Blog + More
U.S. unemployment is actually 25 – 30+%, representing a huge hidden talent pool! Where are the jobs?
Failure to find talent can be found everywhere. This Talent Gap recruitment failure appears at all employment levels, but is most costly in top leadership, management, sales, high tech and/or healthcare, but not exclusively. A Retained Search Firm is usually brought in when other sources have failed. Great Retained Search Firms, by necessity, find ideal talent quickly, quietly and confidentially for highly competitive, sensitive, confidential and/or uniquely defined roles. The right firm will produce superior results at significantly lower costs than “in-house” recruitment. This is because true total “in-house” recruitment costs are not considered, asked for, poorly defined, not fully calculated or ignored.
Companies cannot find great talent, yet want to make certain they hire the best candidate.
This is part of the “Talent Gap” challenge. WASERPA brings access to the “Best in Class” known, hidden, unknown and/or passive talent available. This is vital to all employers. Employers cannot know all candidates and/or, for ethical reasons, may not be able to talk to the ones they do know. While 94% of internal [as well as external] recruiters use Linkedin to search actively for candidates, only 34% of candidates do the same to find new employers.
Great Leadership Driven Cultures and a Great Workplace Are a Choice? ……… Here are two actual opposite outcomes. “Choose Wisely!”
Here are two dramatic examples, representing two actual companies, tracing how two opposite leadership driven cultures went about solving the same issue. For simplicity sake both had $10 Million in sales/revenue, a 10% profit margin and 200 employees (20 management and 180 line and hourly employees). They both had a projected 1 – 3% decline ($100,000 – $300,000) in income for the coming year. At the time both company’s starting wages were near the state and/or federal minimum and already experiencing recruitment and retention problems. The details were modified to protect identities, but actually occurred during the same period of time, after the end of the Great Recession, 2013 – 2015.
Using a lack of talented applicants as an example:
Finance, CFOs or x-CFO-CEOs have HR look at the problem as the cost of not filling critical positions and the increased never ending training of hires and NEOs. Finance asks to lower the recruiting and training costs in order to keep the HR department costs aligned with the lower hire rate and “in line” (ROI) with desired projections. They cut HR staff, programs, wages and benefits to align costs and then report there is not enough talent to fill critical positions (a talent gap).
Operations, CEO, CPO or well led HR sees the same problem and asks, why and how is this happening? Through surveys, data and questionnaires they gather and analyze the data to determine the reasons for the observed outcome (i.e. time spent from starting to completing the application, matches to the job applied for, bulk analysis of the number of system-wide occurrences, possibly by position, all applications actions started vs. completed, those screened out by the ATS matching process, etc.). Educated changes are then made to improve the problem processes and results – receiving more talented applications and hires. (Usually the answer is: simplifying the process itself, enabling applicants to complete the process quickly and more easily; using accurate but more generalized job descriptions in the ATS matching process; plus, insuring informed and motivated hiring management significantly shortens the hiring process itself.)
Companies with great cultures know their cultures promote and reward employee retention. However, most companies don’t know or understand their cultures repel employees from both applying and/or staying. Reversing the talent drain by creating a culture of candidate retention will take time. It took a long time to produce existing negative talent results. Clearly this will not happen within a quarter and maybe not within a year. There is no short term solution to a problem that has taken years or decades to develop and fester. This also appears to have gone hand in hand with the short CEO and C-level life cycle within organizations. Short cycle reductions in costs and boosts in profit were great for shareholders, CEOs and other C-level performance bonus structures. However, they have been a catastrophe for their employees and employment in general.
John Hagen presented “WHAT IS (YOUR) WORK CULTURE AND WHY CHANGE IT NOW” at Portland/Lake Oswego’s Kruse Way Economic Forum
- Great cultures, wages, benefits and people policies produce GREATER PROFITS….not less!
- Higher sales/revenue, performance, profits and great people policies are not mutually exclusive
- Fortune 500 organizations with great cultures and leadership are 105% more profitable than those without!
- Similarly, companies with high engagement (coming from great people policies) are 2½ times more profitable!
- Companies with highly engaged employees outperform those with low engagement by almost 5 times!