Vivo

Last week five separate candidates were rejected for rambling. Today, we’ll explore the ramble.

Rambling is not to be confused with fillabustering. “Fillabustering” (worse than the ramble) is the act of talking nonstophopingthatthequestionaskerwillnotnoticeandcannotdecideifheshouldcutyouoff. Whew. That is the fillabusterer. Believe me, Filla, you are not getting through my team. We have a button we push when you are on the scene.

No, we’re talking “rambling”. Now, in simple terms, “rambling” usually refers to answering something less succinctly than possible — my office manager likes to yell “TWITTER SPEAK PEOPLE!!! 140 CHARACTERS OR LESS!!” — and while I agree that I’d love it if everyone could speak that succinctly (or perhaps in Haiku?), “rambling” is far worse than this.

Offending candidate ramblers just plain old fail to answer the question. When asked how they would set up a DNS, they may talk about the first time they learned what a DNS is. When asked for an example of a project of which the candidate was particularly proud, the rambler has 3 examples — and never quite explains why she felt pride.

Solution: Answer the Question

(The lawyer in me requires that I offer this disclaimer: Warning, this blog post was written by a lawyer. You know, the person who tells you before your deposition to answer”yes/no” questions with “yes” or “no”? Right. That’s me.) Seriously. Answer the question you were asked. Right before you start answering an interview question, take a second, think about what you were asked, and make sure you answer THAT. It’s an art, and it’s not comfortable for everyone. But, you may not have been asked what you hoped you were asked. You may not be asked what you think you should be asked. You were asked a question that the interviewer deemed relevant, answerable, and worthy.

Watch for body language.

The rambler misses the physical cues of his interviewer(s).  Try watching body language yourself. Are people squirming uncomfortably? Is your panel looking at his list of questions and then at you, then at the list, then at you? Is your panel checking their watches? Most ramblers could stop themselves if only they were observing their interviewers subtle and not-so-subtle behaviors.

When caught:

Ever catch yourself babbling? I think each of us has rambled on nervously at some point or the other. Catch yourself, and fix it — even if you have to do it mid-sentence. A trick that works for many is to say “I am rambling. I apologize. Going back to my answer, let me just say ‘yes, I did perform a lobotomy during my residency. — I get a bit carried away on that topic.”

Practice makes Perfect.

Consider practicing your interview answers. Tell your friend or family members the expected questions. Practice your answers. Ask them to listen and tell you if you answered the question. Ask them to count the times you say “another thing is”. Record the session, and play back the questions. Were you asked “how would you”, and did you answer with a “first, I would…?” If not, you likely rambled.

Try Tweeting.

With more full disclosure, I should admit that I do not tweet. But, I also don’t ramble. (Remember, I’m the blunt New Yorker.) So, why not try tweeting? How can some 100s of millions of people get their points across in 140 characters, while you are struggling with 1400 words? Try it. At worst, it makes you a follower. At best, you curb your ramble habit. Oh, and please tell us in 140 characters or less how you did on your journey to cure yourself of your rambling ways. We’d love to hear from you – if you keep it short!

I bet you thought you owned your own resume, right?

We can review legalities, technical implications, and talk about limited licenses, rights to use, etc., but ultimately, I’m quite certain candidates believe it is actually they who own their resumes – not the agency with whom they interacted, or the company to whom they applied.

Well, guess again.

In the staffing world, corporate recruiters claim ownership of a resume that has entered it’s company’s Applicant Tracking System (“ATS”), cutting off all others’ rights to represent you. Similarly, the first contracted staffing vendor to submit your resume to a corporation generally wins ownership rights, irrespective of your actual desire to be represented by the company of your choice.

So what’s wrong with that?  Well, in theory, there’s nothing wrong with a company owning your resume. They process it, screen you, a hiring manager interviews you, and you get hired. But, what happens when the vendor submits you? Or – worse yet – the company-employee-friend-of-yours forwards your profile to their internal HR corporate staffing group in an attempt to garner the company referral bonus?  Well, now you learn firsthand the pitfalls of “ownership”. Here, the company can move forward. If HR tells its employee they have your resume in their system, no matter how it arrived there or how long ago, the employee will not earn her referral bonus. She’d be upset, as she knows perfectly well it was her referral that prompted any interviews. She knows this resume was sitting untouched in an un-mined ATS. You know you want this employee friend to “own” your resume – but the company says no. At this juncture, you really need not think more about this – as the process will halt without explanation and without recourse. No one will tell you why. The company will not be hiring you. For them, it is best to avoid the internal conflict, so best to avoid you.

