Is Your Organization Hip?

Here's a great post from Guy Kawasaki where he interviews Kathleen Gasperini, an expert on the global youth culture.

After reading this, I gotta wonder...how many organizations are staying in tune with this youth culture? And how many organizations are looking at these trends and applying them to their employer brand?

Sure, companies like Verizon, Levi Straus, or Burton all try to understand the youth culture in order to sell more products. But I haven't really seen too many companies that take this message and translate it into their employer brand.

Why is this so important?

Well, for one...these young people are the future talent force.

Two...these young people will begin to dictate markets in ways that previous generations never thought was possible.

And three...who else is going to fill the void left by the Baby Boomers?!?!

Ok, so points one and three were the same thing. I'm simply trying to hammer in a point here. ;)

My prediction: this youth culture will increasingly dictate the types of policies, cultures, and workforces that organizations create.

Because in the end, these organizations are trying to cater to this very youth culture in order to sell more widgets. And if that means transforming their culture to become one that exudes youthful optimism in order to create products that appeal...then so be it.

What will definitely be interesting to see is if some organizations try to meld two different types of brands under one roof: one that appeals to the youth culture, and one that appeals to the Baby Boom generation.

Even more interesting: research that shows how Baby Boomers are more likely to view themselves as younger than they physically are. I wonder if anyone will try to adopt similar tactics used for the youth culture on the Baby Boomers...like a MySpace for people 50+ years??? :o

How Brand You Has Changed

An interesting article from Fast Company that I came across concerning how things have changed since 1995.

And my oh my, how they have changed.

It wasn't so long ago that it seemed like Monster or personal web pages were the only means to create an online brand for yourself.

Now it seems you can't go anyplace on the web without getting smacked in the face with sites like MySpace, YouTube, LinkedIn, Ryze, Doostang, etc. etc.

Is there such a thing as TOO networked?

It'll definitely be interesting to see how things evolve as our society begins to get accustomed to this ever connected world we live in.

A Non-US Search Engine? What's That?

Interesting news from Tara Calishain of Research Buzz: it appears Japan is trying to halt the domination of the search engine market by US firms. Citing fears that having three dominant search engines may prevent Japanese companies from entering markets, a consortium of 30 organizations have banded together to "develop technology for a new advanced search engine."

Who's hopping onto this bandwagon? Hitachi, Fujitsu, and NTT Docomo are among a few of the organizations who are participating in this project.

It'll be really interesting to see if this group can come up with something significantly different than what is already out there.

I'm especially interested now that NTT is involved. They have a pretty good history of progressive thinking as it relates to consumer trends.

The most logical development I'm almost certain will develop from this project: a platform that will leverage wireless/cell phone technology for users. Wonder if they'll have suggestive search terms pop up everytime you walk past a kiosk or vending machine...?

Is There a Defined Search Experience?

Gord Hotchkiss has written an interesting article talking about how Google has established a "de facto" standard of sorts for the search experience. While I may not necessarily agree completely with Gord's analysis, he has some very interesting points.

To say that Google is soley responsible for establishing a standard in search experience is a little extreme to me (yes, I can't believe I'm saying something is "too extreme" either). I agree that they are the current thought and market leader in this area...and their ability to maintain this leadership will be tested in the coming year as other services begin ramping up on re-defining the search user experience.

Google's simple interface won favor with a lot of people...hence, it's current popularity. I think where the rest of the search engines have gone wrong is trying to mimic this interface. Rather than trying to create their own experiences, they've tried to mash the Google formula onto their sites.

If you want to become remarkable, imitating someone else is NOT the way to do it.

Which is why the other engines have experienced limited success to date.

Which gets me to thinking...Google has been getting a lot of hype lately about their recruiting engine. Now you begin to see a lot of organizations begin to adopt some of the same programs that Google has established in order to attract top quality talent.

But I ask again: is this the way to become remarkable? Is this the way to make people go "wow?"

I Have a Friend of a Friend...

Here's a site that was referenced in my previous posting. It's the Friend of a Friend network.

It encourages people to create web sites that utilize the RDF format so that computers can interpret them more easily. In essence, it's a movement that is trying to create the Semantic Web.

It'll be interesting to see if this thing gains popularity.

Note: for you aspiring Talent Researchers out there, check out the FAQ section of the FOAF site. Did you catch the first section talking about what home pages might "typically" say? Very handy phrases for keyword searching! ;)

So You Think You're A Good Researcher?

Hmmmm...I came across a very interesting article towards the end of last week courtesy of one of my brand new interns, Sarah Hewitt. Thanks Sarah...hopefully you don't mind being mentioned in cyberspace like this. ;)

So it seems that the NSA is beginning to become interested in keeping track of all the information on social networks that are popping up all over the place. Sites like MySpace, YouTube, LinkedIn...they're all beginning to pique the curiosity of the NSA.

What's interesting is that the NSA is trying to create a "universal" format for the web. The name: RDF (Resource Description Framework). Using RDF, the NSA (among other organizations) hopes that current incompatibilities in formats will be ironed out over the next few years. In short, the hope is that "one day every website will use RDF to give each type of data a unique, predefined, unambiguous tag."

Why the effort to establish RDF? According to David de Roure of the University of Southampton (UK), "It means that you will be able to ask a website questions you couldn't ask before, or perform calculations on the data it contains."

