Got 'til It's Gone

“Noooooooooooooo!”  That shout when one of your key employees gives his/her resignation.  Two weeks, of course.  Confusion, fear, frustration and panic set in.  What will we do?  Why is he/she leaving us?  Who is responsible for making this person quit?  Let’s find that person so that we may substitute one separation from the company with another!

It’s no fun, but it happens.  Besides the knee-jerk reaction, there are important questions that should be asked:

1 – What led up to this person’s departure? – There were warning signs, even subtle ones.  Longer lunches to perhaps squeeze in an interview?  Wearing nicer ensembles to work? A definite change to communication patterns?  Less willingness to do that little bit extra?  Think back.

While reflection may not change the outcome, it is important to become better at identifying the signs for the future.  Being oblivious is not okay when it comes to talent management.  In the full picture, it’s critical to manage your talent effectively, which includes observation and action.  Asking yourself, “What should I have done?” is fine, but asking, “What can I do now?” is better. 

2 – How effective has support and accountability been? – Odd question, perhaps.  Truthfully, it’s often the case that someone leaves because he/she feels like so much work and effort has been done by him/her without reciprocity from other team members.  Accountability keeps everyone honest.  It also keeps dialogue going regarding areas of drop-off.  Support and re-structure can be offered once those details are known.

3 – How will we get the knowledge about processes, systems, compliance, etc. out of his/her head and into someone else’s in the organization? – I often joke with a new employee when introducing him/her to a seasoned veteran of the company that the veteran has probably forgotten more than the new employee will ever know.  There is truth to this, though.  If someone has been with the organization for years and is truly a key employee (not just dead weight that has been allowed to fester for decades because no one is brave enough to do something about it…ouch!), then the knowledge along with the nuances of history are hard to replace.

Effort needs to be put into mentoring and coaching opportunities regularly.  To try to get all of the knowledge out of someone’s head who just gave his/her two weeks’ notice is silly.  It won’t happen.  By establishing it as a normal business practice avoids panic and an unreasonable  burden of “data dump” between the leaving and the staying employees.

4 – Is the position needed? – Nothing says “Don’t let the door hit you….” then when you realize you haven’t needed that role for some time and have no intentions of filling that role.  But it’s true!  Out of our busyness or sheer laziness, we haven’t looked at role effectiveness.  Perhaps a resignation is a gift (for a variety of reasons, I know) in this vein because we can be forced to look at structure and process.  Does this role push the mission for the organization?  Is there overkill in the management level of the org chart?  Or, the real kicker, measure the results of that position.  If it’s not acceptable, was that because of the person in the role? Or because you don’t need the role?

5 – What will the ripple effect be, if any? – “Who’s with me?” For those of you who’ve not seen the movie “Gung Ho,” watch it.  Besides the datedness and the stereotypes, it deals with productivity and cultural issues.  A rallying of the troops as a result of someone leaving can be crushing, of course.  Walk outs or just a couple more resignations can affect morale deeply.  Repair won’t be overnight.

Proactively engaging a couple of layers of managers and directors will thwart one person from having such power.  Even if a key employee leaves, the communication channels would have been open to more than merely that supervisor.  If I can approach my manager, my director, my CEO as well as my team, then the departure of that manager won’t seem as “end of the world” as if he/she was the only superior who knew I existed.  Be visible, be communicative, be real.

Overall, it’s wise to care for all employees.  It’s very wise to care for those key employees.  Know what they need.  Know why they need it.  Know how support can be given.  BUT, measure effectiveness, too.  We’re not prisoners.  We don’t have to be held hostage by a key employee.  Figure out why and how to get the information out of his/her head and into others’ heads.

And to be truthful, a healthy resignation can do wonders for a company, too.  Jus’ sayin’.

Make It Like It Was

I spoke with a business owner recently (normal, I know).  He’s pretty successful in his field.  He works hard, really hard.  Long hours, tough working conditions, great product.  He was commenting to me that it seems to be harder to be an employer these days.  He’s been at this for quite some years and has enough history to make a comment like that.  He was basing this on his more recent experience.  He has observed that people don’t want to work hard anymore and that people find it too easy to complain (or sue) about things they just don’t like, rather than what’s truly illegal.

I like this guy.  I do.  It’s not just because he feels the pain of some of the HR situations I find myself in.  It’s not because I think all people suck (I don’t, really…no, really).  I find him to be honest.  His frustrations represent a belief that some of the systems put in place to protect people have now become crutches for some.  I concur.  He isn’t lying.

What I have often said is that it’s about people not programs.  It’s wonderfully smart to have sexual harassment seminars for your staff, but does it stop people from claiming that harassment has occurred?  No.  And why is that?  Maybe it’s because it’s too easy to get a payout.  Why go through all of the drama of court?  Why spend all of that money and waste time when the results will probably be the same settlement anyway?  It’s been the pattern for quite some time.

I’d like to submit a thought.  Culture.  I recognize compliance.  I recognize culpability.  Culture, done well, trumps much.  Fit matters more than need.  Filling a need with the first available often does not work out.  Waiting for someone who fits the culture is worth it in the long run.  Too many times we fill to fill, to check it off the list.  We did it…yay, us!  Woo Hoo, Recruiting Team!  (OK, too sarcastically HR…sorry).

Patience, people.  Let’s find us some good peeps!  When people are set up for success in a culture that fits, then a multitude of problems never happen.  I am not saying that harassment training is a waste.  I am not saying that at all.  What I am saying is that if you think annual sexual harassment training is going to keep it from happening or at least the complaint of it happening, then you’re out of your tree.  Train to the positives daily.  Handle the negatives as they come up.

By creating a culture of health through challenging opportunities and open communication, then you’re more likely to see people flourish and not take the time to be entitled.  We can’t fear the impact of the claim that might come up (anyone can sue for anything…welcome to America).  Instead of being overwhelmed in frustration by it, we should use that energy to positively promote healthy dialogue and right thinking in relationships. 

Management should be encouraged greatly.  As HR, we have a big responsibility with managers and ought to regularly seek to impact them.

