheses with which to perform experiments. Basic themes were lack of timely and correct information, too many reviews and too many handoffs. The teams then designed a series of experiments designed to prove or disprove their hypotheses. Most of the experiments were designed within three hours and run over the next few days. Generally, the teams sought to design experiments that targeted a 30 percent failure rate to ensure their ideas challenged conventional thinking.

The teams analyzed the results of the initial experiments and modified as needed, generally changing one variable at at time. The teams also created a prototype branch in Charlotte, N.C., to work out process problems before going live. The use of the prototype is an important tenet of service experiments: design and production problems were generally worked out offline in a laboratory setting before service delivery was tested in a live environment.

Success was determined by customer satisfaction, revenue growth or profit potential. The results of the successful experiments were then combined into operational pilots. The pilots were then run on a sub-segment of potential customers to test the robustness of the new process and gauge the response from financial analysts and customers.

"At the end of the day, the most critical aspect of experimentation and learning is measurement," Milton Jones, one of the bank's group presidents, reminded the teams. "Measurements will defend you if done right; otherwise they will inhibit you."

The rollout spread across the organization and reduced overall costs of banking operations by more than $700 million. Quality remained high, and customer satisfaction was improved. Years later, costs had not returned to the organization.

Involve the Right People

Involve the appropriate people for the appropriate tasks. Encourage senior management to provide governance, guidance and communication and front-line employees to identify, quantify and ultimately eliminate waste.

Senior management has three primary responsibilities. First, it needs to own the process by recognizing that up to 80 percent of the organization's activities do not add value to the ultimate customer and then thoughtfully communicating this knowledge to the organization. Managers should set focused but ambitious targets and help create the vision for the future organization. In essence, management should serve as the link between the organization's strategy and the waste elimination efforts. It is essential that the waste elimination work is consistent with the long-term vision of the organization.

Second, management should lead by example and create a supportive environment that encourages employees to seek out and eliminate waste. Third, managers must continually communicate openly and honestly to employees. Senior management must get employees to understand that eliminating waste is financially beneficial but also produces an environment more conducive to enjoyable, productive work.

Weaving the Fabric

Make sure the approach is woven into the fabric of the organization, rather than treated as an episodic exercise. Waste elimination is a change management initiative as much as a financial performance issue.

In most corporate cultures, admitting that a large percentage of activity does not add value is heresy. To combat this tendency, identify and celebrate opportunities to eliminate waste and modify reward systems to identify and eliminate wasted activities. When systems are in place to align incentives to desired behaviors, clarify roles, decision-making capabilities and access to information so the right individuals at the right level have the right information and power to drive the elimination of waste on an ongoing basis. Support from the midlevel manager and front-line worker is critical to the success of an ongoing waste elimination effort. It is at these levels - not the boardroom - that the necessary operational insight resides.

For waste identification and elimination to become part of the organization's ongoing activities, the approach must be performed in a manner consistent with the organization's culture. The chief learning officer can play a central role to ensure initiatives leverage organizational strengths.

Eliminating waste through organizational pruning is essential to improve profits, but also to position the organization for healthy long-term growth. Elizabeth Roth wrote in the 2010 edition of Rose Magazine, "Roses that are left unpruned can become a tangled mess of old and new canes all competing for air and light. Pruning is essential to the health of the rose. Cutting out dead and diseased wood will encourage the regular development of healthy new canes and ultimately, the goal of all rose growers, beautiful masses of blooms."

[About the Author: Brian Klapper is the president and founding partner of The Klapper Institute, a management consulting firm focused on business performance.]

Diversity in Global Business

Diversity in Global Business: How Business Schools Can Prepare Future Leaders

by Oliver Ashby | Diversity Executive

As business continues to evolve following the recession, it's becoming more and more apparent that having an international presence and acceptance of diversity are imperative. Research and labor statistics indicate a continual increase in the general recruitment of women and racial and ethnic minorities: Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that 68.3 percent of entrants into the labor force from 2006 to 2016 will be people of color and women. As such, diversity, both in terms of nationality and professional background, plays a key role in the makeup of a business school education.

