When I first became an executive recruiter, there was no computer on my desk; just a shoebox full of 4×6 note cards with contacts’ information. Newspaper advertising was still an effective means of generating a candidate pool, and the ‘facsimile’ was the vogue way to transmit résumés. The trusty telephone –and a healthy network- served as the primary means for finding needles in the haystack.

Today, social media affords easy access to a surfeit of talent-related information; the haystack has mushroomed into a ‘hay mountain’. The executive recruiter who keeps up with the trends and technologies can search smarter, farther and harder for a whole handful of talented ‘needles’. Greater choice allows our clients more exacting selectivity and less compromise on job requirements.

With that said, these tools are also responsible for increased job shopping and job-hopping, altering the structure and behavior of the executive recruitment landscape. The speed and frequency of talent flow between companies has been on the rise, in spite of the flat economy.

Although fewer people are using the phone, it remains an excellent tool for connecting the dots between the glut of data in the virtual world and the thickening relationship mesh in the physical world.

More information ≠ Better connections

While it’s easier than ever to find names, titles, email addresses, and numbers, the wide avenues of communication have simultaneously created new hurdles to connecting authentically. We must now compete with the constant clamor of emails and updates, tweets and texts. Today, sustained performance hinges on the ability to prioritize hundreds of messages, responding only to the information most relevant and critical to immediate objectives. Unless disgruntled in their current role, most executives will understandably overlook or ignore messages that aren’t relevant to their responsibilities.

So, how do we overcome this information barrier? With personal connections.

Initially this may sound daunting. Working as an executive recruiter, we need to generate a critical mass of contacts for adequate reach, but this isn’t just a question of numbers. More than ‘linking in’ with others, our work still revolves around cultivating relationships for talent searches today and tomorrow.

Sparks really begin to fly when we enlist advocates: those who will repeatedly take time out of their busy days to recommend us to the bright talent in their networks. That is still the most reliable way to align company culture with candidate capabilities, competencies, and motivations. It is also the slowest. Indeed, I know of recruiters who have forsaken the phone altogether, perhaps believing that they are faster or more effective working exclusively online. I would argue that this mentality unnecessarily sacrifices opportunity.

The trick lies in finding equilibrium. Dive too deep into the ‘hay mountain’, and you risk getting lost and wasting time on unproductive research. Conversely, just poke around the fringes, and you may not find the best candidates in time. Finding and remaining in the sweet spot takes a balanced approach and sound data analysis.

We have to become adept navigators in the ocean of talent information, tapping relevant relationships to draw a map to the best candidates. Think of it as crowd-sourced recruitment. It’s the combination of new and old technology and the ability to compile more data to make better-informed decisions.

Regardless of how communication preferences and trends evolve in the digital realm, actively building and cultivating personable relationships will reliably distinguish successful executive recruiter efforts. Once we’ve researched the most promising leads online, it’s ultimately the phone that allows us to get through to an audience immersed in digital communication. Though some argue that the phone may be at the beginning of its decline, I maintain that it still has a place among the emerging avenues of communication.

It just takes some old school persistence and patience, neither of which will ever go out of vogue.

What do you think?
Have you noticed a shift in candidates’ and contacts’ preferences in mode of communication?
How has your use of the phone evolved?
Share your thoughts by fax, phone, or the comments field below.

Thought Experiment: What would happen if every other e-mail went to the wrong inbox? Or if Starbucks messed up every other order? Or if doctors made the wrong diagnosis 50% of the time?

A lot of dissatisfied customers and significant lawsuits, for a start.

Would it surprise you to learn that the same rate of failure exists in executive hiring?

According to Barry Deutsch of IMPACT Hiring Solutions, “roughly 56% of newly hired executives fail within two years of starting new jobs.”

