HealthCare Voice

Why Do We Forgo Transparency In Recruiting?

Executive candidates continue to write about their frustrations with healthcare organizations that are unwilling or unable to disclose material issues regarding executive or management positions for which they are recruiting.

This is not a random, occasional occurrence.  These continued comments from frustrated executives come at a time when healthcare organizations need to find and retain the best people, not drive them away because the job was not appropriately represented by internal or external recruiters. This is a common reason why executives fail to stay in a position beyond 18 to 24 months.  In fact there are documented cases where the newly employed executive did not stay in the position beyond 180 days.  That is an extremely costly miss-hire.  Other times, the candidate may stay but there is a certain sadness emphasized with a resigned shrug of the shoulders when asked if they were satisfied with the recruiting process.  “Well, I am here now.  I never should have left, but the door has closed on that part of my life.”

Somehow there is this misguided belief that it is perfectly acceptable for organizations to mask negative factors about a job, thinking that their omissions of important information is really OK, and that everything will work out in the end.  An executive begins a new job filled with hope that they can make a positive contribution.  They are attracted to the organization usually because they are painted an attractive picture, and they are wooed mightily in one-on-one meetings with key leaders and at dinners with the CEO or board members.  They want to believe the best about their new employer. They are excited that they are beginning a new career with an honorable organization that is committed to doing the right thing.

It is devastating for the new executive to learn that the part about doing the right thing did not include being transparent about the pros and cons of the organization, the challenges the position would pose, the true scope of responsibility or even the compensation package.

In my conversations with candidates, I have found that this has been and continues to be an across-the-board problem:  both internal and external recruiters engage in these practices.

By way of example, in a recent interview, a Chief Operating Officer complained that a potential employer’s best offer was $45,000 less than what they were told by the recruiter, a partner with one of the largest firms in the executive search industry. That is no insignificant amount. The candidate walked away and the frustrated client was forced to restart the search while the expenses once again began to mount.  “If I had known the truth, I would have never gone through the process,” the former candidate lamented.  In many lower level searches – for managers or directors -- this is a very common problem because most candidates, eager to advance in their career, do not know that it is OK to ask for the salary range up front.  Hint:  If the recruiter does not know, tell them to find out and call you back.

On the other side, Chief Executive Officers and Chief Human Resource Officers must demand better of their internal search team or their hired headhunters.

I cannot control what candidates are told by prospective employers, but as a partner in an executive search firm, I can insist that clients be transparent, so I can deliver appropriately qualified candidates a detailed Position Prospectus that outlines the critical information the candidates need to know, such as:

     1.    Selection criteria

    2.    Compensation package with a specific range for the base salary

    3.    Profile of the corporate culture

    4.    Performance expectations

    5.    Hurdles to success

    6.    Project schedule

Making assumptions is never a good idea, and what I am finding is that it is a fool’s errand to believe that all candidates understand how the executive search process works. 

Let me know what you think.  If you would like to learn about a candidate’s recruiting rights, or questions candidates have the right to ask, let me know.  I would be happy to extend this conversation.

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Millennials and the Mess We Left Behind

I have just finalized my lecture on leadership and career management for the Health Management and Policy graduate students at the University of Michigan School of Public Health in Ann Arbor.  I enjoy speaking to students because it allows me a chance to stay connected with emerging trends and a robust source for new ideas.  In other words, I learn as much from them as, hopefully, they learn from me.

One very positive trend is that this generation -- the Millennials -- seems less focused on consumption than their elders.  That is a good thing since they are the generation that must deal with the very serious consequences of more than 40 years of excessive government and consumer spending, much of it financed with mountains of debt. While consumer spending has slowed, the federal government continues to spend more than it takes in.  The national debt as of 1:30 PM GMT on Tuesday, Feb. 15 is $14,097,682,614,097, or $45,471 for each U.S. citizen.  The bad news is that since Feb 28, 2007 the national debt has been increasing by $4.12 billion per day. 

In 2010, 68 percent of our debt was financed by foreign sources.  They are warning us that they are increasingly frustrated with our inability or unwillingness to tackle this debt problem.  At the current pace, in 10 short years, the interest on the national debt will be $1 trillion a year. Coincidentally, that is equal to the amount of our national debt held by the Chinese government. 

A trillion dollars is a big number. David Cote, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Honeywell and  a member of the President's bi-partisan deficit reduction commission, has provided us with the best illustration of how stunningly large this number really is. This is a must watch Video. (When you arrive at the page, scroll down to start the video.)

If that explanation doesn't take your breath away, you are either already dead or just beyond help.

In my youth, my father’s ultimate punishment for not doing well in school or for not following the house rules was to ask for my car keys until he felt I had learned my lesson.  Frankly, I am surprised (shocked) that the Millennials haven't collectively and figuritively asked us to surrender the car keys.  

What does the debt crisis have to do with my lecture to the graduate students of this great University?  Plenty.  The financial mess that they must clean up means that their lives -- and their careers -- will be markedly different than those of their parents and grandparents.  For these future healthcare executives, it means that the industry they are preparing to enter today will be substantially different within 10 short years because the current trajectory for federal spending, if not substantially reduced, will create a sovereign debt crisis the likes of which will dwarf the current problems in the Euro zone -- Greece, Ireland and Portugal. That will trigger catastrophic consequences for this nation and its expensive healthcare delivery system, most economists agree.

So these students of today will be forced to deal with dramatic change, and more than their fair share of gut-wrenching decisions.  Managing their careers will be more challenging than for any generation over the last 50 years. The rules of personal brand management, job searching, resumes  and interviewing will change. 

The pressures on future leaders to perform -- reduce costs and improve quality, safety and service -- will be more intense than at any time in our industry's history. 

To make matters worse for these future hospital executives, many medical schools seem oblivious to the need to immediately change the way they educate the physicians of tomorrow. Without this change the sometimes nasty conflicts between hospitals and physicians that occurred when hospitals converted to the DRG payment system and the physicians did not, will seem like child's play. But then that is whole other story.

Another positive trend is that my experience/interactions with the Millennials suggests that they are bright, responsible and most are keenly aware of the challenges they face ahead. I am betting they will do what my generation failed to do -- make tough choices, act responsibly and deliver safer, better healthcare at a lower cost.

What are your thoughts?

 

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Building a Professional Network, Not On-Line Recruiting Sites, Key to Finding a New Job

For unemployed or underemployed executives, sitting in front of a computer screen, submitting resumes and applications on line will not, in all likelihood, produce a job offer.  And yet that is exactly what thousands of out of work executives will do today.  They will push paper to potential employers and hope something sticks.

It is not a complete waste of time, but it is close.   The computer is a networking tool, not the primary pathway to a return to employment.  At the end of the day, it is the scope and quality of networking relationships that will produce the best results in the most efficient manner.

Let me explain why I think building and sustaining a robust network of professional contacts is so critical for executives today.  The economy is showing signs of recovery, but staggering annual deficits and a crushing national debt signals that this decade is more about retrenchment, not business or life as usual as we have come to know it over the past 20 years.  As we move through a period of sustained high unemployment, executives and managers cannot treat the development of a personal/professional network as a luxury for which there is little time in their busy schedule of work, family and leisure activities. This period of sustained higher than normal unemployment will be accompanied by continued volatility in the executive and management job market.  In other words, no one is completely protected; everyone is at risk of losing their job.

For executives who have not invested time and effort in developing a large network who now find themselves on the job loss bubble, or those who have already been sacked, you have waited too long.  Without this robust network of relationships that can help you connect the dots of potential new opportunities, you face prolonged unemployment unless, of course, you are an industry star or incredibly lucky.  Not to be trite, but luck is not a very successful career management strategy.

