Posts Tagged ‘hiring’

The Financial Impact of Not Hiring the Least-best

The financial gain of hiring A-level talent is probably 10-100 times the person’s compensation. The financial cost of hiring a walking lawsuit is probably 10-100 times their compensation. Assuming the duds and the stars represent 10% of your total hires, it’s what you do with the other 90% that really matters. To get a sense of the enormous financial impact of shifting people from the bottom half into the top half, first categorize the 90% into three big buckets — the Best, the Not Quite Best, and the Least-best. Based on these definitions they should be of equal size: The best, or upper-third


The Godot Effect

Personally, I wouldn’t even know him if I saw him.  – Estragon , Waiting for Godot Some years ago I was sitting in a product design meeting. The discussion kept circling around some particularly knotty issues that no one in the room actually knew much about. In one sense, this wasn’t a serious problem given that the company was still actively hiring and there was a recognition that more people were needed. Someone finally commented that we’d have to make sure to hire someone with the particular expertise in question, and in one fell swoop, that task was assigned to a non-existent person. Again, this is not necessarily a problem … yet.


The Financial Impact of Eliminating Your Mashup Hiring Strategy

In a previous article , I suggested that most companies don’t have a formal hiring strategy in place that drives planning and decision-making.


I Learned All That I Needed to Know About Recruiting From the New York Yankees

You won’t read it in the newspaper, but it’s a fact that the New York Yankees were the world champions of recruiting long before they were declared the world champions of Major League Baseball. The Yankees are perennial winners (many call them a dynasty) not because of their superior equipment, IT processes, or their financial or marketing prowess, but rather their extraordinary recruiting and talent management strategy. Discover How to Learn From Other Industries If you are a corporate recruiter, you might think that it’s silly to learn lessons or emulate practices from professional sports, but you would be wrong. Ignoring the many valuable lessons the sports industry provides could cost your organization millions! While sports analogies are not loved by all in HR, it’s hard to find a CEO who doesn’t like them or who has not used them in their memoires. All leading organizations strive to learn and improve by benchmarking against other organizations in and outside their industry


Use Humility to Improve Performance

I've written before about the importance of humility as a leadership trait . But, as was recently pointed out to me, humility is an important trait in employees, too. When people act humbly, they are acknowledging their limitations and accepting that they cannot go it alone. This mindset is valuable to a team because it serves as an invitation for others to help


Google Hiring 200 Recruiters. NOW!

In what is by now an open secret, Google is hiring 200 recruiters and sourcers for a one-year gig. Details are sketchy, but Dave Mendoza did post an email about the hire to his site Six Degrees From Dave.


Why Cost Per Hire Is a Dumb Metric and Quality of Hire Is Not

In all the brouhaha about great new sourcing initiatives and Web 2.0 tools, how much have your recruiters and hiring managers improved their ability to hire great people, not average people? In my opinion, we’ve downplayed what it really takes to be successful in our profession — recruiting, counseling, and closing top people who have multiple opportunities, and making sure our hiring manager clients don’t blow it. To start refocusing on the right stuff, I’d like to nominate quality of hire as the metric to assess recruiting department performance, and relegate cost per hire to the second page. I believe cost per hire is a misguided means to judge recruiting department performance.


Who’s Responsible for Quality of Hire?

Over the past few months I’ve been describing a new approach for determining quality of hire, and using changes in this to justify any new expenditures on an ROI basis. While the methodology is pretty slick, the pushback is coming not from the process, but from the idea that HR/recruiting is responsible for quality of hire at all.


« Previous PageNext Page »

~~~ -->