The same scenario plays out with the agency who is presenting your resume to their client and your prospective employer. Though you have given this agency permission to be your advocate, and have little to no recollection of ever having submitted your profile to this company’s HR posse through other means, there is now a question of ownership. It’s best to avoid you altogether. Plus, you appear “overly shopped around”, and therefore less desirable.

So, what’s the solution? Heck if I know. I’m just here to turn your world upside down.

Marilyn Weinstein is featured in the HR Resource, “Five Reasons Why You Should Partner With Recruiting Firms.”  In the article, she talks about HR professionals and how, ”there is a stigma associated with recruiting firms. But, the truth is, recruiters are a necessary evil, particularly in the technology world. Recruiting firms have a database of high-quality candidates, network exclusively with the types of candidates that their clients seek, and surround themselves with subject matter experts.”  http://www.hrresource.com/articles/view.php?article_id=4422&page_number=1 

Full text Below:

Five Reasons Why You Should Partner With Recruiting Firms
Marilyn Weinstein - Vivo
May 10, 2011 — 89 views  

I’m often asked how to better develop this partnership and it’s one of my favorite subjects. This is what I suggest: Top-tier executives and consultants advocate: when deciding what business process to outsource, focus on internal core competencies, and outsource when it makes sense from an external expertise and economies of scale perspective.(1) Focus on Core Competencies. Recruiting is no different from other outsourced processes. HR should ask itself, is building and maintaining a database of top-tier candidates a core competency? Are there open positions for which active candidates – those on job boards and those who apply directly to website postings – simply will not suffice? If the answer to the first is “no” and the second, “yes,” then it makes sense to consider leveraging an outside recruiting firm (2) Separately fund recruitment efforts.

The same process followed to obtain a budget for recruitment or “placement” fees should be used when obtaining funding for any vendor service, All too often, it seems as if organizations reach out to recruitment firms as a means of validating their own internal recruitment efforts – rather than as a means of finding the best and brightest among the candidate pool. This way, the argument can be made to higher-ups that the entire market was scoured before a hiring decision was made. Despite enlisting the help of an external firm, this mindset often reflects the desires of internal recruiters to not have to pay a contingency fee, but, think that through – that means, hoping that the firm will not be able to deliver what your company needs. Then, there’s the question of who owns the budget for these recruitment fees. Do they fall under HR’s budget? Should the business unit in need of the candidate be required to pay for the service? Uncomfortably for all, when budget ownership is not pre-determined, some mud-slinging usually ensues. Department heads want to know why this expense must ensue; line managers will argue that the internal folks lacked competency. All but a Federal examination will be launched because no one wants to pay the resulting fee. When recruitment fees are established upfront, and a pre-determined expense is anticipated, none of this finger pointing takes place. (3) Carry out Annual Budget Exercises Combining Numbers 1 and 2. Most Staffing Directors participate in annual or semi-annual headcount and hiring discussions. That is the time to look at the types of positions available, decide which of these require specialized attention, and then set aside budget for outside recruitment firm fees where appropriate. This is the time for the Staffing Director to stand up and say, “This is our core competency. We specialize in the functions performed by employees in these types of positions. Equally important, we can more efficiently staff these key IT positions by utilizing a few strategic, trusted recruitment partners, and leveraging their expertise and their core competencies to make these critical hires.”

Importantly, it’s time to stop believing that the use of outside firms indicates an internal weakness or incompetence. Instead, it should be viewed as a way to gain efficiencies. Period. (4) Find just one firm. Once a company decides to reach out to recruitment firms, they often believe that a contingency fee is the best way to cover the market as it allows the organization to leverage each and every willing and able recruiting firm out there. There are several reasons why this is not an ideal approach.First, this drives prices up. By increasing demand – the same candidates could be called over and over for the same job – their salary demands and the contingency fee will both increase. Counter-intuitive, but true. Secondly, you are not as likely to get a firm’s best work or primary attention. Recruitment firms will work much more diligently on exclusive or semi-exclusive requirements than they would when a requirement has been issued to every one of their competitors. Lastly, it’s an annoying process that requires a lot of tracking and administrative work for HR. Date stamped applications, responding to multiple questions from different sources, providing feedback to the masses, managing different vendors-it all adds up. How can this possibly provide additional efficiencies? (5) Drive firms to meet your already high standards and fire those who do not. Again, treat this relationship like you would treat the relationship with any outsourcing provider. Outsourcing providers carry out your processes, they enhance your efforts. They are not given Carte Blanche access to do and say whatever they’d like. These agencies represent you. They are the first point of contact with each of your potential new hires. If you are not sure what precisely they are saying to candidates, it is time to find out! Train your recruiting partners, and measure them on performance.

