“Endeavors succeed or fail because of the people involved. Only by attracting the best people will you accomplish great deeds”
Colin Powell, American statesman and retired four-star general in the United States Army
An innovative medical business had been quite successful during its startup, with a brilliant entrepreneurial founder who also brought in some high flyers who saw a great opportunity for future growth. The initial vision was clear — get new products off the ground. This small band of zealous entrepreneurs attracted other like-minded people they already knew from medical research circles or they had worked with in prior startups. Consequently, they had no trouble finding employees who were aligned with their vision and culture, had stellar capabilities, and were initially engaged in this exciting mission.
As it grew, however, the company faced new challenges. It needed employees who could maintain the business and handle the “tedious” tasks, such as regulatory compliance, financial activities, and HR requirements. Not surprisingly, the need to grow a more mature business clashed with the entrepreneurial spirit of the founder and his original colleagues, who wanted to hire more people like themselves. Hiring became problematic. Moreover, the company’s lack of a distinctive employer brand made attracting new employees difficult.
Many organizations face similar challenges as they move through different stages of growth, and leaders lack agreement about the desired culture and the kind of people who will take them to the next level. This chapter will address both the attraction issue — building a clear and differentiated employer value proposition or brand — and the talent acquisition processes that lead to successful hires.
Attracting Talent — Building a Strong Employer Brand
Fast Facts
The ACE Perspective
Google has become a talent magnet, receiving as many as 10,000 resumes each day — over 3 million per year. While you may not relish having so many resumes (hopefully electronic ones) sitting on your desk, you would certainly have a wide choice of top talent. Other talent magnets across a spectrum of industries include brands such as Starbucks, Coca Cola, Apple, General Electric, Lenovo, Disney, Zappos, Toyota, and Procter & Gamble.
Volume is one piece of the puzzle. Certainly, if you are attracting few applications, your chances of success are reduced from the beginning. A second, perhaps more important, piece of the puzzle is whether or not you — or any other company — are attracting the “right” talent that will be aligned, capable, and engaged in your culture. While millions of people may think it would be cool to work for Google, are they likely to be highly productive and fulfilled there? Would they remain engaged and stay for a long time? Will they have the capabilities to compete with the talent already there? Are their styles aligned with others at Google?
A major part of building a strong and effective recognizable employer brand, whether it is global or only local in a single city, is developing a good talent value proposition (TVP) — a clear description of the value that a prospective employee, contractor or other type of labor will discover by affiliating with a particular organization. More specifically, a TVP is a set of distinct and differentiated attributes that individuals would obtain from the organization in exchange for the knowledge, skills, experiences, and abilities (KSEAs) and performance the talent brings to the organization. The TVP should specify the distinctive features that speak to the uniqueness of working for a Google, a Tata, a Siemens, or a government bank and be clear about what the organization expects in return. What is the quid pro quo of the employment relationship? This is where Alignment begins.
Being clear about what the company does not offer is also imperative. If it attracts talent looking for benefits that do not exist, the result will be dysfunctional outcomes such as spiritless performance, aberrant behaviors, or early separation, all at a cost to the organization’s performance. While most TVPs do not reach down to the job competency level, the good ones reflect organizational characteristics that will attract a high percentage of Aligned and Engaged employees, as well as employees with the Capabilities that are needed.
At Qualcomm, for example, employees are supported with many services to eliminate distractions from their core work, but they are expected to be self-motivated and to be able to think and operate innovatively with minimal supervision. This approach is likely to attract talent that will be Engaged in this type of culture and Aligned with innovative goals and values. It would be inappropriate to include a reference to the benefits without mentioning the work expectations as well.
The better the TVP is understood and agreed upon internally, the higher the Alignment is likely to be within the organization. If the TVP is communicated effectively externally, the chances of attracting Aligned prospects will be greatly increased. If Google receives 10,000 resumes each day but needs to hire just 50 people per day, it would likely be better to receive 500 dead-on-target resumes, without excluding too many great fits.
While the development of a TVP is beyond the scope of this book, Figure 10.1 provides an example worksheet that my Metrus Institute colleagues and I have found helpful. In this example, the innovative medical business we described at the top of the chapter wanted to differentiate itself from other large and more traditional medical firms. Company leaders identified five key attributes that collectively set the firm apart from most of its competitors. They selected two attributes, flexibility and autonomy, and worked with us to define them. This process included thinking through the elements of Figure 10.1 and establishing a clear operational definition, a description of the “is now” versus the “could be” and the business case or rationale for making investments in growing this employer brand attribute. Lastly, we identified barriers to change and the resources required to make it happen.