Aside from building a professional network that can help in the event of a job loss, it also is important to have a network that will be the source of new ideas for strategies, program development and problem solving.  In other words, your network also is a tool to add value to your organization.

As I speak to professional associations across the country, I am frequently asked about the role that networking sites such as PLAXO, LINKEDIN and Facebook should play in the   development and management of a professional network. They, like thecomputer and other personal connectivity devices, are tools.  But just having connections on these sites will not be any more helpful or successful than sending resumes to on-line    employment sites.  Having   hundreds or even thousands of contacts is useless unless you do something with the information by engaging these people, finding out where they work, what they do and who they know. Moreover, waiting  until the last minute to engage your contacts, or after the last minute when you are signing up for unemployment, is not much different than starting to build a network from scratch after you lose your job.

Building and nurturing a professional network requires discipline – to work on this every week, to allocate time to talk to or email people.   Successful network development has become a core competency for leadership and career management success.  To new graduates  and up and coming executives,  I encourage you to begin building and nurturing a relationship network on day one of your career.  This will be as important to your success as producing stellar results.  For those senior leaders who have enjoyed success in the past, it is never too late.

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Another 'Work of Art' Dies...

As we began the New Year, America lost one of its important heroes, a great leader from a generation filled with remarkable leaders, known and unknown.

Richard "Dick" Winters was an intensely private and humble man who had asked that the news of his death not be announced until after his funeral.  Mr. Winters died in Central Pennsylvania after a battle with Parkinson's Disease, the Associated Press reported. He was 92. 

Why is Mr. Winters worthy of note?  He became the leader of E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne after the death of his company commander during the D-Day invasion of Normandy.  He was not the only battlefield promotion that important day in the history of the world.  We might not have ever known of Mr. Winters -- his courage and his skills as  the leader of Easy Company -- had it not been for Richard Ambrose's best-selling book and the HBO miniseries of the same name: Band of Brothers.

What made Winters such a good leader?

"When he said, 'Let's go,' he was right in front," said William Guarnere, 88, who was called "Wild Bill" by his comrades. "He was never in the back.  A leader personified."

"He was one hell of a guy, one of the greatest soldiers I was ever under," said Edward Heffron, 87, whose company nickname was "Babe."  Heffron said that thinking about Winters brought a tear to his eye. "He was a wonderful officer, a wonderful leader.  He had what you needed, guts and brains.  He took care of his men.  That's very important."

Another Easy Company veteran said of Winters, “I would follow him to hell and back.”

During the invasion, Winters led his 12 men who had survived the landing in destroying an enemy battery and obtained a detailed map of German defenses along Utah Beach.  When ordered to take out the German cannons that threatened death and destruction on other units landing on the beach, Winters never told the officer that he only had 12 men.  More significantly, before attacking the battery, Winters went first -- alone -- to scout the German defenses. In September of 1944, he led 20 men in the successful attack of 200 German soldiers.  In the Battle of the Bulge, Winters and his men held their position until reinforcements broke through enemy lines.  Shortly afterward, Winters was promoted to Major.  

He was beloved and respected by his men. 

As I work with the leaders of today, I sometimes think back to this Greatest Generation, the enormous sacrifices that they made, and the valuable lessons they learned in the heat of combat.  Every day another great leader, another hero from this time in American history, dies. As their numbers dwindle, they still have lessons to teach us about great leadership if we will only look. That is their legacy.

As I read about Major Winters, as I thought about Mr. Ambrose's compelling book and the powerful miniseries that captured our attention, I am reminded of a definition of leadership:

"A great leader is a work of art.  A bad leader is a tragedy."

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Quote Source:  Associated Press

Seed Newsvine

What Would You Do?

So, here is the $64 million dollar question for hospital CEOs.  You learn that in the next 12 months the federal government is planning substantial cuts in Medicare reimbursement. Big cuts to balance the budget.  Moreover, CMS announces that all Medicare payments in 2012 will be tied directly to quality of care, patient safety, and customer satisfaction performance measures. Managed care payors announce that they will follow the government's lead. They, too, will join in the plan to bundle payments to providers, forcing immediate financial collaboration between physicians and hospitals.

This reflects a potentially devastating change for hospitals and physician practices, the perfect storm. This is the REAL sea change that consultants have been harping about for years.

To survive, hospital CEOs must take dramatic action including reducing costs by at least 7 to 10 percent below current Medicare rates. Quality of care -- using a variation of pay for performance formulas -- will be the key driver for all future payments. If hospitals do not measure up, they will get less, a lot less.

What will you do?   How will you restructure your organization?

This is no hypothetical scenario.  Today it may be just a fear, fodder for blogs, subject matter for futurists, and the inevitable journal articles about the doom and gloom future of healthcare.  But just around the corner, much sooner than later, it will be a reality.  

I have incredible confidence in the quality of U.S. healthcare leadership.  I know that, if challenged in this way, the vast majority of healthcare executives and physicians will respond in a dynamic and productive way. There is, in most executive suites, an untapped reservoir of extraordinary ideas and creativity that will lead to a new vision for the U.S. healthcare system.

However, most CEOs today are reluctant to advance these extraordinary ideas because we are an industry that is not comfortable with sudden change. Consequently we focus on what is safe in terms of strategy and innovation. But we are nearing that economic/reimbursement tipping point.

This is a subject worth thinking about.  What will you do?

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Don't Be Afraid...

When I faced tough, gut-wrenching challenges with a former job, a trusted adviser and friend urged me to come to grips with the inevitable.  "Quit making excuses.  The dysfunction is killing you; it is suffocating your spirit."

He was right.

For so many years, I had seen the handwriting on the wall, but I worked overtime at making all the excuses for avoiding the ultimate tough decision.  However, when I came to grips with the facts and decided to leave, it was as if the curtains opened, the seas parted, and the answers to all those debilitating issues that I had rationalized for years suddenly seemed so clear cut. I kept asking myself, 'What took you so long?' 

I am not alone in making this mistake.  

In our new economy, healthcare leaders will be tested as never before.  Leaders must not be afraid to ask for help. "I can't do that," one CEO said, explaining that his board might conclude that his request for support would signal that he was not the right man for the job "...and they will push me out."

If that is true, what is going to change in 2011, 2012 or 2013 when the Medicare reimbursement is repeatedly cut and the challenges only become more problematic? 

Leadership is about confidence and courage.  But it is also about admitting when you need help to address a major issue.  There is not a top health system or hospital CEO in the country that is going to have all the answers to the challenges that will assail our industry. The smart guys know why and when to ask for additional resources.  They know that waiting will only prolong the agony and increase the financial consequences.

Executives who allow themselves to become trapped by the myriad of reasons why they cannot change, or why they cannot ask for help, will learn that those reasons are, in reality, only the lies we tell ourselves to justify why we do not take bold action, why we will sacrifice our mission and our vision for a less riskier game of "small ball."

I have been there. But once I got over that mental barrier to deal with what I thought were insurmountable issues, I opened a new career door.  Today I am happier than I have been in years, doing what I love to do.

I am not an exception.  You, too, can make the tough decision and find great happiness and career satisfaction.

© 2011 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

To Be Or Not To Be...TRANSPARENT

Transparency in recruiting is essential, yet many organizations, and their recruiters, play fast and loose with the term or ignore it altogether.

Lack of transparency in the recruitment process is one of the principle reasons that more than 50 percent of all candidates recruited from outside an organization quit, are pushed out, or are fired within the first 24 months, according to employment industry studies.

In more than 17 years in the executive search industry, I have heard candidates describe horror story after horror story regarding how the truth about a company, a job or even the compensation plan was covered up or, at times, distorted. When a frustrated candidate approached her new boss about an intractable problem that would dramatically affect her tenure – the boss replied with words to the effect:  If we had told you the truth you would not have taken the job.  If I had $10 for every time I hear that line from candidates, I would be on financial easy street.

