Starting my career in the software
development trenches at consumer electronics company Psion, I've seen the
challenges of recruitment from all angles. And as my career has evolved from
job seeker to recruiter the frontline experience has stayed with me.
Particularly the ability to recognise the very best skills for the job. I also
have an appreciation from both angles of how important it is to invest time in
recruitment to make the right decisions. A bad judgement call has repurcussions
on the individual, the immediate team and the wider business. In recent weeks,
I've once again found myself in a situation where considerable people growth is
required. I'm working on a project at Accenture, assisting their Embedded
Mobility Services group. Mobile is increasingly a hot topic, and there's
strong demand for people providing expert consuItancy in a variety of mobile
development project settings. This experience has led me to review my beliefs
about the best way to carry out recruitment in such situations. Permit me
to think aloud...
To start with, I remain a huge fan of graduate recruitment programs. The
best graduates bring fire in their bellies: a "we can transform the
world" attitude that doesn't know what's meant to be impossible - and
often carries it out! Of course, graduates typically take some time
before they can be deployed in the frontline of commercial software
development. But if you plan ahead, and have effective
"bootcamp" courses, you'll have new life in your teams soon
enough. There will be up-and-coming stars ready to step into the shoes
left by any unexpected staff departures or transfers. If you can hire a
group of graduates at the same time, so much the better. They can club
together and help each other, sharing and magnifying what they each
individually learn from their assigned managers and mentors. That's the
beauty of the network effect.
That's just one example of the importance of networks in hiring. I place
a big value on having prior knowledge of someone who is joining your
team. Rather than having to trust your judgement during a brief
interviewing process, and whatever you can distill from references, you can
rely on actual experience of what someone is like to work with. This effect
becomes more powerful when several of your current workforce can attest to the
qualities of a would-be recruit, based on all having worked together at a
previous company in the past. I've seen the benefit of this effect via
networks of employees, sometimes at competitive companies, who all knew each
other and who could vouch for each others' capabilities during the recruitment
process. I've also utilised internal networks of high-calibre people from
newly mergered and acquired companies, a time when talent can easily get
overlooked. The benefit here isn't just that you know that someone is a
great professional. It's that you already know what their particular
special strengths are. ("I recommend that you give this task to
Mike. At our last company, he did a fantastic job of a similar
task.")
Next, I recommend hiring for flexibility, rather than simply trying to fit a current task description. I like to see evidence of people coping with ambiguity, and delivering good results in more than one kind of setting. That's because projects almost always change; likewise for organisational structures. So while interviewing, I'm not trying to assess if the person I'm interviewing is the world expert in, say, C++ templates. Instead, I'm looking for evidence that they could turn their hand to mastering whole new skill areas - including areas that we haven't yet realised will be important to future projects.
Similarly, rather than just looking for rational intelligence skills, I want to
see evidence that someone can fit well into teams. "Soft
skills", such as inter-personal communication and grounded optimism,
aren't an optional extra, even for roles with intense analytic content.
The best learning and the best performance comes from ... networks (to use that
word again) - but you can't build high-functioning networks if your employees
lack soft skills.
Finally, high-performing teams that address challenging problems benefit from
internal variation. So don't just look for near-clones of people who
already work for you. When scanning CVs, keep an eye open for markers of
uniqueness and individuality. At interview, these markers provide good
topics to explore - where you can find out something of the underlying
character of the candidate.
In summary, I see recruitment and induction as a task that deserves high focus
from some of the most skilled and perceptive members of your existing
workforce. Skimp on these tasks and your organisation will suffer -
sooner or later. Invest well in these tasks, and you should see the
calibre of your workforce steadily increase.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Reconsidering recruitment.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.itjoblog.co.uk/blogadmin/mt-tb.cgi/160
Like the idea of using staff networks to find future employees but how do you identify or create them when you don't have a merger to do it for you?
The Network idea is good, but a company would have to spend time and effort in setting these up most companies do not have the recourses to spend time on this type of activity.
I like the fact that you recognise "Soft skills" such as inter-personal communication and grounded optimism this is so important in building a flexible team that is able to deal with the clients requests and pull together as a team member.
You seem to recommend the graduates who bring fire in their bellies and have a "we can transform the world" attitude that doesn't know what's meant to be impossible" in my experience of graduates they seem to have very little skills in life, not normally able to work as part of a team or on their own without supervision and seem to be out of touch with the latest methods. I still get graduates asking the basic questions on project management and development.
I favour the self taught or people with experience that can turn their hand to all situations, people who have life skills and possibly a background in other disciplines, people that are able to think out of the box and able to look ahead and see the whole picture.
Not being a graduate dose not automatically mean you don’t have the fire and new ideas to drive a team forward.
Thanks a very good article and a lot of good advice.
Hi Ben,
>how do you identify or create networks when you don't have a merger to do it for you?
Networks have to start somewhere. One way to start is to involve existing staff members in your recruitment activities - offering them bonuses if they recommend people who are subsequently employed (with the bonus paid if the new starter is still employed after, say, six months).
Another step is to encourage a collaborative spirit within the company - in which people feel that their colleagues are on the point of becoming their good friends. Appoint someone to be the social organiser, and give them a small budget to subsidise activities.
// David W.
Hi Karl,
Thanks for the feedback. I take your points about "graduates". They vary a great deal among - which is why you need to work hard to find the ones most worth employing. You're right, too, that many "self-taught" people can turn out to be star performers. That's why I also recommend taking some risks in the recruitment process - provided you are ready to act fast (via terminating a probation period) if it turns out that you made a mistake in the process.
// David W.