By instilling in students the importance of diversity, business schools are ensuring that future leaders are confident and able to lead and succeed in every environment, be it finance in New York, consulting in Europe, manufacturing in China or startups in Latin America. After graduating, students apply their respect for diversity and global presence to their corporate culture, spreading the value of a multicultural workforce.

At London Business School, for example, the current first-year MBA class has more than 400 students, 91 percent of whom come from outside the UK., representing 62 nationalities.

By offering truly global classes, business schools can create environments where students share experiences from different parts of the world, instilling within them a well-rounded global management perspective. In light of the proliferation of global business and our increasingly flat world, this perspective is critical for future business leaders, who will see far more opportunities and requirements to work on a much more interconnected global stage. Today, companies ranging from General Mills and Deutsche Bank to The Boston Consulting Group and LexisNexis International seek employees who understand the global marketplace and bring a unique worldview to their companies. Having a diverse background is now a core quality that job candidates must exude when applying for jobs in all industries.

So, to foster collaboration and encourage diverse groups of students to work together, business schools throughout the world are putting programs in place to ensure students graduate with a holistic and diverse education. MBA study groups at London Business School, for example, are designed to combine six or seven individuals from different nationalities and backgrounds. A real-life case: One of this year's groups is composed of a banker from Brazil; a corporate development director from the U.K.; a management consultant from Italy; a captain from the U.S. Army; a financial controller from the Ukraine; and a helicopter pilot from the Middle East.

These diverse groups take a wide range of core courses together, using each other's skills to enhance their development. Often, feedback from students indicates that they gain almost as much from their fellow study group members as they do from faculty. This unique approach to encouraging diversity gives students the opportunity to work closely with peers from nationalities they may not have been familiar with before starting business school - ultimately giving students an advantage in their careers.

However, diversity isn't as simple as grouping together just anyone with different nationalities or cultural backgrounds. It's about building a team with assorted thoughts and beliefs that, when combined, will help create a more comprehensive solution to growing global business issues. By also incorporating a globally diverse faculty into the mix, business schools can ensure students are being exposed to a variety of cultures and business backgrounds during their studies. For example, at London Business School, the 99 faculty members come from more than 20 countries. The school's 30,000 alumni represent more than 100 countries - another diverse pool of resources that students are exposed to.

By giving MBA students an international experience, business schools can help prepare future business leaders for what is becoming a truly global and interconnected workplace. How are you incorporating diversity into your work? What gains have you or your organization made as a result?

[About the Author: Oliver Ashby is the business development manager for London Business School.]

Level Three Diversity

Level Three Diversity

by Tamara J. Erickson | Diversity Executive

What are your goals for your company's diversity and inclusion program this year? Gauge your progress over the past decade. Organizations committed to increasing workforce diversity tend to go through several clear stages, with distinctive focus and programs in each.

Level one:

The first important step forward is simply the desire to attract and retain a more diverse population. In this initial stage, companies move from a homogeneous workforce, typically defined in terms of race and gender, to one that encompasses a more heterogeneous talent pool.

Most companies moved into this phase in the 1970s and 1980s, often spurred by government requirements. However, it remains an important priority for many today. Over the past year, I've worked with a number of major organizations that define their primary diversity goal as bringing people from a wider variety of backgrounds and perspectives into their companies.

In this stage, two programs take priority. The first is recruiting. Companies typically look for new talent channels in new locations. They may engage new recruiting specialists and reshape key messages to appeal to new audiences.

The second important programmatic activity in this stage is awareness building. Without this accompanying educational component, companies may recruit diverse individuals but expect them to conform to the dominant population's norms. It's easy to fall into the trap of assuming individuals from different backgrounds have the same preferences and expectations as the majority group.

Level two:

The second stage of diversity shifts to a focus on the retention and engagement of diverse populations within the organization. Here, companies add the important goal of inclusion to their priorities - creating an environment in which a wide range of individuals feel comfortable, grounded and able to succeed. There is clear recognition that individuals from diverse backgrounds are likely to have a wide variety of preferences and expectations and that they may require additional support to develop productive careers.

