Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Careers

The January Wrap-up

Russian Ice Aquarium

I had so much fun doing the end-of-year posts that I want to repeat the experience regularly.  So the Monthly Wrap will (a) cover short things that didn’t fit elsewhere, and (b) update things that did.  Here’s the debut:

An update on “the Twitter experiment.” A couple of months ago, in the post HR Superstars: A Handy Guide, I promised to follow everyone on the iCMS list of “21 HR Leaders in Web 2.0 You Must Follow” and report on the experiment.  I duly created a Twitter account and set up a TwitterDeck column to show every superstar tweet.  However, after a couple of days I decided that only 16 of them offered enough substantive content (as opposed to personality chat) to be relevant, so I trimmed a bit.  I did not tweet from this account at all for the first six weeks, but it was found by a few other tweeters, and I’ve followed back those that seem to offer interesting content.

The interim findings: Quality and quantity are not mutually exclusive, but they often do not go together.  A couple of frequent tweeters are consistently interesting, a couple are not.  On the other hand, tweeting infrequently does not necessarily lead to better tweets!  And on the third hand—I realize even more than ever that everyone’s personal filter is set to a different version of what’s meaningful/interesting/useful.   So I’m still working on how to draw general conclusions from the HR/Recruiting Twitter stream.  Next step in the experiment is to go beyond the original list and see who else is rippling this particular pool.

Unintended Messaging strikes again. I’m expecting this to be a monthly feature!  In January, the most striking example I encountered was on the website of a mid-sized professional services company.  I think the page was labeled “Executive Leadership” but it could have been some close variant of same.  Photographs of the leadership folks were arranged in three columns and (let’s say) eight rows.  On the bottom row were three women.  You guessed it—the only three women.  Title-wise, they were indeed at the lowest level of the leadership hierarchy, which was arranged from President/CEO/Etc. down to Director of Marketing/HR/Whatever.

How to avoid this unfortunate image, in which women appear to be crushed under a heavy stack of men?  My first thought is alphabetical arrangement.  Second would be some type of grouping that would allow the women to be scattered in among the men.  For example, put the top four guys in a C-level group, then break up the others into functional groups such as operational, people, or whatever would work.  I’ll bet there’s a way . . .

What are they thinking at Kashi? It’s nothing to do with Careers directly—but a gaffe in corporate communications will eventually rub off on the employer brand.  Short version:  Those of us longing for Kashi waffles, and finding none at the store for several weeks, went to the Kashi website for insight.  Buried on a deep page was a small note saying:  “We are experiencing delays in production due to repairs and equipment upgrades at our waffle facility. We expect to be fully stocked in early 2011 . . .”

Yes, you read that right:  2011.  And insult is added to injury by another post from the company describing this year+ gap as a “temporary shortage.”

A year’s lapse in the availability of a popular product line is really huge from a business perspective.   But even more problematic is letting people wonder for weeks (and maybe forever) about the missing waffles, because the automatic assumption when a product line disappears is either “unpopular product” or “troubled company.”  A little more research discovered no signs of clarification via press release or Facebook page.  (In case you think I shouldn’t be scolding a small-but-earnest natural foods company—let us not forget that super-giant Kellogg bought Kashi in 2000.  And Kellogg can’t help out with these waffle woes???)

That’s it for January.  Another Monthly Wrap feature:  The illustration is just for visual enjoyment.  See more ice wonders at EnglishRussia.

The February Wrap-up

Kitchen Counter

Continuing the 2010 tradition, some updates and short takes for last month:

Following up on the meeting detailed in Confused about .jobs Job Boards? . . . reports (sort of) about the event were summarized by John Zappe in this post on ere.net.   It certainly doesn’t clear anything up, but if by chance you’ve followed the saga thus far, it’s a must read.

If you are new to the topic, however, you can just jump directly to the Recently Breaking News.  In the nick of time for this wrap-up, Zappe posted an update that reveals a new turn of events.  To wit:  Direct Employers has taken down all the controversial .jobs sites (which were in beta but scheduled to launch this month) for “enhancements.”

