jessica lee writes.

Come & Get It - Using Twitter to Hire Presentation.

yesterday afternoon, i had the honor of spending a little bit of time chatting about using twitter to hire at the Cool Twitter Conference. and i was in good company considering you had folks from the Washington Post and CNN Politics sharing how they use twitter... and also there was Mark Stelzner of Inflexion Advisors and Job Angels. what a good line up! i was flattered to be playing with the big boys.

the slides and (fuzzy) video from my session are below. i had 15 minutes to talk it up... and it was mostly to non-recruiting, non-HR folks i was addressing so you'll see that i didn't go super in-depth during the chat on sourcing... it was a pretty high level overview of how to use twitter to recruit. and the slide deck? well, i think i pulled together something kinda lovely. every slide had 140 characters or less of text, in the spirit of twitter. you'll get it as you click through. enjoy - and if you have any questions or need to borrow content, let me know.

(email subscribers or mobile web viewers, slides + video may not be visible! click through to ze bloggy to view them in their entirety.)

View more OpenOffice presentations from surbee.

cool twitter conference - jessica lee - using twitter to hire. from fistful of talent on Vimeo.

On Twitter for Employment Branding - Get Back to Basics.

so... back to this idea of using twitter to recruit and hire. there's that whole thing about finding candidates... but the other part of using twitter for recruiting, maybe even the bigger part of it, is focused on employment branding. but what does that really mean - employment branding? time to put our marketing hats on.
 
first, some employment branding definitions. if we look to the reverent Dr. John Sullivan, here's his take:

"Employment branding is unique in that it is the only long-term recruiting strategy. The viral-based perception management program designed to attract top-quality applicants is based on the premise that the organization is well-managed in the eyes of the target candidate population. It has many critical elements, only one of which pertains to getting the message out through awards programs, editorial content in target publications, presentations at conferences, and through viral marketing driven via the employee referral program. It is not the same as recruitment marketing, although recruitment marketing should be aligned with the employment branding effort."

that's a mouthful - much more than 140 characters, that's for sure. and for this twitter conference on thursday that i'm chatting at, it's likely going to be non-recruiting and non-HR folks that i'll be speaking to... so when i think about the notion of organizations using twitter for employment branding - whether a mom-and-pop shop or a fortune 500 - really what this boils down to at a basic level is simply projecting and marketing your organization as being a great place to work so that would-be candidates seek you out. simple enough.

first, the big disclaimer! you've gotta have the goods to sell when it comes to why your employer is a great place to work. maybe that goes without saying. but, if the culture is toxic and the environment is crap at your organization, then employment branding whether done old school or new school with web 2.0 methods like twitter will not save your recruiting life. you've gotta stop reading this and go back and fix the issues. maybe a little later you can then think about employment branding.

for more traditional employment branding, pre web 2.0, there are lists upon lists of great places to work - Fortune magazine has a list. local magazines have lists. coincidentally, my pal Kris Dunn's organization, DAXKO, where he's the VP of People, just received accolades from Fortune Magazine as being one of seven great small businesses to work for - another list from Fortune focused more on small companies though. that's a totally cool recognition for them to be able to sport. but... what if you can't make one of these lists? what if you don't have the marketing or PR folks to help get you on the list? or what if your employee program budgets are dwindling and you're more boot strap but you know you're still a great place to work?

talent management and recruiting thought leaders cite tactics like... workplace rankings and awards. world-class employee referral program. editorial placements. benchmark studies. having a WOW website. being written up in academic case studies. all really good stuff... but a lot of that can fall to the way-side as an HR or recruiting pro if you've got all that day-to-day stuff you've gotta execute. companies who do all of that stuff well likely have strong marketing and PR peeps behind the scenes to help. but herein lies why and how the web and social media is one of the great equalizers. david can now go up against goliath.

there are tons of resources out there on what it means to have an employment brand, who does it well... (for starters, go here and here and here.) read up, and just keep in mind that the basics of employment branding don't change with twitter. if you take all the components of what it takes to build and market an employment brand, all those things that make your organization a great place to work - those are all the different things you could conceivably tweet about. take Kris and DAXKO as an example - they could easily take much of what Fortune highlights as making them special and use that as fodder for their twitter feed. imagine tweets that highlight...

• no one has private offices
• a work/play lounge is offered, complete with a Nintendo Wii and a 52-inch plasma TV
• all new employees get 15 paid vacation days
• all staff receive free YMCA membership
• staff receive $1,500 annually each to spend on professional enrichment
• after every seven years of service, staff are entitled to a four-week sabbatical

all compelling stuff, right? and imagine pushing that out there via twitter for public consumption. (and yes, they are already on twitter. check them out here, @DAXKO.) keep in mind though, you've gotta have the goods to back up the kool-aid you're trying to offer - just like DAXKO does - when it comes to why your company is a great place to work.

so i guess in the end? it's somewhat back to basics on employment branding, folks... it's just that this time, twitter is just another tool for your arsenal for getting the word out. wow. i think i have my brain wrapped around half of my talk for thursday now!

What's The Work Life Balance Like?

i have to admit that whenever candidates during interviews ask me what's the work/life balance like at my company, i'm a little biased. my mind immediately goes to... how much balance do they need? what kind of outside of work obligations do they have that could interfere with being present while at work? are they not willing to commit and give my company 120%?

the reality is that i've never worked less than or even a 40 hour work week. most weeks i'd say i'm a 45 to 50 hours per week kind of gal. i carry my blackberry with me at all times. i take my laptop home almost every night. and then there's all the blogging and extracurricular stuff i do which i'd have to guess take up 10 or so hours a week. i'm invested. and i spend a lot of time working and thinking about work... but this is my choice. no one makes me do this. my company doesn't put it on me. there isn't a culture to work ourselves to death with 70 or 80 hour work weeks. it's just that with any position i've held, i've always invested in the gig and company similarly - because i know i will reap the rewards from it.

so when a candidate asks me what the work/life balance is like... i can't quite figure out how to answer it especially when i know that i'm surrounded by mostly other folks who are just like me if not more driven. yet part of my job is to sell the gig and sell our company. so most times? i'm honest. i tell them that i love what i do, and i'm surrounded by people who love what they do... and that means they commit in whatever ways they want to commit which means for some, it could be a 60 hour or more work week - if that's what they choose. and sure, there are those who put in their 40 hours and then go home. it takes all kind to make the world go 'round, i suppose.  it's an honest answer - but is it appealing? am i doing a disservice and not selling enough? and how would you/do you answer that question?