In this stage, customization-based programs take priority. Many companies assign mentors or special counselors to help with integration and career development. Some create specialized career tracks, perhaps to supplement specific skills or provide exposure to key parts of the organization.

One of today's most commonly used approaches at this stage is promoting the formation of affinity groups. Done well, these groups can provide members with access to leadership, serve as a communication channel for key openings in the company and create an enjoyable meeting place for colleagues with similar backgrounds or interests. Sponsoring these groups highlights a company's commitment to diversity.

However, the perceived role and ultimate effectiveness of affinity groups varies widely among companies. For some, employee affinity groups are primarily social - giving employees of like backgrounds an opportunity to interact. In other companies, affinity groups are charged with an important education role - to promote cultural visibility more broadly within the organization. While valuable, these types of affinity groups probably fall short of achieving the ultimate objectives of retention and engagement because they fail to tackle the bottom-line question of an individual's career success.

Affinity groups with the greatest opportunity for impact focus on enhancing members' professional opportunities. Success requires that the company put systems in place to work with affinity groups to further specific business goals and to develop and tap the pool of talent represented.

Level three:

There is a third stage of diversity, perhaps aspirational for most today, represented by a fundamental shift in attitudes toward people who are in any way different. In this stage, we appreciate the rightness of multiple positions and acknowledge the legitimacy and benefit of individuals' differing values, views and behaviors. This requires moving past political correctness - not offending or harassing those with diverse perspectives - to acknowledging that the existence of differences is vital to arrive at a full appreciation of an issue and its possible outcomes. It becomes possible only through thoughtful education that emphasizes the underlying logic and value of individual views.

My wish for 2011 is that more organizations will include programs aimed to reach this stage as an important component of their diversity goals.

[About the Author: Tamara J. Erickson is a McKinsey Award-winning author and expert on organizations, innovation and talent. She is the author of What's Next, Gen X? Keeping Up, Moving Ahead and Getting the Career You Want.]

Saying Without Speaking

Saying Without Speaking

by Ladan Nikravan | Chief Learning Officer

People make 11 decisions about one another - including credibility, trustworthiness, sophistication, desirability, power and competence - within the first seven seconds of meeting, according to research from New York University's Stern School of Business. Leaders may not be aware of what they are saying with their bodies, but others are receiving the message.

"What matters is that as a leader, you have to realize what a certain body signal will most likely trigger in the audience and what their behavioral reaction will be as a result," said Carol Kinsey Goman, author of the forthcoming book The Silent Language of Leaders: How Body Language Can Help - or Hurt - How You Lead. "So much is done nonverbally on a first impression. As a new leader, you don't have 90 days to warm up an organization, you have the very first time your team sees you. Leaders have to understand that body language resides in the eye of the beholder."

According to Albert Mehrabian, professor of psychology at the University of California, Los Angeles, words account for only 7 percent of the message an individual conveys; the remaining 93 percent is nonverbal. Additionally, 55 percent of communication is based on what an audience perceives, and 38 percent is transmitted through tone of voice. Leaders' audiences are picking up most of their managers' messages - and all of the emotional repercussions behind the words - from nonverbal, body language signals.

According to Goman, body language is the management of time, space, appearance, posture, gesture, touch, smell, facial expression, eye contact and vocal prosody. To make a positive impression, leaders must instantly project two distinct types of skills.

"Leaders send out two sets of cues and followers look for two sets of cues in leaders," Goman said. "They look for status cues - authority, confidence, competence - and they look for warmth cues - empathy, approachability, likeability. Great leaders have learned to balance those and display more of them unconsciously."

The unconscious portrayal of negative body language has scientifically been proven to affect business decisions. Research by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab shows how subtle, unconscious, nonverbal cues provide powerful signals as to what's really going on in a business scenario. If such emotions, when negative, are not controlled in these scenarios, the effect can be dangerous.