Do I think that things are better today in the working environment?  Sure, but when compared to specific places in time.  Do I think we operate in fear rather than proactivity?  Yup.  Our companies might see fear in their own eyes, but that view doesn't have to be true.  Point out a clearer picture.  Practice painting it yourself.  Create buy-in.  Invest in people and impact overall culture.  

The good old days are seen through rose-colored glasses.  It's like any form of nostalgia.  It always looks better from behind.  Just imagine how good today will look in 20 years when we make it as awesome as possible (yeah, I said "awesome").

Papa Don't Preach

“Make it work.”  I love this phrase.  It brings to mind those hard-nosed, over-working small business owners who are keenly aware of the limited resources they have.  They have little time for holding hands and for coddling employees.  In essence, “You can’t do it? Then get out” is the attitude.

The major metropolitan areas on the East Cost of the US that I have engaged with throughout my career (Philadelphia, New York, primarily) are full of small business owners.  Many first generation citizens built their businesses on the 24/7 principle of work ethic with little concern for how much PTO they’ve accumulated or if there is an ergonomic chair for them to sit.  They busted their humps and created an atmosphere of hard work above all.

And while I love this (work ethic matters!), I have also gotten to watch these family-run small businesses push their children into roles that they have little giftedness in or desire to do.  The guilt of what a grandfather and father have done to build a company sits on the son/daughter who is primed to take over, despite the fact that the son’s/daughter's talents do not lean towards running this business.  These conversations are very difficult for a son/daughter to have with dad; there is so much of a personal nature behind it.  A father might preach the painful story of how the business began and the work it took to build it.  Guilt can easily set in.  Ideally, the father will understand and support his child's choice, but often I have seen a dismissal of such a desire and a fatherly push to take over the company.

Perhaps it’s from this traditional thought pattern that some management holds hostage employees who need to go.  Companies can find themselves in the unfortunate circumstance of desperately keeping employees because of their knowledge of systems, processes or product despite their lack of cooperation with other staff or overall lack of connectivity to the organization’s mission.  The employee has shown that he/she is disinterested and demotivated, but because he/she has been there for some time and knows everything, we have to just deal with it.

Managers have encouraged, yelled, cried with and threatened these employees.  And to the detriment of some companies, some of these employees have been promoted through the years and now serve in leadership-type roles (supervisors or managers).  Why are these flakes promoted?  How is it that the apparent reward of knowledge solely over the full package of long-term connection is quality enough to promote someone like this?  Companies find themselves stuck to do this.  Well, get un-stuck!

Our places of employment are not Guantanamo.  We are not holding prisoners, but employing people (I know, some employees think the former, but don’t you believe them!).  If someone is not the right fit, then plans need to be made to transition this person out.  Employment at will is still a valid policy in the US and is allowed to be used, as long as it does not conflict with other legislation and policy.  So, set up knowledge-sharing opportunities so that those who you do see a future with can learn from those who should go.  The words here are simple, but the action of them is tough.  Managers think about the chaos that might occur when so-and-so is fired.  If our employees are not prisoners, then why is management?  The work-relationship is not about that.

If your father said, “you have to work this company and that’s final,” there is more to work through emotionally and relationally rather than just professionally.  In our workplace, most of our relationships are not familial.  We’re not disappointing two or three generations.  Management has a job to do.  Finding and keeping talent that will move the company forward is part of our responsibility, just as moving out that talent that is destroying or, at the least, stagnating the mission.  And to be honest, we’re not doing any favors to that individual employee who doesn’t fit.  Let that person discover what he/she should connect to in a new organization.   It’s okay; we’re not their father.

4 Minutes

Dynamic, collaborative relationships are desired.  Most companies that I get to work with are often eager to find professionals who understand how to make an impact with the skill set they have while being respectful of the authorities in place already.  Smart employers often seek to find these exceptional people with vigor.

So, where are these people?  Do they exist?  After speaking with some of the ones we get to work with at Humareso, I would say 9 out of 10 have become discouraged about the talent pool.  Whether it’s a non-committal attitude, a desire for a list of all benefits offered by the company prior to the first interview or an awareness that the depth of work ethic displayed falls short of what’s actually needed in the workplace, these employers have dejection written on their metaphorical faces.

People, let’s display what should be displayed, not just as an appearance, but as a true picture of the qualities we possess.  Do I think that all candidates fall into the descriptors above?  No.  However, do I think that these employers are wrong?  No.  They are responding to what they see.  And remember, what they "see" is not always viewable.

I sometimes wish that everyone’s skill sets could be viewed, such as what a model has to do for his/her interviews.  Show me what you can do.  You can sit all day and tell me how great you are, but it’s better when I see you get up and walk the catwalk.  The tangibles are visible.  How do you move?  What does your face do when you walk?  Do you capture the look we want?  It takes about 4 minutes to know.  So, theoretically, can you show what you must in 4 minutes?

Most potential employers conducting interviews say they can tell within a few minutes if you have what it takes.  So, if the interview is a half an hour or longer, what is happening in the interviewer's mind?  You’ve got to make a quick, competent impression as an applicant.  The shortfall here is part of the reason that these potential employers feel that there is a lack in the talent pool.  They struggle to know what you know because it’s not presented in a coherent way.  If you have four minutes, what do you want to share?  Practice.

OK, naysayers, I hear you.  “Yeah, but John, when I walk into an interview, I don’t get to dictate the questions.”  After years of witnessing interviews, I would have to say that more than half of those times begin with a potential employer asking one of the following questions to start out:

• Can you tell me a little about yourself?
• Why are you leaving your current employer?/Why did you leave your last employer?
• Why did you decide to apply for this position?
• Why should we hire you?

Think about what you can do with the answer to any one of these questions.  Can you give them a great snapshot of your competencies, personality and work ethic in four minutes by answering one of these first questions?  Heck, yeah (Sorry, I will tone down the language moving forward).  Practice what that response is.  Look in the mirror and work it out.