When to Walk Out of an Interview.

i was was a little jarred earlier in the week when i experienced something i've never experienced in the thousands of interviews i've done over the years - i had a candidate cut the interview short. she ended it! granted, it was by phone, so that made it a little easier to stomach... but 15 minutes into the phone call, after i had asked her a question and she paused and we had about ten seconds of silence, she blurted out that she thought this was going horribly as she wasn't able to articulate herself as she would have liked to. she quickly followed up with that she didn't think this would be a good fit, and then hung up. i couldn't get a word in to save my life, no less save the interview. wow.

stepping back and looking at this situation... a few things.

she was a little nervous. and she was having difficulty articulating herself. i probed her and asked plenty of follow up questions to draw answers out of her. i'm not ruthless or evil in interviews though - i just ask a lot of questions if you're giving me short answers, that is if i think you've got something i want to know about. make sense? i was willing to work with her, hence all the follow up questions i asked. if i didn't think she was worth it, i wouldn't have bothered. she was clearly lacking a bit of confidence though so i must have scared her with my probing. given this market though, isn't now is the time to man up?

personally, i've walked out of two interviews before - but for good reasons, maybe, kind of, sorta. i was interviewing for a gig and the panel i met with was so horribly uncomfortable, boring and depressing - you could sense the tension in the room among the panel - that i honestly couldn't make it through the interview. 20 minutes in, i looked at them point blank and said, "this isn't going to be a good fit." and i walked out and left. time number two? in retrospect, i'm not sure it was fair of me... but this recruiter looked at me and asked, "if you were a dog, what kind of dog would you be?" my knee jerk reaction was just to respond, "a bitch?" and then walk out. (how else are you supposed to answer that question?) but i simply said i didn't understand where this was going. i couldn't go through with the interview after that. he was a rookie recruiter who was fumbling his way through the whole thing and i just couldn't deal. maybe he was having a bad day, or maybe it was me. having a bad day who knows. i'm sure he still remembers me as the one who walked out on him.

i do think that there are times to cut an interview short though - as a recruiter, or as a candidate... but what about you? have you ever walked out of an interview? or have you had candidates walk out on you? and when is it okay if ever?

Today, You're Being Redirected Elsewhere...

guess what? i spend a good deal of time writing in other places and for other spaces. so today, i'm pointing you in those directions as oddly enough, i have a few different articles and blog posts dropping in various venues today.

• over on Fistful of Talent, i'm talking about offer letters and why some candidates refuse to give their resignation until they receive an actual letter with an actual signature. sure, as a job seeker, you want to be prudent before you call it quits at your current gig... but i kinda feel like if as a recruiter i've done my job properly, you should trust me. i am never going to make an offer to someone unless i know there's a job for them... so you should take my word that i'm not going to screw you over.

• i was also asked recently to guest blog/guest write a few different things. over on MediaBistro, a site dedicated to folks in the magazines, television, film, radio, newspapers, book publishing, online media, advertising, PR, and design industries, i'm squatting on their Media Jobs Daily blog on the notion of "great places to work" and what that really means. i think i might drop into their jobs blog more regularly with guests posts on behalf of the day job since the folks who read that blog are the kinds i recruit and hire. it's good exposure.

• then... at the end of June, i'll be in New Orleans for SHRM's annual conference and speaking on a panel with Lance Haun, Laurie Ruettimann and my pal Kris Dunn on HR bloggers... and in anticipation of that session, i've popped up a  quick and dirty post on the SHRM conference blog on e-business cards.

• lastly, my friend Martin Burns of Zoominfo who writes the blog good to know, asked me to contribute to Zoominfo's monthly newsletter which goes out to about 15,000 recruiting and HR pros. what an honor! i partnered up with Chris Ferdinandi of the blog Renegade HR to write a tutorial on using Twitter for employment branding. and really, the guide can be used for anyone who is trying to use Twitter to market just about anything. it's the basics... we might have to do a follow up that goes into more detail.

so there you go, folks! hop on over to any or all four of those locales to get your fix of my writing today. i'll be back tomorrow with more here though. here's to a fabulous thursday!

Thanks To You, I'm Now Senior Employment Manager.

a quick note... earlier in the week, i received some darn good news at my mid-year review. i've been promoted at the day job! wahooo! totally unexpected. i'm still blushing and smiling ear-to-ear. a few things went through my head that day which i still am noodling on... like:

• OMG - I've gotta really make sure I've earned this. promotions are earned but at the same time, there's something about the psychology of it all for me at least, where i feel like i need to really, really step it up and show the big boss that she made the right decision. i'm looking for another project to take on... as if my plate weren't full enough as is... i know.
• New Business Cards! a title change... it's not the fanciest title in the world... i've gone from employment manager to a senior employment manager... but i'm frantically wondering where do i need to make updates? who has my bio for upcoming gigs? LinkedIn, my email signature... and where else? i'm not doing a good job of managing my online presence, i thinking.
• Cha-ching! so, really... in the midst of the economic situation we're facing? it feels pretty good to be rewarded from a monetary standpoint. holy crap... i'm fortunate.
  

but one of the biggest things that i've been noodling on? i received a handful of emails from staff congratulating me but the ones in particular that i found so cool to receive were the ones from folks i had recruited and hired over the past few years. they would say congrats followed by thank you for hiring them which was silly to me because the truth is? my thanks really go to them as they're the ones who make me look good on a daily basis. had they not returned my calls, come in and interviewed and ultimately accepted my offer? well, as cheesy as it sounds... there is no me without them.

so for my recruiting and HR pals out there... when's the last time you said thanks to someone you recruited and hired? their success is tied to your success... so say thank you, will ya?

More on Diversity: I'm Not a Sell Out. I Just Play the Game.

last night, i was putting the final touches on a presentation deck for a career development workshop my firm is hosting in conjunction with the Lagrant Foundation. for those not in the PR or advertising industry, Lagrant is an amazing organization whose mission is to increase the number of ethnic minorities in public relations and advertising by providing scholarships, career development workshops, professional development, mentors and internships.

we're hosting 40 or so students from DC area universities for a half-day session (plus lunch! free food!) where i'm having our CEO, our NYC office managing director/chief diversity officer and a slew of others from my firm talk with the students on a range of topics to equip them with tools and a realistic picture of what it's like to work in the PR industry. we'll end the day with my team talking about how they can set themselves apart as candidates and the basics of entering into the world of PR.

the content of much of the workshop isn't particularly groundbreaking - and we've done many similar talks for recruiting purposes with other student groups... but today's session feels different because it's with Lagrant students - all minorities. and more than anything, i'm really pleased about the level of access they are getting to our senior leaders in hopes that we can begin building relationships with all of them... because this is exactly what i think the best diversity programs are made of - access and relationship building.

that all being said... i had a moment of panic last night as i was thinking about the workshop. i saw this blog posting about why too few women make it to the top. have a read. i laughed as i initially read through it because there are definitely pieces that resonate with me and specifically that i:

• do see this as a game, and i play it.
• capitalize on relationships.
• don't ask for permission.
• don't cry at work. (or at least, i have tried really, really hard... there was that one time i went out for a haircut during the lunch hour and was completely devastated with the result and had a nervous breakdown at work... oops.)

but as i pondered reasons why too few women make it to the top and the author's list, i couldn't help but to wonder if there were another way to read the post - that this is how white men in the US make it to the top, that these are the expectations of leaders and what you have to do to be successful. (and yes, i think a lot of what is included is very Western.) does that make sense though? because if you currently have mostly white males at the top, the reasons listed for why women don't make it to the top actually could very well also be reasons why everyone else doesn't make it to the top including minorities of either gender.