Dore Butler and Florence Geis, researchers at the University of Delaware, compared the nonverbal affect responses to male and female leaders in an audience of peers and found that intellectual assertiveness by women in mixed-sex discussions elicits visible nonverbal cues of negative affect from both men and women. Females taking a leadership role in the group received fewer pleased responses and more displeased body language responses from fellow group members than male leaders speaking up and offering the same input.

"What happens to emerging leadership female candidates is that they don't get recognized by the peer group because of this nonverbal contagion that goes around the group," Goman said. "Women were not even seen as being as developmental as the males in the group in the University of Delaware study. If by any chance there is a leader in that group, such as a boss, manager or a team leader, what would happen unconsciously is that the rest of the group would take a lot of its cues from that leader, whether that were the leader's intention or not. That can severely hurt the growth of women as leaders if the body language of senior men is projecting negative emotions."

Learning to control body language is essential for managers to be perceived as credible and forthright by peers and their employees. If leaders' body language doesn't match their words, they're wasting much of their time. "If you really want to build collaboration, you need to realize that your body has to say the same thing," Goman said. "You have to face people directly; you have to look at them; you have to lean forward slightly; you have to nod; all those subtle signals are essential in order to get that person to respond and open up to you. That's how you build relationships nonverbally."

[About the Author: Ladan Nikravan is an associate editor for Chief Learning Officer magazine.]

A Vision for the Future of Recruitment: Recruitment 3.0

A Vision for the Future of Recruitment: Recruitment 3.0

by Matthew Jeffery

(This article, co-authored with Amy McKee, director, global talent acquisition, at Autodesk, is a greatly abridged version of an in-depth article also co-written with McKee and published in the June Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership.)

