Showing posts with label Recruitment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Recruitment. Show all posts

Thursday, September 4, 2014

Against the grain?

Recently at least two of my clients requested my assistance in selecting people to positions they needed to recruit into. My OD self stirred in the confidence of the relationship, but raised a question of identity.

Both clients however decided that all they wished were  referrals. They would shortlist and recruit at their will. That was a small relief. But the anxiety revolved around the ability to place and position my request in their mould to people on my social network. However in one case, it was apparent that the client knew a candidate and wished an independent opinion.



I brought on my scientific temperament and asked the candidate to respond to the Harrison's Assessment online questions. That gave me a surer footing in the face to face interaction.

That is when it occurred to me that differentiation by specializations deflect whole person presence in the selection process. That to me is an organization effectiveness window.

So when I gave my sense of a thumb rule, the client's eyes and ears were up. Here's what I mentioned.

25% to social references from professionals known by the candidate.
25% to sound psychometrics especially on person role fit and likely derailers.
25% to candidate track record, of which 15 is self-report, 10 is based on rewards and ratings of others.
25% to the interview method or a slew of selection processes.

Now I have conveyed to my social network that I do not think am a specialist at recruiting. But they liked my trusting them to their ability to refer and do their references a world of good.

What was against the grain, was a learning experience for me. What do you think?

Monday, January 7, 2013

Excuse, Apology and Job-Market Symptoms


Over the weekend, I had a fair bit of writing and editing to do. When done, I thought of surfing the channels on television. I heard recruitment specialists speak in near unison on a business television channel. Their views however fell between an apology and an excuse. The apology was for the job-seeker, and the excuse on behalf of their corporate customers. The excuse rationalised on behalf of their customers was that they could not find high quality skills anymore in India, where they once sourced hundreds of thousands of people with low-end skills! Media can become a mask for shadow play of the real actors, especially when the lights shine on sensational content.

Bangalore was bashed as the most unfriendly job-market location in India. IT and IT enabled services began to appear a desolate and forlorn sector. Even the financial sector in India seemed like a convenient adjacency to this trend. Retail and FMCG were accorded ‘sunrise’ status. While my words may seem like exaggeration, let us look at some possible explanations.
1.       Risk Classification : India’s IT sector was founded on services after a troubled history with vending home-grown products. Risk reduced, and risk- averse, scale in repeatable services became king to the cash piles. Services were premised on the availability of low-cost human resources. Scale became the enemy of relevant scope. In creeping  stealth, depth and expertise were systematically discouraged. IT and IT enabled services customers now see diminishing returns from such a service provider location."...(Amex), which outsources projects worth nearly $1 billion (around Rs.5,500 crore) a year to India, has stopped giving fresh work to its software vendors in the country, depriving them of millions of dollars in revenue in the December quarter"
2.       Intangible Assets : Awards, mementos and certifications were routine forms of congratulations. Despite professing to be in the knowledge economy, and claiming to be assessed on maturity of business processes, no disclosure of skills or competency based assets are in the public domain!  Specifications of skills and its visibility on ‘bio-data’ were signs of recruitment. And how facile the pattern was, as long as the predictability of demand for mere skills lasted. Capability is an intangible asset and tells on the experience clients have. Paper and screen may be tangible, but like the proverbial book cover, the story beneath could betray the cultivated image. 
3.       Measure is not Purpose : Leaders reigned if they had investment capital. The leaders reduced their purpose to operating margin comparisons in some firms. In other firms, they modified purpose to customer retention, even if it meant keeping below industry norms of profits and margins. Leadership in firms never culminated. Leadership is a capability that requires a distributed capacity to share aspirations and execute to a purpose bigger than themselves. “Often short-term solutions become part of a strategy of consistently avoiding deeper problems” said Peter Senge recently.

4.       Humans as Living Systems : Employees who had depth in skills and capability left home-grown enterprise for firms that valued their intellect. This often meant they opted for offshore units of foreign firms that had business operations in India. They value the ecosystem of their first-world employers more than the salary package."In the West, which is facing the task of reinventing its societies, we can anticipate that a more ecological approach will be needed. Firms and institutions will be increasingly viewed as ecologies, as sustainable complex systems" says David Hurst in his award winning article of 2012. 
5.       Experience, not transaction : Services are competed based on an experiential differentiation. Engagement with customers requires that bids are won not merely on capability. Deciding on how to engage with the client would be strategy. However, annual operating plans are often devoid of strategy, because they are reduced to a shade of the past – operating margins at the cost of capability that targets a market.
Job market trends are symptoms of an economic system, although the job seeker is a system in himself or herself. We need more loops of thinking than the immediate linear ones. Open organisations can integrate economic, ecological and employee goals. The need for the virtuous cycle is not complete if we discourage feedback in loops that affect outcomes. The medium is a vehicle, not the purpose. The television remote is for the viewer, not the producer, the featured or the feature! Which button can rescue you from this loop?