Ray B. Williams cites an array of studies documenting failure rates of newly appointed and promoted executives:

• “Harvard Business School reported a 40% to 60% failure rate of U.S. executives in 2003;
• In a 2010 U.S. Conference Board report, only 36% of employees rated their companies’ leadership as good or excellent, down 50% from five years ago;
• A 2005 Corporate Executive Board Recruiting Roundtable survey found 89% of new U.S. executive hires indicated they did not have the optimum level of knowledge and skills to do their jobs;
• A Right Management Consultants’ 2005 report indicated that about 30% of new mangers and executives fail at their new jobs and leave within 18 months.”

As it turns out, some very real costs lurk behind the common fantasy that newly hired executives reliably hit the ground running.

ChiefExecutive.net details the costs associated with failed executive assimilation, including handsome severance packages, cost to recruit a replacement, and impact on stock value and market capitalization.

Considering what’s at stake, companies would do well to take additional precautions to protect their investment by ensuring their newly hired executives do not contribute to the above statistics.

To share some of those precautionary measures with you, I turned to friend, collaborator, and seasoned leadership development consultant Tom Fumarelli. In Tom’s 30+ years as a global operating executive –half of that time as a C-level executive- he managed public, private and family-owned businesses with high-performing teams in a variety of industries and dozens of countries. Trained at Wharton and Harvard, Tom honed his craft working as a CFO, COO and President in consumer goods, retail, banking, and other business sectors. Today, Tom puts his executive experience to work for clients in executive coaching, leadership development, and business consulting. As an executive coach, Tom helps companies’ newly hired executives assimilate into their positions, minimizes the chances of their failure, and works to protect his client’s recruitment effort and investment. In the six years that I have known Tom, he has been one of the toughest and best clients of my career. His high standards and integrity stepped up our partnership and set the foundation for many successful executive-level hires.

Roy Notowitz: Start by describing how you help companies.

Tom Fumarelli: Essentially, I work with business executives and owners to make sustainable change and achieve their personal best. Together, we focus on improving performance through collaboration, communication and accountability.

One element of my services, what you’ve asked me to discuss today, is ensuring that newly hired executives -at the VP-level and above- assimilate into their positions, understand corporate culture and expectations, and build and reinforce behaviors that will provide the greatest benefit to the company in a short period of time.

Most executives are expected to make their mark within the first 100 days, but if they do so in a manner that does not honor company culture or include key constituents in decisions, failure is possible for the executive, for his or her team, and for the company. This preventable situation happens more often than most companies choose to acknowledge.

It’s not unusual for ‘assimilation’ to be confused with ‘on-boarding’ or ‘indoctrination’, so let me take a moment to parse the distinction. On-boarding typically applies to the management level or below, and includes introducing the new-hire to HR policies, delivering an employee handbook, defining preferred methods of customer interaction, and sharing company vision, history, and culture. In a nutshell, on-boarding is a diffusion of information.

Successful assimilation –as a part of executive coaching- builds on that education by focusing on performance. The whole experience is a dynamic partnership between the executive being coached, the coach, and several key constituents in the company: the executive’s superior(s), key peers, and occasionally some subordinates.

To allow for adequate goal setting, regular feedback, and participation from a number of people, the process generally takes about six months. The goal is for the new executive to acquire a practical understanding of company culture and vision, familiarity with the idiosyncrasies of his or her peers’ work styles, and clear comprehension of the responsibilities and resources that pertain to the position.

I always find it amazing that companies spend so many resources on recruitment, but rarely invest the time or effort to ensure success once the executive is on board. Too much emphasis is placed on execution and tactics, while not enough attention is given to facilitating assimilation.

RN: At what point should a company consider involving an executive coach to help with assimilation?

TF: Coaching for a new executive is relevant and applicable in many instances. It is especially useful in three situations: when the executive assumes a position that has been held by another individual for a long time, when an executive moves into a newly created role, or when someone is brought in to run a privately owned business that has been previously managed by its owner/founder.

