If you really want to see a VP of HR get nervous, ask him or her about the candidate experience at their organization. Like profanity-laced tirades and red faces? Ask a job seeker what happened the last time they applied for a position through an ATS. Of course, there are some wonderful exceptions out there, and I am so proud that many of our clients have made the candidate experience a goal in 2012, but I think we all know that for the most part the CE is still pretty lousy. From my vantage point, it’s one of the biggest topics facing HR, and now that the job market is beginning to improve I expect a harsh spotlight to be shining on this issue.

In most circles outside of our industry, the popular thing to do is to bash HR and recruiters as nasty, unfeeling cretins who purposely design byzantine application processes and cackle malevolently each time a candidate leaves a voice mail about a job they interviewed for two months ago. I’ve written about the candidate experience a lot over the last few years, and my opinion really hasn’t changed: it’s a simple numbers game that HR is on the wrong side of. In an interview I did with recruiting guru Peter Weddle, he put it all into perspective:

You cannot recruit more talent with less recruiting resources. It defies the laws of human nature. If you want to hire talent, you have to use the talent of the recruiting team, and that means giving them the time and support they need to do their best work. Frankly, I don’t get it. Companies spend hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars on their ATS and then let the vendor off the hook. Not only are the vast majority of these systems abusive to candidates, they’re abusive to recruiters, as well. In addition, they’re costing employers a fortune by giving them inaccurate data on the source of candidates (causing them to misspend both their recruitment advertising dollars and the time of their recruiters).

Me? I’ve been waiting for top management to see the cost of a bad candidate experience and—well, I think they need help. If you’re a recruiter, show them the revenue potential you lost when that great salesperson walked out the door because no one called her after the interview. Tell them about the time, resources and impact on care and morale that will result from fumbling the Respiratory Care Manager you wanted so badly.

Fortunately, there are some great resources out there to help. Experts on both www.ere.net and www.shrm.org are telling their success stories and showing blueprints and examples of the steps they are taking to fix the candidate experience. It’s not going to happen overnight, and it’s going to be a process filled with setbacks, but I believe those that truly want to fix it—and the CEO’s who have their backs–will prevail, and win the battle of not only common courtesy, but the war for the best talent.

My kids brought their most recent report cards home last week.

Altogether, a great showing. My daughter got straight A’s but was less than stellar in the “Learning Related/Self-Directed Learning” categories. This included, but was not limited to:

follows verbal directions; follows classroom routines; demonstrates organizational skills; maintains attention.

What was I saying? Oh, yes. The social skills side of school was where she fell a little short. But when you see great grades, it’s tough to take that other side of the student progress report too seriously. She scored well, and that’s what counts to schools, so what more do you need to know?

My son got three A’s and two B’s and shined in every learning category except maintains attention and contributes to classroom discussions. But what my husband and I loved was that this marking period, he barely even showed us his homework. Never told us — or wrote down — when he had a test. Hardly ever asked for help, unless some tougher math had him down (Dad is a CPA so, yes, I defer anything past 4^th-grade math to him). He did what he did on his own, without a whole lot of pressure or review on our part beyond the normal, “Hey bud, do your best work today.” And, “Take your time with stuff.”

Considering today’s version of the report card got me thinking about RFPs. Requests for Proposals are, at least from our agency’s viewpoint, never an envelope or email a recipient jumps for joy over. Sure, it can mean new business. An influx of potentially great projects. And (CHING CHING) more billings. But the thing about an RFP — defined as, “An invitation for providers of a product or service to bid on the right to supply that product or service to the individual or entity that issued the RFP.” — is that it never tells the whole story. Its answers have probably, at least in part, been recycled. And we’re all going to try our best to tell the “individual or entity” what they want to hear.

Two things I don’t like about this definition I just cited…

#1 – “invitation”, to me, brings to mind carefree times and, usually, alcohol. No RFP I’ve ever been part of has ever included either.

#2 – The phrase “to bid on the right to supply that product or service” is off-base because a.) bidding isn’t really bidding when you don’t know what others “invited” to the fun are bidding, and b.) supplying our service — creative thinking, strategic solutions, and service — isn’t really a right. It’s kind of an honor, but definitely not a right. It’s really more about our ability to meet the expectations of the inviter. (Is inviter a word? I don’t think so because I keep getting a red line whenever I type it. Sorry. Maintaining attention now.) If we don’t perform as expected, we really have no “rights” as a supplier — we’re shown the door, regardless of how well-written and substantiated our RFP response was.

Which brings me to my biggest gripe about the RFP: it’s a ton of work. Not that we mind work, but RFPs can be daunting in size and in scope, especially since many of them are not written by the people you’ll actually be reporting to. Typically, an RFP is put together by the Purchasing Department. And, pardon any unintended aspersions cast at the Purchasing industry, but they really don’t care too much about what we do. They just want 43 answers to the questions on their checklist. We’ve received some RFPs that looked as though they were intended for tire suppliers. For example, “Please define the total quantity of radial tires you would be able to provide in last minute/’rush’ situations.” But they cut “radial tires” and replace it with “innovative recruitment ideas”.

But don’t get me wrong. I’m not completely against RFPs. Alstin has won quite a few of them over the past few years — even against much larger, much more well-known firms. (Insert fist pump here.) They do allow the organization requesting information to do a sort of side by side comparison of breadth of services offered. They do work to level the playing field and, if you do an accurate job of representing yourself, help you win business you might not have otherwise had access to. They, at the very least, let the individual or entity make fun of people for making typos.

But the real problem is that what we’re able to offer in list format — even with excellent full color samples — isn’t even close to definitive when it comes to truly explaining the competitive differences that make our agency best suited to win the business.

My daughter’s report card listed that she’s Progressing (P) at “listening without interrupting”. But in the case of discussing alternatives and brainstorming creative ideas, listening WHILE interrupting is when some of the best work comes about. Do I really want her to get a “Demonstrates Consistently” (DC) in that area? Sure, she’ll probably replace that “P” with a “DC” by the end of the year, and on paper, that looks great — especially, eventually, on a college application. But what does it really mean? What does it really sacrifice?

RFPs are a valuable tool for beginning the process of getting to know a group of individuals you may choose to work with. But it’s just one of many, and maybe not the most telling. Give us a test project and compare our ideas to what our competitors come up with. Or, try our recommendations out for three months and compare your numbers to those from the three months prior. Talk to us face to face — because sometimes, gut feelings are the most accurate “report” you can get.

Oh, and if we do surprise you with a great RFP response, take us out for ice cream.

Because along with winning a million dollar account, nothing’s better than someone taking you out for ice cream. Even if you’re older than eight.

In an article recently posted on US News Money titled, “10 Faux Pas to Avoid When Starting a New Job,” new hire mistakes range from poor etiquette to poor dress code. Considering the fact that it hasn’t been easy to find a job recently, the last thing you’d want to do is sabotage yourself within your first week, or even your first day of employment at a new workplace. It’s easier than you think to fall into bad habits in a new environment or to accidentally give off the wrong impression to co-workers. Although some of these mistakes might seem obvious a little reminder never hurts, especially if you have been out of the workforce for an extended period of time.

Here is a sampling of a few of the worst things you can do as a new hire:

 “1. The late bird gets in trouble. Being late occasionally is one thing, but chronic tardiness is another. Showing up perpetually late will put your new job at risk, so set your alarm earlier and get out the door on time.

5. Dress however you want. Even if you’d rather wear your slippers and daisy dukes to your new job, it could make you some enemies and put you on the black list immediately. Check out what everybody is wearing when you visit the office. A good rule of thumb is to dress more formally when you first start work. You can always dress down once you see that everyone is more casual. Also, pay attention to who dresses in what way. Managers may be dressier than their subordinates, so follow suit (pun intended). It never hurts to dress nicely!

7. Figure out the hard stuff on your own. Hate asking for help? Failing to do so could be detrimental to your paycheck if you make a big enough mistake. Don’t be a turkey—ask for help, ask questions. No one expects you to know everything early on, so it’s perfectly acceptable to ask once how to do something. Take notes to avoid having to ask the same question over and over.

8. Let your tasks stretch further than your job description. This one might not get you fired, but if you’re getting more and more work dumped on you that wasn’t mentioned in the interviews, you may be overloaded and want to quit. Make sure you fully understand the role. While many companies will want you to get your hands dirty and participate in duties that might not be ‘part of the job description,’ you’ll have to approach the subject with your manager if you find yourself in a situation where you are given much more than one person can handle.

9. Be who you think people want you to be. Everyone wants to put their best foot forward on a new job, but going overboard can make it hard for people to get to know the real you. Let your personality shine (quietly, if it’s a strong one). Never lie about your skills (or anything, really), and you’ll be on the fast track for success.”

Have you recently found yourself tip toeing towards any of these common pitfalls? Fortunately, once you know about some of these mistakes, most of them are easy to avoid as long as you can master some self-awareness. While it’s true that sometimes there is no avoiding certain conflict and that you “can’t always please everyone” steering clear of these new hire mistakes can help you at your new job in the long run. To read the entire list, view the full article to see more of what you should evade.

Did this list miss anything? Do you have another tip or two to add? Let us know what you think new hires should try to avoid when getting a feel for a new workplace.  

You may think all I do is dream about iced tea and carp about the darker side of today’s technology. However, I do know the secret to saving the economy and creating jobs:

The answer? You can’t.

Not really, anyway. There’s a great article in the New York Times Magazine by Adam Davidson titled Can Anyone Really Create Jobs? The answer, unfortunately, is no.

The fact is that creating [jobs] in a far-too-sluggish economy is practically impossible in our current capitalist democracy. No corporate leader is rewarded for hiring people who aren’t absolutely required. Most companies hire only when its workforce can no longer keep up with the demand for its products.

If you’re not familiar with Adam Davidson, I highly recommend checking out his Planet Money podcasts. He does a great job of explaining complicated financial issues and their ramifications in an unbiased way. I often turn to these podcasts when I want to learn about issues like toxic assets, the mortgage crisis, why we bailed out banks, etc.

Okay, so there’s two schools of thought on how we create jobs, and while you may favor one over the other depending on your political view, the truth is that neither one does much good.

Many on the Democrat side champion the Keynes’ view that the government can create jobs by spending a boatload of money. The problem with that, as Davidson states, is:

The stimulus…has to be borrowed, and it has to be really, truly huge — probably something like $1.5 or $2 trillion — to fill the gap between where the economy is and where it would be if everyone was spending at pre-recession levels. The goal is to goad consumers into spending again. And President Obama’s jettisoned $400 billion jobs package, hard-core Keynesians argue, is nowhere near what it would take to persuade them.”

The Republicans obviously champion a more fiscally conservative view that says that a Keynesian stimulus can’t grow jobs or fix the economy — only time can, and that any meddling we do only delays the recovery. Davidson points out the irony of this viewpoint:

It’s a puzzle of modern politics that Republicans have had electoral success with a policy that fundamentally asserts there is nothing the government can do to create jobs any time soon.

Of course, I wouldn’t expect Romney, Perry, Cain or any GOP candidate to shout, “Just sit tight, we’ll get through this!” In fact, many of the “jobs creation” ideas proposed by the Republicans like tax cuts and loosening of regulations are at odds with this wait-it-out philosophy.

So is there any hope? Davidson closes the piece with his opinion:

An economy is truly healthy only when its people know how to make and do things that others will pay them a decent amount for. Jobs, in other words, are not the cause of a healthy economy; they’re the byproduct. And that’s another thing most national politicians know but will never say. So perhaps instead of (or, at least, in addition to) arguing over plans that aren’t going to happen, we should focus on what almost certainly will come true. The economy that emerges from this recession is going to be different. Without the distortion of a credit bubble, it is clear that far too many Americans don’t know how to do anything that the world is willing to pay them a living wage for. No economic theory offers them easy salvation. We don’t need to become a nation of app designers. An economic downturn is a great time to learn things — carpentry, say, or aerospace engineering — that others will eventually pay for.

My post today is really less a blog post and more a call for help. I’d like to get our readers’ feedback on LinkedIn groups that focus on Human Resources or Recruiting. In many ways, these types of discussion groups are the whole point of social media, but (in my humble opinion) I often find that there isn’t a whole lot of value inside the different LinkedIn HR and Recruiting groups—at least the ones I’ve come across.

The problem could very well be my own lack of knowledge or involvement, and perhaps there are great groups out there I need to join to change my opinion. Of course, a big industry-wide problem is that many of these groups are populated either by recruiters who blindly throw their candidates or searches into conversations:

QUESTION: “Hello, I am a healthcare recruiter in North Carolina, and I’m wondering if you’re still blocking social media sites at your healthcare institution?” Amy Recruiter, NC Health System

REPLY:  “Accounting Professional with 7 years experience AND knowledge of defense industry. Contact me today!”

Or the discussion threads are started disingenuously by people using a group as a slimy way to promote their own business. We’ve all seen the online discussions on groups that follow this script:

“Does anyone know of a good background checking software that is price competitive and can make a recruiter’s life easier?” Joe Blow, recruiting industry veteran.

Hi Joe. Why yes, there is a wonderful solution out there. ABC Background Checking is the premier background checking…” Jane Doe, HR systems vendor

Dig a bit deeper, and you’ll never guess what company both Joe and Jane work for.

Okay, I’m exaggerating a bit, but even when the discussions are legitimate, I rarely find them compelling enough to make me want to comment or read more. In fact, I usually find that the articles I read from places like www.ere.net have “comment” sections below each article with discussions much more relevant and interesting for the recruiting industry.

Are other people feeling the same way? Or am I missing something?

An article posted on Inc.com titled, “Sheldon Yellen: Why I Went on Undercover Boss” follows Sheldon Yellen’s experience when he decided to go undercover to gain more insight on his employees and their everyday work. While many might consider the television show just another reality program aimed at entertaining the masses, Yellen explains in this interview how the adventure actually helped him relate better to his employees.

First the article discusses a little bit about this background, “Sheldon Yellen had an inkling that he was out of touch with his 6,400 employees. After all, as the CEO of Belfor Holdings (No. 4,753 on the 2009 Inc. 5000) a $1 billion diversified building services company based in Birmingham, Michigan, Yellen oversees Belfor Property Restoration, the largest property restoration company in the world with 195 offices in 27 countries.” The next few questions offer details of what Yellen’s new responsibilities became and what he did on the job.

“What job positions did you tackle as part of your undercover operation?

I first did demolition, and then I was extracting water and drying out a property. I was asked to crawl under the crawl space of that home to remove installation under the house. My third stop, I was hanging dry wall; and my fourth stop I did soot and smoke removal.