touchy subject for some, i know. however i do believe 100% that i wouldn't be where i am now had i not decided to play the game. deciding to even play though was something i struggled with - and i bet some of these students will probably go through the same. for me? i still feel strongly about the fact that there is a Western notion of what an ideal leader looks like - and it's why you have the same kind of people leading organizations here. and deep down inside, i don't want to accept that it has to be this way and that i can't be successful as a leader in a different manner... because after all, you have different ideals for leadership in other cultures and wildly successful organizations, so it has to mean that leaders don't really all have to be one way. yet i also recognize it will take lifetimes for that to change. it's difficult to reconcile this.

helping me though... years ago, i had an Asian American leader say to me once when i confessed i struggled with the idea of doing things professionally that seemed really counter to how i was raised, culturally. i told him that i felt like i was being disrespectful and a sellout in some ways by choosing to play the game. but he said something to me that has stuck with me... and it was simply that he never felt like it had to be an either/or proposition. during the day, to get ahead, to be successful, you play the game recognizing that it is a game and it is a race. but the moment you leave your office walls and go home? game over. you don't have to continue playing and you can be yourself, your natural self including all the mannerisms or tendencies or living by values that are more in line with your culture... but it's not selling out to play the game. it's just doing what is necessary to be successful, and provide for your family at the end of the day. it's only selling out if you completely forget where you come from, who your people are, and choose to not give back to them.

this was an important lesson i had to learn... and i'm thinking i might have to share it with the students too...

Making You Look Good Makes Me Look Even Better.

for the first time ever in my little recruiting career, i recently dared to recruit a personal friend for a position with my company... and now?! she's a finalist for the role. i've never loved the idea of working with a friend... but the stars seemed to align in this situation so wonderfully that i decided to hell with it and made it happen.

last week, i wrote about how proud i was of her and how it helped remind me why i'm in this game and love what i do... and i felt that same thing again yesterday - brimming with pride as we determined that she is the best fit for the position and for our company's culture. i knew it all along, of course, but i'm biased just slightly - so it was great to have it confirmed by others. in chatting about my pal moving forward in the process though, i realized that in her thanking me for all my help throughout each step of our interview loop that she may have thought that my work and effort to get her to this point was because she's a friend. i mean sure, i'll accept her gratitude because whether she's offered/she accepts a role with my company, i'm just happy to have helped her get some clarity on the direction of her career. but, the reality of this situation is actually this: everything i've done for her is pretty much the norm and what i'd do for any candidate - friend or not. and maybe even more honest is that recruiting her has actually been self serving. let me explain...

all the background information i can give you, i'll give.

with this pal of mine, before she even threw her hat in the ring, we did a whole lotta talking just to see if we agreed the position would be a good match for her. and the ground we covered included:

• her background.
• the role as it was described on paper and then the intangibles plus what was advertised versus the actual job description. 
• the team the position was with and its structure, the manager for the role and the position's predecessor.
• how the position and team both fit into the bigger picture of the company.

walking through all of that helped her and me both figure out if she should really apply for the position. but truly? i do this with most all candidates in their first interview. the only difference with my friend was that i wanted her to make the decision about whether it was a good match before she officially threw her at in the ring. with a stranger? we can both decide in our first meeting about the fit  - and a part of the fit has to do with where they are in their career and their motivations compared to my needs. beyond figuring out fit, all of that talk is aimed at prepping a candidate, or my pal in this case, spectacularly for their successive interviews after they've been able to get through me.

making you look good makes me look good.

before any interview my pal walked into, she knew exactly who she'd be meeting with, a little about their background, their role in relation to the position she was interviewing for and what to expect from them in terms of demeanor, interview questions that could be asked and their interests. on her own, she also did her own homework - which i'd expect the best candidates to do. (my prep isn't ever enough to carry anyone, and if it is, i'm doing the candidate a disservice.) my pal googled the heck out of everyone she could possibly could, unearthing articles and background information even i wasn't aware of... and then she found a way to connect with each person she met with. couple that with the other background info, the result of all of our talking was that my pal was a prepared candidate. and that? made me look like an even better recruiter.

so for my HR and recruiting pals... i have got to ask you... what are you doing for your candidates? and is there any reason you wouldn't help your candidates wow the hiring managers you work with? i think *great* third party/agency recruiters do a good job at this - but there isn't any reason why an internal, corporate recruiter like me, or you, shouldn't do this too.

remember - making a candidate look good, makes you look good.

Building Relationships, Online.

it seems weekly i'm getting requests to come chat formally and informally about social media for HR pros or recruiters. i'm totally flattered. the thing i seem to always spend the most time explaining is the notion of building a relationship online. people want to know explicity how you do it. sure you can find people to follow/friend on various social media sites... but how do you actually turn that into something actionable such as recruiting candidates, or hiring?

i now frequently use the anecdote of how my met my last boyfriend through twitter... the story is going to get old at some point (which i'm sure he'll appreciate hearing less about!) - so here's another illustration of how relationships are formed digitally, through social media from Mike Arauz, a strategist for the firm Undercurrent.

how great is this breakdown? and read his post on the spectrum of online friendship to learn  even more on how to develop online relationships... just keep in mind the the next step in all of that as a recruiting or HR pro? it's to take it offline. pick up the phone, meet in person.

and the same could be said for job seekers as well. want to get to know an organization or a specific recruiter? don't just stalk then attack... build a relationship. hope to see you offline soon. :)

Does a Recruiter or a Company Own Candidate Relationships? What About Your Twitter Followers?

when i was speaking at a recruiting/HR networking group last week, one of the things i asked the group to consider before jumping into social media (particularly to source and recruit candidates) is whether you do it as an individual, or more systematically as an organization. on the surface, it seems like a somewhat simple, albeit practical, question. do i create a personal twitter account with my name? or do i create one that incorporates my company's name?

jumping in as an organization and implementing a social recruiting road map as an organization is a bit tougher, particularly in large organizations. you may need to consider legal, marketing and scalability across geographic areas and/or business units. jumping in as an individual though? seemingly easy. just sign up! but this too poses a bit of a problem, especially when you think about the "portability" of candidates and communities. let's think this through...

someone asked in that same session how i thought people found me on twitter and why did i think they chose to follow me. i said that that if i had to guess...

