Jason Blais: From the Recruiting Front Lines

What would happen if top VP or Director of HR became CEO?

TAKE THE POLL on LinkedIn

I believe the first step on the path toward success is to look within. That doesn’t mean we need to set up meditation schedules and personal reflection time, though those aren’t bad ideas, but rather that we need to figure out just what our companies are made of. Specifically, what skills our workforce is made of. I am willing to stake my reputation on the fact that there are employees working in all our organizations today who have valuable skills that we are completely unaware of. That is, our current employees may present us with the skills we need to operate lean and thrive while other businesses merely survive.

There are numerous studies available that provide statistics on the dollar-value of engaged employees, and the damages caused by bored ones. For access to a number of these reports, visit SHRM, and type “engaged employees” or “bored employees” in their search engine. You’ll find volumes of surveys and articles to this point.

Figure 1 The Life Cycle of an Employee, Used With Permission from SHRM

Through careful and thoughtful analysis of the skills that are required to carry out your business functions and the ancillary or unused skills present in your workforce, you can begin to build engagement while operating more efficiently.

During staffing reductions, either by layoffs or attrition, there is often a work gap left behind by the departed employees. That is, when a company lays off one person, it is common that some portion of the work that person performed must still be completed. Customarily, this work is picked up by the remaining employees, adding a sense of increased burden to the insecurity they are already feeling. We have an alternative to this process, however, which can have a splendidly counter effect- increasing our employee engagement and sense of security. It’s what we call the Auxiliary Workforce Plan (AWP).

Essentially, the AWP provides the roadmap to identify, develop, and utilize untapped skills and talents present within our current workforce. Through this mechanism, we can provide interdepartmental and cross-functional opportunities to our employees, which lead to stronger engagement, and better overall understanding of our business. For the employees, it manifests professional development, resume building, and increased variety in their day-to-day job activities. This is truly a win/win practice that will provide the greatest benefits when the economy is at its worst.

Fundamentally, the premise is rather simple. First, we identify skill sets associated with each job function within our company. Then, identify secondary and tertiary skills that our employees have, but do not use in their primary job description. When staff levels are reduced, we can now examine the work gap created, in terms of job functions, and identify which skills we need to complete those tasks. Next, we simply match up the necessary job functions with the right employees based on the skills sets needed and available. Okay, maybe it’s not exactly SIMPLE. Here is a scenario that may provide a clearer picture:

From “15 Ways To Train on the Job, In a down economy, trainers turn to homegrown help” By Kathryn Tyler, HR Magazine, September 2008

• Instead of hiring external consultants, turn to the real experts: your own employees.
• Highlight internal talent.
• Implement job shadowing.Create or expand formal mentoring.
• Develop teachers throughout the organization.
• Cross-train. Employees who have more than one skill become more valuable and flexible.
• Host interdepartmental conferences.
• Give job rotation assignments.
• Develop training projects. On-the-job training projects and “stretch assignments” give employees a chance to learn while doing real work, not just hypothetical classroom exercises.
• Create an online bulletin board, e-mail discussion list, blog to share best practices & ask for help.

The Granite State Human Resource Conference’s 2009 Human Capital Summit took place on Tuesday, May 12, in Manchester, NH, attracting nearly 300 professionals in HR, nearly 50 exhibitors, and a dozen or so sponsors. This year, the conference offered more HRCI credits than ever before- with a PHR or SPHR able to pick up 6.25 recertifications hours, and GPHR able to pick up 3.25. The day of professional development and networking was punctuated with a moving keynote speach by Bert Jacobs of Life is Good talking about the power of optimism.

After the 2008 conference, I was asked to join the volunteer board that organizes this event, and accepted a position as the Information Management Chair. Indeed, being part of the process this year has truly changed my perspective on the event. What I had seen as a one day event, which I really looked forward to, has become the culmination of so much work from my peers that it I now see the day of of the conference as a relief. Relief that it’s finally here. Relief that our hard work paid off. Relief that I could take a month off from thinking about it… or almost a month. Beginning in a few weeks, we’ll be working hard at putting together the pieces to execute the 2010 conference.