This new relationship between the executive and the company resembles a marriage in some respects. How many divorces would be prevented if newly wed couples began working with a marriage counselor from day one, instead of waiting for problems to develop? Moreover, think of what contributes to a successful marriage: communication and giving feedback when something is not right.

For companies, successful assimilation should start before the executive’s first day. Recruitment assessments -personality tests, interviews, evaluations, etc.- provide the ideal platform to design an assimilation program tailored to fit the unique match between the candidate’s personality and talents, and the company’s culture and needs. Involving an executive coach late in the recruitment process would reduce the rate of executive failures dramatically.

RN: What are some of the typical challenges that leaders may face when entering a new organization or new role within the current organization?

TF: Let’s look at the three situations I just mentioned.

Where a new executive is filling a position long held by another, there will inevitably be discrepancies in working styles, communication, personality, initiative, etc. The new arrangement’s success will pivot on clear expectations, regular feedback, and sustained participation from those key constituents I mentioned earlier: the superior(s), peers, and some relevant subordinates.
In cases where the executive takes on a newly created position, there’s a good chance of crossed messages and misunderstandings. What’s more, expectations of success and the role may change along the way. I’ve seen cases where decision-making authority isn’t clearly delineated; the new executive takes action with the best of intentions, gets his or her hand slapped, and feels undermined. This is all preventable.

When the new executive is brought in to fill a position previously occupied by the owner/founder –I call these companies ‘family-run businesses’- there are some more specific and delicate challenges. For some owner/founders, relinquishing control can be difficult. There may be a strong emotional attachment to the business, and he or she may scrutinize the new executive’s actions, decisions, and expenses with exacting attention. The new executive’s success depends on the owner/founder’s willingness to delegate and to let go emotionally. In many of these cases, it’s beneficial for the owner/founder to work with a coach independently.

If we think of these family businesses’ management culture as a cohesive organism, a newly introduced person enters like a foreign amoeba. He or she will have new ideas, and a new work style that will inevitably rock the boat. The organism will react by doing everything it can to combat that new entrant; not intentionally, but because it’s new, different, and strange. If the executive is made to face off against the family culture, he or she will lose every time.

RN: What are the most common errors associated with bringing on new executive talent?

TF: I attribute most executive failure to communication problems: inadequate feedback, inconsistent engagement, unclear expectations, etc. The key constituents don’t take the time to ensure that the new executive is in alignment with expectations of management or is familiar with the scope of the position’s decision-making authority. Introductory meetings aren’t enough. Sustained success takes real involvement over time, consistent feedback, and regular engagement.

Too often, new problems will surface for the new executive or the boss –behaviors or decisions that they don’t agree with- and they shrug it off, thinking “It’ll work itself out.” Or superiors may not do a good job sharing their vision, seemingly expecting the new hire to catch on by osmosis. Clear communication could prevent both of these problems.

RN: How do you help increase the likelihood of success?

TF: My clients prefer a results-oriented plan, primarily so that the expectations for the new executive are clear, but also so that they know what they’re getting from me. Decision makers appreciate the structure this lends to the process. It’s not just a ‘feel good’ exercise. Typically, I’ll start with a 360º feedback survey; which includes the new executive, pertinent superiors and peers, and occasionally select subordinates.

In some cases, I’ll facilitate three-way conversations between the new executive, myself –acting as executive coach-, and the boss. Together, we’ll answer a host of simple, essential questions, including: ‘How do you like to work?’, ‘What does success look like?’, ‘What’s important?’, ‘What’s not important?’, ‘What do you need and expect from me?’ and ‘What tools are available?’

After collecting data from these conversations, I’ll encourage –sometimes insist on- the respondents’ participation in the development of an executive coaching action plan. Increasing participation and getting key constituents’ skin in the game greatly improves the likelihood of the new executive’s success. Once that plan is in place, my responsibilities shift to ongoing monitoring and regularly soliciting and facilitating feedback. The nature of this process typically demands an engagement of about six months, sometimes longer. After that point, at my client’s request, I’ll check back every quarter.

