RSS

Posts Tagged ‘hiring’

Job Applicants: Vegas Doesn’t Exist Anymore

Posted by

An astonishing 37% of hiring managers are using social networking sites to research applicants, with over 65% of the group using Facebook as their primary source.

The days of doing a routine background check using CRB Direct on your criminal past or even credit history have been widened to include voyeurism into your daily life and lifestyle. People complain that it’s wrong; they say it’s an invasion of their privacy. Right, wrong, invasive not invasive – companies are doing it. I’m not talking about companies who ask you to supply your username and password and so they can look at your profile. I am talking about them going out on the internet and viewing whatever information you have made available to millions of others to see.

Remember the saying “whatever happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”? Well that isn’t the case when you share the ins-and-outs of your life via social media for the world to see.

Knowing that any future employer may be looking at what you have posted on the internet, why not use a little common sense, a little bit of good judgment, in what you share? Why not share things that are near and dear to you and that would be worth not getting a job over?

Example: my faith is important to me. I would gladly miss out on an opportunity to work for a company who didn’t like something I posted about my religious beliefs. That company would probably not be a good fit for me and I would most likely not be happy working there.

That belly button piercing I got on the way to the Bon Jovi concert with friends – not important to me, not near and dear to my heart – maybe I don’t need to share that sordid tale accompanied by an even more sordid picture on Facebook.

People are rethinking what they have posted; almost 90% of internet users admit to changing information in their profiles to become more suitable to outside employers and friends. This is probably smart thinking considering 69% of recruiters said they’d rejected a potential employee because of what they saw on a social networking site. I know lot of you out there will disagree but, to me, once you put your “private” life on the internet, it’s not private anymore.

And the kicker: you are opting-in to all of this. Nobody is extracting information from you.

The smart applicant thinks about how to use social media sites. Like an unfortunate tatoo, social media indiscrimination can have long-ranging consequences.

###
More links:
MIPRO Consulting main website.
MIPRO on Twitter and LinkedIn.
About this blog.

Does Your Employer Trust You?

Posted by

Imagine this. An adviser tells an employer that by introducing a working practice they could cut costs, reduce their carbon footprint, improve productivity and make life better for their workforce. Should the employer listen hard and think how to make it work for the organization? Or should they say, ’It sounds like a good idea, but I’ll limit the idea to a few senior staff members?’

This is exactly what is happening with flexible working in most organizations. The question posed above sounds like a no-brainer, yet nearly 40% of companies restrict flexible working to senior staff according to a study done in the UK. And this statistic corresponds to that of the US where nearly 94% of companies claim to allow employees the flexibility of working offsite but only 40% extend the benefit to at least half of their personnel.

That’s not something you call wide adoption in the face of compelling constructive evidence.

Even though flexible working is better for the environment, improves worker productivity, permits rapid scalability and helps attract a wider talent pool, employers are reluctant to offer this option at a company-wide level. But by doing that, they are excluding many of the people who could benefit the most and also excluding those who see work-life balance as a necessity not a luxury. And on top of that, it is the junior staff, the young talent, that have the greatest job mobility. There are more job opportunities available to them and they are the people that organizations want to recruit; they are the future of any business. These are the workers who can and will move elsewhere if they don’t get the working practices they want.

Echoing this sentiment is an interesting article, Attract and Keep A-Players with Nonfinancial Rewards, which cites that according to CTI Research, 87% of Boomers, 79% of Gen X’ers and 89% of Millenials cite flex working as important. The article goes on to say that companies that treat time as currency – through remote work options, staggered hours and reduced-hour arrangements – are more likely to attract and retain high-caliber employees.

Given the benefits of offering flexibility, why are companies reluctant to offer this option on a grander scale? It appears to boil down to trust.

Huh? Really?

I find this lack of trust almost unfathomable when I work for a company that supports flexible work schedules for all levels of employees, not just senior management. We have staggered start times depending on employee preferences: some are early risers, some not so early, others have farther to commute and like to avoid heavy traffic times. We have moms who adjust schedules depending on kids’ school schedules. Others have scheduled days to work from home to cut down on commuting to the office. There has even been restructuring to offer job sharing in order to retain valuable employees.

To me and everyone here at MIPRO, this is a measure of common sense.

The good news? I think the trend towards more flexible working options is going to continue to grow. And as the economy and job market in the US continue to improve, employers are going to need to focus on offering flexible work arrangements if they want to hire and retain top talent.

###

More links:

MIPRO Consulting main website.

MIPRO on Twitter and LinkedIn.

About this blog.

Fighting the Bad: What Your CEO Wishes HR Would Do

Posted by

Tim Sackett over at TLNT plainly talks about a difficult topic: why, as a HR professional, you need to champion the ‘must-do’ moves. Must-do moves are the things in your organization that you must own and absolutely see that they get done. And they’re not always comfortable. Sackett talks about the obvious example:

I asked the group a question: Do you have anyone in your organization that you need to get rid of?

Almost every company does, whether you openly talk about it or not. Problem is, preserving organizational integrity and culture requires difficult decisions. It means someone has to be the champion of ‘fighting the bad’, because a little bit of bad — a few bad employees, for instance — can have serious downstream effects on a team’s performance. And this job is yours as an HR pro. You can’t ask your hiring managers to paint over the bad with good, just like you can’t ask them to make this difficult decision. Here’s Sackett again:

What we realize, but many of our hiring managers fail to realize, is that “Bad is Stronger than Good” when it comes to employees. We hear all the time about “Addition through Subtraction,” and yet we struggle in our organizations to make this happen.

Most likely this happens in your organization because you are trying to make your hiring managers manage and have them make this decision. In reality, they have made the decision – and they told you. They hate conflict even more than you do, and this was their cry for help. Take it, run with it, make it happen.

I think a lot of companies don’t do this until cost-cutting or blatant performance issues force their hands. But what Sackett is trying to emphasize is that ‘bad is stronger than good’, and you can’t have bad if you want the good to shine. We’ve all seen a team or culture crippled by a few poor performers, and we know the old saw, ‘a few bad apples…’

Sackett’s point is a good one: if your company’s team integrity and culture is to remain effective, someone has to champion fighting the bad. If you’re HR, that’s you. Grab it and make it happen.

###

More links:

MIPRO Consulting main website.

MIPRO on Twitter and Facebook.

About this blog.

PeopleSoft 9.1 Recruiting Management: An Overview

Posted by

As any HR pro has learned from the past 18 months, sweeping changes in the economy create changes in recruiting concerns.  Chief among these is theOPSE_logo misperception that talent is easier to find now because of a saturated, supply-side market.  That is correct, but it’s also largely irrelevant when it comes to smart recruiting.

Getting talent is not the issue; the raw applicant pool isn’t the clear answer.  Finding the right talent, for the right position, at the right time is still the key.  The challenge to HR is now to get to the right person  instead of sorting through a hundreds of resumes in brute-force fashion.  Having an solid, systematic way of putting the best candidates on top of the pile is even more important than ever; in other words, smart filtering and screening processes matter.

If an organization is looking within its own walls, sourcing right internal candidate is equally important.  Why?  These days, the candidate’s old job may not be available if placed in the wrong new position.  Productivity is not lost just by a new (and wrong) person in a job but also as a result of lost productivity in the old job.

If you’re a PeopleSoft shop, how nice would it be to be able to tie these requirements directly into your PeopleSoft applications and business processes?  Well, that’s what PeopleSoft Recruiting Management is all about.

(more…)