However, I have to address those who do practice the answer.  Can you act like you believe what you’re saying?  The words are not the only important part, but the facial expressions, body language, inflection and lilt in your voice, etc., too.  Robots are not attractive and will not communicate who you really are (unless you really are a robot, and in that case, please be sure to check “other” in the Self-Identification section of the application).  Being believable is done when you are believable.  Crazy, right?

Authenticity begins with a belief in who you are and a confidence in it.  You might not be a fit for every company, but you are a fit for a company.  Your disillusionment with the process of finding a job can be seen clearly in the first four minutes, even if you’ve practiced your answer.  The spark in your eyes is dim, the life in your voice is weak and the enthused body language is replaced by a slouch.  Be prepared, yes, but be engaged, too.

I do believe that the talent pool needs to get stronger in certain skill sets (technology, written communication and mathematics) and in presenting those aptitudes.  I believe it takes work to get the job you want to get.  I don’t believe that you should just hope it works out.  Rather, work it out.  Do what you have to do to be enthusiastically ready for an interview.  Share with those potential employers why it would be great to have you as an employee based upon a clear and vibrant expression of your competencies.  Believe in who you are.  You’ve only got four minutes.  

Price Tag

What does talent really cost?  That's a great conversation starter with a CEO or CFO.  "Too much" may be the simple answer.  But after the off-the-cuff response, how do we consider talent's worth?

One of my favorite examples is Don LaFontaine.  You know, Don.  Well, you know his voice.  He did movie trailers and some television voiceover work for years.  He famously used the opening phrase, "In a world," many, many times.  If you're not readily familiar with his work, please allow me to illuminate - http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4781d17ca3/don-lafontaine-tribute-king-of-trailer-voiceover-from-trailermash - (I already see many of you nodding your heads, "Oh, that guy").  For the movie producers and television executives, Don was sought after as the premier talent for this type of work.  He was paid handsomely and had the ability to pick and choose the work he would do.  But don't think Don was a slacker.  There were days where he would work on 35 assignments...yes, in one day.

When Don started doing this work, I don't imagine that he thought he'd make millions doing it.  He worked because he needed to earn a living.  Those executives early in his career recognized his talent and were willing to pay more to have him voice their television openings and movie trailers.  The price tag for Don grew over the years and he understood that what he could do with his voice had value.  Don also recognized how he could use his talent for good in donating it to charitable endeavors until his death at 68 in 2008.

Don is a great example of the cost of talent.  Was Don worth the cost?  Well, since I am writing about him, I am saying yes.  He was someone who served consistently in his role and became sought after for his excellence.  Don was guided by those who saw something more than he did initially.  "Voiceover work is voiceover work" could have easily been Don's mantra, but he was able to see more by the way those around him responded, including the increase in pay.  How are we encouraging growth and optimization of talent?

One of our traps is that we fight hard to hire someone who we think will become invaluable to our organizations.  We just know it and we push for it.  When it happens, we're elated.  What often happens afterwards is the issue.  Where is the plan for growth and expectation?  Who is holding the process accountable?  How will success be determined and does everyone know that?  Watching this prospect leave after one to two years, having never really hit the mark for the organization, is a waste of money and a poor use of time and resources.  It will cause those to whom you pleaded at first to not look with favor upon your next fight for talent.  

Our job includes the initial recognition of what could be.  Like our friend, Don LaFontaine, a path has to be drawn to communicate vision for what a person could bring to the company.  Dream a bit and set the bar.  Don't apologize but rather cause someone to feel as though he/she could rise to the occasion.  And the stack of money isn't all that needs to be communicated.  Dialogue about impact and reformation.  Consider how many well-paid executives leave their jobs and why?  Often, someone is whispering in their ear a better laid plan for how he/she will bring value to another organization.  We need to offer insight into how we see someone's talents benefiting our company today.

Create those plans.  Work with management.  Met expectations will show value, to the organization and to the employee.  Even the "small" roles to the executive are pivotal to the overall success.  Consider again, Don LaFontaine.  What was it that he really brought of value?  A nice voice?  Good tone?  Yes, but one greater thing.  He could use those talents to bring anticipation.  A movie executive wants people to come and pay to see a movie.  Don could create the desire to want to see a movie.  That is pivotal.

Recognizing the worth that talent brings will require money to be spent.  But the price tag for it all is worth it when you align need to expectation.  When people work without a charted course, dissatisfaction sets in and a lack of motivation takes hold.  And senior executives get frustrated.  And HR people and recruiters have to back-peddle as to why this talent that they fought so hard for isn't working out.  Redirect those energies by putting it into a healthy plan of expectation and recognition.

Hear Don's voice in your head talking about you and your company. "In a world where talent is cheapened and left directionless, one company has the courage to take a stand."  Chills, baby, and I can't wait to see that movie.

Desperately Wanting

Professionalism is not passe.  I am not sure who started this rumor, but that person is wrong.  The business community still regards appropriate engagement in conversation and the written word to matter. 

For instance:

• If you're applying for a job and the phone number you put on your resume is not the right number, please correct.  How do you expect to be reached?  Just via email?  Sometimes that's not enough.  Update your resume to reflect how you want to be contacted and remove any information that is wrong.
• When you work for an organization, it's not smart to share with others why you hate your boss.  It's not smart to do that at work and it's really not smart to do that online.  Facebook and Twitter do not need to know that your boss's bad habit of biting his/her nails is leading you to look for another job.  They don't care if you're working 60 hours a week but only being paid for 40.  They don't care that Swedish Fish have been replaced in the vending machine with low-fat Fig Newtons.  Burning a bridge is never a wise, professional decision, especially one that's now in annals of the Internet for all of eternity.
• A meeting time is just that - a time.  When you say that you will meet someone at 3:00, that does not mean 3:15.  It actually means 2:50.  And don't laugh it off once you arrive.  Apologize.  The occasional traffic issue will happen and is completely understandable; that's the exception, not the rule.  Professionally, look to show your appointment you care by respecting their time.
• If you use your own cell phone number for work purposes or as you search for a new role, please get rid of the "please enjoy the music while your party is being reached" feature.  Let the phone just ring, for Pete's sake.  I don't want to hear a scene from Scarface, music from Tupac as you voice-over a declaration that you know he's still alive or your child saying "Wait for Daddy" over and over again.  This is your business line; treat it as such.