Some CEOs and/or their well-intended but misguided minions will cover up any number of issues to avoid admitting the worst kept secret in the world:  that they have problems – from leadership dysfunction;  the bloody and brutal nature of inter-office politics; the management silos that squash innovation, drive up costs and harm patients; and the immovable barriers that stymie performance. The inventory of issues are endless.  In some organizations so is the list of problems that everyone knows but are not allowed to disclose to potential new employees.

Some organizations decry the practice of being deceived by fraudulent references but will go to great lengths to cloak the truth about their shortcomings to their potential employees.  It is as if the companies are playing a massive and costly game of “you figure it out.”  This practice is not just limited to a few complex hospitals or other healthcare service businesses.  It is a widespread problem across all sectors.

For companies who are honest about their issues, who practice full disclosure, they typically are able to recruit and employ candidates who stay longer and produce greater value. Honesty contributes to a sense of belonging for employees as well as a deep pride to be working for a company who walks the talk.

I can think of no reason for any organization to engage in a recruiting process that is anything less than completely transparent about the good, the bad and the ugly of an organization.

The upsides in this environment are endless.

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

The Ethics of Providing Misleading References

One of my mother’s oft repeated lines, reflective of her status as a true Southern Lady, was, “If you can’t say anything good about a person, don’t say anything at all.”  Hardly her original line but it is certainly a standard of conduct worthy of practice. 

There is a variation to this standard in the recruiting industry.  When giving a reference, recruiters would prefer that executives adopt this rule:  If you can’t say any good about a former employee, don’t lie.

I know of cases where exasperated executives, so happy are they to be rid of a troublesome or poor performing hospital executive or manager, that they have given remarkably favorable references.  Perhaps a sense of guilt led them to do what they thought was a good deed.  “I didn’t want to hurt his career,” one CEO said.  I guess that CEO did not think about the next CEO who would have to deal with his now departed employee’s problems.

We do that a lot in healthcare – say nice things to an unsuspecting future employer about a candidate.   Truth is we need to stop this. Giving a good reference when the former employee’s performance has been less than stellar is not doing anyone any favors, especially to the person who was sacked.

Verifying the performance of a potential employee is one of the age-old struggles of talent acquisition.  Recruiters are seeking good information to avoid a costly hiring mistake.    Companies that erect Chinese Walls to protect themselves against a lawsuit for a bad reference do not help the process even though these “walls” rarely prevent an enterprising researcher or recruiter from trying to dig out the truth.

If you feel compelled to support a former employee who did not succeed in your organization, then find those traits  that you liked and politely decline to answer each question regarding performance in which your response might be negative. 

This might be equivalent to “damning by faint praise” but at least you have done the right thing.  

© 2010 John Gregory Self

 

  Seed Newsvine

Common Resume Problems Frustrate Recruiters, Employers

What many executives and managers do not know about producing a credible and effective resume is frequently startling.

I spend a good part of each day reviewing resumes, and frequently complete my work with varying degrees of frustration. Many of my colleagues share this feeling.  It is not a frustration born of ridicule but the realization that these good men and women are hurting their career brand.

There seems to be an intellectual disconnect between the common knowledge that the resume is actually the first interview in the recruitment process, and the lack of clarity and specificity regarding a candidate's past jobs, their scope of responsibility and value contribution. That candidates are initially included or excluded in the search process based on their resume seems to escape comprehension by far too many executives in the job market.  

Depth and range of experience and value contribution are two of the most important facets of the resume. Lack of clarity or obfuscation --unintentional or on purpose -- are two of the most common reasons potentially qualified candidates are eliminated in this first round of candidate screening.

With the continuing high unemployment and shrinkage in the number of leadership and management positions, candidates cannot afford to submit a resume that does not clearly and concisely detail the depth and scope of experience and extols the value of their accomplishments.  When it comes to your resume, if you do not sell yourself, it is highly unlikely that anyone at the candidate screening table will rush to be your advocate.  

if you would like a free copy of an executive recruiter's resume guide, please email JohnGSelf Associates.  I would be happy to share this with you.

[email protected]

© 2010 John Gregory Self

ahref="http://technorati.com/faves?sub=addfavbtn&add=http://healthcarevoice.typepad.com/healthcare_voice"> Seed Newsvine

What Am I Doing Wrong With Career Management? Nothing and Everything

An up and coming executive expressed angry frustration with the whole recruitment process.  Called twice for attractive positions that apparently represented career advancement, each opportunity ended with the job being awarded to internal candidates who were less qualified and lower paid.

“What am I doing wrong?”  Nothing and everything.

Nothing in the sense that his resume was an excellent reflection of his career progression, his performance, and the value creation for each prior employer.  In each case, the recruiters expressed great interest and assured the candidate that he would be a perfect fit – just what the client was looking for.  He interviewed exceedingly well – no apparent mistakes.  He received assurances from several of the interviewers that, in fact, he was just what they were looking for, but in the end, the jobs were awarded to internal candidates who were less skilled, less experienced but with a lower salary target.  This leads me to the “everything” part of my answer.

The young executive had no career plan, no targeted industry on which to focus, no concept of career brand management, a narrow list of networking contacts, and a lack of understanding of how the talent acquisition process really works.  Ten years ago, his list of “have nots” would have been largely inconsequential.  Today, those deficiencies are huge.

Here are some important career management points to consider:

1.   Recruiters are focused on building a credible panel of candidates for their client – whether as a search consultant working for an external firm or as an internal headhunter.  That is how they are compensated or evaluated.  They may, or may not, have your best interests at heart.  They certainly do not work for the candidate, regardless of how friendly the relationship.  They are probably unaware, or do not care, how not being selected for a position can subtly impact your personal brand.  Candidates who look at numbers of positions are naïve if they do not believe that the “always the bridesmaid, never the bride” image will ultimately affect their career brand.
2.  Always ask if there is an internal candidate.  Recruiters do not always like to divulge that information, but you are entitled to know.  Push the envelope and try to find out if that candidate is credible or if their involvement in the search is more “political” or “for show.”  If the candidate is a strong contender, or if the recruiter is evasive, it is time to hit the brakes.  In this troubled economy, employers are less likely to take a risk with a more expensive outside hire for non C-suite positions.  Candidates can always tell the recruiter to call them back if something cannot be worked out with the internal person.  Or better yet, just decline consideration.  This can be a smart, brand-enhancing move but timing and style are everything.  However, be forewarned that it is not a good idea to treat a recruiter badly.  They have memories like elephants, and they share information internally with notes to the candidate database.
3.  Develop a career plan – the sooner the better – focusing on a specific job or a type of work that brings joy and satisfaction.  Focus on a sector or an industry segment, if possible, and begin building your networking of contacts across this spectrum.  Do not focus building relationships only with external recruiters since they handle less than 35 percent of all management and executive recruiting projects.  Keep an open mind given there is a good chance you will not end your career doing the job you thought you would always have.  Finally, allocate time every week to focus on career networking and industry research.  This is as important as staying relevant with new ideas and technological developments in your current field. This is not “your parents” job market and it is only going to become more challenging. 

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Results or Reasons

"In life we can have results or reasons.  If you are not getting the results you want, your reasons are the lies you keep telling yourself."    

                          Harald Anders, "Be Realistic: Create a Miracle"

This applies to our careers, our performance, and our relationships.  

You can argue with this statement, Mr. Anderson wrote, "But it will be like wrestling with the wind, it will keep you busy, but you will not get anywhere."

A great friend, a genuinely nice man who I admire enormously, was frustrated by a sudden change of events. After a successful and principled tenure at a public hospital, he resigned over what he felt were troubling ethical governance issues. He went on to interview for other jobs, all without result. He was smart, intelligent and experienced. He had impressive recommendations --some of the best I have seen in my 16-plus year in executive search -- and a 25-plus year record of accomplishment in a branch of the armed forces medical service corps, however he recently decided to retire rather than endure any more unsuccessful executive searches.

