The Asia Pacific Headhunter

How to Build a Better Boss and Why It's the best recruiting tool

Link: New York Time's: Google's Quest to Build a Better Boss

What's the new next thing in leadership? Nothing quite so new, but definitely some reaffirming qualities that should be focused on (but usually aren't focused on enough). Leave it to Google to mine through tens of thousands of their own HR data - employee feedback, surveys, performance reviews, promotion nominations, etc. to come up with a succinct 8-Point Plan. Their findings in a nutshell: deeper technical expertise is not as important as it was thought. Being a good coach, empowering and stretching your employees and showing genuine interest in them as people makes a team that is happier and performs consistently better. 

Why is a headhunter writing about this? Because when I work with clients, I need to be confident that they are, indeed, a good company people like working for: a company with happy employees that perform well. That's my leverage in getting the best people for that company. It's known that hard-to-find/highly-sought-after people (like at Google) leave their jobs for three most common reasons: 1) they don't feel a connection to their company or their own purpose 2) they don't get along with colleagues, and 3) they have a bad manager.  What's interesting with Google's Project Oxygen, is that they found the the last reason - how employees viewed their manager, had the most impact on employee happiness and performance. Happy employees are the biggest recruiting tool a company could ever use. If you want to hire the best, make sure your current employees have a great manager or team leader. 

 

Working Women Discriminate On Appearance

U.S. working women see appearance as key: survey | Lifestyle | Reuters.

According to a survey conducted by PINK magazine women in senior leadership positions see appearance as key to their success at work. A more eye-opening result was that one in five female executives say they have withheld a promotion or a raise due to the way an employee dresses.

That kind of discrimination is hard to believe especially coming FROM women who face discrimination themselves when it comes to leaving work to raise families and in other areas. I think there is a fair number of woman who feel they have to show a tough persona to succeed at a high level in business, I wonder if surveys like these reflect the result of taking on that persona.

Bilingual Japanese Online Job Boards

Just to add to my previous post Top 15 Japanese Online Job Boards, another generous reader and Tokyo-based search consultant Gary Bremermann of Robert Leonard Consulting, commented on two other Japanese online job boards that are bilingual. In addition to Daijob.com that was mentioned in the Gomez report, Gary recommended:

careercross.com - Tokyo-based online job board aimed at the niche market of bilingual jobs for Japanese and English speaking professionals. They have listings for full-time, part-time and temp jobs.

ecentral.jp - Aimed at bilingual professionals seeking international jobs in Japan and employers requiring bilingual candidates. They've partnered with the ACCJ, the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan.

And to add to that:

Jobba.net - a job board aimed at Japanese speakers for jobs world-wide.

Thanks Gary for your input!

 

Get paid for going on a job interview

Getting paid to go on a job interview... by the company that's interviewing you???! Sounds like a far-fetched fantasy for candidates, but that's what start-up NotchUp.com is basing it's whole business model on. Candidates (preferably happily employed ones) can sign up for free, put up their (LinkedIn) profile and calculate what their interview fee would be with an interview-price calculator. This is based on your industry, job, highest educational degree, years in industry, time in current position, and current salary.

This platform is meant to cut out the recruiters and headhunters. Since companies need only pay the interview fees set up by the candidates they choose to interview, the comparable fees are supposedly lower than the recruiter's traditional placement fee which is a percentage of the new hire's first-year salary. As a recruiter, I should really discredit this model (after all, it's going after my job!), but I'm a fair person and see that everything has its merits and disadvantages.

First off, sure -- throw money into the mixture - and changing the roles of who gets paid, you'll get some interesting results. I'm sure in some cases companies -- esp. start-ups who's future depends on excellent talent can save money in placement fees by paying lower interview fees. Passive candidates (happily employed who are successful at their job) who otherwise would not put their profile up may be enticed to put their profile up if there's money in it for them. In it's best light - it may work well over regular online job boards and with a companies that work with lame recruiters who just slap up job ads everywhere and wait for whatever comes in - only to send out high-volumes of low-quality candidates to their client.