The trick with executive coaching is to adapt to the unique dynamic of the individual and the company: establish clear lines of communication, guidelines, acceptable actions, and address the other topics I’ve discussed earlier. Everyone involved should take a step back for an objective look, share goals and tools, and explain what he or she needs to be successful. These are essential questions for any new relationship, but few organizations make the effort.

RN: What should trigger someone to consider using an executive coach to help with assimilation?

TF: Mid- to large-cap businesses tend to have a clearly structured process with enough resources to ensure that new hires get the attention they need to be successful. It’s the smaller-cap and family businesses -which were responsible for 64% of new jobs created in the US during the last two decades- that may not have such a program in place. They may overlook the importance of investing in the executive’s assimilation because they’re starry eyed with their new hire.

Since small business represents 99.7% of all businesses in the US today, this group stands to gain the most -and provide the most benefit- from enlisting the services of an executive coach.

RN: What should people look for in an executive coach that will help smooth the assimilation process?

TF: The people who are better at this level of coaching are those who have been senior-level executives themselves. Experiencing assimilation and seeing the difference between good execution and poor execution informs a level of attention to the big picture and the small details that cannot be synthesized from theory alone. Such a wealth of practical experience provides structure, measurable deliverables, and follow-through; all important ingredients for successful executive assimilation.

Personally, I find that my track record as an executive helps me to understand my clients’ objectives with a big-picture perspective, and retain sensitivity to the projects and pressures of each new-hire’s position.

RN: What other services do you provide and how can someone contact you?

TF: I describe what I do as a three-legged stool. I offer Leadership Development Consulting (e.g. training workshops, team and partnership interventions), Executive Coaching –a part of which we’ve discussed here-, and Business Consulting (tactics concerning strategy, operations, and management).

Each of those legs supports the other two. My business consulting keeps me fresh on contemporary issues. I take the successes and lessons from my coaching clients and share those concepts on a confidential basis with others in similar circumstances.

In general, I approach problems by blending the business perspective with a thorough look at the unique challenges and styles of the organization and its individual contributors. Because no two clients have the same strengths and challenges, each of my solutions must be tailored to fit the situation. The beauty is in honoring the diversity of each individual and entity.

I can be reached through fumarelli.com

 Please let us know your thoughts on this topic.

1. Have you witnessed executive failure that could have been prevented with more investment in assimilation? If so, what did you learn from the experience?

Have you ever worked with an executive coach? What did you learn from the experience? What would you add to Tom Fumarelli

Resigned to Resign

The moment of truth is often not when the candidate accepts your offer, but when they actually go to resign.

 As recruiters’, we often pat ourselves on the back when a candidate accepts a job offer and agrees to make the leap to a new company. However, any recruiter who has been around the block a few times knows that there remains the slim, but all too possible chance that the ‘perfect fit’ might be lured back to his or her old team. (Oh, the audacity!) Therefore, our job isn’t done until that recruit –that employee-yet-to-be- actually shows up for his or her first day of work.

The dynamics of change… have changed.

Since the economy has maintained an ‘employer’s market’ for so long, you might think that companies would make resignations smooth and hassle-free. As usual, reality is more complicated.

Because many employees have been doing more work with less pay, they’re attentively awaiting the chance to jump ship. Consequently, some companies are suffering uncomfortable employee losses, and are reacting with more aggressive efforts to retain top talent intent on resigning. As with most reactions, this is an inefficient response; if retention were truly a goal, it would not have become an issue. Questions of efficiency aside, reactive retention efforts can work if the resigning employee is surprised by a sudden showering of positive attention.  (Never mind that most of these starry-eyed folks end up leaving the company within a year, anyway.)