There’s more detail, and more back story.  But that’s the gist of it.

Also out recently is this AP story, which presents a sunnier version of the .jobs story, largely in the context of profiling Bill Warren.   Reading all these items together, it’s tempting to think there has been a collision of good intentions, ambitious goals, poor communications, questionable decisions, and changing times. But of course it’s the outcome that will ultimately define “what happened.”

In the meantime, here’s one more thought about Employment Happiness.  It’s assumed today that there’s a quantifiable value to having happy employees:  lower turnover, better employer brand, higher productivity, etc.  But that’s a relatively recent point of view.  Were the people making Model Ts happy in the workplace?  The gray-flannel-suited men of mid-century Manhattan?  The drug-enabled workaholics of the zoom-zoom 80s?

It’s arguable that corporate America as we know it was built by unhappy people—and since things haven’t been going too well in the economy since the idea of worker happiness became popular . . . maybe there’s food for thought.

This last item is a bit out of order, since posts about the new Fortune 100 Best Places to Work list will be coming up in March.  But I wanted to get in a couple of small discoveries from the list that didn’t fit into the future posts:

  • The law firm of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe has instituted a non-partner track, offering long-term opportunities for lawyers who don’t want to work 100+ hours a week on their way to the partner suite.  Now that’s a good idea.
  • Six of the 100 companies on the list were touted as having “no lay-offs, ever.”  But Mercedes Benz was the only one where voluntary pay-cuts for CEO and execs were mentioned among the cost-saving measures.

Don’t forget:  In the U.S., Employee Recognition Day is the first Friday of March.  Check out some good recognition ideas for that day or any other.


(Many thanks to rvacapinta for sharing the kitchen counter still life.  You can see a fabulous Friday Night Dinner unfold on his Flickr page—highlighted by an entrée of seared scallops with a cauliflower purée in a walnut vinaigrette with orange caramelized chicory.)

Three Keys to Creating a Great Candidate Experience


Black Hole

A Closer Look at the Candidate Experience drew a comment from Gerry Crispin (one of the masterminds at CareerXroads) that has made me give a little more thought to this topic.  His point:

Firms will increasingly be able to measure the link from an improved candidate experience to higher engagement as employee and (surprise) better company performance.  Then we’ll see some light escaping the black hole.

This is really important.  If companies recognize a significant business (i.e., dollar) value in treating candidates decently, they will be more likely to make an effort in this direction.  So establishing the link between a great applicant/candidate experience and great employee performance can help put this topic on the corporate radar.

It might also be helpful to super-simplify the steps required for process improvement .  There can be a lot of touchpoints and moving parts involved in the candidate experience—but there are really only three rules for making the experience great.

  1. Communicate
  2. Communicate
  3. Communicate

Can’t get much simpler than that.  But as always, the challenge is in the details . . .

First, communicate on the corporate Careers site.  Really communicate.  Go beyond PR fluff and pretty pictures–include substantive information, and plenty of it.  Be transparent.  (This 2009 post on transparency is worth revisiting.)  And make social media communications meaningful, instead of just trolling for passive candidates.

Second, communicate with every single applicant.  Every  one.  Consistently and sincerely.  Impossible?  No!  Even if the communication is just an automated email, it can be nicely worded and can even be informative and helpful to the candidate.  Above all—try to close every candidate interaction with a communication:  an acknowledgement (“thanks for applying”), an update (“we’ll be scheduling interviews later this month”), a kindly rejection (“we really appreciate your application, but”), an interview invitation (“we look forward to meeting you”), a courtesy note (“thanks so much for your time to interview”), a sincere rejection (“although we really enjoyed meeting you”), or an offer (“we are so excited”).