Were the jobs what you expected?

For 53-years-old, it was all difficult for me—physically and mentally, especially being around people that are in a distressed state of mind after a disaster happens—a flood or fire—and they’ve lost everything. The job task itself, people can do and get done. But doing it, while carrying around the burden of everyday life that everyone has and making sure your mindset is right to bring about order to somebody else’s life when your own life may be in chaos—that is a hard task.”

He also explains how this project helped him become more aware of what his employees do everyday, how they think and ultimately how he can be a better CEO because of it.

“How important is having a 360-view of your organization?

The closer the top management can be to the people who are doing the heavy lifting every day, the better the organization can be more sustainable. It gives you a real grounded sense of what’s important. And what’s important in an organization, to me, is people. That is your single greatest asset. Employee retention is very important. I think then it breeds a culture of growth from within. You want to see your people succeed and grow as individuals. Our people are promoted from within. We don’t go outside, hire people and put them in positions of authority. Our managers today started out as trade’s people and I think that’s a very healthy culture. And our productivity levels—as we’ve done 80 some acquisitions in this country alone and we’ve looked at the financial statements of over 150 competitors—are four times our competition because our people know that they are a part of something that’s real.

How do you ensure that your managers and executives move forward with your vision?

I spend my time traveling around and meeting with my management team all over the world. I spend an enormous amount of time on the phone. I don’t believe in e-mail. I believe in having a personal touch. I hand write 6,000 birthday cards a year. I probably write an equal number of thank you notes a year. So between my personal handwriting of 12,000 notes and my phone calls—I call my managers on their birthdays, call on anniversaries, I go to weddings, I show up unfortunately to funerals, I make hospital visits—that’s how I stay in touch and communicate with people.

What is the biggest mistake CEOs make in communicating to employees?

Sometimes a CEO will say something that hasn’t been thought through and then takes it upon himself to just renege on what it was that he or she said. And I think that is just a criminal offense. You’ve got to be very careful what you say and you have to know who your audience is, because if you say it, you have to live it.”

To read more about what Yellen got out of this process, click on the link above to see the whole article.

As a manager or anyone with a position that involves supervision, have you experienced what your employees do day-to-day? Do you feel that you can relate, or is there a disconnect? What have you tried to do to help close that gap?

As an employee, do you feel that your manager or supervisor really understands what your day-to-day job entails? Is there a big disconnect where you are employed and if so, have you noticed any efforts to close that gap?

The team over at LinkedIn (who are enjoying their second annual customer conference – Talent Connect – in Las Vegas this week) recently polled 17,000 professionals across the globe on office pet peeves. Around Alstin, it seems a dearth of assorted chocolate bars left in our candy jar (“Only Three Musketeers left again, boo!”) may rank somewhere in our office’s top five.

In the United States, the big peeve apparently is realizing a coworker decided that your packed lunch looked a little too tempting. (As we’ve learned first-hand in this office, some sleuthing around trash cans may be all you need to do to find out the culprit!) Capitalizing on this trend, here’s a product attempting to foil the lazy, broke and hungry office mates of the world: anti-theft lunch bags.  The seller touts, ”Anti-Theft Lunch Bags are zipper bags that have green splotches printed on both sides, making your freshly prepared lunch look spoiled. Don’t let a sticky-fingered coworker get away with lunch theft again!”

Other than being bummed that there’s no more Twix or Almond Joys to be had, my work related peeve isn’t even one relegated to the office.  Slippery rail season and the usual 15 minute delays aside, I feel lucky to be able to commute to Alstin on a train. However, when it comes to my fellow passengers, the ones that clip their nails, dip themselves in perfume, talk openly and loudly about their doctor’s appointments and decide that my arm is their perfect armrest while reading the newspaper, I can get a wee bit peevish.

Here’s some of the highlights from LinkedIn’s findings. Can you relate to these or have some of your own you’d like to share? Post a comment and let us know!

According to an article on BusinessNewsDaily.com, hiring managers should start thinking more carefully before they remove an applicant from their potential pool of candidates simply because they are what appears to be “overqualified.” While this might sound like common sense to some, considering the economic forecast recently, many employers tend to over look the overqualified and move on to employees that have less experience or education, typically costing the employer less; however, this article argues that might not be the best route for most companies to take.

One of the main reasons is highlighted by the article, setting the tone from the very first sentence, explaining what some might consider the obvious, “While many employers may shy away from hiring overqualified candidates, new research shows they might be the best people for the job.” But we’ve all heard that this might be the case. Again, many employers make their decisions based on cost and don’t always consider the long run, so what really solidifies this information? “While past investigations have revealed that overqualified employees are generally dissatisfied with their jobs and constantly looking for a new employer, a recent study by Aleksandra Luksyte, a professor at the University of Western Australia, finds that giving those same employees challenging assignments can have a strong positive impact on the business.

Specifically, the study shows that overqualified employees who are handed assignments that give them an opportunity to freely make decisions, coordinate or lead others, or be responsible for the outcomes of their work actions, were more likely to put greater effort into both their performance and promoting organizational welfare.” In other words, you get what you pay for and if you’re willing to pay for more experience, education and etc. than you’re ultimately getting more bang for your buck. “‘When overqualified people are placed into challenging jobs, they seem to be motivated to utilize all their under-realized potential into becoming excellent employees,’ Luksyte told BusinessNewsDaily. ‘Our results suggest that by placing overqualified employees in complex jobs, employers may be able to influence the most important work behaviors of their overqualified incumbents.’”

Not only would your company ultimately benefit from hiring someone with more qualifications for their own tasks and duties, but also furthermore, the article goes on to reveal that these individuals also have an impact on those other employees around them. “The research also found that overqualified employees given challenging tasks were stimulated to help their co-workers with professional concerns, such as helping out with a heavy workload, and personal issues, like cheering them up on a bad day. ‘Interestingly, they were reluctant to display counterproductive work behaviors such as neglecting their supervisors’ instructions,’ Luksyte said.” Have any employees that sometimes sport a competitive nature? Hiring overqualified individuals can spark this in others, causing a domino effect of motivation. “Luksyte believes her research shows that hiring and retaining overqualified people could be a competitive advantage, if done right.

‘A fruitful strategy could be one that involves improving aspects of job complexity, such as freedom to make decisions, work structure, participative decision making, heightened responsibility for outcomes or results, and communication with others,’ Luksyte said.”

To read more about the study and the results, click here to view the article.

As a hiring manager, do you typically eliminate any candidates you view as overqualified from your potential pool of interviewees? Furthermore, have you hired anyone overqualified and found success or failure with this in any way? If so, share your experience.

As a job seeker, have you been turned away from a job because you were considered overqualified? What was your response and how did you tackle this challenge?

While some enjoy the so-called perks of working from home, many employees never get this opportunity or option. At some point we all roll out of bed in the morning and wonder wouldn’t it just be easier to be able to turn on our computer and sit at our desk at home to get our work done? If many of us mostly work using the Internet and phone, why can’t we just stay home and wouldn’t it boost morale anyway? Well, for those of us who sometimes have this passing wistful hope, consider the article titled, “Teleworkers confess biggest at-home distractions” recently posted to Employee Benefits News.

According to the article, working from home isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. While many of us assume it would be easier we forget just how easy it is to get distracted in a home office or alternate environment. It seems that when working from home, some actually have to inconvenience themselves to a degree to assure they work during the day instead of watch television, their children or surf the net. As the article reads, “I’m working from home today, and I won’t lie — it’s a tough day. I’m still exhausted from a long three days at Benefits Forum & Expo, and returned home to gray weather and scores of to-do items that had been piling up while I was gone. I’m tired and overwhelmed, and it would be easy and wonderful to chuck it all and go veg out on my couch. It would be too easy, in fact. So, instead of trying to work from the living room I’m fighting temptation by working from the island in my kitchen — lots of light, a high-backed chair and no remote control for as far as my eyes can see. So far, so good.”

So what else do people get distracted by at home while they’re supposed to be on the proverbial clock? “… According to a new CareerBuilder survey, some of my fellow teleworkers are giving in to their darker angels. The survey finds that teleworkers confessed to their top distractions when working from home:

• Household chores (31%). 
• TV (26%). 
• Pets (23%). 
• Errands (19%). 
• Internet (18%). 
• Children (15%).

In fact, some are so distracted (perhaps by all of the above), that 17% of Americans who telework at least part of the time spend one hour or less actually working.”

Aside from the obvious distractions, working from home doesn’t work for everyone by the simple fact that there is a sigh of relief when one can leave the office at the end of the day and step away from work. There’s something about bringing the workplace into the home that makes it harder to actually relax once you have completed all of your work if there’s no real separation from work and home. It can make working from home even more difficult for some than others and trying to unwind nearly impossible. The article does make a suggestion for those that do want to actually work from home sans distractions:

“‘To avoid situations where teleworkers aren’t putting in the necessary time, managers need to be clear about expectations and establish daily objectives,’ says Rosemary Haefner, vice president of HR at CareerBuilder. ‘The autonomy of working from home can be very rewarding so long as it doesn’t diminish productivity.’

Haefner recommended the following tips to help teleworkers work as efficiently as possible:

- Keep a normal routine.
- Find the best spot to work.
- Stay connected to colleagues.
- Plan breaks.
- Work at a coffee shop to maintain human contact.”

Of course for a number of employees, working from home is not only easier, but also necessary. Some have schedules that they must balance their personal lives with work and that is the only possible way for them to take on a job with other responsibilities. For example, there are people going back to school to get an advanced degree and must attend a class or two during normal work hours. There are also some that have children and would rather opt for an alternat
ive at home work schedule than spend the usual 9-5 in an office. Essentially, everyone is different when it comes to discipline when working at home.

As the article inquires, “What are your tricks for staying productive when working from home?”

This year’s Creative Excellence Awards show that Alstin Communications is continuing its winning creative ways.

Congratulations to our graphic designers, copywriters, account executives, administration — and of course, the clients — who make it possible for us to be one of the top dogs.

 Our 2011 Award Winners

1st PLACE

Non-Print Advertising/Promotions (Video/Film, Movie Slides)

2nd PLACE

Self Promotion (Multimedia) – Click Here to View!

2nd PLACE

Employee/Internal Communications (Referral Program) – Click Here to View!

3rd PLACE

Self Promotion (Online)

According to a Wired Science article titled, “Twitter-Mining Captures Global Mood Patterns,” social scientists have discovered that individuals tend to display mood patterns throughout the day using tweets and other forms of social media, providing further evidence that moods positively and negatively cycle throughout the week, especially for anyone in the workplace.

Ever heard of the afternoon slump? When the clock rolls around two or three and you begin to feel tired and cranky? Can’t wait until Friday? Tweets reveal you’re not alone. The article explains, “An analysis of mood patterns distilled from half a billion tweets has produced a civilization-scale picture of how moods rise and fall in tandem, over time and across the world. The details seem intuitive: positive feelings peaking in the morning, dipping during work and rising at day’s end; negativity accumulated over the workweek dissipating late on Friday afternoon. But they’ve proved surprisingly tricky to measure.”

But do these results really mean that social scientists can count on something as simple as a tweet for this kind of analysis? “‘There’s a whole generation of lab work that’s been inconclusive,’ said sociologist Scott Golder of Cornell University, co-author of the tweet analysis published Sept. 29 in Science. ‘Every study would have something different to say about what they saw in their subjects’ affective rhythms.’ Many studies of how moods — or, more technically, positive and negative affect — change from minute to minute and day to day rely on self-reported surveys, which can be inconsistent if not misleading. The subjects of these studies also tend to be undergraduate students from western colleges, a group that’s not always representative of humanity at large. Twitter users, of course, don’t represent humanity either. But the culture- and globe-spanning size of the software platform’s community, and their constant generation of data that can be cross-referenced and correlated and otherwise computationally investigated, make them alluring to researchers. ‘Twitter and Facebook, market transactions on eBay and Amazon: This is the stuff of everyday life’ for much of the world, said Golder. ‘For a social scientist to have access to these records is a fantastic new opportunity.’”

So how can we understand what this means using a global approach and what does this mean to you and your employees? “Using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count, a text analysis program that quantifies the emotional content of statements, Golder and co-author Michael Macy analyzed a total of 509 million tweets generated over two years by 2.4 million people in 84 countries. The resulting trends — positive moods starting high in the morning and declining through the day, peaking overall on weekends — held steady around the world.” Essentially, everything that you might feel during the day and the week- your desire to take an afternoon nap or your excitement over the prospect of spending a weekend doing anything but work- most others around you are feeling as well. If you’re a manager or supervisor, understand that if some of those feelings start to creep up on you, chances are your employees are feeling the same way. As the article reiterates, “A systematic daily pattern of positive mood is a fundamental part of human existence.”

Right around mid-week your employees are tired, grumpy and just looking forward to clocking out on Friday and going home. It’s a pattern that you’ll see every day and every week; so if you’re wondering why your employees aren’t boasting a stellar performance at 2:30 in the afternoon, think back on the science of mood patterns. If this is the case, it also might not hurt to incorporate some unique ways to boost morale in the workplace, for not just your employees, but yourself as well. And if you can’t think of anything, refer back to a blog Alstin posted over the summer on “Keeping the creative juices flowing by getting creative.”

On Monday, I joined thousands of Americans to watch President Obama discuss his Jobs Plan during a LinkedIn sponsored town hall meeting. If you missed it you can watch the event in its entirety below, it’s just over an hour long. While the answer to many of the questions posed to the President was along the lines of “pass my jobs plan” he did offer words of encouragement to all.

With a goal of creating 1.9 million jobs and adding close to 2% to our GDP, Obama hopes that his plan will “have ripple effects and help the recovery take off.” To a gentleman who had recently experienced a layoff after more than 20 years in IT, Obama also emphasized, “You’ve got the skills, you’ve got experience, you’ve got a track record of success. Right now the challenge is not you, it’s the economy as a whole.”
A pick-me-up like that from the President has got to be way better than getting one of the new Hallmark cards intended for the recently unemployed. (Although some of them are pretty funny.) There’s one that reads, “Don’t think of it as losing your job. Think of it as a time out between stupid bosses.” But I digress!

Other highlights of the event included a member of the audience also unemployed, except this time by choice, who asked the President to increase his taxes (he’s a former Google exec), a woman who spoke on behalf of her 65 year old mother who can not find gainful employment and a veteran who questioned how the government will better help vets transition to civilian careers.