Relaxing before the recruitment race is truly over exposes you to unnecessary risk of failure. Aside from the time and energy wasted on an unsuccessful recruitment, current staff –already busy with their own responsibilities- may be covering the vacant position, and expecting a new hire to pick up the slack soon. To mitigate the risk of losing the top candidate at the moment of truth, recruiters should help him or her prepare to give notice.

Bolstering the resolution to resign.

• Let recruits know that resignation can be harder than they expect, but without making the whole event seem more dramatic than it needs to be.  
• Be a resource for them by offering 3^rd party information on resigning.
• If needed, offer to help them develop 2-3 concise talking points.
• Assure them that they will be fine if they just stick to their ‘script.’
• Tactfully reinforce their main motivations for making a move without being too pushy or negative about their current company.
• Reiterate why you’re excited about them joining your company.

With a little extra encouragement and preparation, candidates can have a happy ending, and a fresh start.  The best result is the most anticlimactic: the candidate leaves on good terms, cuts ties cleanly, and moves into the new position without any baggage.  Preparing for the counter-offer mitigates a considerable risk for the hiring manager, improves the likelihood of a successful switch, and boosts your chances of earning that aforementioned caloric sin.

Additional resources:

For tips you can share with candidates prior to them having to give notice, check out my post “Quit Your Job with Grace.” on how to make a graceful exit.

For tips on getting the candidate to accept your offer, read my post “Deal or No Deal: Getting Top Talent to Accept Your Offer.”

Please share your thoughts on this topic.

-      Have you heard interesting stories about key employees giving notice?

-      What is the best way to protect against a counter offer?

>>> About Notogroup: Notogroup is an executive search and talent consulting firm. We have a singular focus on providing the most comprehensive executive recruiting service so that our clients can be assured that each and every hire is a successful one.  For more information, Contact Roy Notowitz.

What does BP’s ongoing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico have to do with your hiring practices?  More than you may think.

Last month, five international oil companies were chastised by the US Congress for having near identical spill-response plans. Putting aside questions of negligence and complacency, this tragedy highlights the risk of only hiring from a talent pool with industry-specific experience.  Tight-knit industry clusters breed mediocrity.  If BP had enlisted the help of an industry ‘outsider’ -one with parallel experience, complementary competencies and a fresh perspective- perhaps their spill-response plan may have had more success.

Yes, experience and pedigree are important, but old hands don’t guarantee new ideas and fresh thinking.  The best candidate with the most promising competencies and creative energy may work in another industry.  While responsibilities and context may differ, the applicable core competencies driving an individual’s success may be readily transferable.

Progressive leaders who toy with the idea of hiring for competency over breed may have trouble seeing past industry boundaries.  This is understandable.  Such actions demand courage and a hiring process that inspires confidence.  Today’s market conditions currently favor such courage and confidence.   A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlights employment trends that support the case for hiring outside the box.

Why act now?  Consider just three reasons:

1. Well-established brands are also well-entrenched.  Future success depends on innovation and connection to the next generation of customers.  Fresh thinking, strategy and perspective borrowed from an analogous company in a parallel industry could propel new growth and prosperity.

2.  Far flung candidates may be reluctant to relocate if the hurdles of selling their homes or finding their partners new jobs seem too high.  Since relocation costs are also on the rise for companies, the risk of failure may seem insurmountable.  Cost-conscious and community-oriented companies must balance the benefit of hiring locally with the potential inconvenience of a smaller, homogenized talent pool.  Under these circumstances, hiring outside of the industry may be an attractive alternative. 

3. Creative thinkers naturally tire of the same old job responsibilities and challenges.  Boredom with their current situation may inspire top performers to jump into something new and stimulating, even if it means a pay cut.  A successful person with the competencies you need will ultimately perform well and quickly compensate with rejuvenated enthusiasm.

In 2008, I met with an entrepreneur who wanted to jump from a career in healthcare into the outdoor industry.  Sure enough, he is flourishing as a national sales manager with a burgeoning outdoor apparel company.  He is passionate about the business and is an authentic brand evangelist in pursuit of market share.  After just one year in the industry, he is a top performer bringing all of his past entrepreneurial experience to benefit his new employer.