• 40% follow me because of their interest in PR and/or my company specifically
• 20% follow me because they are DC based, and
• the other 40% or so follow me because they are recruiters or HR pros or otherwise somehow tied to the field (career advice, workplace issues, etc.)
  

and this is probably roughly how the subjects/topics of my tweets i put out break down as well. the 40% of my followers who are recruiters or HR pros will likely always follow me (please keep following me - forever?!)... but do you see where i'm going with this? what happens if i leave my company, or am no longer specifically recruiting for the PR industry? and what happens if i were to move away from DC? and this is precisely the issue for an organization to think through as they consider jumping into social media a bit further.

so here's a hypothetical question for you - if i were to leave my current company and go recruit somewhere else... do my twitter followers and the relationships i've developed with them belong to me? or my company? it may seem like a minor-ish etail but it actually feeds into a bigger picture issue. if you develop a community of candidates through social media... what happens to the community and all those relationships if you have to leave your market or industry? i think this is something we're going to have to begin grappling with in the near term if there aren't folks out there already dealing with it. my current thought process? let's use me as an example...

• i started using twitter on my own (okay, actually, Kris Dunn pushed me to do it...)
  
• i've developed a following through my own efforts on twitter
• people know me as the voice behind @jessica_lee and i use my own personal name - and i have developed my relationships through conversation (online AND offline both)
  
• i've introduced twitter and other social media tools for recruiting to the organization
• so if i leave? i take my "community" or simply my followers with me

but let's say instead my organization asked me to start a twitter account... or like present day, i've also created a twitter account spefically for my company and we used it as a recruiting tool? i think we might have to approach the situation a bit differently. i'm not sure my followers really are mine to keep.

the idea of "owing" a candidate relationship... i recognize that for 3rd party recruiters, maybe this is an issue that you've already had to deal with - so perhaps there some transferable lessons there for us and maybe it isn't any different from candidate relationships or communities pre-social recruiting... but it just seems that the ease of candidate or community portability, if you will, given the ability to rapidly or more effectively manage them through social media makes this issue a bit trickier.

i'll think this one through a bit more and flush it out for a Fistful of Talent posting. while i'm on this topic though? i'm not sure John Sumser buys into social recruiting as a mechanism for recruiters to create talent communities (or rather, people are improperly describing their "communities," slapping the label on to just about anything... tssk, tssssk)... and Josh Kahn  of Find + Attract flushes out the idea of a talent community manager.

i like all the thinking that's taking place on this idea. :)

Naturally Entrepreurial.

have you ever heard of Ode Magazine? i came across it today via Twitter and fell in love with this article on natural entrepreneurship. think about it - being entrepreneurial doesn't just mean starting your own business. you can be naturally entrepreneurial in your approach to work within an organization - it's about a mentality or attitude... and i'm not sure everything thinks of entrepreneurship in that way. "Entrepreneurship need not be stressful, risky, expensive, lonely, exhausting or require great skills, ideas or self-confidence," Dave Pollard writes. and he also shares six things naturally entrepreneurial people do:

1. They had found their sweet spot, the work where their gifts, their passions and their purpose intersected.
2. They had found the right business partners, people who shared their purpose and whose gifts and passions complemented their own.
3. They did world-class research to identify real needs that weren’t being met by any other enterprise in the marketplace.
4. They used a rigorous, continuous process to invent and commercialize products and services that met those unmet needs.
5. Instead of planning for the future, they had learned how to improvise, to adapt easily to changes in the economy and demographics.
6. They acted with integrity, operating in a way that resonated with their values, and made principled decisions, not opportunistic ones, in the long-term interest of their partners, employees, customers and communities.

good stuff, i think. it puts some additional framework around the kinds of questions i ask people when recruiting for my firm as we're all about the entrepreneurial spirit.

You're A Graduating Senior... And So Now What?

i was at Georgetown University a few weeks ago chatting with a group of students. the topic of the visit of course was recruiting focused but like so many other employers visiting college campuses across the country, i had few positions to actually discuss. we can file that visit under pipeline development.

we talked about what my organization does, the kinds of skill sets and qualities we look for, career paths available... the usual stuff. but before we even broached the topic of positions available, i asked a simple question of the students: "how are you guys feeling about the job market and your job search as you near graduation?" i really wanted to know what they were going through.

most were discouraged and felt helpless. a few were looking for alternatives overseas. several were looking for other options to entering the workforce - another degree, a certificate program, the Peace Corp... anything to keep them further occupied while the market sorted itself out. and honestly, i felt badly for them. but i wasn't want to sugar coat it for them either. it's rough out there (albeit in DC, we're in a bubble of sorts...). many organizations are laying off and/or had hiring freezes. so what were they to do? well, it's the same advice i have found myself giving to experienced professionals who are on the market now too. four things:

- work on branding yourself digitally.
- network. (and you can find real power in networking digitally too.)
- wait it out but keep busy.
- do something entrepreneurial.

the latter three, no brainers, right? it's common sense advice, i think. but what i was surprised by was how few students had thought about how to turn all of their involvement in social media into something more tangible - like their personal brand, and possibly a path to their next/first job. some get it - but not all. check out Matthew Cadwallader, a senior at UMass who definitely gets it. he tweeted a reply to me recently when i put out a note that i am looking for junior level comms/public affairs pros and linked me to his website. and can i tell you how impressed i was? it is such a fantastic example of a student who gets personal branding and what a way to make an impression on a future employer!

i have another chat with a group of students this week on entering the "real" world - but this time with my firm's current crop of interns - and i plan to start off the chat by taking a tour of Matthew's website because i think it's that good.

anything else you think we should be telling students right now?

You CAN Recruit Through Twitter If I Met My Last Boyfriend There!

let's have a little chat about the power of twitter... because it's spoken about all the time yet i feel like people still struggle connecting the dots on how to actually develop relationships via twitter and then turn that into something actionable or measurable. so, let me share a story because pretty much, i met my last boyfriend because of twitter. yep. you read that right. 



it started with us just following each other. i dunno if i followed him or he followed me first... but we stumbled upon each other some how. and it was natural enough to follow each other because we knew of each others organizations/blogs as well as some of the same people since we run in a similar professional circle. but following doesn't quite equate to a relationship... which i hope you know, but read on... i actually did a search of our "conversations" to find out how we first started chatting and things began simply enough with a reply from him to me that included a link to a blog i had never heard of that echoed the sentiments of tweet i had put out there. i thanked him for the introduction to a new resource and that was actually our initial exchange. we didn't quite converse frequently from there - but, he had given me enough to think that it was worth having some conversation with one another. so, it was just whenever it seemed appropriate that we'd have exchanges - all purely professional, and i never really thought twice about him in any way except for being some guy on twitter who worked in the same industry. 



as it would turn out though, probably months after we began following each other on twitter, we were going to be at the same event and i wanted to make sure that i met him for the sake of networking. so, i replied to a tweet of his and asked how could i find him since we'd be in the same place. he said he'd be around and asked when i'd be getting into town... and we tweeted back and forth a few times. he didn't use his actual picture on twitter though, so i wasn't completely sure how i'd find him in a sea of a few hundred people but we did have a mutual twitter acquaintance who i was able to spot at this event, and i asked that acquaintance for an introduction. connection made. mind you, again, still, it was still just a professional twitter relationship at that point... and i had wanted to connect for only professional reasons... but, you meet someone interesting with whom you have good chemistry and then a few more @ replies turns into a direct message or two or three where i began to flirt with him... and direct messages turned into going out for drinks. ha.


the rest as they say, is history. but that was the beginning of our relationship and honestly, i dunno if it would have ever happened without twitter. so what exactly do we take away from this? well, if you're on twitter or want to get on twitter to build more relationships - whether it's personal or professional, including to recruit candidates for your organization - my story is your roadmap. first, find the people you want to potentially recruit (good how-to here at this post by The Recruiter Guy, Chris Hoyt, on conversational recruiting) but then, remember that the true value of twitter - and how you'll develop you relationships - is through conversation. and if you haven't figured it out on your own yet, well, it's easy enough when you break my little story down:

1. begin following, and hope for a follow back. and make sure your twitter bio is clear and comprehensive so they have a reason to follow.
2. start conversing. reply to the person's tweets. retweet where it makes sense... but this has to be organic. don't stalk. just let things evolve naturally.   
3. use direct messages where appropriate or to get more personal but do wait until you've started to develop some rapport through @ replies.
   
