Chapter 7 - The Recruiting Paradox
In technology, there are perennial workforce crises as companies struggle to find people with the skills they need at any given time. In the first place, talent is indeed rare and it is difficult to find the people you need. But this is also a derivative of the pace of technological change (the skills that are hot one month are archaic the next); all companies seem to want the same skills at the same time; and the fluctuation in the profession (not only do companies go on hiring sprees, they also go on firing sprees, and there's a general sense that IT is not a profession that offers adequate stability.)
The paradox is that CIOs are experts at improving business operations, but seem to be entirely inept at managing the resources in their own departments - in particular, their recruiting processes are not effective in bringing aboard people with the right skills, and they seem utterly incapable of developing talent in house.
Ultimately, a company is a body of people, and getting recruiting and development right is one of the most important activities that any executive must address.
Requirements Definition
Recruiting starts in the same way as other IT projects: defining the requirements that must be met by an incoming candidate.
This is often done very poorly, by cramming as many skills as possible into the job requirement rather than consider what is really needed. Workers tend to specialize in one area, and gain some level of competence in related skills that they encounter on the job. To seek a candidate who is a skilled database analyst, can design web sites, and maintain a mail server, is like looking for a barber who is a virtuoso bassoonist and is also a five-star chef. There si simply no job at any company that would give a worker exposure to all of those things.
Another common mistake is looking for employees who can be "both strategic and technical at the same time." This is likewise a set of skills that are not utilized in the same employee - and it is often the sign of a firm that really wants to hire someone to do executive-level work for a technical-level paycheck. Such job descriptions are unattractive to people with strategic skills who feel they should no longer be doing hands-on work, while being attractive to the technical employees who may have the desire, but not the capability, to advance in their careers.
Another significant problem is a complete lack of planning. The author's own experience in recruiting is characterized by instances in which firms wanted people to start "right away," which does not provide adequate time to find qualified candidates, go through the interviewing process, make an offer, and give the candidate time to resign and relocate.
If a company goes into panic mode every time an employee resigns, it has not done adequate succession planning; and if a similar panic arises when a need for skills has been discovered, it has not done adequate resource forecasting. It is all the more ironic that CIOs are probably better at forecasting and planning than most other executives, yet fail to apply these skills to the management of their own departments.
The Interview Phase
In one sense, the interview phase should be one of the simplest parts of the recruitment process: you know what skills you need, have a candidate who seems to match them, and must now evaluate the options to choose the best candidate. However, this is the stage at which most recruiting processes break down.
One problem is that CIOs fail to delegate the task of hiring to others who have the time to conduct interviews. The author presents an example of one CIO who indicated an immediate need to fill a position - but when she had found a spate of candidates, the CIO was overseas in Singapore for three weeks, then two weeks in India, then returned to the office with a schedule of back-to-back meetings for a few more weeks. The net result is that candidates who had been contacted by a firm that was allegedly hot to hire were left to dangle for almost two months before being called to interview, by which time most had moved on to other opportunities or had a bad feeling about the firm.
Another common mistake is bringing in far too many candidates for the first round of interviews. Instead of interviewing the six best candidates, which the author suggests, firms wish to speak to every qualified applicant. It can take weeks to get through the first round, which likewise brings the potential for the best candidates to be hired by someone else, or to feel mistreated by the potential employer.
Finally, firms do not prepare the interviewers well, which sends the message to candidates that they do not know what they really want - or at best, they are not interviews but interrogations in which a candidate is thoroughly grilled by interviewers who are unwilling or unable to provide any information in return. Simply stated, an interview is not only about determining whether the candidate is right for your firm, but "selling" your firm to the candidate, which is woefully neglected.
The Offer Stage
The author speaks of the offer stage as a "thrilling but scary time for recruiters" because they have neared the end of the process: they have identified the candidate the firm wishes to hire, but are uncertain that the candidate will accept the offer the firm extends. It's also possible for them to slip the hook at the last moment, as the offer you will make puts pressure on other firms at which the candidate is interviewing to make better offers, or for their current company to make a counteroffer. So in essence, all the work that has been done so far will either achieve results, or be completely undone.
Delay in making an offer remains a serious issue, even more so because there is only one "best" candidate - and chances are that if you appreciate their qualifications, so do others. Unfortunately, many firms poison the deal by an excessive delay when they require final approval to hire that may come from a manager who is out of the office or a committee (or multiple ones) - even if a recruiter can keep a candidate "warm" for weeks, it's likely that a job-seeker is interviewing at multiple firms, and someone else will move more quickly.
The author also feels that there are many slips at this point because the firm seeks to take control of the offer process, pushing the recruiter aside and switching channels. It's especially frustrating for a recruiter to lose a commission because their client kicked them out of the offer process, and botched it. While the author suggests that having the hiring manager make the offer personally is a valuable to initiating a relationship, she feels the recruiter should still participate in the formation of the offer.
The time between the selection of the candidate and the extension of an offer is "the dark period" where things can go wrong - but there is a second dark period between the time that a candidate has accepted the offer and the time they begin work. This is where periodic personal contact can help keep the candidate on the line: for the hiring manager, or CIO, to personally touch base "will go a long way toward" sustaining the candidate's interest and commitment.
The Perfect Search
The author relates a scenario in which things went perfectly, which emans:
- The CIO gave the recruiter a clear sense of how the position would support his department's strategy, spending more than 90 minutes with the recruiter to answer questions
- The recruiter had access to additional people within the company that would interact with the role, giving them a "multidimensional view"
- The CIO was responsive, providing same-day feedback and approvals on the position description and search criteria
- He gave the firm adequate time ("several weeks") to leverage their networks to identify top candidates
- The first round of interviews included six candidates, and was conducted by phone
- The second round narrowed to four, who were flown in to meet himself and the VP of human resources
- The final round, consisting of two candidates, were brought back for panel interviews, in which panelists were carefully selected and prepared not only to examine the candidate, but present information about the company
- Throughout the process, the CIO made a point of being available, or delegating to someone else who could move things along
- He authorized the recruiter to extend a verbal offer and secure verbal acceptance promptly while the HR department hammered out the details of the formal offer
- After the candidate accepted, the CIO called him the following week to touch base
In all, this "perfect search" doesn't sound all that difficult - but many CIOs simply do not devote the time and effort necessary to doing it well.