When it was suggested that he hire a career coach to improve his interviewing skills my friend responded with pent up frustration, that he had been successfully advancing his career for all his professional life and did not see a need to change his style or approach at this stage of his career.  In other words, what worked in the past should apply today.

What a shame. What a loss for the hospital management industry. What my friend apparently did not consider was that his military career DID NOT prepare him for the rigors of the civilian market search process, including competitive interviewing.  

In dozens of interviews with former Army, Air Force and Navy healthcare professionals I learned that advancement in the military is based almost solely on past performance and relationships, not the actual interview with a new commanding officer. Former military officers say, almost without exception, that their success in advancing in the civilian market was due to two things: performance, and improving their interviewing skills.  

This rule also applies to executives who have risen in their careers through the civilian ranks. The rules of career management, including networking and interviewing skills, have changed dramatically over the past five to seven years. What worked for career advancement earlier in your career, probably will not be effective today. New interviewing techniques, web-based networking tools, search engines that collect and store information regarding your accomplishments or failures, and performance expectations come together to make this an entirely different game.   

In an increasingly difficult employment environment, with fewer jobs due to market consolidation and reductions in the number of leadership positions in anticipation of the impending cuts in Medicare funding, career/ personal brand management  -- exceptional performance, great presence, solid communication/interviewing skills and laser-like honesty regarding areas for self improvement -- will become indispensable qualities.  

Pushing back on this reality will only lead to early retirement or a new career. 

My friend did not see the need to make the change, but if he had, there is no doubt in my mind that he would have become an accomplished physician CEO. Do not let your ego or a stubborn streak allow others to shape your career.

That is a rule that applies to us all, not just to my friend.

"At the end of each day, you should play back the tapes of your performance. The results should either applaud you or prod you."         

                                                        -- Jim Rohn

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Unhappy In Your Job? Don't Wait Until It Is Too Late...

There is nothing worse than going to work every day and profoundly disliking what you do or the people with whom you work.  It is like a cancer that eats away at your soul.  It destroys happiness.

If you find yourself in this position, the best advice I can give is to fix the problem internally.  If that is not possible, develop an exit strategy.  Or, you may need to consider the possibility that instead of changing jobs, you may need to consider changing careers.  

You must have a plan.  People who trust that everything will work out find that everything usually DOES NOT always work out, especially when it comes to careers.  If the problem that fuels your unhappiness is systemic, one over which you have little or no control, then leaving may be the only pathway to a return to happiness. This is why you constantly network. The career network you build can be an important and confidential source of leads for a new job.

As you interact with recruiters, ask whether they are retained or contingent.  The majority of search consultants in both categories are ethical but some contingent recruiters, pressured to produce commissions, may be tempted to "shop" your resume and that is not a particularly good thing for managers and executives who must be sensitive to the concepts of personal brand management.  Be vigilant.  People anxious to get out of a job they do not like are not always in full control of their emotions.  You do not want to fall victim to a lazy or overly aggressive recruiter.  Finally, be sure they know why, in the most positive terms, you want to make a job change.  Emphasize your accomplishments and the value you delivered. Your deep-seated unhappiness is not an attribute other employers want to hear about, much less hire.

In preparing for an interview, be sure you have carefully thought out questions you want to ask to avoid finding yourself in a new job with some or all of the qualities that created the original unhappiness.  Many candidates for new jobs prolong their search because they fail to adequately prepare for an interview -- researching the target company and practicing answers to potentially troublesome questions, etc. 

Overall, the best guide for executing a transition is to use common sense. For example, do NOT respond to blind advertisements, regardless of the reputation of the newspaper or job site. You may find yourself applying to your current employer, even for your job, because if you are that unhappy, it probably shows in your performance or the relationship you have with co-workers.

We spend 75 percent of our waking hours at work. It is a lopsided allocation of time that can affect us completely.  If you are so unhappy, the consequences can be significant.  Pay attention. Do not wait to execute a job transition until it is too late, personally or professionally.  

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Human Resource Career: Making A Meaningful Difference

I want to encourage healthcare management graduate students to explore Human Resources as a profession.  If you want to be different – I am talking about being different in a way that you can make a meaningful difference for the success of an organization – this is a leadership discipline where you can have a real impact. 

Human capital management is on the cusp of being the most essential part of the healthcare senior leadership team following finance. 

The only drawback is that I do not know how long it will take the cusp to become that essential part.  Currently, far too many human resource executives – from Chief Human Resource Officers, to Vice Presidents of HR and Directors of Personnel – are marginalized in terms of their role.  Far too many healthcare human resource professionals are buried in the organizational chart bureaucracy.  Far too few have a seat at the senior leadership table.  Fewer still are really taken that seriously. 

Several years ago, a CEO tried to make the argument that he was better served – politically and operationally – if HR did not report to him.  “There is just too much (controversy) and risk in dealing with the people issues, and I need the flexibility to make decisions regarding the best interest of the organization without worrying about the complications that invariably come when you deal with thorny people issues.” 

CEOs who are concerned about the impact of healthcare (read: payment) reform and a prolonged era of cuts in provider reimbursement should begin by building their business strategy around recruiting and retaining the best people.  They will not be able to do that without a top-tier human resource executive. 

The bad news is that there is a dearth of outstanding human resource executives in the healthcare industry, and given that healthcare leaders are traditionally loathe to go outside the industry for talent, that means that many healthcare organizations will not have access to the best and the brightest in the human capital field.

I want to encourage health system and hospital CEOs to overcome an industry-wide provincialism and recruit human resource executives from other industries.  Yes, I know there will be a learning curve, but if your organization is really committed to best-in-class human resource leadership and innovation, then your best bet may this approach.  For graduate students who decide to go into healthcare, consider a  HR residency or fellowship outside the healthcare industry.  It is a risk, I know, but I think there will be some enlightened hospital CEOs who will see enormous value in that approach and give you a chance.

As for that CEO who did not want HR reporting to him because he thought that it would give him more flexibility, he was right.  He now has a great deal of flexibility.

He is out of work.

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Outperforming the Competitors

Healthcare organizations which acquire and retain the best talent will outperform their competitors -- clinically, on patient safety, and financially.  That is why CEOs must devote more time to recruiting, as well as executive, management, and supervisory development, and retention.

CEOs who until now have found success -- and their comfort zone -- chest-high in operational challenges will discover that, gradually over time, their organization's performance will suffer if they remain in that leadership mode.

With a decade or more of reduced reimbursement, and the potential for market disruption unparalleled in the history of our industry, more and more CEOs are recognizing that their human capital -- the people -- is their most important, and frequently under performing, asset.

Empowerment -- bringing out the best in each employee -- will be a strategic imperative for ever healthcare organization.

Here are some starter questions for leaders who realize that they must shift their focus and emphasis in order to achieve sustainable results that will be necessary for financial stability:

1. How would you describe your organization's culture?  (Test your analysis: Do at least 75 percent of the employees agree with your description?)

2. How do potential employees view your organization?  Is your reputation (recruiting brand) sufficient to attract top performers?

3. What is your rate of miss-hires -- the number of executives, directors and managers who leave the organization in twenty-four months or less?  Do you monetize the cost for this transition?

4.  What is your turnover rate?  Do you hold your team accountable for establishing and meeting targets?  Do you calculate costs for this disruption? (Even with the most conservative of formulas, those costs will surprise you.)

5. How can you sustain investment in executive, management, and supervisory development in a decade of shrinking budgets?

6. Are you getting 100 percent from your executives, managers and supervisors? From your employees?  Can you afford to be satisfied with performance at the 60, 70 or 80 percent levels?

