I keep seeing articles about the problems of finding great workers. How can this be when great workers are literally falling over themselves to find you! Don't believe me? How many applications do you receive each month, how many resumes are on the various online job sites? No one who has spent more than a few minutes researching really believes that out of the huge number of people looking for work today, you can't find that perfect worker.
If I'm right, why are you having so much trouble connecting with the great workers you need? You're having trouble because you're using an outdated model to identify which applicant is a great worker.
My first job after the Army was with a franchise sales organization where I learned to evaluate credit applications. In those days credit cards were limited to the wealthy and general consumer credit was supplied by small loan (finance) companies.
Before submitting an application to the finance company we had to verify that the applicant had enough points. We started with 0 points and added one point for a home phone, 3 points for own not rent your home and so forth until a minimum score of 10 points was reached. If we couldn't get 10 points, we knew the application would be rejected and didn't bother to submit it. This is an exclusion system, in which you are start with some number of applications and review them to exclude those that do not meet specific criteria. Not a bad system if you can easily identify the correct criteria.
Here's an example of how it went wrong for one company. I was attempting to hire technicians to repair electronic equipment controlling lasers. The work required an associate's degree in electronics or equivalent in technical training and/or experience. The HR department used the exclusion method of evaluating resumes (as most do) and rejected many qualified applicants because they did not understand the diversity of backgrounds that provided equivalent skills.
Many trade schools provided the electronics skill training we needed without the general education classes necessary to award an associate's degree. Military electronics schools provide the required skill training, again without awarding a degree. Both groups of applicants were excluded because the HR department limited their search only to applicants with a 2 year degree. Why didn't the HR department identify the "or equivalent" candidates? Either HR didn't take the time to read each application in sufficient detail or did not recognize the equivalent skills from the applicants resume.
Another artificial restriction is only considering workers in your industry. How many other industries us the same skill set that yours does? In my example of looking for electronics technicians, people with years of experience repairing radar, and sonar equipment were excluded because the resumes didn't contain the buzz word "laser"!
So, if I'm correct, and the workers really are out their, how do you find them?
Agree that your system is not finding the quality workers you want: You can't change what you don't acknowledge. -Dr. Phil McGraw
Accept that your system is the problem: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. - Benjamin Franklin
Understand that your system will resist change: Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous patience. - Admiral Hyman Rickover
Remember that the person who bucks the system is the most likely to be a creative problem solver: Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people. - George Bernard Shaw
Again, if I'm correct how do you use these four key points?
Agree that you system is not finding the quality workers you want: The first step in solving any problem is deciding that the current methods are not delivering a satisfactory result, and you must convince the decision makers in your organization that the current methods are not producing satisfactory results.
Accept that your system is the problem: When you talk to the people charged with finding your great worker, they will have a number of reasons why they are having problems. None of them related to the current process. But, just like your production line - when the end product is not right, the process is the problem. Either the workers are not following the process or the process itself is not working correctly.
Understand that your system will resist change: The people at each stage of your process have developed working methods that are comfortable. If your decision is to make changes, remember that you will be pushing your people outside of their comfort zone. Human nature is to resist that which makes us uncomfortable.
Remember that the person who bucks the system is the most likely to be a creative problem solver: If your not satisfied with the current results then by definition the current method needs to change. Who is most likely to have a new idea, the worker who follows the procedures unquestioningly or the one who is always questioning the system?
One of the biggest problems with your current HR process is time. You've added so many staff duties to your employment department to make it a human resources department that you've virtually eliminated their ability to review the applications closely enough to find those great workers.
The state unemployment offices all have people who help job searchers. They help write and polish the client's résumé so it will get read and showcase the searchers abilities. Job fairs almost always have HR people who will provide the same support to attendees. There are uncountable articles and books on how to write a resume. One thing all these sources agree on is that the reviewer will only spend about 20 to 30 seconds scanning a resume!
I don't know about the people in your HR department, but unless I'm buying plain white tee shirts, I can't even pick a shirt in that amount of time. How do I prove to you that this is the largest component in your problem?
Do the following simple exercise:
First, write down all the key elements that qualify you for your current job. Now time how long it takes to read it aloud. If it takes longer than 30 seconds your own HR department would not find you to fill your current position.
If you were able to meet the 30 second time limit (even with rewrites), write down how many different ways can you gain the experience needed to gain those abilities? Which one(s) will your HR department recognize? If you can gain the skills without a degree, will your HR department recognize the equivalency when they see it? Will they even bother to look or just restrict their search to people with the "right' degree from the "right" school.
Write down as many of the different industries that use the skill sets you need. Will your HR department recognize those "crossover" industries or will they limit the applicant base to only people in your industry?
Going back to my earlier example of hiring electronics maintenance technicians and my HR department telling us that they were not receiving qualified applicants. My first step in solving the problem was to take HR out of the process and have all the applications sent directly to me. I reviewed each application (and dedicated 3 to 5 MINUTES to each application), I then provided the HR department with a list of applicants, ranked by my interest in that applicant, to set up interviews. I found the two technicians I needed. By following this process, I never had trouble finding people to fill my openings. Before you cry "I don't have time!" Remember YOU NEED THESE PEOPLE. Either you need these people to keep your business running or you don't really need to hire them. If you really need these people, can you afford not to spend the time to find them?
Was the HR department deliberately causing a problem? Not at all, they just didn't take the time to read each application closely enough to identify the abilities from the applications. This was in job where the skills were clearly defined: electronics experience with a) microprocessors or microprocessor controlled equipment including military experience at the 2nd echelon/depot level, b) a minimum of 1 year hands on experience or an associate degree in electronics or equivalent technical or military schooling. With this clear a description, why was the HR department missing so many qualified applicants?
The applicants were submitting resumes as the first step in the screening process and each was using a different format. In one case a fully qualified applicant, just released from the US Navy, submitted a hand written resume on lined notebook paper. He turned out to be a great worker.
I believe there are three main blockages in the process:
The first blockage is discovering how any particular HR gatekeeper wants to see abilities listed. There are almost as many "right" ways to write a resume and cover letter as there are HR reviewers. I talked with résumé specialist both at job fairs and at the state unemployment office and each had different advice on how to prepare a résumé or cover letter. The comments seemed to reflect each advisors personal desires rather than any commonly accepted industry practices.
The second blockage is screening for skills rather than abilities. Skills are typing speed, familiarity with software applications, or the ability to operate machinery. Abilities are leadership, problem solving, and building customer relationships. Evaluating skills is simply checking off items on a list, a relatively quick and simple process. Evaluating abilities requires careful reading and thoughtful evaluation followed by discussions with the applicant. Checking skills is fast while determining abilities is slow.
The third blockage is that 20 to 30 second gotcha time limit.
Your great worker now has to explain why specific experience is relevant to a particular job:
To a reader who is not intimately familiar with the details of the job Against a highly subjective presentation format standard In less time that it takes for the reviewer to pick a sweatshirt.
Somehow, your prospective great worker has to get her/his capabilities in the "right" presentation format, get it to the "right" person, at the "right" time, and highlight the "right' skill/ability. They have to try to match all four of these elements with little or no real information about who to contact, when to contact them, what format they are expecting, and lastly what buzz words the reviewer is looking for in respect to that particular job.
They have to do it with no feedback on how close or far they are from each "right" answer and no opportunity to adjust their presentation.
Now I know that I have made all the HR pros out there livid, but before you start framing your response, stop and ask one question - are you getting the results you want?
If you are - ignore everything I wrote, if not - change what you are doing!
Allen Laudenslager
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/Allen_Laudenslager/83362