4. if you're going to be in the same place at the same time, request some time together. (and i'd say, use your real picture, please? it makes it easier to connect!)  

yep. so, that's how one little love story began, and interestingly, here's how another has developed - a twitter marriage proposal! not quite how my love story ended. and, i'm just waiting for the day that someone tweets out, "it's over!" to end their relationship via twitter. who knows, it could be me in the future because i seem to be teetering pretty close to there... because my twitter love story? well, we kind of used IM to end it. ha!

But Even My Fellow Recruiters Don't Get Personal Branding...

okay. so, it's not easy seeing one of your own kind in the news and "highlighted" (for all intents and purposes) as another group or profession that's being hit hard by unemployment. i mean it's logical, sure - there are less jobs to be filled so recruiters have less work to do... but it still isn't easy reading about unemployed recruiters - in the NEW YORK TIMES for Christ sake. i mean really! the new york times! { sigh. }

i have to confess something though - not even before finishing the first paragraph, where they named a recruiter... i  Googled her. and i couldn't find much beyond her LinkedIn profile so i double checked Twitter. and i found nothing. i then checked Facebook and found 15 possibilities giving her the benefit of the doubt on that one. and lastly, i checked recruitingblogs.com. nada. and before i could even finish the article, all i could think was... she must not be doing any social media recruiting (so how savvy could she be? ouch. i know... but come on, wouldn't you think the same thing?) but beyond that, she must not be doing ANYTHING about her personal brand in the social media space - and what a shame, especially as a job seeker! i'm sorry to say this, because i know it sounds b!tchy - but, maybe she might be employed or more employable if she had a social media footprint. feel me on that one? and yes, fair enough - simply having a social media presence and using it to enhance your personal brand doesn't guarantee you a job... but really, it couldn't hurt if you're branding yourself in a savvy way, right?

the article continued on and other recruiters were also highlighted - and keep in mind, these are all Silicon Valley recruiters and so i do assume this means their fairly tech savvy folks. but still, i couldn't find any of them on any social media sites. how disappointing! even our very own kind really aren't "getting" the power of social media for your personal brand when now is precisely the time to do whatever you can to set yourself apart and gain a competitive advantage... oh, and yes, there's that whole networking piece of it too. but if you're someone i know professionally and you're reading this, i don't need to lecture you because you clearly "get" it. for my other readers though... for any job seekers, my friends or family, establishing and leveraging your personal brand for the sake of your career? you've gotta do it and here's seven tips for getting started:

1. start stalking but don't get caught. a good place to begin with establishing your personal brand is sitting back and seeing what others are doing and how they are doing it. so, go ahead. stalk them. personal branding boils down to marketing yourself. learn from marketing pros who are general marketing strategists, and then also learn from  those within your industry or space who are doing it well.
   
2. establish a footprint, pronto. if you're not ready to jump right in, okay. that's understandable. but at least go and reserve your name on social networks so that when you are ready to jump in, no one will have stolen it from you. just register. go to Twitter, Facebook, your blogging platform of choice, LinkedIn and reserve your user name. these are the places i recommend you start. you could also reserve your name on other sites like Youtube, Vimeo, and through business/fan/personality pages of Facebook.
   
3. stay simple and be consistent. use a consistent name and a uniform picture across all platforms, and use your real name or a simple and professional version of your name. even i'm not great at this, i'll admit it - i use "jessica lee" everywhere i can but before jumping into the blogosphere professionally, i used my Korean name "surbee" everywhere and i still need to consolidate or change my user name on some sites.
   
4. don't whore yourself out. sure, i said to go sign up for all those sites, but, you don't have to be everywhere. seriously. you have individual and group blogs. you have professional associations and other industry communities with their own social networks. you have Twitter, and Facebook, and Youtube... you can't be everywhere, and you shouldn't be everywhere. it's better to have a strong voice that contributes quality matter to conversations in a few forums rather than being everywhere for "maximum exposure." plus, if you're everywhere, people will wonder... do you do any actual work if you're spending all of your time on social networks? don't spread yourself thin.
   
5. find someone to pimp you out. find a mentor. find a more established voice or persona in social media for your industry, and get to know them. start with stalking, but then gradually try to build a relationship and let them be your champion. people in the social media world are generally pretty supportive of one another and love to help new and emerging voices find their way. be part of social media communities and take advantage of the communities.
   
6. clean up your act. you more than likely already have a Facebook page and in establishing your personal brand, you'll expand into other places... make sure you clean your act up and are presentable on all fronts. (or, consider two completely separate user names/personas and don't even mix personal with professional). i'll blog more next month perhaps on monitoring your online reputation.
   
7. don't be too cute, don't be too silly. social media and social networking is... social. it's about conversations and communities and the very human nature of it makes it's a lot of fun. but, it's your personal brand at stake. it's what could lead you to your next job, or to professional development opportunities. you show and teach people how to treat you, you're shaping how people will see you - and more than likely, cute and silly aren't the factors your prospective employer really are interested in. too cutesy and too silly just doesn't scream professional or competent. witty and funny are still okay, but some things just don't translate well online, so use judgment.

there are folks who are professional personal branding strategists... but the first thing is to simply get started and see what and how others are doing... and then it's simply about being authentic. and if you want proof that this stuff works? well, i'm not only the president... you know that line. i'm your proof. blogging on Fistful of Talent has led me here and on Twitter among other places... and i feel like the opportunities keep come a knockin' as i keep on working on brand "me." there's something to this one folks...