There has never been a better time to be a recruiter.
What we do can quite literally make or break a company. If we can't attract and retain the best staff, then our company will lose ground rapidly, financials will suffer, and it will die a slow painful death.
Recruitment is undergoing a change. Not just a small scale evolution but a fundamental seismic shift. A change that will see the recruiting landscape change forever. A change that will see many traditional recruiters falling behind and being replaced by new, differently skilled recruiters, ready for the challenges of Recruitment 3.0.
Indeed, it is not only recruiters who will be found obsolete in Recruitment 3.0 but many of the current recruitment leaders in top companies today, criminally not preparing their Fortune 500 Companies for the new realities of a changing recruitment landscape. Recruitment leaders' version 1.0 are real, out there in abundance, so obsessed in process and introverted to the point of not seeing outside the window of their office, damaging the prospects of the very company they seek to serve.
Why the need for change?
The current global recruitment landscape is changing. The global war for the best talent is real, (note the use of "best"); talent is geographically mobile and happy to move for the best job; talent is more demanding, not only in pay but career progression and training and development; the experienced talent pool is shrinking in volume; convergence of talent, as recruiters fighting in a smaller talent pool attract candidates across different sectors; the graduate pool is scarily becoming "less skilled" as graduates come out of universities with watered-down degrees, ill-preparing them for working life; talent is less loyal and happy to switch companies every two years on average; competitors are getting smarter in mapping out talent pools and attracting your staff away; and recruitment agencies are failing to be creative in attracting unique talent to their databases, hence perpetuating "recruitment chess" of the same talent across companies.
Those are a lot of dynamics at play.
So are many of the Fortune 500 recruitment leaders applying Recruitment 1.0 solutions to the new world? Let's first look at the core philosophical differences between traditional recruiting and Recruitment 3.0.
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: Not everyone is looking
This is the fundamental underlying core essence of Recruitment 3.0. Not everyone is looking for a job. Different market research exists but the benchmark seems to suggest that, for any given role, only 10% of relevant/experienced talent is actively looking for a role at any given moment in time.
That means that 90% of candidates relevant for your role/s are not engaged in job searches. The best candidates typically among them.
Hence in a candidate short market, with a host of competition for particular skill-sets, the global war for the best talent is being fought out among 10% of active job seekers.
So ask yourself this: Why is my recruitment leader focused on using recruitment agencies, posting on job boards, and CV searching, when they are not reaching out to the 90% non-active segment, which could include the best candidates?
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: Everyone is a potential candidate or brand ambassador, even your consumers
At the core of the philosophy of Recruitment 3.0 is the definition of a candidate. We typically define one as someone who has nominated themselves to be part of an election process. A voluntary act.
But at what point does someone volunteer themselves to be a candidate? When they see your advertisement? When they apply to your advertisement? When you interview them?
So if they are not a candidate until they volunteer themselves, what are they?
They are your average person sitting drinking a coffee in Starbucks, or leading a team at work, speaking at a conference, running down the road, watching TV, or having a pint of the finest ale down the local pub.
What turns a regular person into a candidate? A whole host of reasons. Not being recognized for their contribution at work, poor relationship with their manager, lack of career development, lack of challenging work, poor remuneration.
A company either waits for the moment that someone presses the button and turns themselves into a candidate and then jumps on them, or makes a proposition that is attractive and tempts them into candidacy.
Hence at the core of Recruitment 3.0 is that everyone is a candidate. And it is up to us to create candidates not wait.
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: employment brand is pivotal to your success in talent acquisition
What is a brand? Simply a person's gut feel to a product, service, or organization. Many companies spend millions on their corporate brand identity. But they spend little or no time on defining an employment brand. Indeed some companies are so arrogant they believe their corporate brand is enough to attract people to work for them. Amazing how many well-known corporate brands are nightmares to work for as the arrogance of senior leadership and management feel it is a career pleasure to work for them and spend no time on developing/retaining their core assets.
What is an employment brand? Libby Sartain brilliantly defines it: How a business builds and packages its identity, from its origins and values, and what it promises to deliver to emotionally connect employees so that they in turn deliver what the business promises to customers. Building the employment brand from inside the business, with a consistent substance, voice, and authenticity, may be the most powerful tool a business can use to emotionally engage employees.
Note some of those terms. Particularly "emotion" and "engage." Big new terms for recruiters to adjust to and understand.
Take a look at your employment brand. Can you define it? Probably less than 3% of the Fortune 500 has a clearly defined EVP.
Put simply, imagine going into a supermarket, seeing lots of product on the shelves, but all of it looks the same and is in white packaging. Would your company allow its product/service offering to be so bland and not stand out? So why allow the employment brand to be that white, blank packaging that is not unique and stand out?
Employment brand is a vast subject and in the full article in the Journal cutting-edge ideas are given on how to impact on the full employee experience. But consider this.
Does recruiting have a role in PR?
If your company wants to reach out to new talent, unfamiliar with your brand, and build employment brand recognition on a wider scale, then PR and use/partnership/manipulation of the media is critical.
