Trying to automate the recruitment process

A company recently tried to implement an automated recruitment process to try to reduce or eliminate the vast amounts of wasted time going through CV’s and interviews. It seems like a good idea and as a 3rd party to the process I have watched the results with interest.

They have developed the software themselves and seem to have had reasonable success. As a 3rd party watching the process I have noticed a couple of things.

1) There were a number of emails to the info @ email account indicating that the software didn’t work.

2) The process of applying was very stringent, with only one correct pathway to completion.

This automated application process did indeed reduce the number of valid applications from 700 to 100. That of course was the general idea. For many internal, simple roles that are infact automated themselves, this may actually be a good thing.

The question I raised though was this: Would the automation process actually drive away the kind of candidates that you may actually want?

To explain, take sales for example. If I were a sales executive applying for a job, I would want to be able to sell myself in some way. To be channeled down a pathway would put me off, as I would feel that they were looking for a “me too” person. Not someone with unique skills.

Another example, A network engineer, If I were an engineer, I would want to show case my skills. Especially if I knew I was good. Would it annoy me to be lead down a path? Would I pre judge what kind of person they were looking for? Would I feel that they were after a “me too” engineer?

Automation is great, it provides great efficiency’s in running business. Is recruitment a place you can automate? Can you cut corners carefully enough to make gains in the process?

Annual Chill out day

I have just made a call to a company today during the normal calling that I do every day. Here is the message on the phone.

“No one is available to take your call as today is our annual chill out day, please call us back on Monday”

What a bold and courageous move. Imagine the brownie points you would get from your staff. And how big an impact would it have on your customers? I am sure if you gave them notice, they would be fine or in fact be quite impressed.

This is the first time I have come across such a great idea implemented in action. In these challenging times, it does good to be creative.

Latest Hays salary survey for Australia & New Zealand

The 2008 survey is out. I find their report quite comprehensive while being easy and simple at the same time.

A great resource for employers and employees alike.

Balancing environment and personality

I have spent a bit more time thinking about this after the move of a social person into the nether regions of a company I work with. There must be a balance between the environment and culture a company wants to create and the personalities within it.

Everyone is different. One of the easiest ways around clashing personalities and environment is to only employ people with like minds. So each person is comfortable within the created environment. Of course this is not easy to do, especially within a tight labour market where you take the best you can find.

Some people thrive from an open plan office environment, others find it too distracting. Maybe there is a way to mix it up. Other times some personalities can become overpowering for others and stifle their ability to be highly productive.

One of the best ways to ensure the balance between personality and environment is right is to meet with your people often, informally to see how they are finding things. Also get management to have the personality and environment balance on their agenda’s. Watch how relationships are going between staff.

Creating the right kind of environment is a key element to creating a happy workplace for your staff.

Moving a social person to the back office

What happens when you move a social person into their own remote office? Give it 2 months and they will leave. Part of a socialites worklife involves talking and being around collegues. I get a chance to see this theory in action.

A company that I work with has just moved their socialite into an area all by herself. So in 2 months from this date we will see if she is still around. It is a hard balance when it comes to social people. Obviously being social carries a risk of being less productive than someone that is a bit more reserved and quiet.

However if someone is very good at their job and a social person too what do you do? One thing you don’t do is isolate them. It is important to find ways that can cater to their need to socialise, while still maintaining the high work standards.

I will give you an update in 2 months time.

Microsoft’s tips for working from home

Here is a link to 7 tips Microsoft provides to help make the working experience for staff members productive. In my opinion the biggest factor that has stopped this becoming a reality for many employees and employers is the PROCRASTINATION BEAST.

While the tips that Microsoft provide, procrastination is still in my opinion the biggest killer to home based employees. Because their time is paid for by the employer, the employer can rightly expect the same level (or in theory more) productivity from home based workers. But at home it is easy to become distracted.

One day this phenomenon will become more common place, until good systems can be wrapped around it though it will remain a rarity among companies, rather than the norm.

Is not telling customers you outsource decieving them?

I had an interesting conversation with an accountant the other day. I found out that they have a small outsourcing branch in India processing some of the more standard accounting functions. They had a team of 4 trained by New Zealanders in New Zealand accounting practices.

The interesting thing is that because it is non customer facing work, all their customers don’t know that they send some of their work off shore. The question becomes then “Is this practice deceiving your customers? “. Personally I don’t think so. Though I am sure others will disagree.

Ultimately as a company you are contracted to deliver a service. Surely the way you deliver that service should be up to you. The issue is not so much whether you do off shore resourcing rather it is about what level of transparency you will provide your customers.

It is a choice each company that send work offshore needs to make. Some will be transparent and offer lower rates for work done offshore, others will keep that portion of their service very quiet. The concern you may have if you do keep things quiet is what will happen when (if ever) your customers find out you have been sending their work off shore?

Tell it like it is

One thing that employers hate is the unabashed lying that sometimes goes on in CV’s. Or maybe I should call it fabrication. It ends up wasting everyone’s time when it is found out. Most of the time it is found out well before someone is employed. Sometimes it isn’t.

Likewise, potential employees don’t like it when employers fabricate how grand and best fit the job is. This fabrication of the job description leads to disappointment down the track for all as well. In fact I would go even so far to say that it is the start of a dissatisfying spiral for employer and employee alike.

I had a chance to see this in action recently. The employer had talked up an aspect of the business that was new and exciting. The (potential) employee got excited at the prospect of working within this new area. It wasn’t until a third party provided a reality check on what the job was actually about that put a halt to this mis-communication.

What would have happened should this person been employed.

1) The employee would have become disillusioned because the job wasn’t what they thought it was.

2) The employer would become frustrated because the employee was always after a different ball

3) Management in the process would become annoyed because they had to drive the employee to focus on the standard (boring) stuff.

4) The employee would leave or be sacked after a very short tenure and the whole process would start again.

What’s the message here? Make sure you are clear up front what the job description is. Don’t get carried away talking up the cool stuff if it isn’t what is real. Ultimately it costs a lot to hire someone new. Don’t waste it.

Record low unemployment in New Zealand

The pinch for employers is growing by the month or so it appears. With record unemployment levels hitting 3.4% in the month of December. Why is this happening? Why is it that so many employers from every industry finding the employee resource so thin?

The answer I believe is simple. Because many families can no longer survive on a single income, the mother also has to go out to work. This is substantially increasing the number of people in the workforce. Wages no longer cover standard living in New Zealand. This is also why so many New Zealander’s are heading across to Australia.

Further proof of the idea that wages are no longer matching costs is a rare comment by the Finance Minister Michael Cullen. Stating to the effect that employers should review wages. Along with talks of tax cuts (No surprises why that is being discussed).

Anyway the guts of all this is that …
1) More people are going to continue to move to Australia (the grass is always greener on the other side right).

2) Wages will go up as the high skilled demand more from their employers or leave for better conditions (supply and demand).

3) As a result of higher wages, prices will rise (got to cover the costs of delivering the product or service)

4) Inflation will go up and hopefully tax will come down (if we are lucky).

5) More families will feel the pinch and the need to send the “Mum” out to work just to make ends meet (this is the saddest part of the whole scenario)

Even some of the big companies are struggling

This article may be the beginning of the end for Yahoo. It is definitely not winning against the giant google. You have to wonder what the loss of 1000 jobs will do to the remaining employee’s morale.

And it may be my brain but with such a dramatic cut in resourcing you have to wonder what on earth were the 1000 employees doing that doesn’t need to be done now? Either they have been wasting space for along time, or Yahoo’s productivity will slow.