What are your thoughts on the Obama Jobs Plan? Looking at your organization as we head toward 2012, we’re also curious about your plans when it comes to jobs. Are you likely grow and add to staff, hold steady until there’s more signs of economic life, or plan to cut back?

Share with us your thoughts and watch those of our President here:

Video streaming by Ustream

Last week I read an interesting study sponsored by the Kenexa High Performance Institute entitled: Attitude? What Attitude? The Evidence Behind the Work Attitudes of Millennials. In the report, they examine the conventional wisdom we have about today’s millennials as employees to see if the stereotypes have merit. Here’s just some of the things we tend to think of when we describe the millennials in our workforce:

• They feel entitled when it comes to their job—if they don’t like their work or variety of opportunities, they’ll leave.
• They demand a sense of fulfillment and personal accomplishment at work, and have little tolerance for more entry-level or menial tasks.
• They expect to be rewarded and praised for every small accomplishment.
• They are comfortable with change, and have few qualms or concerns about job hopping.
• They are rarely satisfied.
• (I would also like to  add that they’re thinner, have more hair and whiter teeth—darn those Millennials!)

However, the result of the Kenexa study paints a much different picture. The authors state that “by tracking more than 25 years of opinions through the WorkTrends study, we actually find that this picture is false.” In fact, as you’ll see in the charts below, in many cases millennials are on par or even surpass their Boomers and Generation X counterparts.

The study concludes with this summary:

Books are being written and stories are being told about the vast differences between Millennials and their generational predecessors. Yet, when it comes to the workplace, the differences are shockingly slight. How can we explain the disconnect? It’s possible that HR professionals and managers are adapting to their new charges, and creating programs that incorporate Millennials’ views into the workplace.

True, the study says, younger workers (“whether the hippies of the sixties or millennials today”) do display traits common to youth like periods of angst or optimism, but most organizations have seen many these attitudes before and can handle it. How about you? What does your experience as a recruiter or HR pro tell you about the millennial workforce?

The longer I work in recruitment advertising the more I believe in the old saying that the only true constant is change. I think Charles Darwin was spot on when he said, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”

That thinking also applies to our conventional wisdom about recruiting methodologies. Case in point: I just finished Malcolm Gladwell’s book, “What the Dog Saw,” and there was a chapter called the “The Talent Myth: Are Smart People Overrated?” In that chapter, Gladwell recounts the well known ABCs of recruiting we all grew up on: “Show your A employees love, your B employees training and education, and your C employees the door.”

This process of “differentiation and affirmation” is in many ways the brainchild of McKinsey and Company, the huge management consulting firm. It’s a concept a lot of organizations take to heart and implement to a large degree. At Alstin for example, we hire superb people, offer them support and direction when they need it, and then get out of their way so they can do the great job they were meant to. It’s a very empowering, entrepreneurial spirit that has served us well for over four decades.

But what happens if a company follows that advice to the extreme—or worse, misinterprets it? Actually, we know the answer, because one of McKinsey’s biggest clients did just that:

“[They] set up internal Performance Review Committees. The members got together twice a year, and graded each person in their section on ten separate criteria, using a scale of one to five. The process was called “rank and yank.” Those graded at the top of their unit received bonuses two-thirds higher than those in the next thirty per cent; those who ranked at the bottom received no bonuses and no extra stock options–and in some cases were pushed out.” As a senior member of the company said, “We hire very smart people and we pay them more than they think they are worth.”

So who was this large organization that tightly followed the direction of McKinsey, the country’s largest management consulting firm? The company was none other than Enron, and in some ways they were considered the ultimate “talent company.” Gladwell continues:

“Among the most damning facts about Enron, in the end, was something its managers were proudest of. They had what, in McKinsey terminology, is called an “open market” for hiring. In the open-market system–McKinsey’s assault on the very idea of a fixed organization–anyone could apply for any job that he or she wanted, and no manager was allowed to hold anyone back. Poaching was encouraged. When an Enron executive named Kevin Hannon started the company’s global broadband unit, he launched what he called Project Quick Hire. A hundred top performers from around the company were invited to the Houston Hyatt to hear Hannon give his pitch. Recruiting booths were set up outside the meeting room. “Hannon had his fifty top performers for the broadband unit by the end of the week,” Michaels, Handfield-Jones, and Axelrod write, “and his peers had fifty holes to fill.” Nobody, not even the consultants who were paid to think about the Enron culture, seemed worried that those fifty holes might disrupt the functioning of the affected departments, that stability in a firm’s existing businesses might be a good thing, that the self-fulfillment of Enron’s star employees might possibly be in conflict with the best interests of the firm as a whole.”

Perhaps one of the biggest problems at Enron was that they paid more attention to their stars than to the mission of their company, and therein lies the foundation of their error: instead of giving its employees the support and freedom to serve their clients the best way they could, Enron forgot about their customers and just focused on what their “stars” wanted to do, whether it was good for the organization or not. More from Gladwell:

“Enron’s leader Jeffery Skilling: “If lots of [employees] are flocking to a new business unit, that’s a good sign that the opportunity is a good one. . . . If a business unit can’t attract people very easily, that’s a good sign that it’s a business Enron shouldn’t be in.” You might expect a C.E.O. to say that if a business unit can’t attract customers very easily that’s a good sign it’s a business the company shouldn’t be in. A company’s business is supposed to be shaped in the direction that its managers find most profitable. But at Enron the needs of the customers and the shareholders were secondary to the needs of its stars.”

To read more about Gladwell’s article of Enron and the Talent Myth, click here.

Are you feeling irritated at work lately? Easily annoyed, perhaps? Maybe a little bit too anxious, or even like you’re drowning with a never-ending stream of tasks? While this might sound like the beginning of a therapy session, many people in the workplace have found themselves feeling similar emotions for years. If you’ve been feeling a bit down at work, don’t worry you’re the only one. There are thousands of overly stressed employees still trying to cope with some of the issues they face daily, as soon as they sit at their desks in the morning all the way up until they shut down their computers and clock out at night. The solution? Come to the Alstin couch and we’ll talk.

A blog post from Alexandria Levit titled, “Why So Much Frustration at Work?” reveals some common emotions that employees face and might shed some light on how to help ease your pain. She starts off by explaining that the feeling of control is essential to staying on top of work both mentally and emotionally, and more importantly, it’s essential to your mental health in general, going beyond the workplace.

“A key ingredient is the lack of control that a person perceives for the outcome of their work. In psychology, this is called locus of control, a concept that was originally developed by Julian Rotter in the mid-twentieth century. One has an internal locus of control if he believes that he controls his own destiny, and he has an external locus of control if he believes that his destiny is controlled by other forces like authority figures, fate, or God. Over the last half century, psychological research has determined that males tend to be more internal than females, older people are more internal than younger people, and people at higher levels in the organization are more internal than junior-level staffers. In general, having an internal locus of control is viewed as more desirable, since these individuals tend to be more achievement oriented. They are more persistent and work longer and harder to get what they need or want. It’s better from a mental health perspective too, because when you feel that you can affect the outcome of your work, you are more satisfied and have a greater sense of accomplishment.”

Now that that’s established, what can you do to feel in control at work when you’re sensing that out of control spiral that makes you want to pull your hair out? Breathe deeply and relax. Levit’s got a few tips for that too.

“Acknowledge your own choices

Just being alive means that you make thousands of small choices every day, and those small choices add up to make a major impact on your life. As for the bigger choices, usually you do have the power to take control of the ones that are really important.

Set achievable goals every day

Being able to check even minor things off a list each afternoon will improve your self-esteem and increase your internal locus of control.

Practice making decisions

Work on the skill of listing and evaluating the pros and cons of each option and coming to a conclusion on your own rather than relying on the opinions of others.”

To read all of Levit’s tips, see her blog post, and just as she asks- “Have you successfully overcome frustration at work? What strategies can you share?” Don’t forget to check out her other posts that can be just as helpful and relevant. Have you recently hired someone that could be experiencing the problems mentioned in her frustration post? Last week’s- “Make Sure Your New Person Doesn’t Quit.”

People are joining LinkedIn at the rate of one new user per second and depending on what they’re doing for a living – or want to do for a living – they’re using the social media giant in all sorts of ways. On Mashable last week, a telling inforgraphic was posted based on research conducted by the group Lab 42, a company that exclusively uses social media to field online surveys, that’s particularly share-worthy:

I log into my LinkedIn account a few times a day (during the work week that is, I am not that much of a nerd – although some may beg to differ) to browse status updates or to post one of my own. Maybe you’re even reading this blog today because of the link I put in my status update. For me, LinkedIn is also my virtual Rolodex, a go-to networking destination and so much more. I’ve used the site to recruit for Alstin – with positive results I might add – and I am sure the majority of recruiters checking out this blog have too.

What do you think the best aspect of LinkedIn is – for you personally? Here are a few thoughts to get you going:

• It’s social and it’s not Facebook.
• Networking – LinkedIn is where it’s at!
• Finding or recruiting for jobs.
• Marketing my company.
• All of the above.
• Another great reason to use LinkedIn is for … (You tell us!)

Do tell and leave a reply below. We welcome your thoughts – thanks!

Job-hopping seems to be more prevalent than ever as many job seekers took whatever they could find during the recession and might now be re-evaluating those decisions with things starting to look up for some industries. Now that you have your employees, how do you keep them? If you are looking to start hiring again, how do you make your company more attractive than others to the job seeker? Guy Kawasaki, well known for his association with Apple, wrote a blog post for the Harvard Business Review titled, “Enchant Your Employees” on just that. Here are a few tips he offers to help solve this problem:

“Empower them to do what’s right. A logical offshoot of autonomous work is that you trust your employee enough to make the right decision for customers. When you show this level of trust and empower employees, they do the best work that they can.

Judge your results and their intentions. Most managers are harsher judges of the results of their employees than they are of their own results: ‘You didn’t meet quota, but I really tried to meet mine.’ This is the opposite of what an enchanting manager does. Be a tougher judge of your results than your employees.

Address your shortcomings first. Now that you know what to judge, now you need to know what to fix. No employee is perfect, but neither are you. Before you pontificate about what your employees should fix, talk about how you could have done a better job yourself.

Don’t ask them to do what you wouldn’t do. The flip side of the willingness to suck it up is that you never ask employees to do something that you wouldn’t do. If you’re not going to fly coach class from San Francisco to Mumbai, don’t ask them to either. This is a great philosophy to apply to employees, customers, partners, and vendors.

Celebrate success. On the other hand, when your organization succeeds, take some time out to celebrate. Macho and relentless toil in the face of success (or failure) is over-rated. And the best kind of success, and the best way to celebrate success, is as a group.

Don’t rely on money. I’m not saying you shouldn’t pay people fairly — even well — but money is usually the enemy of enchantment. It can pollute relationships because it muddies the motivation: Are people doing this because it’s their job or because they truly believe in the product or service?”

To see all of the tips, follow the link above directly to his blog post. What’s even more interesting is some of the comments and reactions from other readers. Take a peek and let us know what you think. Is this a problem your company could potentially face in the near future? If so, what steps are you taking to prevent it?

So that crazy picture from the 4th of July BBQ was definitely Facebook worthy…or not.

I remember the days (actually, not that long ago) when we were warned about the consequences of being caught in an unflattering photo that could possibly reach the Internet. There were commercials broadcasting the dangers of pictures placed online becoming a permanent fixture in the public eye. But forward to present day, and we’ve all embraced a norm of posting any and everything that catches our attention. It seems we’ve become less inhibited where the Internet is concerned and despite the many warnings, and multiple stories of people losing their jobs/marriages, etc. over comments and tweets, there are still a variety of offenders still posting risqué photos and lewd, crude, and downright rude remarks, jokes, quotes, and lyrics. Of course, this is usually done in fun, and what people believe to be somewhat “private” and exclusive to only their group of selected “friends”.

Lest we warn again… there is a new reason to rethink what you intend to put online for all to see. You’ve probably heard that employers have been Googling you to see who they’re REALLY interviewing. Well now the background check has been given additional steps to include an even more thorough search which findings will be kept on file for a period of 7 years. Social Intelligence Corp., a background check company, was found to be in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act by the Federal Trade Commission. They have now been granted a license to screen job applicants based on their Internet photos and postings.

What does this mean for you? You no longer have to be a celebrity like Kim Kardashian to feel the backlash of your statements/opinions on Facebook or Twitter.

When you’re applying for a job, the new standard part of background checks will include a search of all that you’ve posted to the Internet, including Facebook, Twitter, blogs, Craigslist, Flickr, and the like.

In case you were not aware of this already, employers must inform you, the job applicant, if they took adverse action based on something found on the Internet. This will at least notify you to change your privacy settings accordingly and make you aware of what you need to delete. However, with this new turn of events, these actions are no saving grace. In the instance that a search on you returns something job-threatening on the social media sites, and there it will be entered into your file, where it will stay for the next seven years.

You should know though that, although Social Intelligence will keep the negative findings on file, these results will not be reused. It is a one time disclosure and with each request from a new employer, a new search is conducted. The filed away results will serve as background information if ever needed for legal reasons.

 “We store records for up to 7 years as long as those records haven’t been disputed. If a record is disputed and changed then we delete the disputed record and store the new record when appropriate.”

- Geoffrey Andrews, Social Intelligence COO

The searches are limited to what’s already publicly accessible, meaning what they can find on the social and professional networking sites you may be on. And like a credit background check, the job applicant must give their permission for the screening of social media to be used. Keep in mind that not only will your photos, updates, comments and tweets be scrutinized, but that also includes what fan pages and groups you’re joining, among other things – For example, if you’ve decided to join the “I hate _ people” group and are a fan of a few weapons pages and/or posting your whereabouts each week at naughty venues, these are most likely frowned upon.

Social networking sites contain information that employers are not supposed to rely upon to make hiring decisions, but that doesn’t mean that it won’t happen. While employers are researching applicants, they must be aware that all the same protections due job seekers in the traditional world, still apply online. Since many sites include photos, employers are not allowed to preclude a job applicant based on categories they may fall into (race, disability, gender, age, etc.). Any hiring decision made should be documented and include valid information on why one candidate was hired over another.

Employers should not ask to be accepted into a social network under a false alias to check out potential candidates. In such cases where this has occurred, the job seeker may have an actionable cause.

- “Social Media Concerns for Employers and Employees,”

- VETS NET

A research study commissioned by CareerBuilder showed that out of the 2,667 HR professionals surveyed, 45% of them admitted to already using social networking sites to investigate job candidates, another 11% have decided to incorporate social media screening into their exploring methods in the near future, and 35% of employers claimed to have not hired candidates based on undesirable findings on social networking sites.