Candidate Bill of Rights Vs. Recruiter Code of Conduct.

our friends at ERE, and Kevin Wheeler, are having a conversation on the notion of a candidate's bill of rights. i get it... there are a million plus frustrated job seekers out there who have had some bad job search or selection experiences. i even have my own stories from being a job seeker at a point or two in my career. so the gist of the bill of rights:

• honesty and authenticity - the status of a position will be honestly stated
• accuracy - candidates will receive accurate information about a position, its requirements and expectations
• complete information - candidates will be fully briefed on an org, HM, and position
• process - candidates will be told the selection process
• status - candidates will be given a reason as to why they are not being considered for a role
• confidentiality - candidates will be entitled to security and confidentiality to their data
  

this all sounds nice... but folks, isn't this what recruiters should be doing anyways? i mean... i take some pride in my work and i work hard with up and coming recruiters to train them well and instill good habits in them - and really, that's what this boils down to for me. so instead, i propose a recruiter's code of conduct. after all, why should the onus be on a candidate to expect a certain level of service? shouldn't we simply be delivering?

it reminds me of when last year when Jet Blue put out a customer's bill of rights after a group of passengers had been stranded on a runway. folks were happy to see the airline taking accountability and establishing their processes and standards for dealing with situations that go awry. but here's my beef with the customer's bill of rights, and a candidate's bill of rights. everything points to you, the customer of the candidate.

you should expect to receive a specific level of service that includes...
if you don't receive a certain level of service, this is what you'll receive...

but where's the "we" in all of this?

we will promise to deliver the highest levels of service to you by doing the following...
if we don't follow through or deliver in the way we promised, here's what we'll do...

do you feel the difference? when we say "we," the accountability is put upon those providing the service versus those who are receiving it - and that's what will ultimately make the difference. the person providing the service has to be the one to commit to excellence and then deliver. candidates being treated fairly is important - but this is actually about recruiters doing their job with excellence. and no, i don't think a professional society like a SHRM or ASTD equivalent needs to uphold such standards or a code for recruiters like Wheeler suggests in the comments of that posting on ERE. look at how well SHRM represents the HR profession now. that's a big fat FAIL in my book.

we can do this on our own... i'll think about drafting up a recruiter's code of conduct to perhaps throw up on Fistful of Talent... and i'm thinking there's  separate code for third party/agency recruiters versus corporate recruiters... but we can do this, folks. candidates shouldn't have to demand a certain level of service - we're better than that.

PS - hit me in the comments for things you'd want to see in the recruiter's code of conduct.

Preview: Measuring Social Media for Recruiting.

lots of folks are experimenting in social media for recruiting, including me... but what do we have to show for it? 

i've been thinking about how to measure social media lately, and specifically when it comes to social media recruiting (or social recruiting) and using social media to grow your employment brand. i have a blog posting in the works for Fistful of Talent on this... and i'm still trying to boil it down and get it into a concise, clear posting that includes some tools for ROI. but before i could even attempt to wax poetic on this, i had to consult with some of my internal social media experts for their wisdom. i'm not sure if many people know this, but i recruit social media pros for my firm as we have an online team that focuses on using digital media, including social media, for public affairs and communication campaigns on behalf of our clients. and of course, in the process of getting some of our clients to make the leap into the world of social media, we've had to become darn good at helping them understand the value and the ROI. not the easiest thing to do, right? many still think about Facebook and Twitter and the blogosphere as a playground. but check out the blog of one of my internal social media gurus, It's Not a Lecture, by David Wescott who is a total smarty. some things i was left to think about when it comes to measuring social recruiting and whatnot after talking to David:

• there are a few different reasons to use social media "tools" for recruiting - 1) to find candidates 2) to build relationships with potential/actual candidates 3) to build/supplement your employment brand. separate out the three from one another when thinking about measuring the ROI. 
• how expansive your online network is does matter - including how many friends you have on Facebook, how many Twitter followers you have and how many connections you have on LinkedIn. it also matters how large the networks are of all of those folks you interact with on FB, Twitter and LI because they are in varying degrees part of your network. all this translates to the level of your influence in social media which is a consideration for the ROI - this impacts your employment brand. 
• for relationship building, keep in mind that social media is about conversations and communities – and you've got to think about what being part of those communities can teach you about the culture of said communities. if you're recruiting engineers or teachers or in my case, PR pros, understanding their culture will make you a better recruiter, right? you'll "get" them better. you'll be able to build better and more meaningful relationships with them... it's hard to measure relationships though yet it's important to remember this is part of the point of using social media for recruiting. think about it in the context of time you may spend on Twitter communicating versus the time you spend on the phone. social media tools just substitute or enhance other communication methods you were using.   

more on this later in a post for Fistful of Talent. i'll include possible tools to use to actually measure influence, reach, etc... but i think what measuring the ROI of social media will boil down to is that we'll have to make a bit of a shift in thinking because a lot of the measurements will be qualitative - it won't be as much about the numbers which makes it harder to make spending decisions… but qualitative measurements still do matter. and we can think about it this way - in advertising, what is value of putting a can of Coca-Cola in George Clooney’s hand? does it have value – can you measure it? yet it's still supremely powerful, yeah? (David shared that little bitty with me after reading it on someone's blog. i've gotta find who originally said that because i think we've gotta think about the ROI of social media in a similar way...)


cheeres and here's to a great week.

How We Talk About My Company.

every so often, i have my CEO teach a class for our staff on how to talk about our company. sounds a bit basic but it's amazing how many people struggle with their elevator speech. (seriously! quick - what's your elevator speech? see!) the goal of the class is to give them one more tool for their business development tool box and the class is geared towards our junior or new staff. 

i wonder though... how many people spend time teaching their recruiters or HR staff how to talk about their company? we talk about recruiting tools and techniques all the time - but is that enough to be a good recruiter? and do we ever institutionalize the process and teach recruiters how to talk about their organizations? afterall, i know you too believe recruiters or HR pros as employment brand marketers is crucial.  

no elevator speech is the same - and every situation warrants a different version, but the stuff to consider teaching your staff about how to talk about your organization (and recruiters, listen up): 

• know who you are talking to. an elevator speech is good - but not everyone gets the same speech. know what they do and what their priorities are. 
• understand and respect their organization and their current business partners (your competitors). no one likes someone who doesn't listen, and no one likes a trash talker. enough said. 
• adjust capabilities. maybe your company sells a hundred different products or offers a dozen different services like mine. don't share everything - an elevator ride is short. get to the point and share what's relevant. 
• check over your shoulder. who else is in the elevator with you? can you say what you're going to say? what if someone else hears? know your surroundings.  
• watch, connect, seek follow-up actions. not all elevator speeches will come of something. are you making a connection? is the person digging you? if so, find a way to follow up... otherwise, leave it alone. 
• integrity + chemistry = partnership. relationships are a two way street. for an effective partnership, there has to be some chemistry. (back to watching, connecting and seeking follow-up actions.) 

and for some consistency in how we speak about our organization (brand, brand, brand), we also teach staff key words to use. even better though - how we've come to teach staff to talk about the company is based on client evaluations and surveys. we developed a value proposition tool after an extensive process of gathering client feedback and analyzing from their perspective how we spoke about ourselves, how they wished we spoke about ourselves, and how they speak about us. who better than to listen to, right?

when developing junior recruiting staff, i always spend a good chunk of time on the art of the interview. forget the tools... those will always come and go. to be a good recruiter, sure, you need to be able to make sure the skills are there, but i want you to make sure the fit is right and to do that, you've gotta be well versed in how to talk about the job we're recruiting for, present the position in the context of the team it's on, speak to where the role fits into the context of the company and discuss what this role means for the bigger picture or the future of the organization. bad recruiters focus on just the position, good recruiters can paint the whole picture for a candidate. 

so how do you talk about your company? 