Now, here's where I see the model lacking:

First off, the point is to attract good candidates right? Good people aren't attracted just by a few hundred dollars for their time. They are attracted to good opportunities that help grow their careers and their strengths. I'd say 9 times out of 10 the candidates I recruit are attracted to the opportunity, the challenges, and the company rather than just the money.

Secondly, recruiting and headhunting isn't just about getting the right candidate to the job or vice-versa. I doubt any recruiter would be paid just for that. (Contingent recruiters usually get paid ONLY when THEIR candidate gets hired, and they usually provide a guarantee for up to 3 months - it varies of course). The hard work doesn't end there (which is where NotchUp does). Job interviews don't automatically lead to a job offer. And a job offer doesn't necessarily lead to a successful hire. There's a whole process in making the successful hire go through. Recruiters and headhunters manage people (candidates, HR managers, hiring managers, other decision-makers), people's expectations, timing, and other factors that are crucial in making a successful hire. A lot of wasted time, energy and money (in terms of lost productive work time for everyone) happens not only in the search for getting that first interview, but in the follow-through that happens after the initial job interviews. This is another part of where recruiters and headhunters provide value and service.

In the end, I seriously doubt this online platform will make a dent in the demand for good quality recruiters and headhunters out there who provide very targeted, high quality service for their clients. It certainly won't replace third party recruiters. If anything, this will probably become just another tool for recruiters to use in research.

Crazy Job Trends in Japan

The way jobs work in Japan has always been different, with "Lifetime Employment" and Freeter probably the most widely known work and career styles that continue to be quite uniquely Japanese. But I just read an article from Joi Ito's blog (which is a great read for a variety of reasons) talking about a new company who are really bringing another very innovative work style to Japan. The company is called, "Otetsudai Networks" ("otestudai" is the noun form of the verb "testudau　手伝う" - which means to help or assist someone with a task) and they take advantage of the proliferation of cellphones with GPS technology and also the preference of many young Japanese to work in ways that give them a lot of freedom.

Joi explains it best:

With Otetsudai Networks, if you are willing to work, you sign up for the service with your skills and focus, take a GPS reading on your phone and then just hang out. If you are looking for someone for say... 3 hours to man a cash register or help wash dishes, you just send the request to Otetsudai Networks and within minutes, you have a list of people available. The list shows what each person is qualified for, how others have rated their work and exactly how far away they are. Typically you will receive a list of half a dozen or more people within a few minutes.

The businesses are rated too on a per-manager basis so when you're hanging out with your friends and you get a request to go help at the corner convenience shop, you know how your peers have rated that particular guy who's asking you to come and help. You can also counter the request and say you'd go if they paid you 2000 yen / hour instead of 1500.

As more and more people start using this system, it's liable to start filling a very important gap in the workforce. It's also a perfect example of a location based, peer-to-peer reputation based, mobile behavior oriented product for an aging society.

This is a REALLY interesting idea. For employers (or anyone for that matter) who want 2 or 3 hours of work done for them it creates a great opportunity to get help quickly. For people who have flexible time situations it brings opportunities to them where they are right now. I can imagine this kind of scenario. You have an area you want cleaned and it's too big a job for one person but you only have a couple of spare hours. You look for 3 available people in your area and you could have help within minutes that serves their needs and yours.

The fact that this is all run through cell phones also means you have a way of tracing all those involved to help eliminate any possible fraud. There will be issues with quality of work for some people, but the risk is low since you can start with short periods of time and since the system becomes reputation based over time. The other barriers I can think of are possibly legal in regards to some workplaces having legal requirements for safety training for employees. None of the issues are insurmountable though. I for one will be really interested to see how this grows.

Attracting Candidates with Job Satisfaction

Link: AdlerConcepts.com: Articles & Resources - Job Satisfaction as a Recruiting Tool.