If the quality of resumes is not high, or the messaging that they employ on your behalf is not up to par, then put the firm on notice. If poor performance does not improve, fire the firm. The relationship between an organization and their recruiting firm can certainly be complex at times. However, as with any other relationship with an outsourcing provider, it is critical to understand the variables involved in ensuring that the partnership is as successful as possible. While ignoring any of the steps above is not something that is recommended, it is most critical to recognize that your recruiting firm is a strategic business partner – a member of the team – rather than a tactical solution provider. The best recruiting firms are specialized and connected enough to identify the most dynamic talent available for your business-critical positions, even if they have to turn over rocks to find it. Approach the relationship nonchalantly and you may not be pleased with the output. Approach it strategically, with a dedicated budget and well-defined criteria, and you likely will not be making any hiring decisions without them any time soon.

Check out our funny video creatively made by some of  the folks at Vivo. Here is the link from our YouTube Channel

Do you know all your "friends" ?

I have 742 Linked In Connections and 373 Facebook friends. One of my employees has 6000 Facebook friends (He is in a band. I do want to keep this in proper perspective.) Some of my employees are “Open Networkers” and have thousands of Linked In Connections. 

So, what guesses can you make about me when you compare and contrast me against someone with thousands of Friends and Connections?

At first blush, you may assume I don’t visit either site very often.  You may also guess that I do not value either for professional and/or personal interactions.  Both assumptions would be incorrect. I am just a “less is more” person. 

Interestingly, my 6000-friend employee said it best last evening. A friend (an “IRL” friend, for those of you needing test/web speak) said to him, “you may have 6000 Facebook Friends. But how many would be there for you if you had a flat tire?”  Now, I’m not going to pretend that all 373 Facebook “friends” would get out of bed for me on a rainy night. But, to be fair, I have triple A and would never put that to the test. But, I can tell you that I know all 742 Linked In connections enough to feel comfortable to reach out and ask for professional assistance. If you tell me you would like to meet someone in my network, I am comfortable enough to ask all 742 personally if they would let me facillitate that introduction.

My own rule: If you wouldn’t enjoy my sense of humor (pure snark), I am not friends with you on Facebook. If I don’t know you enough for me to be comfortable saying “hey, gotta sec?”, I don’t connect with you on Linked In. The former has no professional relevance. But, the latter is huge in my ability to help the other 741 people I am connected to. Rest assured if you see some way I can help you, that I feel 100% comfortable asking the other 741 to help. But please don’t ask me for 2nd level assistance. That’s a whole ‘nother story.

Something doesn't smell right. Should you say something?

Dear VR:

As part of our interview process, we invite candidates in to shadow us for a day. A stellar candidate spent yesterday with me. The problem is he had extreme halitosis.

What should I have done? Should I tell HR the real reason I don’t want him to work here? Should we hire him anyway, and overlook the bad breath? Should we tell him?

PS: I now think this may be the reason he’s been unemployed for the past year.

Signed,

Still Gagging

Dear SG:

That is a tricky situation. It is definitely your right to say nothing and just decline to hire this candidate. You don’t owe him or anyone else anything more. But, just think of how much he might benefit from learning the truth. What if no one has ever told him?

Be honest with your HR department. Perhaps your HR Partner would be willing to speak up.

Each of us has had to suggest deodorant, bathing, and even had to ask consultants to step up their laundry habits. It’s a moment of discomfort for all involved. But once done, we all breathe a bit easier…

You were fired. If you do not learn how to properly answer the question, “why did you leave your last position (or the one before that, or the one 5 years ago)” you will not be rehired. First, let’s review what does not work.

Hemming and hawing does not work. Yelling “I was fired” is likely preferable to stammering, stalling, hemming and hawing. You have to expect this question, and the interviewer expects an answer.

Blaming your employer/your crazy former boss does not work. Very few people who are fired think it is anything but the other person’s fault. Very few people who relay their belief that their firing was the result of someone else’s wrongdoing are rehired. It doesn’t matter who is really to blame – it’s just one of the three sides to the story, and is best left out of the interview altogether.

Mistaking the interview for a bonding time in which complete sharing is appropriate. Most often, when we ask a rejected candidate why he said “I was fired” during his interview, we are told “because we were really bonding. I could tell she understood me. I decided on full disclosure.” It is the interviewer’s job to find out how much you will tell her if she puts you at ease. It’s not a first date – it’s an interview.

Preparation is key. Expect the question and prepare an answer. Here are 5 better ways to say “I was fired”, when that is the truth.