Of course there are other questions.  Dozens, from the structure, quality and objectives of your organization's performance evaluation system, to the effectiveness of your orientation program (you should be moving to an onboarding model), to the candidate screening process and cost of identifying and hiring the best people.

Actually putting people first (as your most important asset) -- not just promoting it in recruiting materials or annual reports -- will require a transformational shift for many CEOs. Transformations rarely occur without frustration and conflict, but the journey and the results will be well worth the investment...and heartburn.

© John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Hiding in Plain Sight

We pay too much attention to emergencies -- the big events -- in government, in cities, in business and in our careers.  We miss the subtle changes that drive real change.

That is how marketing consultant Seth Godin sees it. In a recent blog, Mr. Godin argues that most of society's institutions, businesses, even our careers can withstand external shocks and survive.

"No single technology destroyed the business model for newspapers...the writing has been on the wall for decades.  No single event demolished the music business.  It was a series of slow changes over the course of two decades, all the way back to the CD," he writes.

"Smoking killed far more people than terrorists, it just wasn't as dramatic."

One bad interview, one disaster meeting, a botched sales call or a terrible decision is not a game changer. "The sudden impact of one event isn't sufficient to change everything forever."

He argues that we should not worry as much about what happened last week or last month. We should stop focusing on today's hype -- the breaking news, the talking heads with their mixed bag of opinion regarding the dire consequences we face -- all of the noise.  Mr. Godin believes the frenzy of the here and now distracts us from what really matters.

"The glacial changes of years and decades are becoming more important, not less," he believes.  With advice that seems to challenge the conventional wisdom of any number of current management fads, Mr. Godin declares that we should "focus on what happened 10 years ago and think about what you can do that will make a huge impact in six months."

The subtle changes that will alter our lives -- our businesses and our careers -- are right in front of us, hiding in plain sight.

© John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

The Perils of Conventional Wisdom

Conventional wisdom is a throw away term that gives leaders a false sense of security.

It lulls executives into, at best, faulty analysis and, at worst, it produces a career limiting decision.  Only when conventional wisdom victims are packing up their offices under the watchful eye of corporate security do they realize that conventional wisdom is seldom right.

Born of our own biases, experiences and rooted in that other dangerous business term, common sense, conventional wisdom is just a snapshot of previous events, successes and mistakes in which our memory of the successes are expanded and the mistakes are distorted.  Filled with misplaced confidence, these recollections produce for leaders an inviting mirage in a scorching desert.

Business consultant-author-speaker Aubrey Daniels writes that he is on a campaign to stamp out common sense in business.  He believes there is too much reliance on a concept that Webster defines as "the unreflective opinions of ordinary people," and that these "unreflective opinions are based on unanalyzed experience." He quotes the late Edward Deming, quality guru extrodinaire, who believed that experience teaches us nothing.  "If experience teaches us anything, why are we in such a mess?" Deming liked to ask.

I think we need to treat conventional wisdom for what it is: the poor and unreliable cousin of common sense.

© John Gregory Self, 2010

Seed Newsvine

“It Wasn’t A Good Fit” Spells Disaster for Prized Candidate

Dan, a promising young up and coming executive in a hyper-competitive industry who was pirated away by another company, arrived with great fanfare; it was a real coup to get him on the team.  He was truly a trophy catch, sought after by others in the market segment.

For Dan, to make the move was a tough decision in his young, but successful career.  The new job offered more money, probably faster promotions, but he was secure in his current position and his wife and kids were happy with schools, church and friends.

The entire recruitment process was played out in a cloak of secrecy.  A recruiter called a senior executive who got the green light from the CEO. The executive who was coordinating the recruitment process kept information on a "need to know" basis.   Contact with the entire senior leadership team was very limited.   When meetings or dinners were scheduled, several of those executives were unable to attend as the result of some last minute conflicts.

In the end, after weeks of clandestine meetings and intense selling, Dan decided to accept the offer.

Six months later Dan suddenly disappeared from his new company.  When a concerned colleague asked what happened, he was informed by human resource executive, "It just wasn't a good fit."

Dan's otherwise promising career now had a giant black mark, and Dan's family was devastated.  They felt betrayed. Sure he received a nice "package" but that was small consolation.

"It wasn't a good fit...." what does that mean, exactly?  To be honest, that is really HR code (read:  excuse) for a breakdown in the recruiting company's talent acquisition process.

If you are searching for specific reasons for an embarrassing corporate misstep, here are a few.  In Dan's case, there were multiple errors.

1. The company recruiting Dan had no Comprehensive Onboarding Program (COP). Well designed and properly implemented, a COP will prevent some of the most common and costly recruiting and employment mistakes that companies make every day.

2. The scope of responsibility and reporting lines were not formally resolved before the executive leading the recruitment made Dan the offer.  He knew what he wanted Dan to do, but it was clear that some of his colleagues were not on the same page.

3. The impact that management silos, built and protected by long-term executives, would have on Dan's ability to achieve success went unchallenged.

4.  The CEO, who generally approved of the recruitment, hosted a dinner for Dan, his wife, the senior leadership team and their wives.  Here again, several key executives were out of town or encountered "last minute" conflicts.  Overall, the CEO remained above the process.

5.  There was virtually no transparency regarding the company's culture or any of the negatives that exist in virtually every organization in the world.

6.  Human Resources, relegated to the role of sideline observers, assumed that Dan would discover inside information regarding the good, the bad and the ugly of the company through his own due diligence.  Instead of risking the wrath of the lead executive who was now heavily invested in successfully recruiting Dan, they took the position:  Let the buyer (the candidate) beware.

7.  Candidate interviews were more "show" than "go." More time was spent on wining and dining Dan that he should leave their formidable competitor than exploring in detail whether Dan, with all his talents and impressive record of accomplishment, was really "a good fit."

On the other side of the coin, Dan owns some of the responsibility for his rather spectacular and very visible career crash.  His relative youth and inexperience with this type of high-powered recruiting approach notwithstanding, Dan should have asked more questions during the interviews, pressing for more information on the culture, how and when decisions actually are made, and whether there was complete buy-in from the other executives, especially those with whom he had limited contact during the recruitment.  Sure the lead executive assured Dan that everything would be great. And the offer was impressive, with tremendous upside bonus and profit-sharing potential, but there were enough yellow flags that Dan should have been more diligent.

That said, it is important to note that candidates are decidedly at a disadvantage in the search process, especially those conducted under a fog of corporate secrecy.  It is very difficult for candidates, trying to stay below the radar of their current employer, competitor or vendors who might try to profit with this type of market intelligence, to dig too deeply on their own.  The more calls they make, the more risk of exposure they face.  That is the job for the recruiter – the external search consultant or the internal recruiter - but, in this case and so many others, that information was not forthcoming.

Without full buy-in from the leadership team regarding Dan's scope of responsibility, reporting lines, performance deliverables and, most importantly, how Dan would operate in a culture structured around passive-aggressive management fiefdoms, there was little chance that this prized recruit could be successful.

Finally, the CEO, who chose to stay above the fray rather than challenging his team on those very critical cultural and job scope issues, was the great enabler, not the great leader.

© John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Effective Communication Key to Success In Job Interviews

David was a great candidate, at least on paper.  He had the right credentials – more than was required for the position.  He had degrees from good schools.  Most importantly, he had solid experience.

True, he had moved around a bit, something that causes recruiters concern, but he had plausible reasons – to be closer to a surviving parent who was terminally ill; a new CEO wanted to bring in his own executive team; there was one mis-hire along the way; and one move was for his wife – she had been promoted and the new position was too good to pass up.