When you're deciding which job to take, what factors do you consider? Sure, money is important, but at the end of the day money won't keep you at a job where you don't feel satisfied, or feel that you haven't made any accomplishments or progress. It wouldn't keep you there if management gives you no direction or support. That's why job satisfaction is such a big factor to weigh in. In last week's AdlerConcepts newsletter, Kathy Barton explored what the common denominator is for all management approaches to motivating employees: setting clear goals.  When people have clear goals to work towards, they can gage their progress and truly feel satisfied when they accomplish a task or can sense progress towards it.

How can you use this in recruiting? Adler talks about the 30% solution when hiring - which is offering a candidate a job that is 30% better than their current job - in terms of challenge, growth and compensation. Here's how job satisfaction is factored in:

The concept of greater job satisfaction can easily be added to the 30% solution. Just using a performance profile is a positive differentiator. Since a performance profile focuses on what a candidate would DO in the job, rather than the attributes the candidate HAS, you can talk about how your company has a commitment to providing its employees with clear goals. Discuss with them the specific things that the candidate would need to do to be successful in the job. Then tie these goals to company strategy and how it benefits the company's clients and you've just "branded" the job, giving it even greater value. . . The 30% solution also helps you tap into a candidate's desire for greater challenge and satisfaction from the job. 

The big draw is to show how the company will help and support the candidate accomplish what they have to stretch for in this new role. Add a competitive salary, benefits and other fun perks and you have a great job offer a wise candidate couldn't turn down.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ADS

Most of the software designers today prefer getting certifications like 70-290 and 312-50 to their credit. This is because their education leaves them unaware of search optimization or what needs to be done to register domain. They cannot distinguish between a net call and a pc phone. Just knowing about windows backup is not enough now.

Paying Your Employees to Innovate

Link: $152,000 for Your Thoughts Harvard Business Online.

It's true. A $38,000-per-year employee devised a way to streamline an internal business process for her company, resulting in saving her company $304,000 in the first year of implementing her innovation. Her reward? Half of what she saved them - $152,000.

This article from the April issue of Harvard Business Review has some pretty good and interesting advice for companies wanting to promote innovation from their employees with monetary incentives. Let's face it, real incentives should really involve not only recognition, but money as well. If you think about how much is spent on outsourced consulting on cutting costs, improving productivity and implementing innovative practices, a lot of those resources could be invested internally on encouraging and supporting employees who are closest to the day-to-day details to think up great ideas and to follow through with a well-articulated implementation plan.

There are so many benefits to this kind of approach - not just for the obvious ones for the company but for employees as well. For those in non-commissioned salaries, where the only chance they can make more is at their performance reviews, it offers them a new challenge to make more money. It allows them equal opportunity to be entrepreneurial, thus pushing the comfort zones of being an "employee" and perhaps driving them up to even better performance.

Top 10 Success Factors with Onboarding

This was brought to my attention by a comment from Sue Edwards, president of Clearing the 90-Day Hurdle, an onboarding coaching service that deals with all the challenges of a new hire (especially senior executives) - for the employer, the employee, and recruiter. They address a lot of the issues of being a new hire, hiring someone new, and easing the transition into a successful one.

It's clear from the number of hits that my post on Onboarding keeps getting, onboarding is  a concern for a lot of companies who realize the value of keeping the talent they've spent so much effort, time and money in recruiting. They realize why it's just as important to invest as much time and effort into retention and development of staff.

From their website:

A lot can go wrong in the first 90 days after a new executive hire or promotion. Would it surprise you to learn that at least 40% of new leaders fail to meet the expectations of their new role?

• Desired results are not achieved within the expected timeframe

• Difficulties in assimilating to a new culture and earning credibility are barriers to success

• Productivity and employee engagement are negatively impacted

Research conducted with over 20 executives shows clearly that:

• There is remarkable agreement on the most important behaviours for success in the first 90 days — regardless of the interviewee’s industry, gender, internal or external role.

• Providing new hires with the "secrets to success" in their first 90 days is critical to enhancing the ROI on recruitment and re-training costs.