(1) Simply state, (if true), “my position was eliminated.” If true, please say this. If the layoff coincides with a widely known economic downturn (market segment, geographic region, etc.) this is particularly wise. If your position was eliminated due to financial reasons, say it loud, and say it proud, irrespective of how horrible it felt for you at the time.
(2) Never Volunteer. Fired because you exploded at work after a particularly stressful 6-month period? Just succinctly say that you parted ways after ___ (describe the time; was it “after 8 successful product launches in 3 weeks”?
(3) Keep it short. Less is More. “We parted ways” may work if you’re nailing the interview and have a good resume otherwise.
(4) If it’s ancient history: fess up. If it was 3 or more positions ago, just say it, “I was fired”. Admit a learning lesson (always in hindsight), state your personal growth. Keep it simple, and to the point. If your most recent positions have shown career progression, longevity, (your) stability, etc., best to just come clean and move on.
(5) Discuss it with the person who fired you. Let’s say hypothetically you’ve had one really relevant position, and you’ll need that reference. There’s no way around it – you’ve been fired. Discuss it with the person who fired you. Call her. Buy her coffee. Ask her how you may word the termination. Remember that being fired holds you back when it comes to future employment. So, while we’re not suggesting that this person and you will become friends, you’d be surprised how far a simple conversation can go toward eliciting an agreeable response to “so, why did you leave that position, anyway?”.

Over(used) and Out?

Linked In published its list of the most over-used phrases yesterday They are:
1. Extensive experience
2. Innovative
3. Motivated
4. Results-oriented
5. Dynamic
6. Proven track record
7. Team player
8. Fast-paced
9. Problem solver
10. Entrepreneurial
So, what should you do if your Profile is laced with these fluff words? Should you rewrite immediately? Well, at least one expert advises, “if you are using any of these terms, wipe them out.” But, fluff is fluff. We in the Valley so love our Valley-speak after all. So, net net, at the end of the day, bottom-line? No one likely got thrown under the bus for using any of these meaningless terms…

Insights on how to get that job

Yesterday our own Sandy Brown, Executive Business Development Manager, served as a panelist on the  RAL Associates: Executive in Transition Meeting. The crowd enjoyed a lively dialogue on the recent trends in executive hiring.

 Some themes from today’s event:

Cover letters are no longer relevant. Interestingly, almost no one bothers with a cover letter any more. Unsurprisingly, if you are going to attach one, it should be highly tailored to the exact position for which you are applying and should be extremely brief with three to four bullets at most.  The “ten second” rule applies here. 

 How to stand out among the pack? Audience members asked, what to do when constantly hearing they are in the “Top 3 candidates”. The panelists recommend, “know your CEO. Know his/her vision.” Also,  they suggest, “ask yourself, ‘where can I add value?’, then show your interviewers.  Bring your 30, 60 and 90-day plan.” This was met with some initial skepticism from the crowd.“Why would I give away my secrets?” one audience member asked.  The panelists agreed that this is a risk you should take.  Companies are looking for risk takers right now. Coming to the table with this level of detail shows your planning skills. It shows you are proactive, decisive and did your homework. One panelist recounted the story of the candidate who refused to provide such a detailed plan, because it felt like what he should do after he is hired. “What if the company is just picking my brain, and not looking to hire me”, he worried. So, the company hired another candidate – the one who brought such plans to the interview.

Economy-prompted changes in executive hiring? Right now, the panel agreed you need very specific skill matches. Companies are not as willing to take near matches, or those with generalized skill matches. Companies are being picky in industry, exact same roles, titles, team sizes, etc. Hiring managers want everything on the resumes and oftentimes want a laundry lists of skills

Job boards? The panelists’ views differed greatly on the subject of whether there is value in posting jobs on Monster or the Ladders. One panelist noted that she would be inundated with resumes if she were to post – so she does not. Another panelist reminded that there may be a gem hidden in those 500 resumes, making it worthwhile. Also, he reminded, this is a great way to build his network and have candidates lined up for the next opportunity.

While not exactly new, the panel also urged people to feed and nurture their networks, today moreso than ever before. I guess that’s what makes events like this all the more relevant as we look forward to 2011.

As the client, when’s the last time you tested your (outside) recruiters as to their knowledge of your business? Your revenue model? Your unique value proposition? The credentials of your management team?  Well, guess what. Some of us are dying to answer these questions. 

More often than not, we are drilled on three issues: (1) our fee. How low can you get us? (2) our guarantee period. How high can you get that? (3) Our willingness to follow HR’s rules.  Obviously, if you get into quality of resumes, sourcing capabilities, technical screening skills, etc., most agencies’ pitches will sound similar to each other.  But, I cannot say we have ever been asked about the client’s business. And, we should.

Outside recruiters are sometimes the first a candidate has heard of your company and your opening.  Should we give wrong information, shed less-than-positive light on your company, or not follow up with candidates in a timely manner, the candidate is likely to think poorly of your company (and us).  With so much potential to harm the candidate pool, shouldn’t screening of recruiting partners include some basic expectations in this area as well?