This is not a rant (alright, maybe a little) but rather a reminder to respect yourself enough to know how to engage and behave as a professional.  I went to college a while ago.  I did not have a class that taught me how to be professional when I left college.  I was the guy who wore PJ's to class on occasion, challenged classmates to name the full cast of Love Boat (both character and real names) while instruction was going on and left a drool ring on most of the notebooks I had for class.  I needed to be more professional than that once I left college, and I knew it!

Do we know that today?  This is not about age.  It's about consideration.  Entitlement has swept through our culture like wildfire.  We expect others to acquiesce to us.  "This is how I am" is a mantra of freedom that we embrace.  The problem is that when you have to collaborate with others and rely on others, you cannot always just be who you are. 

It may be your right to answer a phone saying "'Sup," but is that the way you want to be known?  Is that the way you want your company to be known?  Let me say that the answer may be yes.  But what I do know is that we don't ask first how what we do will reflect the company; we hope that it won't be a big deal as we think about it afterwards.  Professionalism takes forethought.

The workplace is not home.  You have to think about how what you do will impact others and what message it will give about the organization.  And if you are not working, your potential employer is thinking about how you will fit within the culture.  Your entitled perspective, though your right, might keep you from being hired.  Humility is a lost art in the workplace and it's one we should display.

Think about your demeanor.  Think about your understanding of professionalism.  What do you know versus what do you show?  Are they the same?

Our companies are desperately wanting those who will set the tone for engagement.  It is about skill sets.  It is about education.  It is about abilities.  It is, also, about professionalism.  We can present all of what the company has and knows in a broader way if we know how to appeal to a broader audience.  Professionalism takes knowledge, thought and practice.  It's just like how I worked on knowing the full cast (both character and real names) for Eight is Enough.  Ah, college... 

Signed, Sealed, Delivered

#culture is a hash tag trending topic on Twitter.  I see some great thought leaders on this subject post idea after idea.  I enjoy reading them and sometimes find myself drifting into "Thought World" and losing track of time.  I have to pay the bills somehow so back to work!

While at #shrm13 in Chicago last week, I couldn't help but be bombarded with some more ideas and considerations by the fleet of speakers on hand.  So, as someone who looks to culture often to help with any organizational diagnosis I am asked to do, have my thoughts changed or expanded?

Simply, no, but largely, yes (Uh oh, am I having a moment here?).  Company's are to ask themselves a very simple question - What are we going to be about?  That is the basic question that has to be asked and answered.  Talent is interested in knowing the answer to this question.  Interviewing is not just about the company finding out about the candidate, but the reverse as well.  The candidate wants to see if you know what your company is all about.  Failure happens quickly here.

Organizations who do not know who they are fall apart.  They don't know what initiatives to start and stick with rather than start and know an end to it (it's okay to do this, by the way).  Some companies float aimlessly hoping that whatever they throw against the wall will leave a residue of something that works.  Culture is now defined.  People recognize that their intrinsic worth for the organization is only about "what can you do for me?"

Listen, I know that our employees are there to be productive and to increase the profitability of the company as a result.  That's not a secret to an employee.  However, when it's all that there is, then the culture is established as only being about that.  Depth is lost.  Knowledge investment and the capitalization of it is not a priority.  Organizational attractiveness and vibrancy doesn't exist; the mechanic of the company is all that there is.

So, again, what do you want to be about?  Let me ask this: what difference would it make to your organization if you had employees who were emotionally bought in to the mission of the company?  What if they understood that, while their skills are important to the success of the organization, they were to bring their creativity, passion and openness to work everyday?  And, what if they knew that the company valued those aspects and would take action in light of them?  You see, saying you want an honest dialogue with everyone means very little if nothing ever comes from those discussions.  

I have walked into organizations that encourage open discussion and sharing.  After the meeting is held and heads nod in agreement, it's right back to the same old same old.  Culture is then defined.  The actions of the organization win out every time over pithy slogans in the lobby or a letterhead with the mission statement on it.  If I tell my kids I love them but most of what I do sends a different message, then will they believe me?

Learning new components as to how to deliver messaging around culture or how to consider culture in light of the competitive climate today is fun.  I enjoy it.  However, it builds upon the foundational question that companies need to ask themselves.  When we ask talent to sign on the dotted line of the offer letter, we have to be prepared to honor that commitment in return.  It's our duty to establish what we want to be about and to lead our talent accordingly.  We are the ones who invisibly sign such a contract.

The new employee should not be looked at to fix it for the company.  "Well, if we hire Jennifer then she will get this all fixed" is not fair to Jennifer.  It's a company with lots of people and decision-makers.  We're not spectators.  We, too, are signed and sealed to the health of the organization which includes culture definition.  If organizations take the time to think deeply and act upon this commitment, I believe that there would be a strengthening of market share and global positioning.  

It's time to deliver on this commitment.

A Moment Like This

You know, I am going to see Kelly Clarkson next week.  She is awesome.  I don't know if you're a fan of American Idol.  I used to be, especially that first year.  Kelly was the perfect choice and embodied the hopes and dreams of other undiscovered talent.  She gave others a vision for what could be.  She set the stage, literally, for others to shoot for the moon.  And in that finale, when she gets choked up singing her first hit, A Moment Like This, I join her in being teary-eyed and overwhelmed at what had just happened.  

I am very excited to be going to SHRM13 to see her and, hopefully, to sing with her.  She doesn't know it yet, but security ought to know that I am planning on singing backup for one song.  Please don't escort me back to my seat, Mr. Big Bouncer...it's cool.  Right, Kelly?  Pretty please?

I don't think it much matters as to whether it's singing or dancing or typing or preparing reports or selling or litigating, when you find the right fit, it's exhilarating.  Finding someplace where you belong is everyone's ideal; we're wired for it.  We want to be a part of a community.  Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs 3rd Stage is Love/Belonging.  We need this engagement level to be met for holistic living and healthy growth.

