Diamonds in the Rough, cont,

Watch out for those red flags!!

We've all heard this, "watch for the red flags", but do we all really react when we see them? And now, when there are so many more unemployed candidates than there were two or three years ago, resources have popped up all over to help those, "less than stellar" candidates get through an interview and land a job.

Here are some subtle red flags that I've picked up over the years, that I hope, if you haven't already, you can add to your screening arsenal.

• Too Much Information: I see this one often. A long resume, with lots of big words, making the candidate who for their whole career has been in middle management (based on job titles you see on the resume), but the resume reads like they worked right alongside Bill Gates when he was starting Microsoft. Make sure that the candidate's descriptions of their positions make logical sense with the job title. A division, or regional level manager rarely sits in on negotiations for the acquisition of venture capital. And while there has been a lot of downsizing over the past couple of years - if their resume reads like they were integral in starting Microsoft - well they'd still be there - someone else would have been let go.
• Big Profit and Revenue Growth Claims: Salespeople and Sales Mangers love to do this. On the resume they report that the grew revenues or consistently grew profits, and then stop there. If there are no numbers following these statements beware. I cannot tell you how many times I have had really good people leave this off of their resume. A good candidate will know how much they grew sales and/or profits, and happily put that on paper (and a good reference can verify that). Now, don't just assume that if there are numbers, they are accurate. I know of a business owner who loves to rave about how much his business grows every year. Once, a few years ago his revenue was listed in a business weekly. Well, now here a few years later, if his claims were true he'd be a lot bigger than he is. Check the numbers, and use common sense. If there are no numbers backing up growth claims, or the numbers just don't make sense with what you know about the previous employer, or can reference - RED FLAG!
• Lots of Job Changes: I do believe that the days of staying with one employer for life are over - but excessive job changes - by these I mean from one company to another - or subtle gaps between positions are a red flag. I look for growth or progression from one position to another. If someone is jumping from company to company with the same job title, that's a LOT different than moving for a higher level position each time. The difference - one is marginal and being moved out - the other is a high performer being recruited out. I'd want the latter working for me.
• Body Language or Dress: A candidate's body language, or what they wear should match what they've done in the past. If you have a candidate sitting in front of you for a high level sales, or sales management position, and they are not well groomed and wearing well tailored clothes - RED FLAG! If that same candidate is well dressed and groomed, but is slouching in her chair, fidgeting, glancing away when answering questions - RED FLAG! While the business world has gotten more casual - that doesn't mean that everything is appropriate.

I hope I provided you with a tip or two to help you weed through the field of candidates. I'd welcome your feedback.

Scott

Diamonds in the Rough - The Overqualified

Tuesday's Update: "What Would You Like Them to Forget?"

"The candidate is overqualified".

We hear this often from clients. Their concern? Once the economy improves the candidate will leave for a better position more in line with their experience. May they do that? Sure - a valid concern. But, wouldn't there be the possibility that a "perfectly", or under qualified candidate would do the same?

Think of it this way - what would you like that overqualified candidate to forget?

There are some good people unemployed right now. Many are finding it difficult to find employment at the level they were at pre-recession. If those candidates are willing to take lower paying positions - what's the downside? The risk that they may leave? Isn't there also a risk that your business may improve or change and you may need some of the skills that they have?

The best employees, when laid off, typically will not sit at home and collect unemployment checks until they run out. The best employees will want to stay busy, doing anything, even at a level lower than where they were before. These are the candidates that we want.

The next time you're thinking this candidate is overqualified ask yourself - what would I like them to forget?

Scott

Diamonds in the Rough?

Conventional wisdom has it that the best candidates are found among those that are currently employed, that as recruiters we should avoid the unemployed. Well, with high unemployment, and a very slow jobs recovery (expected to last for a rather long time) there are some "diamonds in the rough" to be found. Sifting through the masses to identify them can be tricky.

Over the next several days I will provide some tips I've gathered for mining candidates from the unemployment rolls.

Monday's Tip: Why is the Candidate Unemployed?

Over that past couple of years I have had many people in my office asking for my advice on their job search. One of the things I have tried to tell all of them is to be honest - put the reason for leaving every job on your resume. My rationale? Let the screener, HR Professional, hiring manager, whomever, know why you left a job or were laid off. Take the guess work out of the process for them. They are reviewing piles of resumes. Anything the candidate can do to move to the "consideration" pile, rather than the "no" pile will help.