However, before we move ahead, it’s good to take a moment to look back and appreciate the highlights of the 2009 Human Capital Summit. We were able to offer a very well-received variety of presentations, including:

‘Managing your Talent out of the Gate; Trends and Best Practices’
‘What is a Green HR office?’
‘What is your Brand?’
‘Retaining and engaging the Older Worker’
‘Surviving a DOL Audit’
‘Workplace Whitewater’
‘20/20 Employment Branding’
‘How to Use Technology but not Feel used by Technology’
‘Strategic Development of Sustainable HR Policies’
‘The ABCs of Total Compensation’

Aside from the great sessions, there was a great amount of energy, enthusiasm, and camaraderie all around.

adad

Layoffs slow to 539K in April; jobless rate rises

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090508/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

============================================================
Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/

(Reprinted from the Employment Branding Best Practice Exchange on LinkedIn)
After speaking with more than 100 HR professionals over the last year, I’ve found that very few develop or feel they control the employment brand. At first, this appears to illuminate a broken system. It seems logical and intuitive that the people who spend the most time dealing with the employees, and focused on the employee/employer relationship, would be the exact right folks to build and manage an employment brand. So why isn’t this the norm?

I have come to believe that there are three very common realities that take place once a company makes a thoughtful decision engage in employment branding. Each of these three, in my opinion, creates less than ideal situations which negatively impact the value and return your EB realizes. I’d be interested in thoughts from this group on whether or not these seem to be accurate representations of reality, or if you can share ideas on how to avoid this pitfalls.

Here are the three most common scenarios I’ve seen first hand, and the obstacles created by each:

1) INTERLOPERS:
Once the idea for an employment brand initiative gains support and agreement, senior managers (particularly CEO’s, GMs, and Marketing Directors) feel compelled to guide and direct the brand- to put their stamp on it, if you will. The power and control is taken away from the HR professional, and too much emphasis gets placed on how the company will market the brand. This emphasis leads to a contamination of the brand, as efforts are made to make the brand “look good” and fit into a pre-determined definition. Of course, we all know that brand loyalty and penetration is directly related to brand integrity. This practice most often leads to a rift between the brand you use to attract candidates and the reality of your workplace.

2) DETACHMENT:
The decision is made to outsource this work entirely to an advertising/marketing agency who promotes an employment branding specialty, but who’s experience is truly in the consumer branding realm. This is common with companies who lack one or more of: internal resources (labor hours and/or creative/design competencies), understanding of the process to build the brand, and confidence in internal ability to do the job right. My company is an HR vendor, so I will not bad mouth this world or the enormous level of talent and expertise in it. However, creating this disconnect between HR and the outside agency can demotivate internal experts to engage in the process and offer their best effort in supporting the agency. The other drawback to this practice is often that the agencies are unable (not unwilling) to really get to the heart and soul of your true employment experience. It has become second nature to managers and employees to say nice things to outside vendors, either because of fear of being caught saying anything negative, or out of a sense of duty to put on the best face possible.

3) SHORT ATTENTION SPAN (I should have listed this one first, right?):
While buy-in and engagement are promised by the management team, it is quickly swept aside, and the resource support is never provided. This happens more often than any other. After a compelling presentation and proposal to the management team, GM, or CEO, you are able to generate widespread understanding of the value of employment branding, and support. Then, when you need to fill a position or hire an outside consultant for some creative work or analysis or SEO, there are no funds provided, and the req’s are denied. The expectation becomes that you, and you alone, will somehow take care of this initiative… in addition to all the other work you already do. This unrealistic circumstance makes it nearly impossible to put the time and effort in initially, and even more difficult to sustain it through completion. What began as a great initiative which you proposed and presented, has become an unmanageable burden to you. Can you spell frustration?