So again, the old warnings still apply. Though we’ve become such a tech-savvy, social media loving society, you should remain cautious in determining what’s appropriate for the eyes of the “world-wide web”, remembering that once something’s out there it is hard to be erased.

Let’s face it: a hiring manager’s job is tough. It’s not easy to find someone out there in a pool of thousands of applicants who “fits.” And we don’t just mean fits the job description or has a skill set that fits the position. It’s also important to find someone who fits in terms of the actual office environment and someone that might actually have more talent than the person who is hiring. In essence, a hiring manager has to find someone that is better than him or her; someone who can do things they can’t and, at times, that can be a bit hard to swallow. How do you find someone who is better than you after admitting that that’s what you’re looking for?

Jason Seiden’s new blog post, “How to Surround Yourself with People Better than Yourself” might be able to help. Seiden’s article offers a few how-to tips on making the right (and tough) decision. Here are a few suggestions:

• Let go of judgment. The first step in recognizing talent is recognizing talent! You can only do this if you are able to put aside your own issues and prejudices and see others for who they are. ie, if you’re starving, any chef is a 4 star chef. You’ve got to be able to compensate for your own “schtick” when assessing others.
• Let go of jealousy. If you’re jealous of what they’ve got, you’ll feel it, they’ll feel it, and badness will be inevitable.
• Let go of labels. Strong people don’t need anyone to define a relationship with labels because they’re able to figure it out on their own. Trying to label a relationship can scare a strong person off. (Not comfortable with ambiguity? Keep that to yourself.)
• Let go of doubt. Great people want people around them who are even better then themselves. If you don’t believe you belong, you don’t belong.
• Let go of control. Great people will do things you don’t understand and can’t explain. Insisting on living in a world you fully understand will keep you from experiencing people who can open you up to new and bigger ideas. Great people approach their worlds with innocence, wonder, and curiosity.
• Let go of you. Help the people around you shine brighter. The strong ones’ll keep you around and start feeding your gift back to you. (The weak ones will show their true colors by trying to take advantage or assuming mal-intent on your part—easy to deal with once you’re prepared for it.)
• Let go of self-esteem. The thing about surrounding yourself with awesome is, you are always being challenged. It’s with love and support, but they’re challenges nonetheless, and you must win, without help, without cheating, without rationalizing. And when you don’t win, you must bounce back quickly and confidently because you don’t want to fail twice in a row.
• Let go of safe. Surrounding yourself with extraordinary people guarantees one thing: change. Scary, risky, life-altering change. No-more-comfort-zone change. For instance, if I were the worlds’ best matchmaker and we were hanging out, I could find you your true love. When I did, would you be ready? Great people requires us to abandon the safe harbor of our routines.

Seiden concludes with, “Did you get it yet? Greatness happens when you let go. It’s the ultimate ‘stone soup;’ you bring only your true self and all the other ingredients you think you need actually are provided by others when the time comes. It takes an incredible amount of self-confidence and faith to play this game—but I never did say it was easy. That’s my recipe. I hope you can make it work for you!” To read all of Seiden’s tips, see his blog for even more helpful information.

Have you experienced a tough time finding the talent that you need? Have you ever been afraid to hire anyone because his or her methods weren’t exactly in your “comfort zone?”

Have you ever experienced the opposite- gone out on a limb to hire someone even though you weren’t sure and had wonderful or terrible results? Share with us.

 We’ve all seen promotional products done poorly. The sloppily printed smiley face squeeze ball that ends up rolling around your office drawer. The pen that doesn’t write. The letter opener that you’ll never use. But when promotional products are done correctly they can be one of the most memorable and inexpensive ways to make an impact. In fact, recent studies show that promotional products have the lowest cost per impression of all media. That’s a lot of bang for your buck. And that’s where YourHRStore comes in.

www.yourhrstore.com

 YourHRStore is our new custom promotional products electronic storefront. We’ve developed a convenient venue for HR professionals to find the right products for their very specific needs. A well-chosen and professionally executed product can undoubtedly add impact to your HR initiatives. The new hire who is greeted with a gift that reflects your corporate identity. The career fair materials that draw applicants to your booth. The customized giveaways that reinforce the importance of retaining your employees. These are smart ways for HR to effectively use promotional products.

Take a look at our site and then add YourHRStore to your list of go-to vendors. It’s a smaHRt way to make a big impact.

I came across this interesting infographic earlier this week via Exploring Social Media. With it came the challenge to those in the social media space to “teach more than preach” to those who think this whole social media thing is easily avoidable, not worth the time, the effort, the risk …. because it seems like there’s still plenty of people out there who aren’t buying it, or who are not so sure how to make the most of their social media accounts. That is if they have any. Or even want to. There may also be a little bit of the “Us vs. Them” mentality and dialouge happening sometimes between these two camps too.

A while back, I set up a quick online survey where I asked our blog readers and clients a few questions about how they view social media - click here to see all the questions and results. I remember being particularly happy that to the question regarding level of expertise the answer “clueless and happy to stay that way” got the least amount of votes. However, looking at the infographic stats and also at the percentage of Alstin clients who are tapping into the medium – whether that be through a simple Facebook PPC campaign, or a full blown strategy – is less than half, some more schooling is likely needed.

Our blog tends to cover the latest and greatest approaches to social recruiting quite a bit, but we know that at times we’re not always preaching to the choir. Some of you are just not in step with this media approach for a variety of reasons. We want to hear from those people today.

What are your thoughts, issues and big concerns? What can Alstin help you with or understand better? Blog about more, or less for that matter? We’re always at the ready to talk shop and help educate our clients on what may (or may not!) be the right way to approach social recruiting for their particular organization. Do you agree with these numbers? No matter the camp you fall into, we want to hear from you.

If you’re part of the recruiting, HR or communications industry, you’ve no doubt witnessed a big increase in recruitment videos over the last few years. Maybe you’ve seen some award-winning, “best practice” recruitment videos with polished messages and striking images. Perhaps you even have a “day in the life” video on your career site or a message from one of your organization’s leaders on why candidates should consider your organization.

Those are certainly great uses for a recruitment video (and yes, your friends at Alstin can develop a great one for you) but I think it’s easy to forget how recruitment videos can also be used as tool to correct misconceptions about an employer. For example, the Baltimore Police Department (like many police departments across the country) is significantly under-represented by women. When they examined the issue further they discovered that one major reason was uncertainty and apprehension over the required physical tests. The solution was this simple, no-frills, 50 second video outlining the physical tests.

I really like this video, not because it’s going to win any awards for production or clever taglines, but because it’s a great example of how video can be used cost effectively (and with a quick turn-around time) to target a specific need or issue.

How about you? What misconceptions could a 1 minute video clear up about working at your organization?

Did you ever hear about the studies involving witnesses? Despite a group of people seeing a staged crime take place at the same time, there are rarely two people who agree on what actually took place. Different individuals see different things, and often misinterpret what they saw because of their own experiences and/or biases.

Candidate/employee feedback about an organization’s recruiting practices and work environment can be wrought with the same potentially damaging issues. And though flawed and inaccurate recruiting feedback isn’t a crime punishable by law, it can hurt your employer marketing campaign and your ability to market your opportunities to potential candidates.

As a copywriter who likes to know a little more about a client than what their website tells the world, my experience with feedback has run the gamut.

I’ve gotten bare bones info:

“Here’s what our hiring manager says.”

I’ve gotten the basics:

“You can just check out our Careers page.”

I’ve gotten information overload:

“Here are five year old employee testimonials along with detailed job descriptions for each opportunity we post.”

I am most ecstatic when a client has Alstin moderate and conduct a professional focus group. I liken it to finding a key to a treasure chest — one that is brimming with priceless tidbits of knowledge instead of smelly pirate souvenirs. It makes differentiating a client’s work environment more “Eureka” and less “ARRGGH!”

I recently got access to focus group feedback that, when printed out, was two inches thick. But the trees’ loss was my gain. The report included information from focus group sessions with our client’s newer hires, candidates who interviewed with our client but didn’t accept an offer, new grads, and industry professionals who work for organizations other than our client. The focus group moderator tapped into interviewing experiences, preconceived notions about the client, personal opinions of the industry in general and more specifically, what people thought about working for our client.

You may think such an opportunity for feedback would quickly turn into a forum for complaints. But with the right moderator, the result is not insults, but insight. By including your own employees as well as those who’ve chosen other organizations, objectivity and quite a few, “Wow, I never realized that” moments can be gleaned.

Keep in mind, though, that the best focus group reports are about more than quotes and opinions. Analysis of that feedback by a seasoned professional is key. Data is the raw material, but enlightening, useful competitive intelligence is the final product.

Anyone can ask questions. But only a select few can ask questions and present thoughtful conclusions that give life to ideas that will truly distinguish one organization’s opportunities and culture from those of another.

Have you left some wiggle room in your next budget for a professionally moderated focus group?

Next time inquiring minds want to know more about your plans for drawing the best and brightest talent to your organization, know that a focus group is worth its weight in gold.

When was the last time you actually thought about interview questions and about how they apply to you? Hundreds of thousands of unemployed individuals are searching for a job right now just like you. And just like you, they’ve also probably thought that as we’re slowly coming out of a recession, you’ll take whatever you can find. But do you really mean that? Part of becoming successful in your job search isn’t just walking into an interview with your portfolio in hand and some scripted answers to common questions — even if you think those answers are well thought out. An article featured on Glassdoor.com titled, “Tips For A Successful Job Search: Half The Battle Is Knowing What You Want” asks readers and job seekers what they really do want from a job, challenging them to go after it.

The article explains, “If you’re a recent graduate or a job seeker who hasn’t been on the market in awhile, starting a job search can seem completely overwhelming. And in this economy, it can also be tempting to jump up and take the first offer that looks halfway reasonable. But if you’re looking for a new job, having a concrete outline of what you’re looking for can ensure you’ll find the job that’s really the right fit for you (and that you’ll be much more likely to stay at).”

Here are some vital things to consider when searching that you should never overlook:

“Know What You Want in Terms of Job Description

Most fields and industries have blanket job titles that can mean many different things at different companies. The might mean that a communications director at one company could be responsible for all print publications and marketing material, while a communications director at another company might work exclusively with social media. Before you jump at a job posting that has a title similar to yours, take the time to really comb through the job description. Do the details sound like something you could spend the next 2-4 years of your life doing? Are the responsibilities, managerial expectations, and day-to-day duties all in line with what you’re seeking?

Know What You Want In Regards to Salary (and Benefits)
Knowing your salary expectations are key, especially if you’re a recent college graduate or someone else who is just entering the work force. If that’s the case, you’ve probably worked throughout your education, but you might not have any clue what to expect when it comes to an annual salaried position, benefits, vacation time, and other parts of the offer package. As you start your job search, you should have a salary range in mind that corresponds with the job titles you are seeking out, as well as what kinds of benefits. This will save you a lot of time in the long run from applying to jobs that are out of your price range.

Know What You Want in Terms of Growth
It’s really easy to develop myopic vision during a job search, and only look for a position that will get you out of your current situation (whether that’s unemployed, bored, or unhappy at work) immediately. But when you’re starting a job search, you should have your entire career trajectory in mind. Where do you want to be right now, and then where do you want to be in 3-5 years? What position (and company) is going to help you gain the skills you’ll need to get to that next step?

Know What You Want Regarding Work/Life Balance
When you’re unemployed and looking for a job, any job, it’s easy to nod your head during an interview and say ‘Yes, I have no problem working overtime every night and most weekends.’ But is this what you really want? (If you’re a workaholic and it’s fine, more power to you.) As you start your job search, have an idea of what kind of work/life balance is ideal to you. If you’re interested in catering, for example, but you hate working weekends, you’ll want to seek out firms that cater corporate lunches and events (which usually take place during breakfast and lunch) versus those that exclusively do weddings (which will require weekends.) The better match you can find, the happier you’ll be, and the longer you’ll be able to stay in that career.”

While some of these points might seem basic, don’t forget to seriously think about them, as many job seekers seem to in the heat of the moment. Being unemployed can sometimes create a sense of desperation and a need for instant gratification, but put on the brakes. One of the most common interview questions is: where do you see yourself in 3-5 years? If you’re considering answering this one with, “I need a job and I will be your slave for the next 3-5 years,” then you might want to take a step back to determine what is actually important to you to assure that your job search is a successful one in the long run.

What employees say about the organization they work for holds plenty of weight. From being ”brand ambassadors” through their (good or bad) word of mouth advertising, to seeking out employee referrals or to help their employer win a coveted  ”Best Places to Work” designation and more, it matters big time.

There’s a great interactive infographic put together by Fortune magazine on their 2011 Best Places to Work awards that you might want to play around with (you can click here to check it out) to see what the buzz is these days on top ranked companies from their own people.

You’ll be able to sort through the most popular words workers used when citing their companies:

However, what makes this infographic a bit more interesting and fun to navigate is that you can also sort through comments specific to the companies that made the list:

It’s no surprise to me that words like People and Team and Family rank high. How would your company rank? I know “people” and “culture” are top factors for me, what about you – let us know what are your top reasons for valuing where you work?

While things continue to look up on the economic and job creation front, there are still 5.8 million Americans that are among the long-term unemployed. Recently, Alstin’s Anne Hillman blogged about a crazy trend – jobless discrimination. It’s almost hard to believe but yes, companies are currently advertising open positions clearly stating that only currently employed candidates need apply. The unemployed are not part of a protected class (like race, gender, or age) in the US, unless you happen to live in New Jersey.

On ABC’s World News Tonight this report was filed noting the “cruel irony” of such a practice. Employers that engage in this pre-screen were confronted via phone on the big question: Why? One organization simply stated that this was a legal and common practice, another claimed to have made a mistake.

Besides calling attention to an issue that clearly should be made illegal in more states than one, the ABC News piece offers some real solid tips to candidates who are part of the long-term unemployed, particularly on how to effectively fill in their resume gaps.

Check out the report and be sure to let us know your thoughts. What would you think if you read “only currently employed candidates apply” in a job ad? As a hiring professional, does long-term unemployment or a large gap on a resume weigh heavily on your decision to interview? If you are among the long-term unemployed, how are you attempting to overcome the hurdles?

Facebook is not only used as a social networking tool, but it also serves as a massive online medium for advertising to all kinds of people internationally. While several retail companies have used Facebook to get their product out in front of the masses, Facebook is also an excellent resource for companies looking to hire or obtain fans and followers.