As in the case above, the risks can be daunting, but the pay-off can be substantial.  If you’re ready for some brave hiring, hedge your bets with these tips:

1. Prioritize values and culture fit.

Take stock of your company. Review the vision, mission and values driving your business, then let them guide the hiring structure.  Don’t forget to pay close attention to culture fit.  Employees who are a good cultural fit perform better and typically stay longer.  I’ve written more about culture fit on my blog.

2.  Follow your map.

To determine fit and identify transferable competencies, develop a structured behavioral interview process. Carefully align the interview questions to the competencies needed for success.  Then, create a consistent selection process.  A blog post that I previously wrote provides recommendations for structured interview techniques.

3. Look past the horizons of your industry.

Would it surprise you to learn that some of the best footwear designers come out of the automotive industry?  What complementary industries harbor folks with the talents, capabilities, and competencies you identified above?  Look for these people with experience in parallel, but relevant industries.

Building momentum takes time.  Be patient.

If you’ve invested effort in the above suggestions, then it will pay off to allow your new hire to absorb company culture and vision.  Once she gets up to speed, there’s no telling how far she’ll take you.  Although you can be sure it won’t be in the same direction as your four major competitors.

>>> About Notogroup: Notogroup is an executive search and talent consulting firm. We have a singular focus on providing the most comprehensive executive recruiting service so that our clients can be assured that each and every hire is a successful one.

In search of more data, I discovered another major study by Leadership IQ of 5,247 managers covering more than 20,000 hires that points to deep-seated flaws with the interviewing and assessment process used by most companies. Perhaps the most salient statistic was that only 19% (one hire out of every five people hired) in a typical hiring process were classified as an unequivocal success. The study also indicated that 46% of new hires fail within 18 months.

The hypothesis given by the Leadership IQ Study was that the majority of hiring managers surveyed reported that they ignored subtle clues and were too focused on other issues, too pressed for time, or lacked confidence in their interviewing ability. The study also indicated that hiring managers emphasized technical competence over candidate motivation, coachability, emotional intelligence, and temperament.

While not much credence was given to the hiring process in these reports, the Recruiting Roundtable report offered some redemption for the value an experienced recruiter can bring. The report concluded that “recruiter skill” does correlate to improvements in quality of hire.

The top three recruiter skills for improving quality of hire included:
1. The ability to partner and communicate with hiring managers
2. The ability to gain a clear understanding of job requirements
3. The ability to recruit / hunt (of course).

Even though I was knocked a bit out of orbit by the research findings, I still believe that a comprehensive and structured interviewing process does improve quality hire. In my opinion, the real issue is inconsistency. Unfortunately, recruiters do not have professional standards of excellence that would provide the consistency needed to correlate process to improved hiring success.

In the absence of true professional standards or accreditation for recruiting, I will now have to give more weight to recruiter instinct and experience. While I have always believed that experience and skill are important, I have been more humble about promoting my own experience and passion for recruiting. Perhaps the talent it takes to be an incredible recruiter is not different (in concept) to the talent of a star athlete, musician, or an admired artist.

In truth, the best way to improve quality of hire is most likely to include a combination of all of the elements described above. However, when selecting your next recruiter, remember that it takes great talent to hire great talent.

A March 2009 study on talent management trends published by the Aberdeen Group showed that “organization fit” also known as “culture fit” surpassed other hiring quality measures for the first time. According to the report, this trend suggests that companies are now looking for employees who will stay longer and have the ability to adapt and grow with the business over time.

While the concept of “culture fit” gets a lot of attention for being one of the most important considerations when hiring, companies frequently do a poor job in defining and evaluating culture fit. When the economy creates a headwind for companies, hiring mistakes can set a company back significantly.

Why culture fit is so difficult to assess?