And third . . . communicate during the interview itself, and during other personal interactions.  Whoever talks with the candidate should have something to say–they should be knowledgeable about the position and about the company and about the candidate.  (Reading the resume before meeting the candidate should be a minimum requirement.)

That may sound like a lot of “extra” work—but for many companies, it may be mainly a shift of priorities.  Once they start looking at the process from a human connection perspective, there may be a lot of obvious opportunities to tweak for improvement.

More ideas: Interesting background view from  Paul Dodd and Sarah Welstead at head2head.  A Gen Y take from blogger/strategist Sarah White.  A good example from Best Buy Canada Ltd.  And a thoughtful prediction from Claudia Faust at Improved Experience.

The “New” Fortune List: Part 2

Fortune 100 2

More observations on the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For list, 2010 . . .

A Lesson from the List:  Right-sizing the Corporate Careers Site

Given the fabulous workplace at SAS (see Part 1 for details!), we can surmise that the main challenge for their recruiters really is tracking down those perfect passive candidates and luring top talent through the gates of paradise.  Therefore, it’s not surprising that the SAS Careers site is truly minimal—just a (long) list of benefits and some job search tools.  That’s all.  No videos, testimonials, day in the life, social media.  Just the opportunity to apply.

Over at Publix Super Markets, on the other hand, where many prospective employees can expect to work long hours stocking shelves or filling prescriptions, the Careers site has every conceivable bell and whistle.  Publix has almost 140,000 employees compared with not quite 6,000 (U.S.) positions at SAS, and as of January 2010 they were looking for 1300 new employees, while SAS was in search of 52.

Point: In considering what is “best practice” for a corporate Careers site, we really need to look at the context.  Arguably, SAS doesn’t need a state-of-the-art web presence.  Publix does.

A Question about the List:  Is It Still Relevant?

A few years ago, the Fortune List seemed to be investigative and informative.  It offered examples of what worked in the workplace, and showed off companies that had built solid employer brands.   Getting on the list was a valuable achievement, and falling off would presumably be a disgrace.

When you look at that set-up, it becomes obvious that the list is not likely to change much.  There are only 100 spots, and once you’ve identified 100 companies that meet the criteria, the quota is full.  New places will only open up when a listee messes up seriously, goes out of business, or gets bought up.  So by now the news is not who’s on the list, but whether they rise and fall in relative rankings.

This year SAS vaulted from a respectable Twenty all the way to Numero Uno.  Why?  No way of knowing.  Fortune doesn’t explain its rankings.  But some suspect that companies figure out the secret of improving their rank and deliberately work their way up.  I.e., they study the test.

This year I spotted five newcomers:  McCormick, FactSet, Mercedes-Benz, LifeBridge Health Care, and DPR Construction.  There are probably more, as I didn’t make an exhaustive comparison—but I’m pretty sure I recognize 90% of the companies as perennials.  Given that 353 companies competed . . . the apparent conclusion would be that at least 248 competitors (2/3 of the set) fell short of whatever it would take to dislodge an incumbent.

Point: Maybe it’s time for Fortune to shake up this drill.  What about categories for small, medium and large enterprises, to establish a more level playing field?  What about special recognitions for innovators and most improved companies?  What about breaking out the citations for listees in terms of (a) tangibles like pay and perks, and (b) intangibles like respect, fun, loyalty, etc.  And what about adding a new point of view, so the Great Place to Work Institute is not the sole arbiter?

Just some thoughts . . .

The June Wrap-up: Spotlight on BP


BP June 28

The standout story of June was British Petroleum’s handling of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  “Careers” Meets Crisis, posted at the beginning of June, noted that BP’s Careers page remained unchanged more than a month after the crisis began.  Not only was there no mention of the spill, the “Featured job category” highlight extolled opportunities in the Gulf of Mexico.

A month later, the featured job category is IT.  But nothing else on the page has been added or updated to address the ongoing Gulf crisis.  Similarly, nothing has been added or updated since the spill on BP’s  Environment and Society page—which seems like an even bigger disconnect.