He was clearly the best qualified candidate but David had a problem that he could not overcome – he could not tell his story in an effective way.  Another candidate, with good credentials and experience, though not as extensive as David’s, was selected and David joined the ranks of the “65 percent club”, a statistically constant group of well qualified executives who lose out in a search because they do not interview well – they did not communicate effectively.  Here is what I mean:  they were not specific in answering relatively focused questions.  When asked about their weaknesses, they used the often tried but seldom believed answer, “I worked too much.”  They could not provide specific examples for where they added measurable value for their former employers.    

There are only so many interview questions and there are books upon books of the commonly asked questions.  Yet, very few candidates seem to know these books exist, much less bought one to be better prepared. 

Being an effective communicator should not be confused with being a good public speaker.  Not everyone can stand in front of 500 or 1,000 people and wow them with a Power Point presentation.  However, anyone who aspires to leadership must master the art for group meetings or one-on-one sessions. 

There are three common themes of a job search in today’s hypercompetitive job market.

1.  Rejection.  There are more candidates than there are jobs at every level.  Great candidates are eliminated – are rejected – in every job search.  Rejection hurts.  If you have been rejected enough – and most candidates in today’s market have been rejected multiple times – it can crush your spirit and affect your performance the next time you are interviewed.
2. Preparation.  The best candidates are prepared, with a great resume that demonstrates experience and success, and the confidence that comes with practice – anticipating questions and preparing focused responses then rehearsing them in front of a mirror.  Preparation includes reviewing your career history, knowing dates of tenure, names of co-workers, and information on compensation. Submitting a list of positive, articulate references is important as well.  Many candidates demonstrate a lack of preparation at least three to four times in the average interview.
3. Communication.  Candidates must be able to deliver specific facts and examples of success, or lessons learned from failures, with the calm confidence and focus that comes only from practice. 

Good leadership and effective communication are intrinsically linked.  There are examples of great CEOs who were only mediocre public speakers but in small groups and one-on-one meetings, they were the best.

Good preparation and effective communication are the keys to avoiding the pain and despair of rejection.

© John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Managing References: Achilles' Heel for Many Candidates

Reference management.  This is a difficult issue for more executive candidates than most people realize.  Candidates assemble a panel of references. They talk to their references once, maybe twice, and then push the autopilot button.  

Big mistake.

Surprisingly, candidates rarely ask their references what they might say regarding questions concerning "leadership strengths" or "weaknesses."  On autopilot, they just assume their reference contact will say the right thing.  

Bad mistake.

Most executives engaged in an active job search, will identify 3 to five trusted colleagues as references. They submit those same references to five or six recruiters.  If they end up as finalists in more than one search, those references may be called four or five times.  At some point they will suffer from reference burnout. In the end, their comments will begin to drift to the realm of "damning by faint praise." 

For many candidates, reference management is hit or miss, and reference management seems to be an annoying necessity of the search process.  

Dumb mistake.

Here are some things to consider:

1.  Develop a panel of 10 to 12 references so that you can rotate them.  You do not want to wear out your supporters.

2.  Stay in touch with your references.  Let them know what position you are up for, who may be calling, and when to expect a call.

3.  Keep your reference list up to date.  I once had a CEO candidate provide me with three references.  I had asked for eight.  Two of his references were no longer employed at the company where he said I could reach them. He was the favored candidate with political juice, but in the end he was eliminated.  Why?  The board was concerned by his lack of attention to detail.  

4.  Communicate with your references.  The most frequently "botched" interview question is, "What are your weaknesses?"   Who better to help you craft a credible answer than your references?  This adds credibility.  There are other tough questions that references can help you answer, assuming you talk to them in advance.  Let them know that you want this job search to be a learning experience.  Most references will be very candid when you present it in that manner.  

5.  Secondary references can be deadly.  If you mention the name of a colleague during an interview, that person can become what recruiters call a "secondary" reference.  He or she may not be on your reference list, but that does not mean they won't be called. If you are going to be a name dropper, be sure they are people who will speak highly of you. 

6.  Relevance and quality of the reference are critical.  If you are pursuing a CFO position, and your references cannot speak to your experience as a CFO, Controller or Director of Finance, this is not helpful.  In fact, it will become a negative.  The quality of the reference also is important.  You want to identify and use references who are articulate, up-to-date on the relevant issues and who can enhance your candidacy. References who do not meet these tests will only compromise your career brand and your credibility with recruiters.

In trial law, young attorneys are taught never ask a question of a witness to which they do not know the answer in advance.    

The same principle applies to reference management.

Candidates who do not manage the reference phase of the search process are seen by recruiters and employers as being sloppy because they are responsible for giving names of people who can vouch for their abilities in a positive way.  In this competitive job search environment, the lack of attention to the very people who can help you could spell rejection. 

Candidates cannot control their competition but they can be better prepared than anyone else.

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

HEALTHCARE VOICE: New Publication Schedule Announced

There are millions of blogs.  Everyone is competing for attention. 

I am no different.  

Over the past year, I have experimented with a multiple formulas in terms of what to post, when to post and how often to post. I have monitored my readership metrics by day of week and subject matter.

With that information, I have decided to change my publication schedule.  Effective immediately HealthCare Voice will now publish on Tuesday and Thursdays at 1 AM Eastern Time.  Google will serve as my distribution channel via Email or RSS feed. 

HealthCare Voice will focus on recruiting, career management and innovative ways organizations can improve talent acquisition.  Finding and retaining top talent is critical to the success of businesses. Yet, most organizations continue to rely on a 50-year-old model -- transactional recruiting -- that is outdated given the dynamics of our new economy.  HealthCare Voice will provide valuable insight regarding strategies you can use to improve talent acquisition through the use of Transformational Recruiting.

I hope you will continue to subscribe, and share my thoughts with friends and colleagues.  I hope you will feel free to contact me with your comments and suggestions. 

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Executive Job Search: Action Plan for Success

Does the best team always win the important game?

No.  The team that is well prepared and executes flawlessly stands a better than even chance of winning, even against a more talented opponent.

The same principle applies to career management and the interviewing process.  In fact, our research shows that the best qualified candidate is hired only 45 percent of the time.  The qualified candidates who are well prepared and who do a better job communicating in the interviews will usually land the job.

In this increasingly difficult job market – healthcare hiring declined in June for the second month in a row – there is no substitute for preparation and flawless execution.  With some economists predicting unemployment rates of between 5 to 7.5 percent for the next seven to 10 years, the  return  to the go-go days of robust employment is not likely in the foreseeable future.

For candidates in the job market, this puts on more pressure to outperform the competition.  Here are some tips to enhance a candidate’s performance in the interview process.

• Enhance your brand.  Produce a resume that effectively promotes your brand.  Your resume is your first interview.  It must be complete and error free as well as provide a compelling reason for the recruiter to select you for further consideration.  If you are not getting interviews, then change your resume.  If you are not advancing beyond the screening interview, rethink how you are answering the questions.

For a copy of my resume guide, click here.

• Be prepared.  The telephone interview is one of the most challenging parts of the recruitment process.  Have your information immediately available including prior employments dates, beginning and ending salary, the name of your supervisor and your relevant accomplishments.  Some firms insist on having a complete chronological history of employment so be prepared to explain it.  Preparation breeds confidence and confidence is a key ingredient for success in the job search. Also, during the telephone interview are you monitoring your energy level?  Are you standing or sitting?.  Look at a mirror.  Are you smiling?

• Do your homework.  Research the target organization.  Talk to colleagues who may know people in the company.  There is a wealth of information on line about the company and its leadership team.  Learn as much as you can.  Be prepared to demonstrate this newly acquired knowledge without being critical of operational problems or marketing challenges.  Inappropriate or poorly timed use of your research can be as damning for a candidate as not being completely informed or politically insensitive.  Using this knowledge in asking questions is one way to be effective. FYI, some recruiters view a candidate’s lack of questions as disinterest in the job.