• Even exceptional, talented new hires are often unaware that some of their well-intended behaviours are potentially derailing.

For more insight, there is a free report on Top Ten Success Factors and Seven Deadly Sins for Leaders Transitioning into Organizations, based on Edwards' experience of coaching leaders-in-transitions for small businesses up to Fortune 500 multi-nationals, along with in-depth research with senior executives, human resources leaders and recruiters. So far I've received positive feedback from people I've passed it on to (with her permission of course!).

Challenges in Recruiting in China

This Korn/Ferry report was passed on to me which I found quite interesting.

"Overcoming the Challenges of Recruiting and Retaining Talent in China’s Life Sciences Market" provided some interesting insight to the issues and unique features of the MNC environment in China. While it focused on the life sciences sector (medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, etc.), I would think the conditions and skills shortage were similar in other sectors.

Brief description of current environment:

* Severe shortage of PRC nationals in executive roles with sought after skillsets - widening a gap in local talent versus expat talent.
* MNCs look to returnees to fill those roles, however problems in cultural fit lead to just 1 out of 3 returnees succeeding.
* Steep salaries - Whereas globally, compensation increases with cost of living (about 4%), in China the minimum annual increase is 10%.
* High turnover rate - Because of skills shortage, top execs expect 50-100% comp increase when considering new jobs, where realistically it should be 15-30%.
* Relocation within PRC relatively new and very difficult to retain talent
* Organizational development also relatively new

What this paper explores is the need to stabilize the workforce by localizing the workforce with a proactive focus on training and development programs that foster loyalty to the company's culture.

It's clear that while recruiting is intense, HR development will be even more intense.

Download KornFerryReportChina.pdf (506.1K)

Guest Blogger: Jobster CEO Jason Goldberg on Asia Pacific Headhunter

This is a guest post by Jobster CEO Jason Goldberg, as part of  the recruiting blog swap.

ok, so i must admit that finding time to maintain my own blog as well as run jobster at a time when we have 3 major "things" happening in the same week is very very demanding on my time ... let alone my living on an airplane ... so you can see where i find tons of time to blog swap :)

 

but anyways ...

 

i'm excited to report that after just 5 days we are already seeing a ton of folks providing unique user generated content on the new jobster.com site.  i've launched many products before in my career but i must say that this one is a lot more special than the ones prior.  i think that is because it's a living breathing organism.  that is, because the users are creating the content minute by minute in a dynamic fashion vs. the old model of pre-packaged and programmed content.  sure, user generated content has existed for a long time now -- especially when it comes to product reviews (e.g. book reviews on amazon.com or hotel reviews on tripadvisor.com), but what we're seeing here is something different.  it's more myspace for the workplace.  it's more wikipedia for careers.  it's new.  and it's growing on it's own.  fun to watch.  and fun to evolve.

 

another interesting sidenote is seeing the global nature of the content.  while most "job boards" take on a local flavor, the content being generated on this "careers site" is taking on a global flavor which knows no borders.

 

on a totally different note, i was going to blog on this the other day on my blog but have not yet so i'll just post it here.

 

if implore everyone to take a few minutes to read jack and suzy welch's column from last week's business week:  "so many ceo's get this wrong."  the short story is that the welch's argue that inside a company there is nothing more strategic than people and because of that, the position of chief people officer should be given the same recognition and access and visibility as the cfo.  amen. 

 

here are some snippets from that article, since you need to be a business week subscriber to view it online.

JULY 17, 2006
                                        IDEAS -- THE WELCH WAY
By Jack and Suzy Welch

So Many   CEOs Get This Wrong
HR   has to be about more than palace intrigue -- or company picnics

If human resources is the   most powerful part of an organization, as you always say, why is its impact   felt in only a negative way? -- Fadi Rahal, Louisville,   Ky.