Now - that only really works for good candidates. The one's we're after!

Lot's of people have been laid off over the last couple of years. Some are out of work because their company closed, or their division was moved. If we can verify this, we may have uncovered a diamond in the rough. Good candidates, laid off for reasons beyond their control should be able to explain that, and remain positive and confident. Those candidates unemployed for reasons within their control will tend to explain their employment status in vague terms, or actually become defensive or speak negatively about their previous employer.

Look for candidates unafraid to say they are unemployed, and discuss the circumstances of their separation. Certainly then verify the information.

There are good candidates out there in the pool of unemployed workers, and I will continue to provide tips on attracting and identifying those candidates over the next couple of week.

Scott

Interesting Economic Data

Each month I participate in a webinar focused on economic and other trends in the staffing industry. There was an interesting piece of data that was shared that I thought I would pass along.

Temporary staffing has been the leader in job creation over the past several months. That said - for the first time since the recession began, staffing services are reporting that attracting quality candidates is now a larger "problem" than generating sales. This trend has now reversed itself, indicating a tightening of the qualified pool of candidates. This data seemed convincing to me that, albeit slowly, there are signs of recovery in the economy.

We still believe that an economic and jobs recovery will be slow, and could be positively or negatively impacted by many factors in the coming months.

Scott

Job Numbers - Wading Through the Spin

I came across this article this afternoon, and thought that it provided some good, and somewhat objective data. While I still believe that the economic recovery will proceed slowly, there are positive signs, so long as we keep the political spin doctors and their individual agendas out of the mix!

http://www.theworkbuzz.com/current-affairs/september-job-numbers-redux/

Reaching Gen X and Gen Y Candidates

I came across two pieces of information today that I found interesting, and thought I would pass along.

According to research performed by Forrester:

"who polled nearly 43,000 people during the second quarter of 2010, between Generation X (31 to 44 year olds) and Generation Y (18 to 30 year olds) smartphone ownership stands at 23%. That's roughly 1 out of every 4 people owning a device that gives them access to their social networks, maps, music and even the occasional YouTube video."

And secondly;

"As noted by Bernstein Research analyst Colin McGranahan, consumers are adopting the iPad faster than any other consumer electronics device, including the iPhone and the near-ubiquitous DVD player. The iPad's current sales rate is approximately 4.5 million units per quarter, according to Bernstein. That tops the 1 million per quarter that the original iPhone sold at launch, and the 350,000 per quarter when DVD players first launched. " (http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/gaming.gadgets/10/05/ipad.adoption.ars/index.html)

Why do I pass these along? Recruiting. This demographic represents a tremendous number of people. If we're trying to reach them using traditional recruiting means (and even some that seemed "new" and "cutting edge" as recently as a couple of years ago) we simply may be missing them. Traditionally we would advertise in printed newspapers for candidates. Those referenced in the quotes above are getting their local news from smartphone apps. They are most likely not reading the printed version of the newspaper, or watching the TV news broadcast. Their smartphone or iPad is attached to them 24/7. Those devices have replaced the need for a printed newspaper, or watching the local news.

If we are using traditional recruiting resources, or even job boards as our sole recruiting resource we are likely missing opportunities to communicate with this attractive, talented demographic. Consider such resources as pay per click social media advertising; paid ads on local news media "apps"; or keeping in touch with candidates through text messaging or blogging.

At TriStarr we have invested a great amount of time and energy in investigating, and using these and other tools effectively to reach potential candidates so that they are available when you need them. If you are interested in learning more, feel free to contact me, I would be happy to share what we've learned.

Scott

Legal Update

A recent bill has been introduced in the US House (H.R 5107) and US Senate (S. 3254) that would amend the FLSA to require employers to keep record on and notify workers of their employment or independent contractor classification and their right to challenge that classification. If passed this legislation would impose civil penalties under the FSLA (up to $1,100 per employee for first offenders and $5,000 per employee for repeat or willful violations on employers that misclassify employees as independent contractors. Further, the Act would also amend the Social Security Act to establish administrative penalties for misclassifying employees, or paying unreported wages to employees without proper recordkeeping, for unemployment compensation purposes. The new recordkeeping would relate to exempt / non-exempt determinations and Independent Contractor determinations.