Google your recruitment leader's name today, alongside your company name. What do you see? The vast majority of Fortune 500 recruitment leaders have no identity on search engines. They don't promote their company brand. They don't speak at events. Recruitment 3.0 leaders will be fired for not being a proactive champion of their company as a great place to work.
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: The Psychology of People
People are naturally social. They love to talk. Engage. Gossip. They are hungry for information.
When forming a relationship, they want honesty, authenticity, integrity, transparency and communication. Two-way communication.
A good salesperson knows this. Build a relationship. Relationships sell.
When looking at employment branding, people want relationships with people, not faceless, bureaucratic companies.
So the key is allowing people to have transparent, trustworthy, two-way communication with your company. And yes, a relationship.
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: You are not in control of what people are saying
Everyone's talking about your company, whether your executive leadership like it or not. Be it your products, services or leaders … and, yes, even your company as a place to work. Google today: "Working for *****" (insert your company name). You can see what people are saying on blogs, websites, and Twitter feeds. Log into Glassdoor.com. Those conversations are taking place right now, (sadly few are taking place on official company channels/sites, as many don't allow or are closed to any form of engagement or comments).
People love to talk. The difference in 2011 is that they tell their friends about their views via larger mass communication channels and their friends are now large communities. Word of mouth spreads like wildfire.
So why are so many companies not adjusting to this reality? Corporate PR and Marketing are educated in a specific old school way; it's their DNA to just push out a message and leave it out there, not to engage in conversation. Heaven forbid, it could distort the core message and can even lead to the message being overturned!. That's a massive miscalculation in 2011. Not engaging with communities is harming many corporates.
Yes. This is pretty scary for modern corporates. Business can no longer control what is said. Today there is a shift in the balance of power. Technology is shifting the power away from the publishers, media, the elite, corporate to us, the people. Recruiters need to embrace this, as must as their PR & Marketing departments.
Those companies that listen, are humble, have "official channels" that are open and seek to solicit the opinions of their community will be the winners of Recruitment 3.0. But how do companies listen and seek opinions?
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: Building relationships and communities is key
The growth of the power of the Internet and communication is unstoppable. The "Twitter revolutions" in the Middle East show that people are grasping and using technology to communicate their views, much to their anger of the elite.
Social media and networks are on fire. Whatever you look at — Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn, Twitter — the growth stats and usage is phenomenal. People talking, 24/7.
Why have so many recruiting leaders and Fortune 500 companies failed to grasp the importance of social media and engaging and building talent communities?
Yes, many companies can beat their chest and proclaim they have a presence on Facebook or Twitter but they are using them in a style reminiscent of Recruitment 1.0 "post, pray, and spray."
Leap onto some corporate Twitter feeds today. You will see that many are de-facto job boards. A long list of jobs with a hyperlink back to their jobs site. Try replying and communicating with that company and you will more often than not never receive a reply. Indeed some corporate Twitter feeds post more jobs in the course of a week than they have followers.
Let's cut to the key point. Social media is not about immediate bums on seats. It will not lead to immediate mass new hires or pipeline. It is a vehicle to take people on a journey. A journey that people will board at different junctures. But when reaching the destination, the goal is that they are either someone who wants to work for your company or that they are a Brand Ambassador. Brand Ambassadors are people who may not want to work for you, but they engage in your community, participate in discussions, sing your praises to friends and act as a champion of your brand.
Why do people join at different points on the destination? Some people know your brand and have a feel for your company and hence can reach the end of the journey quickly. Others may not have even heard of your company and hence a long journey of discovery and education awaits. The key is how you attract their attention and how you engage with them.
Social media is a great vehicle to take people on that voyage of discovery and hence asking yourself some deep questions about why social media is key. Questions like……
• What's the purpose of our social media sites?
• Who is the core target audience?
• What experience and takeaways do we want our community to have?
• Will these sites generate repeat visitors?
• How are our sites "sticky" so people want to stay on them?
• What's the difference between our social media sites and our jobs board?
• What's the word of mouth likely to be on our social media?
The Core Philosophy of Recruitment 3.0: Recruitment is boring
Yes. Sorry folks. Recruitment is boring.
Ask yourself how many recruitment job sites or recruitment social media sites you visit when you are not looking for a job. The answer is maybe zero. When people are looking for a job they will happily visit your jobs board and social media feeds but if they are happy in their job — that 90% of non-active candidates — sorry, but they won't visit your sites regularly. Unless they are particularly dull people.
So, goal is to create engaged communities who spread the word. That means that any communication has to be two-way and interesting/informative/

entertaining to the reader.
The full article in the Journal gives some great ideas on engagement.
The New Recruitment 3.0
Recruitment 3.0 is about building engaged communities, telling a story, listening, discussing and fostering an emotional attachment with new talent.
Recruiter 1.0 and 2.0 will be a dying breed in the coming months and years, replaced and thrown on the scrap heap by Recruiter 3.0 who can combine a range of skills including:
• PR & messaging
• Marketing
• Direct Marketing
• Market segmentation
• Candidate Relationship Management
• Sales
• Presentation and Communication Skills
Are your recruiters ready?
Is your recruitment leader ready?
http://www.ere.net/2011/06/14/a-vision-for-the-future-of-recruitment-recruitment-3-0/