After an organization completes the worksheet, the leadership team and other key stakeholders must agree on the attributes. We advise having a small number of differentiating attributes, instead of a laundry list of features that make the organization sound like every other firm. In the case of our medical business, this strategy allowed the organization to align its messaging about flexibility to potential candidates across advertising, recruiting, and selection processes. The organization’s onboarding, training, performance management, and reward functions must be aligned with the flexibility concept, or the organization will not only look and operate out of Alignment but will also likely disengage hires whose energies surge in a flexible environment.
Figure 10.1 Sample Template for Supporting TVP Differentiators
Narrowing the funnel using a company’s unique talent strategy and ACE can be a major help in early elimination of “low probability” candidates. But even this funnel will require good recruiting and selection processes to attract favorable hires.
Acquiring Talent — Selecting the Right Talent
Fast Facts
The ACE Perspective
Based on research, industrial psychologists tell us that the best an employer can hope for is about a 75 percent successful hiring rate, even with proper validation of the selection tools. They further inform us that most firms do not get anywhere near this rate. The success rate of many companies is only around 50 percent. Validated selection tests can help in assessing competencies (knowledge, skills, and abilities that are part of the Capabilities dimension), but they typically lack the ability to assess a candidate’s potential to become Aligned and Engaged.
Theoretically, the interview could help in assessing these additional dimensions, but it generally does not add this value. Many organizations have not validated their interviews, and if they have, their interviewing team — HR, hiring managers, and senior executives — greatly reduce the validity of the interviews by straying from the protocols. However, if done well, the interview can be a powerful tool for helping to assess a candidate’s potential to become Aligned and Engaged in this culture.
To conduct an interview effectively, interviewers should ask questions that will provide behavioral clues regarding a candidate’s likely fit, such as: “Can you provide concrete examples from your background that suggest how you would be a good fit with our mission, vision, and values?” These types of questions require the candidate to prepare for the interview. Asking about the type of people the candidate likes to work with or the kind of work that has been most fulfilling can also help predict potential fit. Andy Lansing, CEO of Levy Restaurants, asks candidates if they are “nice.” He claims that this question is one of the best at finding people who are aligned with his culture, and it warns candidates that they should probably walk away from his organization if they are not.1
Rick Marini, former CFO of Tickle and CEO of BranchOut, relies on four hiring attributes in his high-tech environment: high intelligence, integrity, having fun, and entrepreneurial behaviors. He focuses his interviews on those attributes and knows that this combination will enable a new hire to be successful in the company’s rapidly changing environment. Questions in areas such as these can also test a candidate’s interest in and astuteness about your organization. If they think “fun” is a waste of time, they may not relate with their new colleagues, who see fun as a way to relieve long hours and high pressure.
Probing for prior high Engagement levels can help an interviewer understand the types of situations that bring out the most energy and advocacy in a candidate. Ask, for example: “Can you tell us about a situation in which you were excited and highly engaged with an organization?” If the person cannot provide a clear description of the type of situation that energizes him or her, a red flag appears. Be sure to probe exactly what it was that excited the person. Was it the role, the business challenge, the competitiveness of the situation, a particular supervisor, or people with whom they worked?
Lansing of Levy Restaurants asks: “What are you passionate about in your life?” He says he looks for “fire in the belly.”2 His conclusion: Give him someone who is both nice and passionate, and they will be successful nine times out of ten.
Another important step in assessing fit is comparing the described situational attributes (such as nice, passionate, being a team player) to the reality of your organization. Here honest introspection is crucial.
Does the attribute list represent reality, or is it just a wish list? If you are simply selling the “culture” you would like versus the one that is, it will lead to disillusionment when the candidate is hired. We advise having a distinct list of “best fit” attributes — real ones — for your organization for your interviewers to use in scoring the candidate’s answers to your questions.