Suggested Actions:

1. Review independent contractor agreements to insure that they track the statutory tests applicable in the jurisdictions in which your company operates, and memorialize the facts creating a legitimate independent contractor relationship.

2. Conduct regular compliance audits to insure independent contractor classifications are up to date under state and federal law.

3. Audit directly employed or temporary workers for proper classification as exempt or non-exempt. It may help to have outside counsel involved in initial analysis to protect the legal review from disclosure under attorney-client privilege. NOTE - All TriStarr temporary employees are always properly classified as non-exempt employees.

If you have any questions regarding this issue please feel free to contact us and we would be happy to help in any way that we can. Our staff is continually monitoring this and other legislation and will continue to provide updates as we feel are relevant.

How Will We Work In the US.

I recently attended a conference where one of the speakers was discussing the future workplace. As one of the only countries where health benefits are tied to employment, we in the US may be at the beginning of a significant shift in the way we work. In the US approximately 2% of the workforce is "temporary" or "contingent". In Europe - where healthcare benefits are not tied to employment - that percentage increases to 8-10%. Workers move from job to job, or company to company based on how the skills and experience they have match the needs of the corporations hiring them. Companies need core employees to run their everyday business and then supplement those employees when seasonal needs change, or projects require specific skills.

I believe that there are forces that are working toward this model becoming more common in the US.

1. The business world is getting more and more competitive, and this trend will continue. Successful companies look at every cost. The most flexible companies will be the most profitable and survive. Does it make sense to have employees on the payroll who's skills they only need for three or four months a year?

2. The X and Y generations are different. They grew up in an era where they watched the loyalty their parents gave their employers rewarded with layoffs. They don't feel they can trust corporations, and they are well suited intellectually and emotionally to work in "alternative" arrangements. They will work for short periods of time, gain skills and experience, and then take those skills, and experience to their next job.

3. Healthcare reform was recently passed and how healthcare benefits will be delivered in the United States is uncertain. When healthcare benefits are tied to employment there exists a significant incentive for employees to work for an employer in a "permanent" capacity. If access to healthcare benefits is shifted away from the employment relationship, those incentives are removed, and workers are more freely able to work in "non-traditional" positions.

As the delivery of healthcare benefits are shifted from employers to the government (if you don't believe me save this email and check back in a few years), a significant incentive to a "permanent job" will be removed. Companies who best manage their workforces will be the most competitive and survive. Younger workers are very comfortable working in non-traditional arrangements. These forces are heading to convergence, and when they do the way we work in the US will look different than it does today.

Here is a link to an article I saw in the New York Times today that relates to this topic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/business/economy/20contractor.html?emc=eta1

The Changing Workforce - An EAP for Homesickness?

What a difference a generation or two makes. This question was recently posted on LinkedIn...


"Has anyone implemented a successful employee support programme that helps employees cope with homesickness?


I used to suffer from homesickness when I first moved away from home. It is common when relocating to a new role, but I wanted to gather opinions on ways of how to combat this using innovative or traditional methods of support provided by the employer (emphasis added). I have worked for firms in the past that have had external employee assistance programmes to help with problems outside of work, but wondered if there are any other effective ways of handling this type of problem. Thanks in Advance. "


Now I understand that there are differences in the four generations in the workplace, but I must admit that seeing this question caused me to do a double take. My first impulse was that this must be a satirical post. While I did not immediately click to view the whole post, I felt an urge that people get when passing a highway accident, I don't want to look, but I have to look. So I broke down and looked, and lo and behold, there was the post, and beneath it, serious answers.


Whoa, I thought. I guess I am older than I thought. Programs to help adults deal with homesickness? Is it really the responsibility of the employer now to help people with homesickness? Well, in my opinion I hope not. For me this is a parenting issue. I know that many will disagree with my opinion, and that's fine - in fact I would be very interested to hear anyone's thoughts on this.