• Execute flawlessly.  Practice answering questions, particularly those that may pose a hurdle that you must overcome – lack of relevant experience, short employment tenure, prior termination, etc.  If you cannot answer those issues effectively, you greatly reduce your chances of moving to the next phase.  On the positive side, be sure that your “story” – from providing insights regarding your “growing up” years to extolling your record of accomplishment is a winning summary of accomplishments, metrics and value for the organization.  If you cannot tell your story in a compelling manner, you move down, not up, in the candidate evaluation rankings.

There is one positive thing to remember.  If you have been selected for a site interview – with the full - court press of lunches and dinners – the company is looking for a reason to hire you.  Give them one.  Do not muddle the effort with a silly mistake.  Be mindful of your presence and the surrounding environment.  There are no time-outs in the interview process, including breaks.  Lunches, dinners, and casual conversations during the commute to and from the hotel or to dinner are all on the record.  Pay attention.  Do not appear to ignore anyone at the table, even with a large group.  Do not forget your table manners or dinning etiquette.  Never let your guard down.  This is one important reason not to drink at dinner.  If the evening includes cocktails before dinner, sip sparingly.  The same applies if wine is served with the meal.

If you are not getting interviews,  if you are  eliminated before you reach the finalist chair, do not blame the overcrowded competitive market.  Look in the mirror.  

That is the person who has to step up their performance.

 ^© 2010 John Gregory. Self

Seed Newsvine

Defining Success at Each Stage of Interview Process

What is the definition of success in recruitment?

Hiring the right candidate.  That is a non-starter.  But the question is how do you measure success in each step of your recruitment process that will produce that right candidate?

Before diving into the process metrics, I want to, again, reiterate a strongly held view: that candidates be provided a position description or position prospectus with sufficient detail for them to understand the job, the criteria, experience requirements, performance deliverables and the salary range.  Given that the recruitment process has been described as the equivalent of getting married after four or five dates, I firmly believe that the best way to mitigate the risks that are inherent in this time sensitive process is to provide more, not less, information.  Weaker candidates tend to “de-select” if they know the position is above their pay grade – their experience and current skills.  Moreover, a great deal of time is wasted in the search process, by both internal and external recruiters, because the process is advanced with candidates who frequently are not aware of the salary range.

Virtually every executive or management recruitment process is comprised of two or more interviews. At JohnGSelf Associates, here is how we define success in each phase.

    1. Resume Review -- You finish the round with a panel of candidates with the credentials, skills, and relevant experience who have submitted their resumes and reviewed a position description or a position description outlining the key elements of the opportunity.  Hopefully the resumes will be of sufficient quality that the researcher or recruiter can easily track past accomplishments.  Each resume should be graded and only the top candidates should advance to the next round.  The researcher or recruiter who evaluates the resumes should complete a brief written analysis, preferably online as part of an integrated recruiting information system, highlighting areas of concern or those that will need clarification if the candidate advances.

    2. Telephone Interview – When you have completed the telephone interview round of the search, you should have a group of candidates, any of whom you could invite for a face-to-face interview.  They know the salary range; they understand the scope of responsibility and the performance expectations.  Most importantly, they have been told about the culture of the organization, how decisions are made, and what challenges they must overcome in order to achieve success.  You will know that these candidates have the relevant experience and a record of success in a similar situation.  From this group, subject to background checks, you will select the highest rated candidates for site interviews.  Some organizations will check three or four references prior to the face-to-face interview, but in a “high volume” internal recruiting environment, this may not be practical.  If you use a behavior and values tool like DiSC^© we recommend that you have the candidates who will be invited for site interviews to complete this  so that it can be available for that phase. Recruiters who lack the experience in using one of these tools should seek counsel from someone who understands the tool to ensure that it is used appropriately in framing questions to be asked during the site interview. Success at this stage is having seven to 10 candidates from which you can select three or four for a site interview. Time is now of the essence.  The best candidates are in demand.  You do not want to have a search in which you have only one remaining candidate because the other candidates have withdrawn for whatever reason.  Competition among the candidates is important.

    3. Face-to-Face/Site Interview – This interview should explore, clarify and confirm key elements of the candidates prior accomplishments, their style and how their “presence/chemistry will fit with the organization’s existing culture.  Measuring a candidate’s commitment and passion for success is a very important component of this interview.  The interviewer(s) must fully engage in what is known as “active listening” – suspending other tasks, focusing on the candidate, listening not merely to the words, but the feeling content, and asking for clarification of candidate comments. 

At this stage, success is defined as having two or three candidates, any of whom could successfully do the job and deliver long-term value for the organization.

^© 2010 John Gregory Self

  Seed Newsvine

Face-To-Face Interviews: Hints for Being More Effective

The face-to-face interview with a prospective candidate is the most important component of the employment process. 

Explore, clarify, and confirm are three important objectives that drive my preparation for the face-to-face interview. 

In the Topgrading^© system that I have adapted for retained search, the face-to-face interview lasts about 3.5 to 4 hours and covers the entire range of Topgrading^© competencies:  intellectual, personal, interpersonal,  management,  leadership, and motivational.  This interview includes 30 minutes in which we video tape the candidate answering select questions that are particularly relevant to the position for which we are recruiting.  This video will be edited down to about a 15-minute summary that will be shown to the client as part of the candidate analysis presentation.

You may not be interviewing the next CEO of a health system or the Senior Vice President of Operations and three to four hours may not be practical. However, if you are planning to make a mission-critical hiring decision based on a 30-minute interview, you are playing the employment equivalent of Russian roulette.

Regardless of who is conducting the primary face-to-face interview, the CEO or the department hiring authority, the most important aspect of the recruitment, aside from having a panel of qualified candidates, is to be prepared.  Effective interviews do not happen by accident.  Do your homework.

In addition to doing your homework – a characteristic of a best-in-class recruiting system at each step of the process – you should develop an interviewing strategy.  Whether it is a team or panel interview, or whether three or four people spend an hour or so with the candidate one-on-one, your strategy should focus on identifying the critical questions covering the aforementioned competencies, especially as they relate to relevant experience, style, presence, personality, chemistry, etc.  You should be trying to confirm that what you have learned, or has been learned by others, from the resume review, the telephone interview and any personal or behavior and values assessments.  At JohnGSelf Associates, we use DiSC^© and employ a Certified Behavioral Analyst who has also talked with the candidate and filed comments and suggestions for the face-to-face interview. 

Here are some suggestions to consider.  Remember, this critical session with the candidate is an interview for exploration, confirmation, clarification.

There Is A Reason Good Candidates Are Good.  At this stage of the interview process you should be talking to the best of the best.  Most are adept at anticipating and communicating.  Good candidates sense a pattern in the interview questions and they can anticipate what you are looking for and how you will react to a question.  A wise client once remarked: “Be sure the person we interview is going to be the same person who shows up for work!”  Good candidates are competitive, not dishonest.  If they want the job, they will work hard in the interview.  You have to work equally hard to be sure that the candidate you are interviewing can deliver the value and results you require.

HINT:

  Always insert a pattern-breaking question to disrupt the flow.  An example: What could you stop doing in your daily routine that would help you become a more productive and effective leader?

Most, after recovering, will talk about not being a slave to email, or being more careful with the administration of their “open door policy.”  However, for an important moment or two, you have broken the rhythm of the interview and forced to the candidate to get back on their toes.

Admitting the Bad Things.  Candidates, just like the organizations that are recruiting them, are loathe to reveal their negatives.  Candidates, exactly like the organizations that are recruiting them, have weaknesses and quirks.  Far too often both sides go to great lengths to enhance their favorables and downplay their negatives.