Monday Randomness.

this monday morning is all a jumble. here's some random thoughts:

• all the interviews we do - it's a blur, yeah? and it's hard for someone to stand out if you've been at this for any decent amount of time... but i'm sure we all have a few who stick out in our minds. here was one for me - she was a finance director with MCI and had been with them for about ten years. she was upwardly mobile and rose through the MCI ranks - and she'll be a CFO within the next few years i'm pretty sure. 

i've thought about her lately given all the bailouts and bankruptcies in the news - because what stood out for me in the interview was her attitude about staying with MCI through the accounting scandals and eventual bankruptcy. she was with them for the rise and greatness of MCI, and stayed with them through the end, managing a team of entry and mid-level folks. we spoke at pretty great length about retaining and motivating a team, in the midst of the bankruptcy... interesting dynamic. i was reading an article in the WSJ last night about how Lehman is still hiring and i immediately thought of her. to keep the wheels turning there and to keep folks motivated while they pull that beast apart and dissolve it, they could use a gal like her. because can you imagine that challenge? the ship is sinking, but there's still work to be done. and the work has gotta be well. no short cuts, no half-ass job... it's a unique leadership challenge that not just anyone is equipped to take on.  

• what makes more sense? when you have some big, fat issues the deal with... do you continue with it while the issues resolve themselves or do you go away and return when the problems have been dealt with if it turns out how the problems are solved are good for you? does that make sense? i can't decide. it's just that i worry about investing more of me, and more of my time, when it's quite possible that this isn't going to turn out in my favor.    

• so last monday was "black monday" and it all made me a little sick... the tens of thousands of layoffs. the next day, my big bro sent an email out to the family asking for advice. he and his wife had made an offer on their first home and were no longer sure if they should go through with it. the daily gloom of news about the economy and job cuts were freaking him out. is it really the right time to buy? would this be the best move for his family?

on the bright side, his company is doing well compared to others in silicon valley, and he's likely to receive a promotion this year. he's smart brilliant (like mensa brilliant) and makes enough to care for his family so that his wife doesn't have to work, and has enough saved to cover them for a few years should something happen. yet he still was worried about the big "what if." 

and me too. i'm in overdrive and trying to overcompensate given everything that's going on externally, just in case. i don't know what else to do. yet i can't imagine what the worries and fears and concerns are like for others. i mean really - my entire family talks about what's happening in the market and whether we could be impacted. and it's an interesting discussion to have because i look at us and see how privileged we actually are because of our respective levels of success. our parents were immigrants yet we're all pretty well situated and upwardly mobile yuppies in the making. me, an HR pro. my sister, a PR guru. my brother, a chemical engineer. their spouses, a school teacher and project manager. it's not as if we have to worry about plant closings or the like. i think we have no idea what others are struggling with. and i'm thankful, yet i feel lke such an ass all at the same time.

Why You Need Facebook for More Than Just Recruiting.

in the recruiting and HR world, you hear a lot of talk about the value of social media to build communities and to recruit candidates. a funny thing happens though once you've brought a candidate in the door using social media... all of a sudden, it's as if social media isn't such a good thing, and in some organizations, maybe the use of social media is actually prohibited in the workplace - a big fat FAIL. check out my take on how to deal with the use of social media in the worlplace over on Fistful of Talent today including how it fits in with the engagement puzzle, and why gen y types won't understand you banning it. 

Not All Women Are Paid the Same...

more on the NPR piece mentioned in the vlog here. and a wonderful blog on all matters compensation? here. enjoy!

========================================

as a PS - i finally listened to the NPR piece. black women make 56 cents for every dollar, latina women make 45 cents for every dollar - so it was inaccurate for me to say at the beginning of the vlog that all other women make 70 cents for every dollar. also an interesting stat is that even within a race, the gender wage gap still persists. asian women will make less than asian men, latina women less than latinos, and black women less than black men.

the piece brings up a good point of how women and women of certain ethnic backgrounds are concentrated into certain industries or roles and therefore may be paid less. there's also the argument of women making a "life style choice" for women to enter into roles or positions that allow them greater flexibility or reduced hours so that they can be involved in childcare or child rearing... so it's our choice to make less? is that bullshit? i'm not sure. 

hmmm. interesting piece on NPR. give it a listen.

Diversity Programs Stink, Unless You Join the Community.

affirmative action and diversity (101 lesson: two different things) are two topics that can go hand-in-hand with both having many, many layers, and many, many angles. let me say this first, and now, and loud: i'm not a big fan of diversity programs. i have always had a hard time getting behind them because really, too many organizations go about approaching diversity too lightly, or too naively. in thinking again about Malcolm Gladwell's thoughts achievement shortages, versus talent shortages, diversity programs are on my mind. some food for thought - and more on why i think most diversity programs stink...

let's say you have diversity targets or quotas so that your workforce better reflects the general population. each year, you review your applicant pools and workforce stats to see how they stack up and where you may have fallen short... not enough women, not enough Native Americans, not enough of this or that. you target your recruitment efforts to try to improve those stats by placing advertisements on "strategic" websites or newspapers or associations... but beyond "outreach" attempts, are you actually talking to these communities you're trying to recruit from? where's your relationship with them?

and what if the reality is that in some situations, if not many situations, those highly qualified A-player candidates who are "underutilized" based on your affirmative action plan output simply don't exist? are you doing anything about that? there are industries and professions that have systemic, institutional barriers for why people of certain backgrounds do not enter... it's not usually for a lack of interest that they aren't there. and it isn't that they aren't capable, so they aren't "making it" in your field. there's an achievement shortage which means outreach has to start at a grassroots level and work may need to be done to encourage new blood into such fields and then work to help them be successful in the said field. (think women in engineering for example...)

if diversity is so important to organizations... and in this market, if your reqs are dwindling and you're looking for other talent acquisition or talent management initiatives to take on... i'd challenge HR pros and recruiters to go grassroots. there isn't a shortage of talent in that "diverse" talent pool where your numbers have fallen short... there's an achievement shortage and but placing ads in Latino Times or with HBCU Connect isn't going to fix the problem. you've gotta go deeper. it's no different from when we tell people they need to engage to tap into and become part of a social media communities. you've gotta talk. it's a conversation.

some other good thoughts on diversity (and unemployment) here and some interesting thoughts on what's next for the race discussion post-election of Obama here.