I look at this issue as a Gen X'er just on the cusp of the Baby Boomers. As a generation we were the latch key kids, our parents hadn't yet climbed into their helicopters, and our lives were not structured and scheduled to the minute. We met at the nearest field and picked our own teams for the baseball game (yup the better athletes got picked first, and we most certainly kept score). We hopped on our bikes and disappeared all day, solving our own problems, and making our own fun. We are the me generation. We grew up and left. We and the Boomers are managing and leading now, and as a group I don't think we would be very open to our employees having performance issues due to homesickness.

That said, maybe we do need to be somewhat understanding, since we are the parents of the generation that is now feeling homesick. We've structured and scheduled our kids to a level never before seen. We not only went to their soccer games - we pulled up chairs for their practices. When our kids hop on their bikes to play - they have a cell phone and we are in constant touch with them. When they struggled in school we went in to "discuss" the grades with the teacher. The cord is still firmly attached.

What's my point, and what worries me? There are millions of kids in India, China, and all over the world who are bright, creative, and they will be entering the workforce soon. The number of honors students in India right now outnumbers the WHOLE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES. That's a lot of really smart kids. That's a lot of really smart kids that want a job. My parents used to tell me to "eat my dinner, there were millions of starving kids in China who would love the food on your plate". I've started to tell my kids, "do your homework, there are billions of kids in China who want your job", and they won't be asking for an EAP for homesickness.

President Obama's 2010 Budget Targets Independent Worker Misclassification

On February 1, 2010 President Obama released his FY 2010 federal budget. Included is a proposal, to be jointly administered by the Departments of Labor and the Treasury, to eliminate legal incentives for employers to misclassify their employees. The proposal sets aside funds to enhance the two agencies' ability to penalize employers that misclassify employees as independent contractors, and restore protections to employees who have been misclassified. It also allocates $25 million to hire 100 new enforcement officials to target worker misclassification and establish competitive grants to encourage states to address this issue. According to the budget, this proposal will increase Treasury receipts by $7 billion over 10 years.

If you have questionls about the status of any independent contractors TriStarr Staffing can help. Contact me at scott@tristarrjobs.com

A $138,350 Mistake. Why We Do Background Checks, and Why We Sometimes Cost More

Often, when I am talking to clients I am asked "why are your rates, or fees higher than some of your competitors?" While I have numerous responses to that question, a recent court decision came to my attention that will provide me with another answer to this question in the future.

As I read through the case, it became clear to me that the various background checks that we conduct on all of our candidates, along with the extensive skills, and personality assessments we perform are critical to our success. Do they costs me more money? Sure. Do they then lead to some price differences with my competitors? Absolutely. More importantly, do they help me provide better candidates and reduce mine, and my clients risks? You bet!!!

To summarize the case, a national staffing firm was contacted by a prospective client to supply a secretary / bookkeeper on a temp to hire basis. The staffing firm supplied an employee, but formal background checks were not part of their normal procedures. They failed to determine that the candidate they supplied, and whom the client eventually hired, had been previously convicted of felony fraud. NOTE - I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS RELEVANT FOR A BOOKKEEPING POSITION - NO?) The candidate did not check "felony", or "breach of trust" on their application to the staffing firm. (NOTE - A CANDIDATE NOT BEING TRUTHFUL ON AN APPLICATION? - THAT NEVER HAPPENS RIGHT?!?!). What really flabbergasted me was that this national staffing firm - come on they have more resources than my little company - stated that background checks were not a company policy or industry standard.

Well, it turns out that unfortunately the client lost the case due to background checks not being policy, among other things (I've provided a link to the decision below so you can read more). The damages listed in the case are reported at $138,350! A simple, and relatively inexpensive background check performed by the staffing company should have shown the felony conviction and either resulted in that candidate not being selected, or at the very least allowed the client company to impose strict monitoring and controls should they have chosen to hire the candidate.

At TriStarr Staffing we perform background checks on ALL candidates as part of our screening process. We also do a lot of other things that our competitors may not. Among other things, we ask for detailed job descriptions so the we know all the duties that the position requires, and we ask to meet with hiring manager to further identify what tasks and responsibilities are required of the position. Does this cost me more money? Yup. Does this lead to the prices for my services possibly being higher than my competitors? It may. Are my prices $138,350 higher than my competitors? Not to the best of my knowledge.