If you are looking for a job, don't settle on this point.  I know it's easy to say, but I would want to encourage you to find that role that excites, empowers and challenges you.  Be vigilant in finding that role.  Study companies and look for what they offer employees, not just in compensation or health benefits, but in team-building and in knowledge enrichment.  Where can you grow?  With whom would you want to grow?

We would do well to remember that the candidates we're meeting with are trying to find a role.  It's been tough for some of them.  Some may feel like they've been waiting a lifetime for that one special job.  They often try to put their best foot forward and make a great impression.  

In my career, I have a friend, Matt, who has worked for me twice.  I am a couple of years older than Matt (stop laughing, Matt) and we were friends prior to him coming to work for me.  He wanted to work for a company that would invest in him and encourage him to greatness.  Tall order for any company, I know.  What Matt decided was based upon the relationship we had.  He already felt invested into and knew that he had grown as I had coached him a bit.  I knew that he was a hard worker and coachable.  When he secured a job at a company I was working for, he was elated.  And he did this again when I moved to a different company.  We don't work together now, but we still maintain our friendship.  He has used those times when he was invested into as a basis for discerning future opportunities.

Why isn't that the way it is more often?  Why can't we encourage that type of desire within our teams?  One area of typical failure is onboarding.  We don't do a good job, classically.  We spend so much time sourcing, screening, interviewing, testing, etc., that by the time we find the right candidate, we are exhausted.  "Yay, we are so glad you are here!" is our first day gush to a new hire. And very quickly, that same day, we check out and hope the person stays in the cubicle for the entire day.  That's what we now call a win?

Honestly, it should be more like Kelly Clarkson's win.  We should be enthusiastic about his/her future.  We should decide how to market this person to the others he/she will be working with regularly.  We should consider the deposits of culture seriously; decide on what we want messaging to be.  Leading them on a brisk office tour (just to get it done) is not effective onboarding.  Where is the excitement?  We, too, as a company should be thrilled to have found the right person!

I know that we don't always find the right person.  I know that as a result, our recruitment has become less fun and more task-oriented.  We have relegated the process to filling a role rather than finding the ideal candidate.  I know we talk about strategy and culture, but at the end of the day, we often fall back into a "get 'er done" mentality.  Let's put the brakes on and turn the car around!

Listen, it's not just about the enthusiasm or emotionality of the onboarding, it's about the stability of the company, the suite of training for the new hires and the organizational commitment language observed and heard.  These facets take work and take time, but they will produce a substantial return on investment.  Be long-term in your view!

So, consider how we welcome and introduce new hires.  What should they know about the company after being there for one day?  One week?  One month? Look at that list and decide on how those objectives of learning will be met.  And celebrate all the way through those learning opportunities.  Make the culture more vibrant and healthier.

I am not saying to have fireworks fall from the ceiling like they did for Kelly when she won Idol, but maybe a sparkler wouldn't hurt.

Talk Talk

The previews for the movie, The Internship, already have me laughing.  I mean, getting in with Google's intern program is awesome, but to do so as Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn means hilarity will ensue. They say too much, share too much and expose too much.  So, it's a reality movie.

In the recent interviewing I have been doing for a variety of roles, I have found a few elements bubbling throughout which are very much from the movie.  Some candidates are sharing too much.  I don't mean as far as work-related or skill-related sharing.  I mean, telling me about a child's soccer team drama, a parent's goiter issue or a previous employer's unknown legal issues that could be brought to light.  Why are you telling me this?  I have kids, parents and previous employers, and I guarantee you that I will not be joining you on that path.  An employer wants to know what you can do, not the issues you swim in.

Too harsh?  I know there are some reading and thinking, "Well, I have to use those vignettes to show my personality so cultural fit can be known."  OK, let's say I give you that.  Where is the culture where town-league sports politics, parental health abnormalities and threatened extortionistic testimony is upheld?  If you find that place, please tell me so I can avoid it at all costs.

Candidates, be just as planned with the "personality" sharing as you are with the skill set sharing.  Put thought into what you will share and what you won't share.  The passing introductory mention of a love of the Phillies, for example, is fine as you and the interviewer take a seat if the initial conversation allows for it.  But don't throw it into the mix between aptitude and knowledge-related questioning.  I know that it's public knowledge that I am a Phillies fan.  Trying to bring it up forcefully so I can know that while you are floundering in the main questioning won't work with me.

And yet, I know that there are employers conducting interviews that spend too much time talking about the unrelated rather than the core competencies.  We like the "buddy" that can fit personality-wise and forget that there is actually a job to do.  Again, too harsh?  Consider the amount of complaints, lawsuits, and online write-ups from former employees concerning bad conditions, poorly explained job requirements and terrible management.  Who hired these people?  Someone interviewed them and hired them.  Regardless of whether every former employee is right in their post-employment view, initially he/she was hired for a reason.  There was something in the candidate that made someone hiring said, "yes, a fit."

The challenge is to be mindful of the talk.  What is it that you're talking about in an interview?  Why are you talking about it?  If you are the employer in the interview, consider this progression:

• Ask questions related to the job description and based on the candidate's experience
• Explain how the role works in the organization
• Use some behavioral or situational questioning to get a sense of application
• Allow for questions from the candidate

I am not trying to be overly-simplified in approach, but this short list might be enough to get an employer started on a right path of interviewing.  I would suggest a deeper dive once this progression is more comfortable and used.  There are some other techniques and tools to accompany this basic outline.

I have no doubts that the movie, The Internship, will be hilarious or at least have funny parts (let's be realistic), but in our organizations, we aren't hiring funny necessarily.  We're hiring for skill, for knowledge, for abilities, for fit - all of it.  The candidate ought to be looked at through the lens of growth - Can this individual make a positive difference in the advancement of our mission and vision?  How will he/she do that?  How has he/she demonstrated that previously?  It's a good flow and perspective to write down and keep in front of you as you interview.  

Hold onto those questions that aren't job-related for another day down the road.  Like the company barbecue.  Nothing like chowing down on some ribs while asking an employee how his mom's goiter is doing.