An article online, “Facebook claims more than 31% of the display ad market” is pretty self-exclamatory by the title, but some are still resistant to even test out their recruiting efforts online. So if you’re not convinced just by the title, the article goes on to explain, “The social network had 233.9 billion more impressions than the next largest display ad publisher. Of the more than 1.11 trillion online display ads U.S. Internet users viewed in the first quarter, nearly one in three, or 31.2%, were delivered on Facebook, according to web measurement firm comScore Inc. The leading social network led all web sites that displayed ads with 346.46 billion impressions, a 96.5% jump from the 176.31 billion impressions it delivered in the same period a year ago. Yahoo Inc. sites came in second with 112.51 billion impressions, followed by Microsoft Corp.(53.59 billion), AOL Inc. (33.45 billion) and Google Inc. sites (27.99 billion).”

Still not convinced that it’s worth your time or money? “Facebook has increasingly focused on online advertising, rolling out offerings such as Sponsored Stories, an ad service that lets companies place their logos alongside content from Facebook posts that involve the company. Consumers can click the ads, which appear on the right-hand column of news feed pages in a box labeled Sponsored Story, to visit advertisers’ Facebook pages. Online display advertising is thriving, says Jeff Hackett, comScore executive vice president.

‘We are now seeing more than one trillion display ads delivered every single quarter and nearly 300 individual advertisers spending at least $1 million a quarter on display, numbers which underscore just how large and vibrant the online medium has become,’ he says. ‘And it’s not just about the volume but about the quality of the advertising experience that can be delivered as we see continued investment in compelling, high-quality creative that helps cultivate long-term brand equity.’”

And while so may be leery of the dangers of posting online or creating a company Facebook page (which, yes, some are legitimate), take a look at the competitors in your industry and see what they’re up to. Weight the cons and pros and really consider delving into embracing this option. Using Facebook isn’t just for making friends anymore.

To the tune of $73,000, Workforce Central Florida launched a PR campaign that included handing out thousands of superhero capes to the area’s unemployed in an effort to “raise awareness” about their organization’s services.

Dr. Evil Unemployment

As if giving someone who has been out of work in this economy a satin cape couldn’t get more cringe worthy, their “Cape-A-Bility Challenge” included a cartoon character too – “Dr Evil Employment.”

The Orlando Sentinel reported on this debacle last week. Workforce Central Florida’s Executive Director, Gary J. Earl, was quoted as saying that he “absolutely” approved the project and that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder … not everyone will agree on creative strategy.”

The state’s inspector general has been asked by Florida labor officials – who had a different take and called the red capes “insensitive and wasteful” – to investigate where the PR campaign’s funds came from.

I (maybe) could see handing out the capes to those who made some hires in the area through the organization as a way to champion them for building the economy with jobs – aren’t they the ones “coming to the rescue” here? I can also see however,  that if I were unemployed and got handed one of these things thinking, “I came to Workforce Central Florida and all I got was a lousy cape.”

Insensitive and wasteful, or a creative strategy to call attention to an organization attempting to help people land jobs? What do you think?

A few months ago we posted a blog about Honestly.com, a website that allows employers to rate employees and potentially rate them poorly on a public forum. But let’s be fair here as employees aren’t the only individuals in the workforce that are challenged, questioned or even attacked on the internet. On the other side of the coin rests GlassDoor.com, a website that touts itself as “as inside look at job and companies” that allows employees to anonymously rate their employment at companies, give details on their salaries, write about the office environment, the interview process and just about anything else they want. Previously, we questioned the ethics of posting on Honestly.com about employees and their performance. After all, there are so many factors to consider – whether or not the person rating is actually being honest or holds a strange vendetta against the employees, whether or not the performance at an old job that might have completely different requirements and a completely different environment is even relevant to a new job, and the list went on.

How do they define themselves?

“What is Glassdoor?

Glassdoor is a free career community where anyone can find and anonymously share an inside look at jobs and companies. What sets us apart is that all our information comes from current and former employees, interview candidates, and even the companies themselves. Now with more than a million salaries, company reviews, interview questions, office photos, and more, you have all the information you’ll need to manage your career and make more informed career decisions.

Plus, with Glassdoor’s proprietary JobScope™ technology job seekers have a new way to browse job listings and get instant, in-depth details about thousands of companies, including reviews from employees, salary information, recent news coverage, and more.

No other career or jobs site offers such detailed information about specific jobs at specific companies – all for free.”

But taking a closer look at GlassDoor.com prompts us to ponder the same questions. Is it possible that an employee just never got along with his or her superiors and is now writing to give the company a bad rep? Is it possible that their job requirements did not merit the salary they were expecting; giving them an excuse to post that the company employees pays poorly? GlassDoor.com, just like Honestly.com, allows people to give companies (instead of employees) a numeric rating based on whatever factors the person posting comes up with, as well as a list of pros and cons about the company. While for the most part, it seems as though people writing the ratings include valid pros such as benefits for full time employees, and cons such as work/life balance is tough, because people rating are allowed to basically write whatever comes to mind, this gives room for the same type of personal attack as Honestly.com does. Of course, just like Honestly.com, there are watchdog measures put into place to make sure this type of thing doesn’t happen frequently, but it only really needs to happen once to damage an individual’s or a company’s reputation. Aside from that, just because GlassDoor.com sees the post and erases it, doesn’t mean that no one else saw it and maybe posted it to their site, blog, etc.

The one ethical advantage GlassDoor has over Honestly is that GlassDoor does allow employers to fight back in way, using their own Public Relations. The site contains a “For Employers” section where, for a fee, employers can create a profile or job postings on GlassDoor that can “Tell your company’s story with an Enhanced Employer Profile. Highlight your employment brand, promote your latest job listings, and get access to advanced analytics and competitive benchmarking.”

As a professional, do you believe that the one redeeming factor on GlassDoor.com is enough? Does GlassDoor cross the same ethical lines as Honestly.com, or are they different? Is one more or less ethical than the other?

As a company, are you concerned about your reputation on the internet considering there are sites like GlassDoor that allow potentially disgruntled employees to post poor ratings?

As an employee, have you ever posted anonymously to GlassDoor or used it to research a company before applying or interviewing? Have you ever used GlassDoor.com to specifically look up salaries that a company might pay?

An article recently posted to Fistful of Talent titled, “Recruiters Don’t Own Executive Recruiting” evaluates the role of the Human Resources Recruiter when a company is in need of a higher-level position and why HR recruiters might not be the be-all and end-all for filling these positions.

The article starts off by creating a hypothetical situation in HR, “Ah, the internal executive search assignment—for some corporate recruiters, it’s the pinnacle of the talent acquisition world. Goodbye, days of customer service rep phone screens and hello, exploratory dinners and intriguing ‘meetings over drinks.’ I think a bunch of talent acquisition pros dream of the day when they get the call to fill a senior VP or C level impact role that will literally change the organization. How often can HR say that? So, when the CEO asks you to help recruit a direct report, I get that you feel like you have arrived. You have been grinding for years, filling countless entry and mid level jobs, knowing that one day you would own an executive search when the company had a need. You were sure that HR was going to deliver.”

But the solution the author offers can pretty much be summed up in one concise and ingenious graph, “Here’s my take though: HR does not own executive recruitment. Recruiters don’t recruit executives; executives recruit executives. You are the expert, but not the leader. Weird, huh?” What does that mean? The article proceeds to clarify, “When I have seen this done right, it’s typically because the CEO leads the charge and the successful recruiter plays a combo Kingmaker/Market Expert role. The talent pro is the trusted adviser, coordinating resources and teeing up the CEO with competitive talent intelligence and introductions in the niche market. Don’t get me wrong. The in-house recruiter needs to be the expert when it comes to defining requirements, identifying sourcing strategies, developing a sophisticated team approach and moving through identification, attraction, selection and closing. Talent Acquisition articulates and builds that strategy, but the CEO is the person who will close a senior exec. Sorry, it’s just not HR.”

As someone who has not only worked on the employment side of HR, but also has been a job seeker in the past (we all start somewhere), I can’t recall a time where I was seriously considered for a position, or seriously considered someone for a position, and only interviewed once with a recruiter. There has almost always been a second, or even third interview with a director, Vice President, or any individual who would later serve as my supervisor if I secured the position. That being said, this Fistful of Talent blog is absolutely justified in believing that recruiters don’t always own recruiting.

As an HR recruiter or professional, what do you think? Do you believe that the HR department “owns” recruiting? Have you filled a higher-level position without a final consent from a hiring manager or an executive that might work directly with the new hire?

This is my second blog post on the candidate experience. If you read my first one, you know that the candidate experience is being talked about a lot on both sides, and the talk is NOT good. Most industry experts will tell you that, for the most part, the candidate experience today is nothing short of horrible.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve met with both senior HR leaders and students from various colleges, and they’ve both expressed their frustration. At a seminar I attended this month, a Senior VP of HR at a large, very well-known company said this about the candidate experience: “It makes me ashamed of our profession.”

And just this week there was a great article on ERE.net entitled: Talent Acquisition Steps That Enrage Not Engage which included some very frustrating but very true stories of candidates being abused by the organizations supposedly wooing them.

You may ask yourself (as I often do): If both sides agree that the candidate experience is so horrible, why doesn’t it get fixed?

I think it all (still) comes down to resources. Let’s use Jane the Recruiter as an example:

Jane is a smart, dedicated recruiter who takes a lot of pride in her profession. She’s decided she’s going to make the candidate experience better by starting in her own little corner of the world. Of course, because it’s 2011, Jane’s entire department is stretched thin, and she always seems to be juggling a hundred things that need her immediate attention. This morning Jane’s hiring manager says he needs a Tax Accountant. Internal candidates and the people in their TAS don’t really fit the bill, so the position is posted on a large job board and some niche accounting sites (and of course it gets picked up on indeed.com, search engines, etc.) By the end of the week Jane has over 500 responses, and less than one quarter of the respondents are even remotely qualified.

Okay, now it’s your turn. How can Jane be a brand ambassador for her organization and ensure that those 500 people have a good candidate experience? Suppose all 500 received a “thank you for applying” mass email after submitting their resume, and another mass email when the process ends. Does that really qualify as a good candidate experience?

As you can see, there really isn’t an easy answer to this problem. On one side, you have a recruiting department that is extremely lean and is working without the right resources/tools, and on the other side you have candidates who desperately want to join/rejoin the workforce that are flooding the market. I think as the economy continues to improve and recruiting becomes more candidate-driven, the candidate experience will have to get better, but even then it’s going to take awhile.

Recruiters: How about you? What steps are you taking to improve the candidate experience?

This past week, Alstin had some college students stop by our offices for a tour and a Q&A session. They were a great group of hopeful advertising professionals from Rowan University’s Ad Club who came prepared with thoughtful questions and the right attitude. I always emphasize to student groups the importance of gaining experience (Get it whereever you can and make the most of every experience!) and am always happy to offer tips on professional and creative ways to stand out from the crowd when looking for that first job.

There are a few examples on this blog like the Google AdWords guy and these great resumes  that I can point to, and here’s another terrific example I saw on Recruitng Blogs this week for y’all out there.

Graeme Anthony, a Brit in the PR industry created his very own Curriculum Vitae Interactive Video, or CVIV for short, that’s worth checking out.

As with the other examples, it’s not exactly a shocker that these approaches tend to be taken (and praised) by people in the creative/communication fields, but no matter what business you are in, I think you’ll enjoy this. Be sure to check out a few, if not all, of the links that show up at the end of his CVIV.

Graeme’s currently gainfully employed, but in addition to the great approach, I also like his commentary. He notes on YouTube that he made these videos public “in the hope that it inspires others to demonstrate their natural creativity and secure work.” Nice job and thanks for the inspiration Graeme!

McDonald’s wants to flip the impression that a job with them is not just a low pay/dead-end “McJob” with one super-sized (I couldn’t resist) effort. On April 19th, McDonald’s is launching what they’ve dubbed a “National Hiring Day” with the ultimate goal of adding 50,000 employees to their ranks.

Ad Age provided a great overview of the campaign’s goals and reported that:

The campaign will appear in print magazines such as People, Us Weekly, Ebony and various ethnic publications, on the fast feeder’s social-media and digital channels, local radio spots, and as point-of-purchase, in-store marketing and on packaging on certain items.

And although the campaign is in conjunction with McDonald’s National Hiring Day, much of the advertising push is dedicated to highlighting McDonald’s restaurant employees in various ranks in an effort to improve the image of working at McDonald’s.

“The creative part is really highlighting the people at McDonald’s and dispelling the myths that there isn’t opportunity working here,” said Marlena Peleo-Lazar, global creative officer at McDonald’s USA. “We really wanted to highlight our crew.”

I am a big fan of keeping it real and think they’re headed in the right direction with this angle. When you’ve got 75% of the chain’s restaurant managers starting out at the counter, the fry station or back flipping burgers, it’s hard to deny that there’s a true career path available to the right employee here. I’m also pretty confident that there are plenty of compelling McJob success stories to tell.

McDonald’s also launched an internal campaign to tap into those success stories last week. They’re encouraging employees to generate their own video testimonials that will likely be used in their social media efforts.

Googling around for more details on the new 2011 ads, I saw that back in 2005 the company attempted a similar effort via TV spots that showcased several accomplished professionals (including R&B singer Macy Gray who equated her job at McDonald’s to her “first big break”) that each aimed to improve their hiring image. Anyone remember those? Didn’t think so.

So it remains to be seen how this will pan out. Will the economic climate spotlight this effort as a company offering 50,000 jobs, complete with a potential career path, when we really, really need them, or will it backfire? Although McDonald’s states that they are looking for employees at all levels, I have to wonder how many of them are of the entry-level sort? In the end, is this image shift just too tall of an order? Let us know your thoughts.

If you are currently a job seeker in the tri-state area, chances are you have used the staffing agency The Creative Group to help find the position that you’re looking for; and if you have used The Creative Group previously, be prepared for an inbox full of spam today from “potential employers” that don’t actually exist.

Robert Half, the parent company of The Creative Group announced via e-mail today to their customers that Epsilon Interactive, the e-mail service they use to send alerts to job seekers, was essentially hacked, along with several other companies using Epsilon Interactive. Below is the text from the e-mail that I received this morning, which doesn’t seem to appear any where on their actual website:

“Dear Valued Customer,

Today we were informed by Epsilon Interactive, our national email service provider, that your email address was exposed due to unauthorized access of their system. Robert Half uses Epsilon to send marketing and service emails on our behalf.