However, a few changes have been made to the corporate site.

  • The Gulf Response tab, which was put in place soon after the crisis began, is now more tightly organized, focusing on technical and practical issues.  The level of detail on this page conveys much more effectively the seriousness of BP’s efforts.
  • Some of the content originally shown on the Gulf Response tab is now on the landing page—so users who navigate directly to the site by typing www.bp.com into their browsers (or clicking on a sponsored link) will see Gulf-related material immediately.  The page begins with a large photo feature that depicts people at work: cleaning sand, pointing at maps, rescuing birds, etc.
  • Also on the BP landing page: videos about the company’s good intentions and positive efforts, along with information links (both contact information and news stories).  Overall, the page has a slightly positive spin, but not a pronounced “PR” flavor.
  • On the Investors page, a headline feature leads readers to the “Chairman’s letter to shareholders.” That’s the only reference.

In reality, people looking for information on the Gulf spill don’t make a beeline for the BP site.  Traffic statistics show that the majority of searchers proceed to stories from the Huffington Post, the New York Times, or other news sources.  But people looking for a job at BP are very likely to go to the corporate site—and the impression created there will matter to some job-seekers.

BP has made some moves into social media in the meantime, with a decent Twitter performance, a YouTube channel, and a Facebook page.  However their YouTube effort drew criticism because comments were not allowed for the first few weeks, and on Facebook comments are only allowed from those who have “Liked” BP.  These policies don’t seem to improve impressions of the company . . . .

A hat-tip to Fran Melmed, whose comment on our original story included the idea that BP could feature positive comments and stories from Gulf Coast employees on their Careers page.  (Fran tuned in to the BP/Careers story early with a hard-hitting post on her blog.)

April Wrap-up


Spring Blossom

The customary updates, previews, and quick-takes!

More about . . .

Facebook: Big doin’s this month at the world’s second-most-visited website.  Now nearing 400 million users, Facebook announced it will go for even more dominance by introducing a further array of “ways to connect.”  We’ll check into the details next month—but meanwhile, those involved with social media should not ignore this development.

CERN/LHC: What’s been happening at the world’s biggest science experiment?  Quite a bit, apparently, though none of it easy to understand.  Get an inkling by reading about the first (ever!) “reconstruction of a Beauty particle” on April 21, 2010.  The CERN search for a Recruitment Specialist is now closed, though.

The Return of the Road Show?

In my little world, a key indicator of economic health is the number of road shows I’m invited to.  In the boom days, I could have had breakfast and/or lunch courtesy of some vendor(s) at least once a week, just for listening to panel discussions and watching slideshows.  And probably gotten a tee shirt in the bargain.  (Or a squeezy ball or a festive badge lanyard, or even a logo’d padfolio!)

No more.  Of course I’m not active in the event-rich IT world now, but I’m still on a lot of “lists,” so it stands to reason that I would get fewer invitations, but not necessarily zero.  Yet zero has been the exact number for the last couple of years.  Imagine my surprise, then, when I got several very nice opportunities all of a sudden.  A couple are in the careers/recruiting/HR arena, and I’ll report on those next month.

Meantime, I’m just wondering if the increase in events reflects/predicts improving economic conditions?

Update from the Undercover Employee

Yes, I’m still undercover—though only part-time now.  That gives me an opportunity to continue observing the culture at Company Big without using up too much bandwidth.  And the insight for this month is:  Keep emails short, or at least give them onscreen readability.  There have been dramatic developments at Company Big this month, and the well-meaning execs (those coming and those going) have sent out l-o-n-g messages explaining why, saying good-bye, saying hello, etc.  They may think lengthy blocks of text look more sincere than short paragraphs and bulleted lists, but no matter what the subject, an extended message really benefits from some amount of visual organization.  For a refresher on effective email, revisit a classic post from 43 Folders!


(This month’s “beautiful image” courtesy of Noel Zia Lee.)