You Don't Have To Be A Star (To Be In My Show)

One of my favorite places to be is Disney World.  I know, a bit cliche, but it's true.  Every time I walk down Main Street towards Cinderella's Castle, I have a bit of a lump in my throat.  As a kid growing up in the city of Philadelphia, trips to Disney theme parks were not in the cards.  Don't get me wrong, I did not do without, but vacations were an extra and our blue-collar family kept ends met and little else.  So, at 18 years old, when I first went to Disney World, the anticipation was high and, thankfully, my expectations were met. 

What struck me the first time was how nice and engaged the staff were.  Pleasant smiles, helpful directions and exemplary service were delivered across the board.  Again, coming from Philly, I wasn't used to that.  I mean no disrespect to the City of Brotherly Love, but seriously, most of the "helpful directions" given involved one finger and it always pointed up.  I could hardly grasp why these people were like this, other than through some sort of powerful Kool-Aid guzzled each day.

Now that I am a bit smarter about employee development (you see I said, "bit", right?), I realize that Disney is strong in culture and in personal ownership development for each employee.  The employees really believe that they are delivering a magical day to everyone.  Talent is deeply important to the entire Disney experience.  Corporate Disney spends money and time to find out how to capitalize every skill in every moment.

In Investing in People: Financial Impact of Human Resource Initiatives, Cascio and Boudreau (p. 224) use Disney Theme Parks to speak about talent.  To the common observer, one of the most important roles is that of Mickey Mouse.  Let me warn you that if you read further, I may be destroying a truth for you.  There is a person inside of the Mickey Mouse costume; it's not really Mickey (grab a tissue).  The demeanor with which Mickey engages with guests is important, but let's think about what Mickey does.  He waves, puts his hands to his mouth in a laughing gesture, poses for pictures and walks around certain areas of the park.  Mickey has bodyguards who help lead him around; those same people protect him from the throngs of fans and speak on his behalf.  There isn't much development happening once the basics of the role are mastered.  This role adds value to the experience and thereby, to the overall organization.  Think about it, how stinky would it be if Disney World had no Mickey Mouse (yeah, that's right, I said "stinky")?  

But consider this: How crucial is the Mickey role to the strategic value of the growth and development of that talent for the organization?  Not very.  Waving, laughing, posing - doable.  In learning, the charting would look much like a plateau curve - quick learning of the role at the beginning and then a sharp, flat leveling off.  Let's instead think of pivotal talent.

Pivotal talent is where the investment in development would produce organizationally significant improvement and value.  In the Disney example, think of the street sweeper.  This role is multi-faceted.  It's not about just sweeping; again, if only that, then the learning would be quick and then flatten out.  The process would be demonstrated, measured and affirmed/corrected.  The reality is that the sweeper is often asked questions by the guests.  "Excuse me, can you tell me which way to Tomorrowland?"  "Can you tell me what time fireworks will happen tonight?"  "What time does the park close?"  Direct guest interaction happens.  Street sweepers will even walk guests to the spot they've had trouble finding.  The street sweeper role is pivotal to the success of the experience at Disney World (and other Disney properties) and it demonstrates constant development opportunities for this talent.

The mission of Disney is is to be one of the world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information.  They do this, in one way, by providing exceptional guest experiences.  The investment in the development of customer service, knowledge of services and offerings, recommendations for guest experiences and more will come to fruition through street sweepers.  This makes this particular portion of talent pivotal for Disney.  And yet, Mickey is the star.

Think about the companies you work for or with.  Consider the talent that they have.  What roles serve multiple purposes?  Is that role pivotal to the continued success of the company? Would investing more in those roles advance the strategy of the organization?  It's not about just being the celebrity or the main focus.  Do you think that Martha Stewart is pivotal or valuable?  Investing more in making Martha Stewart more "MarthaStewarty" would be a waste of resources.  Instead, in this case, developing that talent that serves to advance the brand and to make differentiation happen should be priority.

HR professionals can sometimes slip into the star-struck trap and focus more on Mickey Mouse rather than the street sweeper.  Measure the value the role brings to the organization.  Where would more investment matter?  Are the right people in the roles that are pivotal?  If not, how do you get them?

I can't wait to get back to Disney World this year.  I am planning on visiting Mickey and the rest of the characters, but I know I will be appreciating the street sweepers much more this time.  Mickey may be the star of the show, but the street sweeper makes the guest engagement enjoyable and worry-free.  Find the street sweepers in your organization and develop them!

You're the One That I Want

Remember being the "captain" of your lunchtime team?  You know, choosing sides for kickball.  I know the focus of this type of memory usually revolves around the kid that was picked last, but let's instead look at the first one chosen.  You know, that kid that was just the best at everything; he/she could kick a ball farther, run quicker and look cool while doing it.  The two captains would guess a number between 1 and 10 or draw straws or punch each other until someone cried "mercy" (yeah, it was tough being a kid in Philly) in order to determine who chose first.  And then, that miracle kid was chosen and the game was all but over before it began.

While I was not that kid, I was a captain at times.  When I could pick Richie (that kid), I knew we would win.  Nothing like a bunch of boys in Catholic school uniforms playing handball in the schoolyard or stickball on the street.  Nostalgic, yes, but a lesson in fighting for talent.

Workforce planning is a wonderful exercise and one that can help an organization chart out its future needs.  Being strategic in cost management and production output helps greatly in an organization's competitive advantage.  That company can operate leaner and meaner.  Perhaps you've gone through the exercise of developing a workforce plan for one of your business units or departments.  Deciding on a strategy to meet those future needs leads to a few conclusions.

My colleagues at DoubleStar do a nice job with outlining strategies.  Perhaps it's time to GROW internal staff through training and/or development to close the gap that future needs will certainly show.  Perhaps, instead, it might make more sense to BORROW workers through contractors or outsourced means.  Maybe it's abundantly evident that the future needs for the workforce can only be met by EMPLOYING external candidates to bring much needed competencies into the organization.  Rarely done, but still an option, is to PARTNER with other companies in sharing talent resources.  And the least popular strategy, but one that sometimes needs to happen, is to REDUCE the workforce in light of a business reduction or process improvement that will cause fewer workers to be needed.