We deeply regret this has taken place and any inconvenience this may have caused you. We take your privacy very seriously, and we will continue to work diligently to protect your personal information. We were advised by Epsilon that the information that was obtained was limited to email addresses only.

Please note, it is possible you may receive spam email messages as a result. We want to urge you to be cautious when opening links or attachments from unknown third parties. We ask that you remain alert to any unusual or suspicious emails.

As always, if you have any questions, or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at customersecurity@rhi.com.

Sincerely,

Robert Half Customer Care
Robert Half Finance & Accounting
Robert Half Management Resources
Robert Half Legal
Robert Half Technology
The Creative Group”

Taking a look at Epsilon Interactive’s site offers a very brief press release that explains more of the situation without mentioning the Robert Half’s name:

“Epsilon Notifies Clients of Unauthorized Entry into Email System

IRVING, TEXAS – April 1, 2011 – On March 30th, an incident was detected where a subset of Epsilon clients’ customer data were exposed by an unauthorized entry into Epsilon’s email system. The information that was obtained was limited to email addresses and/or customer names only. A rigorous assessment determined that no other personal identifiable information associated with those names was at risk. A full investigation is currently underway.”

A news story appeared on the Huffington Post website Sunday evening offering additional information on the hack which unfortunately revealed that several companies have been attacked by this breach including, “Citigroup, Walgreens, TiVo, Capital One, HSN, College Board.” The article reports, “The names and e-mails of customers of Citigroup Inc and other large U.S. companies, as well as College Board students, were exposed in a massive and growing data breach after a computer hacker penetrated online marketer Epsilon. In what could be one of the biggest such breaches in U.S. history, a diverse swath of companies that did business with Epsilon stepped forward over the weekend to warn customers some of their electronic information could have been exposed.” The post clarifies that, “No personal financial information such as credit cards or social security numbers appeared to be exposed, according to the company statements and e-mails to customers.” The operative phrase here is “appeared to be exposed.”

The concern to me, particularly for the employment sector, is that anyone using the staffing agency might not be aware of this news and could open these e-mails and start sending personal information, commonly found on resumes and cover letters, to the supposed new jobs. Job seekers must remember to always use caution when sending resumes as they typically contain a home address, phone number and e-mail, but this “indecent” takes vigilance to a whole new level. Don’t forget, employers also use staffing agencies as well to push their job openings and might also experience a similar problem. Unfortunately, Robert Half’s website doesn’t offer much information concerning the issue. In conclusion, anyone using Robert Half’s services should be aware that some of the e-mails could be spam and it could potentially be harmful to forward personal information. Be cautious before sending any information.

A while back I asked the question “is this the most absurd job posting ever” over a pretty lame ad a Georgetown University student posted for an “assistant” to help with such tasks as laundering his dirty socks. Click here to check it out and I am pretty sure you will agree with me on that one.

A recent job posting has also been getting some buzz and as an (ahem) expert in all things recruitment advertising, I gotta say it’s pretty on target. The Sararasota Herald-Tribune is looking for someone to join their investigative team and Matthew Doig, the person at the paper conducting the search, does nothing short of telling it like it is.

There’s definitely a certain type of person that loves newspaper journalism (and recruitment advertising for that matter) and when all you’ve got to work with is plain text, a well-written job posting that speaks to that certain someone is sure to stand out and attract.

In this posting, Mr. Doig tells the job seeker basically if you fit the bill then “you’re our kind of sicko.” Enjoy reading it in its entirety below and if you know any of these sickos, you now know where to send them:

We want to add some talent to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune investigative team. Every serious candidate should have a proven track record of conceiving, reporting and writing stellar investigative pieces that provoke change. However, our ideal candidate has also cursed out an editor, had spokespeople hang up on them in anger and threatened to resign at least once because some fool wanted to screw around with their perfect lede.

We do a mix of quick hit investigative work when events call for it and mini-projects that might run for a few days. But every year we like to put together a project way too ambitious for a paper our size because we dream that one day Walt Bogdanich will have to say: “I can’t believe the Sarasota Whatever-Tribune cost me my 20th Pulitzer.” As many of you already know, those kinds of projects can be hellish, soul-sucking, doubt-inducing affairs. But if you’re the type of sicko who likes holing up in a tiny, closed office with reporters of questionable hygiene to build databases from scratch by hand-entering thousands of pages of documents to take on powerful people and institutions that wish you were dead, all for the glorious reward of having readers pick up the paper and glance at your potential prize-winning epic as they flip their way to the Jumble… well, if that sounds like journalism Heaven, then you’re our kind of sicko.

For those unaware of Florida’s reputation, it’s arguably the best news state in the country and not just because of the great public records laws. We have all kinds of corruption, violence and scumbaggery. The 9/11 terrorists trained here. Bush read My Pet Goat here. Our elections are colossal (Bleep! I’ll just let you fill in the blank here. – Annette). Our new governor once ran a health care company that got hit with a record fine because of rampant Medicare fraud. We have hurricanes, wildfires, tar balls, bedbugs, diseased citrus trees and an entire town overrun by giant roaches (only one of those things is made up). And we have Disney World and beaches, so bring the whole family.

Send questions, or a resume/cover letter/links to clips to my email address below. If you already have your dream job, please pass this along to someone whose skills you covet. Thanks.

Matthew Doig
Sarasota Herald-Tribune
1741 Main St.
Sarasota FL, 34236
(941) 361-4903
matthew.doig@heraldtribune.com

LinkedIn topped 100 million members this week and continues to grow at a rate of more than one member per second. Wow, congrats LinkedIn!

They created a great infographic for a frame of reference on this milestone thats pretty cool too. Are you “linked” and using the site as effectively as you can, both personally and professionally? Let me know!

I also invite anyone to join me on LinkedIn by clicking here, and if you want to bring a discussion about how to better harness LinkedIn’s potential off-line, send me an email at: adehaven@alstin.com

“Don’t worry, it’ll be fun. Trust us.”

I don’t know about you, but that sort of lingo always tends to have the opposite effect with me. The company R/GA, a branding firm, leads off the application process for their internship program with these words front and center on their website. Why all the reassurances?

Part of their application process includes allowing R/GA to interview the applicant’s friends too. On Facebook.

Yep, on Facebook. This is how they explain it:

As a part of the application process for the R/GA internship program, we’ll be posting questions on your Facebook wall for your friends to answer … we’ll post three questions – one per day …

You can opt-out of this process, but seriously, opting-out has got to equate to taking yourself out of the running. A person with the company is quoted as saying “ … this is a new way for them to demonstrate sophistication around using social media.”

I am not so sure how approving an app that will post questions on their wall to friends and family (who may be a little bit biased, ya think?) showcases social media prowess – it does show that R/GA is using social media in a new way – but to each his own.

This approach will likely be a fun exercise for the company and for the potential interns who are game. I think we’d all agree however, that this is not an approach that would sit well for the majority of hiring organizations and candidates who are already under enough pressure looking for gainful employment.

What is your take? A creative approach to recruiting? Another Big Brother experiment in HR-land? Let us know!

A New York Times article titled, “Google’s Quest to Build a Better Boss” by Adam Bryant explains how Google decided to try to analyze “performance reviews, feedback surveys and nominations for top-manager awards. They correlated phrases, words, praise and complaints.” Sound crazy? While some of the results of what Google titled “Project Oxygen” might seem a bit obvious, Google managed to effectively build what they call “people analytics” and “produced what might be called the Eight Habits of Highly Effective Google Managers.”

So what were some of the habits on the list?

· “Have a clear vision and strategy for the team.”
· “Help your employees with career development.”
· “Don’t be a sissy: Be productive and results-oriented.”

The article jests, “The list goes on, reading like a whiteboard gag from an episode of ‘The Office,’” but Google took a look at the list and put it into perspective on how they operate. “For much of its 13-year history, particularly the early years, Google has taken a pretty simple approach to management: Leave people alone. Let the engineers do their stuff. If they become stuck, they’ll ask their bosses, whose deep technical expertise propelled them into management in the first place. But Mr. Bock’s [Laszlo Bock, Google’s vice president for “people operations”] group found that technical expertise — the ability, say, to write computer code in your sleep — ranked dead last among Google’s big eight. What employees valued most were even-keeled bosses who made time for one-on-one meetings, who helped people puzzle through problems by asking questions, not dictating answers, and who took an interest in employees’ lives and careers.”

Amazed by this discovery, Mr. Bock remarked on what that meant to Google. “‘In the Google context, we’d always believed that to be a manager, particularly on the engineering side, you need to be as deep or deeper a technical expert than the people who work for you,’ Mr. Bock says. ‘It turns out that that’s absolutely the least important thing. It’s important, but pales in comparison. Much more important is just making that connection and being accessible.’”

Essentially, Google performed what began as an external experiment on finding the perfect boss and later found that when comparing the results to how they operated, Google didn’t have a clue on how to “build a better boss.” To read the process that Google went through to analyze the results, check out the original article.

But what does that mean to the rest of us? Has your company truly looked into “people analytics?” As an HR manager, have you, or have you considered, surveying your employees?

As a professional, have you ever worked for a company that offered a survey for you to fill out about how you feel about topics in your workplace?

After reading Google’s results, you might want to give it a try to see if your company can make a similar discovery.

Six Flags America in Prince George’s County, Maryland is exploring a different way to find the right applicant. “‘We’re looking for the most engaging, outgoing people,’ said Julia Filz, the park’s spokeswoman. ‘We want people who aren’t shy. In this business, you can’t be shy.’” But how can an employer assure that candidates aren’t “shy” in a business that requires enthusiasm and an undying energy? After all, most job seekers do attempt to practice before going to an interview, sometimes so much so that they can come off as almost scripted. When you’re looking to hire someone who isn’t afraid of being in the public eye, Six Flags offers an alternative to the traditional interview and they even explain how to prepare for it in advance on their website.

According to an article in the Washington Post, “About 1,000 job seekers came in for group interviews and were given 60 seconds each to stand up in front of some of the park’s managers and seasonal supervisors and do . . . something.” What “something,” do you ask?

“One woman did 20 pushups. A teenage girl moonwalked, then shrieked like Michael Jackson. A young man did jumping jacks. Somebody drew a picture. Somebody else belted a gospel song.”

And the talent show didn’t stop there. One teenager described her interview process, the results and the expectations she held before walking into the interview.

“Malerie Matthews, a 16-year-old from Upper Marlboro, made up a poem:

Roses are red
Violets are blue
I want a job
How about you?

She was hired as a ride attendant.

‘I thought they’d ask me some questions and give me a tour of the park, and then I’d go home,’ she said.”

And why exactly is Six Flags trying this approach? “‘It’s a different interview style,’ said Brad McClain, a human resources supervisor. ‘But we’re not your typical employer.’ There were role-playing sessions during the interviews, too. But the 60-second showcases were key. Went to a job fair and a talent show broke out! The company wanted engaging. It wanted outgoing. Simply put- “It wanted people who are willing to do the Dougie on command. “‘Who knows how to Dougie?’ aquatics supervisor Olivia Lawson asked a group of applicants, referring to a dance that’s popular with the kids. ‘Teach me how to Dougie.’” Two giggling teenagers stepped forward. They herked and jerked. Lawson hooted.

All kidding aside, Six Flags recognizes the nature of their work and aren’t afraid to admit it- The working conditions and pay aren’t ideal for most, but the amusement parks still manage to get results. “Six Flags positions pay anywhere from minimum wage to $10 an hour. The bright green polo shirts that park employees wear are the opposite of cool. Working conditions can be brutal. (You try operating the Flying Carousel when it’s 90 degrees with 90 percent humidity.) And yet 25,000 people apply for the jobs at the park every year.”

While their interview process might seem a bit odd, let’s not forget the Alstin blog about some of the wackiest interview questions. In comparison, this style of interviewing seems to make more sense considering the type of applicant the company is seeking. The tips to prepare for an “audition” on their website include, but are not limited to:

· Please arrive at least 30 minutes prior to your scheduled audition time.
· Please bring a recent headshot and resume with current contact information.
· If you plan to audition with a musical number, please bring the sheet music or a backing track on CD.
· Please review the audition material requirements. If you are asked to audition with a monologue, please come prepared with a monologue.

So maybe you don’t necessarily want candidates singing and dancing through your office, but are you seeking someone who isn’t afraid of public speaking? Someone who will have to speak frequently to media, travel to see prospective clients to talk to them about your services or give annual presentations on the company’s status in front of potentially hundreds of professionals? Why not give a potential employee the chance to really show off their talent by allowing them to give a mock presentation or a monologue?

As a hiring manager, do you believe that Six Flags is onto something? Could this interview style work for your company, if tweaked to your specifications, or do you think this is an impractical method for a professional atmosphere?

As a job seeker, would you be willing to stand up in front of your employer and do “something” if asked? How would you show off your talent?

In case you missed it- early this month a Pennsylvania high school English teacher became so frustrated with issues she was experiencing with her students, that she decided to publicly blog about the problems, not only explaining the concerns she has for the future of education, but throwing in a few snippy remarks that successfully managed to insult and offend a number of parents, teachers and students around the country. 

Not only was she suspended after this online rant, but according to an article from Time.com, she effectively started a “viral classroom debate.” If you’ve been keeping up on the Alstin blog, you might remember a similar topic that I wrote about at the end of January on why controversy in your social media can be a positive, but as the Time article reveals, teacher Natalie Munroe took controversy to a whole new level, “In one post, she advises students to go get jobs with the trash company. In another, she calls them ‘rude, disengaged, lazy whiners.’ In yet another she doesn’t mince words, proclaiming, ‘There’s no other way to say this: I hate your kid.’”

Is this taking controversy a bit far? To most, yes. But in an interesting turn of events, is what Munroe did technically illegal? Not according to her attorney, “Steve Rovner, [who says] legally she did nothing wrong to warrant suspension. Rovner says his client’s school district does not have a policy in place that dictates what teachers can and cannot do online and Munroe did not name the school, nor her students, in her blog posts.” And though this might hold up in court, the article continues, “Still, while Munroe maintains what she wrote was meant only to serve as amusement for herself, her husband and seven of her friends who read the site, in publishing the rants to a blog — rather than, say, via a mass e-mail to friends and family — she opened herself up to the chance that anyone outside her circle could find the posts.”

To read the entire update on Munroe’s current media firestorm, see the Time.com article. But what can we learn from Munroe’s plight? Here are a few tips that we should all embrace when using social media about not just the workplace, but anything:

1. As the old saying goes, “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” Remember that anything you post online about your work, company, co-workers, etc. is public. Anyone can find it. Even if you have the post viewable to only certain friends, there is still a chance that one of those “friends” could read and re-post somewhere in a public forum.