Too often, clients describe their culture to me with generic statements like “it’s a ‘work hard’ and ‘play hard’ environment” or with adjectives that describe employees as: “passionate”, “friendly”, and “driven”. What’s worse is when clients tell me that when it comes to assessing culture fit, they will just “know it when they see it”.

It is not just about adjectives that describe someone’s personality or what people do on the weekends. Culture fit is defined as the degree to which a candidate’s personality, values, interests, and work style match up with the company values, norms, job function, and overall work environment.

The bottom line is that if culture fit is not adequately addressed, it becomes a wild card in the hiring process.  Interviewers will naturally base their candidate feedback on ill-defined personal preferences and beliefs about what they think it means to be a culture fit.

So, how can your company do a better job of assessing culture fit? Here are 6 suggestions:

1. Get everyone on the same page.
Being deliberate about culture and linking it to the business strategy and ultimately the hiring process can be a huge source of competitive advantage. A company culture can be defined by anyone who is a part of it, but it is more authentic when defined by a collective of individuals at all levels within the company. For it to be leveraged effectively, it should be directed and supported from the top down to ensure alignment with the values, long term strategy, and goals of the company.

2. Avoid looking through rose-colored glasses.
Hiring expert and author of “Hiring Success: The Art and Science of Staffing Assessment and Employee Selection”, Dr. Steven Hunt warns against seeing just the positives. He states, “If done right, there are negatives for every positive”. For example, a culture that is highly respectful and conflict averse may not be a good fit for someone who values constructive criticism or for someone who sees conflict as a healthy organizational dynamic. This approach will help solidify what culture fit really means for your company.

3. Great culture fit does not equal great performance.
Most hiring mistakes happen as a result of an inadequate interviewing process. Remember that culture fit is just one dimension of a comprehensive selection process. Culture fit and performance can be mutually exclusive. This means that an extraordinary culture fit can have ordinary performance.

4. Learn more about your candidates.
Develop the interviewing expertise in your organization and use a consistent process that includes a feedback loop. A comprehensive selection process will integrate the culture fit components into a structured interview process and may incorporate a realistic job preview project, and appropriate assessments such as the Hogan or the Occupational Personality Questionnaire to help better inform decisions and improve quality of hire.

5. Hire a selection expert.
Unless you have selection expertise on staff, I recommend hiring a consultant with expertise in assessment and selection to help build a formal competency model for your company and to design an effective and efficient hiring process. This approach will ensure that your business strategy is aligned with your talent acquisition strategy. A successful roll out might include interview training and a detailed process overview.

6. Stick to your guns.
It may be difficult, but it will be necessary to pass up well-qualified candidates if there is evidence to support that they will not perform the job in a manner that is consistent with your culture, values, and norms. Of course, in order to have the luxury of being highly selective, you need to start with a large pool of well-qualified and diverse candidates. If you cannot generate a sufficient pool of qualified applicants, you will ultimately have to look for additional sources or be forced to compromise.

———————-

About the Author

Roy Notowitz is currently the Managing Partner of Notogroup. Over the past 14 years, Roy has been a trusted talent acquisition adviser to dozens of leading consumer products and technology companies nationwide. Prior to starting Notogroup, Notowitz was the founder of Generator Group in 2000 after having worked as an in-house corporate recruiter and workforce manager for Nike and Intel.

Notowitz has written for, and addressed, groups such as the American Marketing Association, American Electronics Association, Gear Trends, Outdoor Industry Association, and Sports One Source on topics that include talent alignment, hiring trends, strategic staffing, relationship recruiting, employment branding, candidate experience, interviewing and selection. In 2009, he was recently recognized by the sporting goods industry as a recipient of the “SGB 40 Under 40” award.

Roy received his Bachelor’s degree from the State University of New York and his Master’s degree from Virginia Tech. When not working, Roy enjoys spending time with family, hiking, fishing, running and skiing.