These strategies will prove effective.  However, they will only prove to be when a thorough analysis of the business and its current workforce is done.  Throwing these terms around with your executive is not a great idea if you cannot deliver what they mean.  Be mindful of your approach.

Lest you think I have forgotten about "Richie," I have not.  What does your organization do with a "Richie" that lands on your doorstep?  Do you take a look at his/her credentials, KSA's, work history and then say, "Sorry, we don't have anything open right now, but I will keep your resume on file"?  If he/she is a superstar, will your organization really let him/her walk out the door?  Sadly, for many companies, the answer is yes.

Workforce planning is just that.  It's planning.  It's being responsible with the talent you have in front of you and with what you reasonably think will be needed over the next three years or so (maybe five years).  What you cannot plan for is the ace who walks in your front door.  This one person can change the course that some of the workforce plans were based upon.  So the question is not "do we have an opening?" but rather "where can I put this person today?"  This person may just be the one that's needed to open up new doors of business, to develop a new process for improvement, or to invent a new product/service for deployment into the markets.

Think of it this way, I am a huge Phillies fan.  Kyle Lohse is not a Phillie, but if for some reason he showed up on Ruben Amaro's doorstep looking for a job, the Phillies would be foolish not to make it work.  I know there are salary issues that would have to addressed, rotation schedules to be changed and plans to be revamped.  So what?  The Phillies organization, like any other organization, would have to evolve and re-calibrate to chart the course to win.  Isn't that what we are supposed to encourage in our companies?

Don't hold onto those workforce plans like they are infallible and unchangeable.  They are a chart based upon information from today.  If tomorrow, a "Richie" curve ball is thrown into the mix, then adjust.  Don't deny this talent a place in your organization.  Many years ago, I worked for a company that told me, "John, if you interview someone that you think is amazing and brings strength to our team, then let's find a place for that person."  That's a superb order.  We should fight to bring that kind of talent in when we can.

As I shared, when Richie was picked first, it was a guarantee that the team he was on would win.  The opposing team would just grit their teeth and play through their frustration.  They made plans for new ways to attack the situation and moved people around until the best use of talent was happening.  The other team adjusted to the situation.  And because of that, they were more open.  So when a new kid, Dave, came to the school, that team was more willing to have him join them.  They were open and eager to see how he could fit in to help them win.  And on that day, they did.  Dave was as good as Richie.  

What Makes You Beautiful

Stop screaming!  No, I don't mean because of your stress at work.  I mean, because I just used a One Direction song for the title.  Whenever One Direction is on at home, screams and full blown performances happen...I figured it must be the same loudness everywhere else, too!

I often wonder why we value surface characteristics in our employees.  Don't act so outraged!  We do.  Our culture loves good looks, well-dressed, well-spoken people.  Business Insider, along with a number of other articles, reveal statistics about compensation for attractive versus non-attractive people (http://www.businessinsider.com/attractive-people-are-more-successful-2012-9).  Earnings can be up to four times higher for pretty people.  Is that just a coincidence?  I don't think so.  We are the HR professionals that are involved in the hiring process.

But, even deeper, those pretty people are more likely to advance up the corporate ladder over the unattractive ones.  I have not seen nor created succession plans with attractiveness quotients, but somewhere our biases are creeping in.  How?  Well, what makes something beautiful?

Herein is the rub.  What are the criteria?  Nice smile/teeth, wavy hair, strong chin, great figure?  Uncomfortable, I know, but somewhere someone is making the decision as to what is pretty.  Many moons ago, I worked for a national restaurant chain.  I was "encouraged" to hire "the pretty ones" as hostesses and don't hire guys for those roles.  Um, really?  By whose criteria is pretty?  Mine.  No problem.  Needless to say there were all kinds of hosts and hostesses hired in those roles...I saw lots of pretty people. 

Often, our interaction with beauty is not as obvious as that example shows.  Mostly, it's a psychological affinity to a certain look or feature.  It may have no impact on the skills, abilities or knowledge that the employee or candidate has (obviously, if the role is that of a model, then it does!).  There is no real performance appraisal box to check on how pretty someone is (but there may be one on hygiene).  And yet, again, we're paying pretty people 3-4 times more than average/unattractive people.  

Bias is a tough thing to address internally.  Most biases are not egregious.  If an employer does not want to hire someone in a protected class because he/she is in a protected class, then that company opens themselves up to lawsuit, penalties and a host of other issues, not to mention how incredibly ridiculous that is.  The government has seen to it to address those groups of people that need protection, and rightly so.  However, as far as I know, there is no pending legislation concerning the protection of unattractive people.  I know that may be shocking, considering the amount of bills under review, but perhaps part of the issue is classifying who is unattractive.  I mean, do you want to be the congressperson from "x" state to say "I ain't pretty?"  Those of us who may consider ourselves average or unattractive remain unprotected.

As HR professionals, we have to be conscious of this.  What makes someone beautiful in our organizations? Think of qualities like production, teamwork, leadership, work ethic, loyalty, etc.  Aren't they beautiful qualities?  Wouldn't you rather have an "unattractive" employee that makes a real difference in the productivity and positivity of the organization rather than an "attractive" person who brings little excellence to the job?  Of course!  So, let's be sure that our systems align appropriately.

I know you may be thinking "why is he talking about this?"  Well, two reasons.  First, upon doing a simple Google search of the topic, I came across at least 10 pages of results with different articles and studies for each page.  Wow.  And secondly, I like to spend time instructing and coaching college-aged students.  Last night, in fact, I had the privilege of presenting to a group from Rowan University.  There were so many great ideas and such good energy that it was invigorating to me.  After doing some of the research I did in prep for this blog, I thought about companies that might not engage with such bright individuals due to some surface-reaction to attractiveness.  Now, I'm not saying that there were unattractive students in that class last night, but rather, I thought about the personal preferences of the hiring managers that will interview these seniors preventing them from being hired.