2. Before you decide to rant online about your employees that might lack initiative, or the company policies that you don’t agree with, or your micro-managing boss that chooses which color your mouse pad is allowed to be, or any personal issues, take a few deep breaths and talk to your friends or family over the phone or in person about it first, instead of the gut reaction to get instant gratification by posting online. As the article reports, “her husband and seven of her friends” knew that Munroe could offend quite a few by writing what she wrote. Chances are if your family and friends don’t think it’s a good idea to publicly rant about something online, you probably shouldn’t.

3. If you feel that the issues you are experiencing at work really are affecting your own performance or you’re just not comfortable with certain practices, or a particular co-worker, calmly address the problem with that individual or the department responsible for employee grievances. Remember, this is for every employee regardless of whether you are a janitor or a manager.

While blogging about controversial issues can help bump your readership, get your audience involved and possibly help you find issues to your problems, let’s not push it. Throwing around what could be perceived as insults towards managers, employees, co-workers, policies or any other workplace issue is running into dangerous territory. No one wants to be viewed as a social media bully, so again, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.

A little over four years ago, the big work/life issue facing me was my looming maternity leave. Did I save up enough money? How long could I reasonably take off from work? Why don’t I live in Sweden?!!! (Did you know that in Sweden all working parents are given 16 months of paid leave per child? 16 months! Paid! Per kid!)

In the end, I was able to take advantage of four months of unpaid leave. So how does Sweden do it? The cost for parental leave is ultimately shared between the employer and the state.

In the US we have the Family Medical Leave Act.  However, FMLA only requires companies with 50+ employees within 75 miles of the company’s work site to provide FMLA leave (unpaid – pay is optional) to their employees. That means about 40% of the country’s workforce doesn’t even fall under FMLA protection.

Many employers, especially smaller businesses, make the case for “financial strain” or that they are concerned about paying out generous benefits only to have the working parent not return at the end of their leave.

The Society for Human Resource Management has a recent survey that details just 12% of U.S. employers with fewer than 100 workers offer paid maternity leave. The report, which ultimately surveyed 500+ employers, further noted that 7% plan to reduce or eliminate the benefit within the next 12 months. I don’t particularly like that trend.

A recent blog from the Harvard Business Review on how Paid Family Leave Pays Off in California is worth a read – and I only hope this leads to more dialogue on the subject of parental leave between working parents and our state reps.

Back in 2004, California implemented a program that enabled most employees to receive up to 6 weeks of partially paid leave. The number was caped at 55% of their weekly pay with a maximum benefit of $987. This time could be used for the introduction of a new family member or to take care of a sick relative. Last year the program went through a comprehensive evaluation. The findings? Here are a few key points:

• 87% of employers reported no cost increases associated with the program with 9% reporting a cost savings due to reduced turnover or benefit costs
• 91% reported no abuse of the program – use of the program actually increased the likelihood that workers in lower paying jobs returned to work
• Workers who participated in the program were more likely to be satisfied with the length of their leave
• In the six years since the program started, more men are now taking advantage of paternity leave – up from 17% to 26%

A similar program can be found in one other state that happens to be right across the river from where I live and work – New Jersey. I have had friends who were able to take advantage of paid leave in NJ rub it in a little on this one whenever the subject comes up.

You’ll always find paid parental leave offered by top working parent-friendly organizations. And you’ll always find working parents feeling valued by such a benefit. So when is this model coming to Pennsylvania, or the rest of the country for that matter?  While stacking up to Sweden may seem unrealistic, 6 weeks of partially paid leave connected to a state run program may be an ideal approach.

What are your thoughts as an employer? As an employee? Would such a benefit help in your recruitment/retention efforts? Any personal experiences that can back up some of these stats?

Thinking about your sweetheart all day? Anticipating that special, romantic candlelit dinner after work? Ah, yes- it’s February 14^th, which means for many that love is in the air and we can take time to celebrate the relationships in our lives that we cherish most. But in honor of Valentine’s Day, let’s examine a different kind of relationship that most of us work at improving and maintaining every day. No, it’s not your never-ending battle with your spouse to put the dirty laundry in the hamper. This is your relationship with your employees or, on the other hand, with your employer, and it is vital to keep a good one.

Most of us spend more waking hours at work then we do at home (unless, of course, you are nocturnal), so what can we do to maintain a good relationship with those we work with constantly? There have been literally thousands of articles written on how to maintain and improve workplace relationships, as well as several state and federal laws on the subject, so let’s narrow it down to something we can all understand. An article on eHow gives a few tips on preserving this essential connection.

The article starts off by emphasizing the significance of this kind of relationship, “The relationship between an employer and its employees is an important factor in the company’s success. Employers will treat their employees with respect and visa versa if they all want to succeed and achieve goals. Some companies forget to focus on employee retention and appreciation, and then they lose productivity.” The article then summarizes some guidelines to keep in mind in the workplace:

Motivate employees by giving them incentives within the workplace. Treat all of your employees equally and give them all the chance to win a free trip, a free dinner or tickets to the next theatre production. Reward your employees for their improved hard work.

Spend time with your employees. Many bosses and owners forget the ‘little people’ that make it all happen. Sit down and talk with each one of your employees when you have time and ask if they are happy with their jobs and what improvements they think the company should make. 

Plan a team building event and ask all your employees to attend including upper, middle and lower management. Get everyone together as a team and allow them to undergo various team building and trust creating activities. 

Invite all of your staff and managers to an event or a BBQ in your back yard. If you are an owner or the CEO of the company, then what better way to warm up to your employees then homemade BBQ chicken! 

Ask your managers to work closely with their teams and to support any issues that come up, or mistakes that might occur. Get everyone working together on finding a solution that everyone agrees on. If you have to, create a problem and ask everyone to work on it to find the answer.

Now while some of the article might not apply to everyone, keep in mind that this article was written by an eHow contributor that took the time to come up with a few of their own suggestions based off of their life experience. Therefore, this article might offer some of the best ideas, as these come from someone who has experienced employer-employee relationships in the workplace. Alternatively, some of these guidelines are slightly more sterile or cut and dry than the psychology that should go into keeping up good relations in the workplace. Remember, that just like any other relationship, there are no simple, one word answers, but there is always a plethora of advice online that help to make these relationships successful.

Have you found that any particular methods have been successful for your relationships in the workplace? What problems have you had and how have you worked to solve them?

As technology is constantly shifting and advancing around us, it’s hard to keep up sometimes on the most recent trends and information in Human Resources and job seeking. One of the most interesting revelations is that the cover letter, an additional document to follow your resume meant to introduce yourself with a personal touch, is becoming obsolete in some cases. Shocked? Disappointed? Taken aback considering that you just finished editing your most recent draft? An article on Mashable.com titled, “Are Cover Letters Still Relevant For Social Media and Tech Jobs?” explains why.

” As more companies use social networks to screen candidates, many applicants are questioning whether their cover letters are still relevant. With the level of transparency in social media, what can a cover letter offer that a LinkedIn profile or Twitter stream can’t?”

What does this translate to?

“A cover letter’s value can be determined by its approach. Many hiring managers see them as increasingly unnecessary because they’re often text-heavy, unoriginal, and repeat the resume‚ rather than enhance it.

Mark O’Connor, staffing manager at oil company Tesoro, says he doesn’t read much into cover letters, particularly for tech jobs but adds that it doesn’t mean applicants shouldn’t bother to send them. ‘They should be short functional summaries of their relevant experience,’ he says.

Still, O’Connor’s team of recruiters focuses on developing relationships with candidates via social networks. From there, they’re more concerned about the details that lie within the r‚sum‚ and try to hone in on a candidate’s past experience.”

So overall, there are two conflicting messages here – Cover letters are “unnecessary,” but job seekers should send them anyway? Before typing up a long cover letter that details your own philosophies and ideas, rethink everything you think you know about the cover letter. Let’s suppose cover letters are not being phased out, but rather need to be revised. As O’Connor reveals, he would prefer “short functional summaries” of experience and education with a brief personal touch.

But some still certainly place value on the cover letter and believe that it is vital to standing out. “The main advantage of a cover letter is its ability to be customized. Some hiring managers see it as a way to assess your dedication to and qualifications for a specific position.

‘A cover letter, especially one that is customized to the position tells me the person is actually applying for this position. This person cares enough to write something that applies not just a blanket response of resumes to a bunch of jobs,’ says Patrick Chaupham, senior vice president of digital communications at public relations agency Weber Shandwick.

In fact, it’s the lack of tailored and interesting cover letters that keeps Ryan Goff, director of social media marketing at advertising and public relations agency MGH, from reading them. ‘We want to be wow’ed, and the cut-and-paste cover letter will never do the trick,’ he says. ‘Know your audience and, in doing so, give us something that would impress.’”

Essentially, what hiring managers are saying is that a cover letter can and, most often, should be included, but must be written correctly. It should be personal, it should show that a job seeker knows that company and it should be brief enough to not take up too much time to read. Consider the fact that most companies are currently flooded with resumes and don’t have an hour to read cover letter as long as a novel.

Here are a few tips the article shares from other professionals:

“‘Find someone, even a long-lost relative, who can refer you. There is nothing better to open doors than this cover-letter opening line: ‘So-and-so suggested I send you my resume .’
- Eve Tahmincioglu, MSNBC career columnist

“‘Focus on your resume. If it’s strong enough, there won’t be the need for the cover letter.’
- Ryan Goff, director of social media marketing, MGH”

And if that’s not enough, consider other options. As the very definition of the cover letter seems to be evolving just as quickly as technology and social media, try to evolve your cover letter. Consider creative options that show experience and have a personal touch just like your standard cover letter would. Personally, I’m an advocate of trying new ways that incorporate technology- Instead of a cover letter, include a Prezi about yourself, your experience and your education. New ways to stand out to employers are constantly popping up through technology and should be taken advantage of. Read up on your favorite technology and social media blogs and articles to see what you can do differently.

As an employer, how many cover letters have you received in the past month attached to a resume? Do you read each one or just browse the resume to make sure the candidate has the skills you’re looking for? What are you looking for in a cover letter?

As a job seeker, how many cover letters have you spent hours crafting to make sure they sound perfect? Do you find that your cover letters still grab attention or make no difference in the eyes of potential employers? What other methods have you tried to stand out and get your personal touch across?

“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”
- Charles Darwin

When Darwin said the words above, he probably wasn’t talking specifically about the workplace in 2011, but he might as well have been. It’s hard to think of another time in the last century when workers were impacted by so much change. First of course, there was the economic meltdown, which reshaped our job market and the work expected by employers in unprecedented ways. But, perhaps more importantly, there have been the game-changing technology advances (especially in communications) that’s revolutionized the way we work.
What does this mean for the average worker? I think it means that the old cliché “The only constant is change,” will be the new mantra, and it’s important that you don’t get left behind.

Of course, I’m not advocating that you immediately reject everything you’re doing now and blindly jump on the next industry trend or buzzword. I do believe however, that a new mindset is required, and that you ignore new trends and technological developments at your own risk. For example, there’s a big difference between a ). learning about Foursquare, how it’s being used by companies and individuals, and deciding it’s not for you and b.) dismissing it as a waste of time when you really know nothing about it. And trust me, your employer will know the difference.

An obvious benefit to being enthusiastic and adaptable to change is that you make yourself so much more valuable as an employee—and I believe the longer tenured you are at your job, the more important this becomes–no one likes the miserable crank who still wants to work exactly the same way he did 15 years ago and dismisses all new technologies as hogwash.

Here’s how to start:

• Change your attitude. Try to make a point of being curious and open to new ways of doing things. Don’t criticize or judge a new technology until you really understand it. You may find something important that you can apply to your job and share with you co-workers, or make an informed recommendation to your boss.
• Read up on industry articles. No matter what field you work in, there is a website, blog and forum out there where people showcase and discuss hot topics and new developments.
• Attend webinars and seminars. Often just a half hour presentation on a topic by an expert will give you a great base of knowledge you can build from.
• Don’t get too comfortable. Technologies are always evolving. A new tool that may have seemed too unwieldy or unproductive when it was launched a year ago may have made major modifications and had all the bugs worked out.

Sure, it’s tough. We all have so much to do and so little time to get it done, and learning new things brings us outside of our comfort zone. But in today’s fast moving and quick change economy, it’s essential for success.

You walk into an interview dressed in your suit, portfolio and extra copies of your resume in hand and mentally prepared for the run-of-the-mill interview questions such as, “Tell me about yourself.” But when you sit down across from your interviewer, she starts you off with a slightly different kind of question-

 “How are M&Ms made?”

 You might be thinking to yourself, this is a trick question. It’s just something silly to break the ice; some humor thrown at you to see how stiff you are and perhaps the interviewer just wants to alleviate your nerves. But according to the article “The 25 Weirdest Interview Questions of 2010” featured on Yahoo! Finances, this is no trick. Along with 24 other obscure questions, this one is “reportedly from USBank.”

By far, the strangest topping the list came from the prestigious Goldman Sachs, “If you were shrunk to the size of a pencil and trapped in a blender, how would you get out?” The article goes on to explain, “Glassdoor, a job-posting and community site for job-seekers, has compiled a list of the oddest interview questions of 2010, and that zinger—reportedly from Goldman—wins the number one slot. ‘Interviews can be an extremely nerve wracking experience, and by shedding light on the process we hope to give job seekers a leg up in their next interview,’ says Robert Hohman, co-founder and CEO of Glassdoor. Glassdoor combed through 80,000 interview questions shared by job candidates on its site to find the wackiest queries.”

The list of questions continues from a variety of topics including some that seems completely random and others that are formatted like old familiar grammar school math problems or questions that your high school guidance counselor might have asked to get a better idea of what job you would be best suited for, but still the article admits, “Glassdoor is not able to independently verify that these questions were actually asked, or who asked them,” which essentially means we’re just going by word of mouth.

The article reported, “BNET contacted all of the companies who made top 25, and among those who responded, none were able to confirm the origin of the questions. But none of them denied that the questions had been used, either (though some said these questions were not part of a standard set used by all interviewers), and some even offered a possible explanation as to what kind of answer the interviewer was after.”

Just for fun, here are the top 25 weirdest questions in order from the article:

1. If you were shrunk to the size of a pencil and put in a blender, how would you get out? (Goldman Sachs)

2. How many ridges are there around a quarter? (Reportedly from Deloitte)

3. What is the philosophy of martial arts? (A spokesperson for Aflac, where this question was used, says she hopes the candidate quoted Kwai Chang Caine from the 1970s TV show Kung Fu: “I seek not to know the answers, but to understand the questions.”)