HINT:

  I like to offset this with a series of what are called truth serum questions. For example:  When we talk to your references, what will they tell us about your strengths? Or, if I talked to several of your former assistants and direct reports, how would they respond if we share with them what you list as your strengths?  There is always a moment when the candidate, who is aware of our detailed background checks -- something that we remind them of throughout the process -- is not sure who we will talk to. 

Consistency Is Important.  Consistency is a key attribute in leadership.  Inconsistent executives and managers can wreak havoc on an organization. 

HINT:

 To measure a candidate’s consistency, I will “revisit” a candidate’s earlier comments with the same questions reframed.  Very few interviewers can wing this.  You must give careful thought to developing a sequence of questions on various issues.  For example, one of the questions that seems to throw otherwise good candidates into a spin and prompt a less than a stellar answer is:Tell me what your weaknesses?  Candidates just cannot seem to help themselves.  Frankly, the “I work too much”  common response just does not work for me.  I usually resist the temptation to editorialize and wait for an opportune time to raise the issue again with a reframed question: When I talk with your supervisors and subordinates, how will they describe your weaknesses?  Or, Earlier  we discussed your approach to communicating with your team and key stakeholders.  When we talk to the people you worked with in the past, what will they tell us about your style and your effectiveness as a good communicator?

I have seen search consultants and clients interview candidates and take not one note.  I am not sure how they plan to remember what the candidate said and how they said it when reconstructing the interview, but I suspect if there is an interview feedback form – and there most assuredly should be – I am not sure it will be that beneficial.

Most recruiters, especially those working in an internal recruiting department, say they do not have the time for such in-depth interviews, or such a thorough process.  Perhaps their management and executive turnover rate is much better than the national average -- 40 percent of all externally recruited candidates leave or are forced out or quit within 18 months, according to several studies.

Remember, effective interviews do not happen.  Given the astronomical cost of a mis-hire, preparation seems like a small price to pay. 

©  2010 John Gregory. Self

Seed Newsvine

Interviewing Skills: The Telephone Interview

The telephone interview is a killer.

More potentially good candidates are eliminated from consideration based on their performance at this stage of the recruitment process than at any other time.

Everyone is blind.  You cannot see the candidate.  They cannot see you.  This gives the interviewer the advantage.  But badly executed, the telephone interview can lead to premature elimination.  

Game Plan:  The interviewer must be prepared.  Not only should they have carefully studied the resume, but an interview game plan is critical: What am I trying to accomplish?  What do I need to know about this candidate to make a decision for continued consideration or elimination?  

Selling-Recruiting: I believe that in the telephone interview stage, you are still very much in the selling-recruiting mode.  Be sure to give the candidate a chance to ask questions. I prefer to do this at the outset to avoid wasting time if in the Q&A time it is determined that the job is not a fit.  Remember, the candidate may be superbly qualified, but if you do not sell them, this interview could be a waste of time.

Provide the salary range:  This is of critical importance.  Be sure you provide the candidate with the base salary range. If there is flexibility, say so.  If there is not, make that clear as well.   I cannot tell you how much time is wasted qualifying candidates who would never accept a position with the established salary range.  This is far too common even with contingency recruiters. Never assume that the candidate knows this critical piece of information.  If there are other potential "deal breaker issues," this is the least embarasing time to disclose those as well.

Interview agenda:  I am not a big fan of overly long telephone interviews.  You will reach a point of diminishing return around the 90-minute mark.  Most telephone interviews are much shorter -- between 30 and 60 minutes in length. With time constraints, you need to have what I call an interview agenda.  When you start, tell the candidate what to expect in terms of the subjects that will be covered and in what order.

Interview forms:  After interviewing five or six candidates for the same position, they all begin to run together.  Having a complete, accurate record of the interview is important.  It is also important to ask the same types of questions of each candidate.  We develop a telephone questionnaire for each search.  The telephone questionnaire is computerized.  It is comprised of a chronological "walk me through your resume" section as well as questions that relate to specific job challenges.  The questionnaire has protected form fields which allow the interviewers to tab through as they  type notes of the candidate's responses. 

Candidate screening process:  You cannot be effective in recruiting without a defined processes.  At JohnGSelf Associates, our candidate screening process is based on Dr. Brad Smart's Topgrading^©, an exceptionally effective, but in-depth interviewing system.  We break it down into a three-stage interview process. The resume review is the first interview.  In the telephone interview, the second stage,  we focus on prior employment, selected behavior and values questions and several questions designed to measure whether the candidates can actually do the job for which they are being recruited.  The final stage, is a 3.5 hour in-depth face-to-face interview, a portion of which is videotaped for presentation to the client when they are selecting which of the recommended panel of candidates they want to invite for a site interview.  I will address that interview in my next blog.

Grading the candidate:  We grade candidate performance at each stage of the recruiting/interview process. That is why it is so important to have defined recruiting and screening systems.  The grading process is linked to the selection criteria, prior experience and accomplishments and the performance deliverables.   In a highly competitive search, this grade will determine which candidates are selected for continued consideration.  

Respect the candidate:  Finding a job is about dealing with rejection. Unless the position is super specialized, there will always be more candidates than positions.  Treat the candidates with respect from the moment they submit their resume to the moment they are rejected or employed. How you treat your candidates is a very important component of your organization's recruiting brand.  If you have a reputation for not responding to candidates and of not regularly communicating with them regarding the status of the search, you will find over time your recruiting brand will suffer. 

There is no excuse for not treating candidates with respect. 

© 2010 John Gregory Self

Seed Newsvine

Interview Skills for a Technologically Advancing World

Technology is changing our world, especially the world of career management.

When I formed JohnMarch Partners, Inc in 1994, the wily world of the world wide web and the information super highway were still relatively new concepts for most small and medium-sized businesses.  I remember that my firm was the only corporation in Tyler, TX that was using Miscrosoft’s Outlook and the local internet provider did not know how to support it. They knew Outlook Express but not the more complex Outlook.   We became a technical support resource for the ISP.

 Videoconferencing was available at many KINKO locations, and some enterprising recruiters like my team were experimenting with its use.  Facsimile transmissions were still an important tool for recruiters since dial-up connections, which the vast majority of people relied on, were not conducive to the transmission of large document files.  Recruiters regularly received piles of snail mail letters from outplacement consultants touting the strengths of one of their newest out-of-work executives (far too many of these letters looked identical in terms of paper and content).

How times have changed.  Faxing a resume is now ancient history. Sending a resume via the postal service is all but unheard of.  Video conference interviewing is here to stay even though its value as a primary screening tool is highly questionable.   Skype is a new addition, and it will reshape how firms and internal recruiters screen candidates.  At my firm, we are beginning to use this computer video interview program for our chronological interview.  In the past, we conducted this interview on the telephone, which has its own challenges for candidates, but none as daunting as appearing on video. 

Here is the most important takeaway: Candidates who lack the computer capacity for Skype, or those who simply do not know about this emerging internet video pathway, run the risk of being eliminated from a search.  More importantly, candidates must master these video interview formats. Having a good resume and credible experience may not be enough if the candidate comes across on camera as looking nervous, awkward, or confused.  

Technological advances in recruiting will require candidates to adapt and to learn new skills, including how to master the time delay that is common in virtually all video conference connections.  These delays are similar to news satellite transmissions – a delay of several seconds from the time the interviewer asks the question to when the candidate hears its completion  .

Here is a hint for those who are scheduled for a video interview:  as you sense that the question is drawing to a close, smile and nod your head as if you are confidently anticipating the question. This will keep you from looking like a deer in the headlights.

One more thing:  when you use Skype for an interview, do not forget to put on a coat and tie (the pants are optional since you want to use a head-shoulders shot).  It is always a good idea to tidy up the room. Check the background.  You wouldn’t want the recruiter to see your laundry hanging behind you..

Don't laugh. It has happened. 

© John G. Self, 2010

Seed Newsvine