It's silly, really, but we are a society obsessed with looks.  We value people based on this.  Despite the fact that we fight the Miss America pageant and the like, we still tune in to see who wins.  We say we don't allow something so superficial as looks to impact business decisions, but the actions show differently.  Check your biases.  Check the biases in certain departments.  Check the cultural biases - beauty, age, sex, clothing, etc.  There are real ways that we unintentionally discriminate based on non-skill-related characteristics.

When I sit with my children, I share with them how beautiful they are.  What I make a point to do is to share why I think they're beautiful.  I talk about their kindness, compassion, excellence as a student, obedience, friendliness, service...things that will matter in the long run rather than looks which are fleeting.  I believe that my children are physically beautiful, too, but that can't be the emphasis.  I want them to use their brains, their hands, their feet to be recognized and to show accomplishment, not their looks which did not require much effort on their part (showering is an effort, according to my son). 

We should want our employees to know that the basis for their participation in the success of the company is based on their contributions.  We should want them to know that their value is based on real data and impact.  We should want them to know that's what makes them beautiful to the company, not their looks.  After all, what has Brad Pitt done for your company lately?

Big Time

"I'm on my way; I'm making it."  When I finally got a job that paid me enough which allowed me to move out of my grandparents' house and be on my own, it was awesome.  I was stoked.  Honestly, I remember cooking my first meal in my new apartment - pork chops, roasted peppers and tomatoes, brown rice.  I took a picture of the plate as I presented it to myself.  So silly, but it meant so much to me to fend for myself.  I thought I was so "big time." I was on my way; I was making it.

I often think about this time in my early 20's when I am recruiting.  So many energetic, excited newly graduated to mid-20's candidates applying for an entry level position are dreaming of how much of a difference this position will make for their futures.  My heart is so excited for them.  They're vim and vigor is palatable, so much so that when someone in that bracket walks in without that vibe, it is noticeable and an absolute put-off.

What I also appreciate is that same energetic air from the candidates in their 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's.  They share the work experiences they've had and the difference it's made in their goals.  I listen to accounts of successes and failures, lessons learned and those yet to come.  I am energized by their passion for the next chapter of professional development.  But again, if someone walks in without that confident approach, it's obvious.  Age isn't the issue; it's attitude.  I think of Mary Tyler Moore throwing her beret in the air in Minneapolis knowing that she's gonna make it after all.  The attack of life is invigorating to those around.  Without being trite, it's a beginning, not an ending.

However, in a time where the recession has eliminated positions, zapped retirement plans and sent many to the unemployment line, it would be easy to have a somber and melancholy attitude settle in.  I have witnessed tears and heartbreak by those who've been committed to a company for 25 years only to watch the doors close and the pension along with it.  So now, a 58 year-old person is vying for the same job as a 23-year old recent graduate.  

Let's role play for a moment or two.  Be both in your mind for a moment.

You're 58 and you know that you probably won't be making what your last job paid you.  You're afraid you don't have the current skills needed to be seen as viable enough for the role.  You see iPads and SmartPhones as the tipping point to your qualification rather than the 25 years of experience you possess.  You see your competition and you're disheartened that you're sitting in this waiting room.  

You're 23 and you know that you need a job.  Mom and Dad have told you that the support lines are done. You are worried that you don't have the skills for this role as you look at the 58 year-old across from you in the waiting room.  You grab your iPad and Google "skills that a 58 year-old has" so that you can fake it.  You're concerned that the manager will look at you as one of those unmotivated, entitled kids that you've come up against for most of the jobs you've interviewed.  You see your competition and you're disheartened that you're sitting in this waiting room.

Got a picture of both?  Both of them have a self-fulfilling prophecy behind them.  You will be what you decide you'll be.  Attitude is a decision of the will.  I can choose to be the victim, albeit with a right, or I can choose to rise above it.  Listen, this isn't a decision to be Richard Simmons (yeah, I know some of you have "Sweatin' to the Oldies" in the back of your DVD collection).  It's a decision to be positive and confident in mindset.  Your worth as a person is not about the job you do, but rather, the position you have can be reflective of who you are as a person.  So, if you're weary and frustrated, stop.  Really, stop.

Why are you in this position?  Assess the reasons; own what you need to own.  Develop a plan of attack that's tri-purposed.  One - address the gaps that you see in what you did in previous roles/address those areas where you lack skills.  By address, I don't mean just acknowledge.  I mean, acknowledge, confront, seek out learning, develop.  It's not okay to say I don't know how to "x."  Do you know you can search You Tube for guitar playing and learn how to play on your own?  Do you know that the internet has lots of information on certain skills and ability-enhancements?  What about your community centers and libraries (they do still exist)?  Be vigilant in learning.

Two - volunteer.  Use the skills you have and the ones you're developing to give back to others.  Engage with youth, seniors, displaced workers, colleges.  Develop mastery through usage.  Offer to be a resource at whatever level you're able.  You'll grow to be more of a resource as you start somewhere in that chain.

Three - network with attitude.  Sending out LinkedIn invites is not networking.  Finding communities where you can learn and offer answers at the same time will be more profitable.  Be online with purpose.  If you're spending a portion of your days playing "Candy Crush" or commenting to Ashton Kutchner on Twitter, you're wasting time.  Those internet communities matter whether you're 23 or 58.  Listen, my aunt is 72 and she smokes me on Facebook know-how and usage.  She engages with others, meets people and drives interest in what she brings to the table.  She works 3/4 time for a major grocery chain visiting their multi-site operations where she uses her iPhone to tabulate data...hello?  She rocks.

I have often said that if this HR-thing doesn't work out for me (well, it's been 23 years so far, but you never know), I would be happy to pour coffee at Wawa (I'm sorry for those of you who don't know what this is - Google it!).  It's not about what I am doing, but how I am doing it.  Bills can be paid, yes, but my passions can find a way out even in pouring coffee.

Let me encourage those of you seeking employment.  Change your mindset.  There is no reason to be still; there is no reason to be dejected; there is no reason to stop learning.  You can use your time wisely and have great impact.  Share who you are and what you know how to do.  Be open to learning new skills and sharpening others.  Walk into interviews with passionate purpose.  See your time in life, right now, as an opportunity.  Honestly, everyday is a day where we can be on our way.  We're all making it.