4. Explain to me what has happened in this country during the last 10 years (Reportedly from Boston Consulting)

5. Rate yourself on a scale of 1 to 10 how weird you are (Reportedly from Capital One)

6. How many basketballs can you fit in this room? (Reportedly from Google)

7. Out of 25 horses, pick the fastest 3 horses. In each race, only 5 horses can run at the same time. What is the minimum number of races required? (Reportedly from Bloomberg LP)

8. If you could be any superhero, who would it be? (Reportedly from AT&T)

9. You have a birthday cake and have exactly three slices to cut it into eight equal pieces. How do you do it? (Reportedly from Blackrock Portfolio Management)

10. Given the numbers 1 to 1000, what is the minimum number of guesses needed to find a specific number if you are given the hint “higher” or “lower” for each guess you make? (Reportedly from Facebook)

11. If you had 5,623 participants in a tournament, how many games would need to be played to determine the winner? (Reportedly from Amazon)

12. An apple costs 20 cents, an orange costs 40 cents, and a grapefruit costs 60 cents. How much is a pear? (Reportedly from Epic Systems)

13. There are three boxes. One contains only apples, one contains only oranges, and one contains both apples and oranges. The boxes have been incorrectly labeled such that no label identifies the actual contents of its box. Opening just one box, and without looking in the box, you take out one piece of fruit. By looking at the fruit, how can you immediately label all of the boxes correctly? (Reportedly from Apple)

14. How many traffic lights are in Manhattan? (Reportedly from Argus Information and Advisory Services)

15. You are in a dark room with no light. You have 19 grey socks and 25 black socks. What are the chances you will get a matching pair? (Reportedly from Convergex)

16. What do wood and alcohol have in common? (Reportedly from Guardsmark)

17. How do you weigh an elephant without using a weigh machine? (Reportedly from IBM)

18. You have 8 pennies. Seven weigh the same, but one weighs less. You also have a judges scale. Find the penny that weighs less in three steps. (Reportedly from Intel)

19. Why do you think only a small portion of the population makes over $150,000? (Reportedly from New York Life)

20. You are in charge of 20 people. Organize them to figure out how many bicycles were sold in your area last year. (Reportedly from Schlumberger)

21. How many bottles of beer are [consumed] in the city [in a] week? (Reportedly from Nielsen)

22. What’s the square root of 2000? (Reportedly from UBS)

23. A train leaves San Antonio for Houston at 60 mph. Another train leaves Houson for San Antonio at 80 mph. Houston and San Antonio are 300 miles apart. If a bird leaves San Antonio at 100 mph, and turns around and flies back once it reaches the Houston train, and continues to fly between the two, how far will it have flown when they collide? (Reportedly from USAA)

24. How are M&Ms made? (Reportedly from USBank)

25. What would you do if you just inherited a pizzeria from your uncle? (This question comes from Volkswagen. A spokeswoman for the company tells BNET while the question is certainly not standard, the company’s business analysts often have to take over and manage projects started by other people, so this question may have been a manager’s attempt to see how a job candidate would run a project they ‘inherited.’)

Honestly, as someone who has worked in HR previously, I’d have to argue that some of these questions are pretty ridiculous. As an HR manager or interviewer, what do you think? Based on some of the explanations given for some of the questions, would you consider asking some of these? As a job seeker, what kind of response would you give?

What draws qualified job seekers to the opportunities at your company? More and more these days, recruiters are being inundated with resumes from unqualified or under-qualified job seekers who are applying for any and all available positions in the hopes of securing a job any way possible. During this time, that will most likely continue to happen, however, in the midst of the many resumes that come in, how many are from top-quality candidates that have the qualifications you seek and the wherewithal to “cut it” as a productive employee for your organization? Though job opportunities are in high demand, quality workers are pickier than you may think. Along with the needs for stable employment, job seekers, especially those who are currently employed, are searching for the opportunity to improve their situation, be it financially, for educational or professional advancement, unsatisfied in their current workplace or position, or to create better harmony in some way for their home life. How do you capture the interest of a more calculating quality applicant?

First things first…are your job descriptions giving these job seekers the details that mean something to them? According to a survey done by Snagajob.com, when it comes to a job description, job seekers want to see:

• 55 percent want job details
• 27 percent want to see wage information
• 10 percent want quick readability
• 5 percent want more information about perks and benefits
• 2 percent want pictures and video

Of course, you must be sure not to confuse the selective candidates you’re looking for with job titles that are unclear, or a verbose run down of each and every duty involved in the position. You want to use common language, or the terms that someone fitting the role should understand and read easily. Share with them the corporate culture of your business, and the best way to make them feel like they’re not “being sold” is to feature genuine employee testimonials. Who can sell better that your company is a great place to work than the people that work there?

When pitching your openings to possible candidates through job descriptions, print ads, web postings, social media interaction, etc. it’s a good idea to keep in mind the reasons YOU would leave a position, and depict the positive areas in which your organization is strong. There have been a number of articles, blogs, and surveys done that indicate the strongest explanation for employees to be unhappy in their job or to leave their job is a lack of appreciation. Believe it or not, that simple pat on the back may have kept some of your best workers. Thanks to many quotes, sayings anecdotes, we all know that money is not the only thing needed to make one happy. Employees want more, and to keep them happy in the workplace you’ll need to ensure: (from AltaStaff, A Boutique Staffing Agency)

1. Appreciation

2. Respect

3. Trust

4. Individual Growth

5. Good Boss

6. Compatible Co-workers

7. Compatible Culture

8. A Sense of Purpose

If your organization exemplifies these factors, be sure to let prospective candidates know. It’s a good idea to utilize your career site, advertisements, social media tools and more to convey how they will be valued, how their ideas, opinions, and needs will be respected and supported, and how you trust them to do good work in exchange for this open and honest culture you provide for their comfort.

Providing a good work environment is more than the location, the cosmetic structure of the buildings and even state-of-the-art equipment. Often it will all come down to the people, and the ability to feel engaged in your daily achievements and fulfilled in the direction you’re headed.

Make it known that you can accommodate your employees sense of purpose, acknowledge their contributions, respect them as partners in driving the company forward, and it should aid you in drawing in the more sought after candidates.

In November, I blogged about how Monster.com’s Facebook page invited their followers to post questions on what the federal government is doing to create jobs and spur growth. Those that were “liked” the most would be answered directly by the White House.

Austan Goolsbee, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, responded to those questions in a series of videos now found on Monster’s YouTube channel. As unemployment benefits are now starting to expire for 2 million Americans, here’s a timely response to a question regarding the impact of long-term unemployment:

You can view them all on Monster’s YouTube Channel - the questions range from age discrimination, to outsourcing and more. We’re also interested in your impressions of the Q&A’s. Do you think these are the most pressing issues facing America and what’s your impression of the responses?

While some companies seem to be dead set on providing job descriptions and sticking to them, a new article from ERE.net suggests that some are starting to lose faith in these long-standing lists and not only don’t like using them, but don’t believe that they should be eliminated entirely. 

According to “A Zillion More Reasons to Abolish Job Descriptions,” the author Lou Adler writes that “job descriptions are the primary reason why companies can’t find or hire top talent. For this reason alone they should be abolished.” Now before you start thinking, “what does this guy know,” his biography reveals that he is “a noted recruiting industry expert, national speaker, and columnist for a number of major recruiting Internet sites including SHRM, ERE.net, Kennedyinfo.com and ZoomInfo.com.” He is also the president of The Adler Group, ”a training and consulting firm helping companies find and hire top talent using Performance-based Hiring,” and has even written books on the subject. So, what does he have to say job descriptions- a practice that has been used at companies across the world for years? Let’s review just two that stick out.

 “1. Except for the list of responsibilities, they don’t define jobs at all; they define people taking the jobs. If these descriptions left out the required skills, years of experience, industry background, and academic requirements, they’d actually offer something useful as a place to start.”

This is an interesting way to start, but maybe not the most effective argument. While we have all seen, or even written job descriptions, we know that they often read as a list comprised of a desired skill set and background, but most of them also include, if not begin with, a short summary of the position and tasks that the candidate will be responsible for. Some even go so far as to include details on the work environment, the noise level and the climate depending on the job. Are qualifications discussed? Of course, but is that all a job description is? Not typically. Even taking a look at a basic job description sample reveals that they are more than just checklists of characteristics.

“5. They eliminate high-potential candidates from consideration. The best people — especially passive candidates — want career moves that stretch them. Few top people will respond to a job posting that emphasizes skills and experiences unless it’s with a well-known company, or if they are persuaded to check it out through a trusted person or recruiter who contact them. This extra hand-holding narrows the field of people who would even be interested in talking. Worse, most hiring processes screen out these people before they even get through the door.”

I can almost understand the point Adler is trying to make here. Passive candidates, which are apparently “the best people,” won’t respond to a posting from an unknown or smaller company because they are looking to make a career move that will challenge them with a better known company. But with the way the economy has been lately, I doubt that any job seeker, at any level will ignore a potential opportunity simply because the company name is omitted and a job description emphasizes a simple qualification such as, “must have an understanding of Microsoft Office Suite.” While the author might have established this as “extra hand-holding,” from my experience many job seekers actually do the opposite, regardless of their career history. Why apply for something that lists nothing about the job? Are we to assume that the “top people” only seek jobs that are recommended by a “trusted person or recruiter?” I understand that “hand-holding” could be taken as an insult to top talent, but are we truly to believe that less is more in this situation? If the company name is omitted- fine, as this is common, but why even bother sending a resume for a position that you know nothing about? If the job description is wordy, isn’t that better than excluding key duties and qualifications? As someone who has worked in Human Resources for a few years, I have seen people apply for medical positions without proper education or certifications just because they decide they want to be a surgeon today. Do you really want a random individual applying to your nurse position that doesn’t have a license or certification? Of course not, but people do it. When it comes to job descriptions, I’ve found that more, not less, is beneficial.

While I’m not all for job descriptions myself, I don’t believe that Adler’s article really points out one of the biggest problems with job descriptions, that some of the commentators below the article mention. One commentator, Dave Pollock, writes,

“Lou – 100% accurate on all accounts. However, I think you’ve missed the most important reason for doing away with Job Descriptions. Ironically, it’s the reason written into almost all of the descriptions themselves… right at the end. It reads: ‘Other Duties As Assigned’

Translation for High End Positions: ‘If you’re really good at something, we’ll have you doing that as soon as possible.’

On the Low End: ‘If nobody else is available, you’ll do it.’”

If anything, it appears that job descriptions are more often too vague and include, as the commentator highlighted, blurbs like, “other duties assigned,” or “will perform additional administrative duties,” which really says nothing about the position and contributes nothing to the overall description. Perhaps Adler is referring to a different kind of job description. Something specific that he has encountered again and again. Has this been your experience?

What’s your view as someone in Human Resources? As a recruiter or a hiring manager, do you value job descriptions, believe they just need to be more carefully crafted, or believe they should be removed from practice completely?

I’ve been hearing and reading a lot lately about jobless discrimination, a disturbing new trend in recruiting where employers are reluctant to hire unemployed workers thinking the best candidates are the ones already working. I have heard a few unconfirmable stories about employers thinking the unemployed are more likely to steal even including a credit check of an applicant as part of the screening process. The idea being “If you’re in debt, we don’t want a desperate employee”. To what extent this practice goes on I do not know, but this article highlights some crazy examples of actual job ads/solicitations specifically requiring candidates to be currently employed in order to qualify for the opening. The author cites some examples of this practice by surfing for jobs that use the “must be currently employed” language and found several on Monster.com and Craigslist:

A staffing agency representing a “world leader in the medical industry” is advertising for a San José-based product salesman on Monster.com, but the person “must be currently employed.”

A “Big Box” retail giant in New York City posted a Craigslist ad for an overnight freight flow manager who “must be currently employed for consideration,”

..a manufacturing company in Winston-Salem, North Carolina specified on Monster.com that it will not consider any unemployed applicants for a Senior Pricing Analyst position.

And a CPA firm in New Jersey said “DO NOT APPLY IF YOU ARE NOT CURRENTLY EMPLOYED IN PUBLIC ACCOUNTING” in its ad on Craigslist.

Is this even legal? The short answer is yes. We have laws in this country to prevent hiring discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, pregnancy and age. But joblessness? Uh, completely legal.

It’s sad to think many of the nation’s 15 million unemployed are facing this kind of challenge in seeking employment. The economy drops out with plenty of blame to go around but the average wannabe American worker may be getting the real short end of the stick.

Did you ever wonder why certain friends’ posts always show in your Top News Feed vs. other friends? Or, why specific page’s or group’s status updates appear more consistently in your Top News stream?

Well, there’s an answer for that. Carrie Kerpen from Likeable Media wrote an excellent post on September 24^th on just this topic. And, I think you’ll find her discoveries (and her diamond ring analogy) very enlightening.

Many employers have Facebook “Fan” Pages but getting fans to engage and to remain “top of the heap” in the News Feed can be somewhat perplexing. Carrie’s article goes into great detail about “News Feed Optimization” and the three facets that will help your job related posts appear more frequently within your fans’ Top News Feeds:

Tip #1: Get new fans to “like” or interact (through “liking” or commenting) on your posts right away. The faster you can engage a new fan, the more likely you’ll appear in their Top News Feeds. This will also increase the odds of them engagement with your content in the future.

Tip #2: A comment weighs more mighty than a “like.” So, if you’re looking for Top News Feed listing, make your primary goal focused on fans’ and their comments, not just likes.

Tip #3: Promote content on your site that encourages fan activity. The more content you push out there that consistently gets “zero” comments or likes you’ll quickly drop to the bottom of the News Feed heap, or not appear at all.

The illusive News Feed…partial mysteries solved.

What are your experiences within your “Recent News Feed” vs. your “Top News Feed?” Do you notice the people you ‘stalk’ on Facebook appear more frequently than those you have limited (or no) interaction with?

And, my top (sort of related) question, “How does Facebook decide to rotate in the friend photos into your profile Wall?” These photos DO rotate and they seem to rotate with some “rhythm” as it relates to who you’re looking at on Facebook and who’s commented recently on your activity, but not 100%.

Feel free to leave your thoughts and tips here! I’d love to hear form you J

Oh, and my funny YouTube clips for the day: Sesame Street spoofing the insanely popular Old Spice campaign. Hilarious stuff. Way to go Sesame Street!

- Elmo “live’ video blogging

- Grover – “Smell Like a Monster”