If you would like to read more specifics about the case they can be found here: http://bit.ly/9wX3mQ

Today, criminal background checks, skills assessments, personality and behavioral assessments are relatively easy and inexpensive to conduct. In my opinion, these services are part of what the clients of staffing service providers should come to expect. Shaving these costs in the name of price competition can be dangerous. I urge all hiring managers to think about and ask their staffing services provider what types of background checks they conduct. A couple of bucks saved during the hiring process could cost a lot of money later - in this case $138,350! Would you really want to have to explain that to your CEO, CFO, or shareholders?

Texting, "What Hath God Wraught?"

As the father of two teenage girls (my young son hasn't yet started texting - although he is already asking for a "phone"), I certainly can relate to this article. Changes in communication trends also impact my business. Communicating quickly is often the key to to our success. And like Ira points out below - we have to communcate with four different generations, and they all communicate differently.

Texting, "What Hath God Wraught?"
by Ira Wolfe

When Samuel Morse sent the first electronic message from the U.S. Capitol to his partner in Baltimore nearly 170 years ago, he typed "What hath God wrought?" I believe nearly every parent of a teenager today might be muttering the same words.
We are in the midst of four distinct generations of Americans trying to communicate with one another using different media. Communication gaps between parents and kids or managers and employees are nothing new. It's been the subject of thousands of books. Experts have made millions and millions of dollars prescribing remedies to bridge the gaps and mend fences. But they've seen nothing like the gaps occurring today between the Veterans (born before 1946), Baby Boomers (born 1946-64), Generation X (1965-79), and Millennials (born 1980-1999)... or have they? Has anything really changed over the past 170 years?
Take the phone for example: According to Nielsen Mobile, in the first quarter of 2009, the average U.S. teen made and received an average of 191 phone calls and sent or received 2,899 text messages per month. By the third quarter, the number of texts had jumped to a whopping 3,146 messages per month, which equals more than 10 texts per every waking non-school hour. Just for the sake of comparison, at the beginning of 2007, those numbers were 255 phone calls and 435 text messages.
It's hard to believe that little handheld device we used to call a phone is quickly joining the transitor radio and 8-track cassette in flea markets and garage sales. Don't believe me? Just try calling anyone born during the 90s or later. Good luck on getting a real person on the other end to answer it. Voice mail? Good luck on getting a listen before it's deleted. Email? You've got to be kidding. That's old school, baby.
That makes the term "phone" almost obsolete. Using that mobile device to call someone is just a vestige of old technology. The older Millennials, also referred to as the iGeneration because these young people have been raised on the iPod and the Wii, rarely if ever use their "phone" to call someone. They communicate almost exclusively by instant messaging and Facebook. (I intentionally excluded Twitter because contrary to popular belief, young people "don't get Twitter."
This explosion of text messages, tweets, and updates of non-verbal communication is stunning. It has many peoples' shorts tied up in a bunch. "How will kids today ever learn how to communicate?," is often the cry heard from multi-generational training audiences. And the spelling and grammar? "Well...it's horrific," parents and teachers proclaim. But historians might see this revolution in communication as just another lesson in history repeating itself.
Isn't instant messaging today just Morse Code v2.0? What's changed since Morse tapped in that first message? Upon brief reflection, it seems eerily familiar. One person taps a bunch of keys on an electronic device which transmits a message to another party. Only this time the code, all those texting abbreviations that drive grammar and spelling cops crazy, is translated on the spot by the recipient.
Ironically even Morse's first message reverberates loudly with today's texting dissidents -- "What hath God wrought?" It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

"Reprinted with permission from Ira S Wolfe and Success Performance Solutions. Copyright 2009 Ira S Wolfe."

Improving the Chances of a Successful Hire

At TriStarr, we have long believed and preached that the more objective your selection process the greater your chances are of making a good hire. If your hiring process is composed of simply reviewing resumes and interviewing candidates, your statistical chances of making a good long term hire are basically 50/50 - a coin flip (email me for an excellent graphic that illustrates these odds). By adding relative hard skills tests, personality assessments, work examples, and other tools you can significantly increase those odds.

Here's a link to an article that was forwarded to me recently that speaks to this issue. I hope you find this useful -and as always if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Scott

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/136/made-to-stick-hold-the-interview.html