Wanna Work for Obama? Part II.

going back to wanting to work for obama... hitting the stands is The Plum Book. for folks outside of DC, this is the politico's every-four-years-job-seeker's bible. it is a 200+ page bitty that lists all the jobs that will become available with each new administration. as i mentioned previously, there are thousands of roles that will be filled by political appointment... and then there are others. all told, the book has some 8000 opportunities listed. nuts? yeah, but there's a market for this book. the cool thing is that the book also lists the levels/paygrades of the folks holding the listed roles... so it's like a DC-ist's version of vault or glassdoor. you can take a gander o the book online here.

for recruiters in the DC area who hire politicos... it's a cold-calling dream. all these folks are likely on the market now, or are going to be soon once the transition wraps up. if you're networked in DC, you likely already know many of these playres. it's still a good resource though. does that mean it's easy to navigate through the book? not so much... it is afterall, a government publication... so if you can understand what the heck to do with it, see the snapshot below, more power to you. but maybe with obama as president, he'll help automate some of this and use web 2.0 in this venture four years from now... i'd love to see that happen!

Wanna Work for Obama? Apply Online!

so obama has won the presidential election and already, the lines are forming to work for him. as soon as change.gov hit, in DC, we heard the most clamored after webpart was the jobs/career section and that the overwhelming traffic had actually broken the site a few times. good stuff. i love the idea that obama as president is (possibly) inspiring a new generation into civil service. folks want to work for the federal government because they want to be closer to obama and help in create change? awesome. the federal government could use some new blood.

for those who are under consideration for cabinet and other high-ranking posts... it won't be as simple as applying online though. you are about to go through a pretty deep vetting process... according to the New York TImes,

"The questionnaire includes 63 requests for personal and professional records... [Candidates] must include any e-mail that might embarrass the president-elect, along with any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages. The application also asks applicants to 'please list all aliases or ‘handles’ you have used to communicate on the Internet.' "

wow! now that's something new. obama wants to know what you've been saying online and where you've been saying it. now that's impressive and progressive, wouldn't ya say? would be candidates also are being asked to disclose:

• affiliations to freddie and fannie, AIG, wamu and any other institution receiving a gov bailout

• the immigration status of any domestic help they may have

• copies of EVERY resume or bio issued in the past ten years

and just to cover all their bases, candidates also have to provide "any other information, including information about other members of your family, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the president-elect." oh yeah, and they also have to disclose "the most controversial matters you have been involved with during the course of your career." talk about a vetting process! 63 questions/requests! you can bet they aren't using an ATS to gather all that data (or are they?).

i'd never make it through that process but cheers to those who are good enough to pass all those hurdles. i think a new sherriff is in DC, y'all. impressive stuff...

Recruiting in DC Post-Election. It's All Politics.

back in june, the justice department had come under fire for "illegal hiring." recaps of the issue can be found here or here. essentially, the gist was that folks at the JOD had illegally used “political or ideological” factors to hire new staff using methods including tapping law schools with conservative leanings, or weeding out individuals whose resumes demonstrated a liberal bent.

maybe being in DC has jaded me a bit when it comes to politics... but i was surprised that this was such big news to anyone. and maybe i thought this was just always an unspoken thing we all knew, but DC is a political machine and whoever occupies the oval office, i figure there's a natural trickle down to all agencies. not to say that it's right that agencies and departments would overtly weed out people of the opposite political party or with conflicting values and beliefs... but people gravitate towards like-minded or similar people. if you have two individuals who are equally qualified to do a job, chances are you'll hire the one who is more like you because you like them better and it's a better fit. then there's the issue of referrals... let's say someone is a political appointee... you have 1600+ individuals in the federal government appointed into roles who forgo senate confirmation or a traditional federal hiring process - and these are all high-level folks who will inevitably have staff of their own they want to bring in or will need to hire with deep networks and plenty of candidate referrals to make... the trickle down effect is large. i think people in DC know the drill and it's also why there are suddenly a lot of republicans on the job market.

my firm happens to do a fair amount of political work so we get a decent amount of traffic from politicos who are looking for new gigs. we also had plenty of folks sent our way when primary campaigns were winding down. the NY Times shifting careers blog did a good job a week ago of outlining how a politico transitions out... and i thought i'd add a bit on why hiring politicos who are coming off a campaign or coming out of the government is a great idea:

• campaign life is fast paced and frenzied. it takes a lot of blood, sweat, tears and flexibility to work a campaign. you also have to be committed and dedicated. the media machine is 24/7, and you are essentially a slave to that. the travel schedule is frenetic and demanding. you are constantly on the go, you sleep little... but you learn a whole helluva lot about yourself and your (never ending) limits.
• campaigns pay dirt, or nothing, and candidates generally expect less coming in the door. of course, pay them what they deserve and should earn, but expectations are generally easier to deal with.
• politicos are well connected. they come with amazing networks of smart, politically savvy contacts.

it's an interesting time to be in DC right now as a recruiter. you've got a relatively massive, shifting workforce of talented individuals... which has got me thinking that someone should start a makeshift recruiting agency to farm out some of this awesome talent that is hitting the market right now. it would be an once-every-four-years shop that set up and shut down depending on what happens during presidential elections... but it would seem like there's a market for that business model, no? not that i have any plans to enter the 3rd party recruiting world of course...

A Big, Fat FAIL.

there are days i feel like an absolute failure on the job... like when:

• i have to pick the phone and call a 3rd party recruiter for help

• a person i've hired is leaving the company for reasons we probably could have controlled

• someone i've hired is having performance/behavioral/attitude troubles

half of my job is recruiting. the other half is a mish-mash of stuff - some training and development, some employee relations, some organizational development. and the upside of being more of a generalist? i can stay connected, intimately connected. once i bring someone in the door, i'm usually pretty in-tune with what's happening with their career and development. i know their ups and downs. and when it comes to them, or their boss, planning for their next step, i can be pretty involved as i know their background, their motivations, their strengths and their weaknesses. this is the ideal job model to me - talent acquisition pros should be involved in activities that affect retention and development because otherwise, you don't really see the big picture of your talent and organization.

the downside? it's too easy to take things personally. when someone who i worked hard to hire isn't working out as expected and maybe we have to address some performance challenges, or maybe when someone decides to leave... i feel like i've personally done something wrong and that i've failed. i must have missed something during the selection process related to their values and motivations. or perhaps my company has failed to live up to their expectations and we didn't deliver on something we said we'd do. it hurts. and during performance related conversations or exit interviews, i struggle... because it shouldn't have happened this way.

sure... i recognize that there's only so much i can control. i don't manage the people i hire on a day-to-day basis. but i do advise their managers. i do serve as a partner to them. so this feeling of failure? it's not so much a bad thing. it causes me to want to do better. i feel personally accountable. does this make me a better recruiter? I'd like to think so.

more on this later... at the ERE Expo the other week, there was chatter among folks on the topic of what recruiters should do in this economy, especially if your req load has decreased or maybe your firm has frozen its hiring. i was thankful particularly then that i am not "just a recruiter" but also, i was surprised with how narrowly focused some people's roles seemed to be, or that it was so novel or foreign to others to get involved in talent management activities, beyond acquisition... i feel like this should be the norm. not possible in all organizations, i recognize. the bigger the company, the more specialized people become... there has to be some middle ground though. another post for another day, i think.