Because human resources, unfortunately, often operates as   a cloak-and-dagger society or a health-and-happiness sideshow. Those are   extremes, of course, but if there is anything we have learned over the past   five years of traveling and talking to business groups, it is that HR rarely   functions as it should. That's an outrage, made only more frustrating by the   fact that most leaders aren't scrambling to fix it.        

        Look, HR should be every company's "killer app."   What could possibly be more important than who gets hired, developed,   promoted, or moved out the door? Business is a game, and as with all games,   the team that puts the best people on the field and gets them playing together   wins. It's that simple.

You would never know it, though, to look at the   companies today where the CFO reigns supreme and HR is relegated to the   background. It just doesn't make sense. If you owned the Boston Red Sox, for   instance, would you hang around with the team accountant or the director of   player personnel? Sure, the accountant can tell you the financials. But the   director of player personnel knows what it takes to win: how good each player   is and where to find strong recruits to fill talent gaps.

Several years   ago we spoke to 5,000 HR professionals in Mexico City. At one point we asked   the audience: "How many of you work at companies where the CEO gives HR a seat   at the table equal to that of the CFO?" After an awkward silence, fewer than   50 people raised their hands. Awful!

Since then, we have tried to   understand why HR has become so marginalized. As noted above, there are at   least two extremes of bad behavior. The stealthy stuff occurs when HR managers   become little kingmakers, making and breaking careers, sometimes not even at   the CEO's behest. These HR departments can indeed be powerful, but often in a   detrimental way, prompting the best people to leave just to get away from the   palace intrigue. Almost as often, though, you get the other extreme: HR   departments that plan picnics, put out the plant newsletter (complete with   time-in-service anniversaries duly noted), and generally drive everyone crazy   by enforcing rules and regulations that appear to have no purpose other than   to bolster the bureaucracy. They derive the little power they have by being   cloyingly benevolent on one hand and company scolds on the other.

So   how do leaders fix this mess? It all starts with the people they appoint to   run HR -- not kingmakers or cops but big-leaguers, men and women with real   stature and credibility. In fact, managers need to fill HR with a special kind   of hybrid: people who are part pastor (hearing all sins and complaints without   recrimination) and part parent (loving and nurturing, but giving it to you   straight when you're off track).

PASTOR-PARENT types   can come up through the HR department, but more often than not, they have run   something during their careers, such as a factory or a function. They get the   business -- its inner workings, history, tensions, and the hidden hierarchies   that exist in people's minds. They are known to be relentlessly candid, even   when the message is hard, and they hold confidences tight. With their insight   and integrity, pastor-parents earn the trust of the organization.

But   pastor-parents don't just sit around making people feel warm and fuzzy. They   improve the company by overseeing a rigorous appraisal-and-evaluation system   that lets every person know where he or she stands, and they monitor that   system with the same intensity as a Sarbanes-Oxley compliance   officer.

Leaders must also make sure that human resources fulfills two   other roles. It should create effective mechanisms, such as money,   recognition, and training, to motivate and retain people. And it should force   organizations to confront their most charged relationships, such as those with   unions, individuals who are no longer delivering results, or stars who are   becoming problematic by, for instance, swelling instead of   growing.

Now, considering your negative experience with human resources   -- and you are hardly alone -- this kind of high-impact HR activity probably   sounds like a pipe dream. But given the fact that most CEOs loudly proclaim   that people are their "biggest asset," it shouldn't be.

It can't be.   Leaders need to put their money where their mouth is and get HR to do its real   job: elevating employee management to the same level of professionalism and   integrity as financial management. Since people are the whole game, what could   be more important?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In this age of high speed internet and credentials like 642-661 and N10-003, computer security has indeed become a huge dilemma. With the advent of wireless networking it has become near impossible.Viruses can come by the dozens in somethig as simple as html templates and can actually corrupt any computer software invented to date. Nothing is safe.

After 70-294, most of the students go for 70-647. A small number prepares for 640-863. However professionals have always favoured 70-293 over seasoned courses like 70-536. According to them, a course like 220-602 is worth more, owing to the current trends these days.