Measurement is another challenge to the selection process, often leading to misalignment with other talent processes or with overall talent goals. If you are only focused on a single process, narrow time-to-fill targets, you risk jeopardizing other elements of the talent lifecycle. Should employees be fast or effective? An executive with a global services firm recently answered this question by saying “Both!” But when I reviewed the company’s record, the result appeared to favor efficiency over effectiveness. When you figure in the full cost of replacing a bad hire, speed is not always a virtue. Customers or internal stakeholders want someone on the team who is highly effective — not just a warm body to fill a slot. When companies place measures of speed over measures of quality, they tend to have higher turnover and risk bringing on hires who alienate and even prey upon customers.
For organizations of all sizes, recruiting and selection are typically expensive processes, often not managed in the most cost-effective manner. Frequently costly activities occur too early in the hiring process, with “knock out” factors left until the end. For example, if security clearances are needed, qualifying questions should be asked up front before time and energy are wasted.
These inefficiencies can also have an impact on ACE, especially when candidates see processes that are not aligned with the presented image of the firm in the market. In today’s wired world, a poor interview or hiring practice can go viral within minutes after an incident, creating image management challenges with future prospects. Such a situation reinforces the significance of having strong alignment across branding, recruiting, and selection to ensure that the face of the organization is consistent. A few examples of why an organization must be aligned are listed in the “Be Careful What They Say” sidebar. One note: Google’s ratings were not among the highest on this site; one possible reason might be the difficulty of processing and finding aligned employees among the thousands who apply.
Listed below are several remarks about the interviewing process at five firms, posted at www.glassdoor.com, a website allowing people to provide personal feedback about companies, including a special section on hiring experiences. Reviewers can rate experiences as “positive,” “neutral” or “negative” giving each company, big or small, an actual interviewing score on the website. Imagine the implications for employer branding! A few ratings are included as examples to show the variation across companies. The quotes may not be representative of the organization, but they are the public perceptions shared by people who have been through the talent acquisition process. This content is as of February, 2012.
Sears
(44% positive; 35% neutral; 21% negative):
“I applied online, received an email and scheduled an appt. The day before the interview I received a phone call canceling because the position had been filled. I got a call the day after asking if I wanted to reschedule the interview I cancelled. That was really odd to me but I went anyway. I met with someone … an assistant manager, manager or associate. We spoke for a brief moment then she told me that the hiring manager would call me for another interview. I never got a call.”
(40% positive; 40% neutral; 20% negative):
“After a week of hearing nothing, I decided to give the recruiter a call as I hadn’t received any contact details from the interviewers. After three attempts I finally got hold of the recruiter who was “surprised” that Google hadn’t called me back, but that I had been unsuccessful. To my question why she hadn’t bothered contacting me, she said she thought Google would contact me. Yeah right, and I am sure when asked, Google would say they thought the recruiter would’ve contacted me. Simple fact is that recruiters can’t be bothered to contact you if a company doesn’t want to hire you — amazingly they are so proactive before the actual interview …”
(67% positive; 27% neutral; 6% negative):
“Whole Foods was very helpful and responsive. They kept me appraised and encouraged every step of the way. It seemed like a lot of interviewing and oversight for a minor position. Disappointing that I didn’t get the job but I appreciate them letting me know right away.”
Northwestern Mutual
(59% positive; 33% neutral; 8% negative):
“The process is pretty straight forward you first have to attend an information session and then sign up for an interview. The interview usually takes place in their office and if they believe that you might be a good fit for the job they ask you to conduct a market survey in which you interview 15 people about financial management. Your final interview is presenting the findings of the market survey.”
Southwest Airlines
(69% positive; 24% neutral; 7% negative):
“This was my 2nd interview in 2-years; SWA is the ONLY company I want to work for. I did a lot of pre-interview prep. After phone interview, I was moved on to the 1:1 which went very well. Interviewer was very personable, fair and friendly. But not easy!”
PricewaterhouseCoopers
(66% positive; 28% neutral; 6% negative):
“PwC were very professional from the beginning of the process, and soon booked me in for an interview after the psychometric tests online. On the day, there was the primary interview with an HR representative and a director followed by an office tour and a more informal chat with a PwC partner. The firm took less than a week to offer me a place in their internship program which was great considering other offers were on the table.”
Once you have made a good selection — one that has high promise of Alignment, Capabilities, and Engagement — the next challenge is ensuring that the new hire is brought on board effectively.
In this chapter, we have covered the talent attraction and acquisition phases of the talent lifecycle. In the next chapter, we look at how one can maximize performance, beginning at day one after hire.
Action Tips