The implications of this development will probably leave people a little torn: on the one hand, it'll create unprecedented access to sites for scientists who want to analyze each other's experimental data sets. Search itself will be redefined with this new standard format. But on the flip side, it'll mean prying into more personal data will be a breeze.

I wonder: are recruiters going to jump up and down about this bit of news? After all, mining the Internet for its nearly limit-less data will become even easier. Or will they become concerned about the impact on privacy as a result of this?

P.S. If you're curious about what the heck the picture above is all about, click here.

Google vs. Microsoft

Google fires another shot...rather than be content with their share of the search engine market, it looks more and more likely that the firm is aiming their cross-hairs on Microsoft's software domain with their latest invention.

So what have they done? They've created a new spreadsheet application which is available for free in limited quantities. As with all new Google products, it's in beta.

So what's next, I wonder? A PowerPoint application? Google's already purchased Writely...

Think Steve Ballmer is looking over his shoulder more often nowadays?

How NOT to Interview

I'm in the midst of delivering training for some folks on my team this week, so I probably won't have as much time to contribute to the blog. Nevertheless, I'll do my best!

Below is a funny clip from YouTube (this thing is taking over the net) about how NOT to interview. It's a video created by the local Austin, TX government for their workaustin.com site. It's nice to see that even cities are beginning to ramp up on their recruiting efforts to attract high quality talent. Enjoy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvU8fL4MiSQ

McDonald's and the Future of Job-Sharing

Here's an interesting experiment that McDonald's is conducting at some select British locations: allowing employees from the same immediate family to fill in for one another without having to clear it with the store manager.

The "Family Contract" program is an effort to address absenteeism and turnover issues that McDonald's has always experienced.

Talk about a bold step towards something different...

...but it's not surprising to me. As we move towards a world where talent will come in limited supplies, and where retaining talent will be a vital key to success...I think we'll begin to witness more and more organizations creating some "radical" and innovative programs for their people.

It's about time!!!!!

On another note, check out the story about "Irate Shoppers" located beneath the McDonald's one. This is my exclamation point to a previous rant I had about a large retailer not caring about its customer service.

This is exactly why saving a few dollars over providing great customer experiences never equals a win.

Invisibility Cloaks to Flying Cars

Looks like innovation is leaping forward again. Check this story out on ZDNet about how a group of researchers and scientists have taken a big leap forward towards creating invisible materials or cloaks that can make objects "invisible."

This has nothing to do with recruiting, business, or HR in the traditional sense. But whenever an innovation comes out that has the potential to change the dynamics of everyday life (or even industries), I have to give it some love.

You might be asking yourself, "what's next? Flying cars?"

Apparently, yes.

Recruiting: The Google Way

Here's an interesting post about how Google is beginning to recruit college grads. According to this report, Google is beginning to keep tabs on IP addresses of users in order to differentiate those who are coming from a college.

Apparently for a while, Google has been placing Google Scholar as one of their search tabs if they detect that you are coming from a college. Now, they're being more direct by placing a link directly on their front page in order to attract college recruits.

Here are some other articles about Google's recruiting ways:

John Sullivan's Case Study
Allan Hoffman's Article

In case you're wondering, no...I'm not on the Google bandwagon. ;) Although, in some cases, Google is making it harder NOT to be.

Bad Bosses

This is almost funny and saddening at the same time. I came across a site completely devoted to dealing with bad bosses.

It's a typical gripe that you hear or have experienced yourself: "I work for an idiot." (Hopefully I don't have anyone saying that about me ;)

The site features a "helpful resources" section that boasts, among other things, articles like "Why Jerks Get Ahead in the Workplace," and "10 Tips for Surviving a Bad Boss."

I could go into a long description of how having bad managers is another quick path to irrelevance, but something tells me this site might give you a good idea why. I'll expand on this topic after things die down for me here.

The Quickest Path to Irrelevance: Empowerment

Out of the many things an organization can do on a consistent basis to become irrelevant, I think one of the biggest is this: not empowering your own employees to do what is necessary.

What do I mean by this?

Let's take the example I used in an earlier posting. Throughout the whole experience, the one thought that kept leaping up in my mind was that this large retailer didn't empower its own employees to do anything necessary to make customers happy. The same thing kept coming out of each employee's mouth: "It's store policy, sir. We can't do anything about it."

...Can't do anything?

In essence, what the organization is saying to each employee is that it doesn't care about happy customers who offer repeat business. Rather, it values saving a few bucks here and there at the expense of its brand.

Many of you have heard that legendary story about Nordstrom and the man who returned a tire. Here's another great example of how far this company goes in order to please its customers.

Tell me one thing: if an organization went to these lengths to make you happy, would you not become a fanatical evangelist for them? Would you not find every excuse to shop at their stores instead of a competitor's?


I wonder how this problem of empowerment might play out in recruiting or HR?

What about when a recruiter, after sharing their passion about the company to a candidate, goes on to find out after an initial interview (or two) that the company has decided to close the position indefinitely? What about when an employee asks the HR department to rectify a situation in the workplace, and HR really can't do anything because they don't have "power" to discipline a high level VP?

In each of these cases, people are left feeling helpless and at a loss for an explanation for the candidate or employee involved. And in each case, people walk away...respecting the organization and its brand a little less.

What's worse, those affected by this lack of empowerment will never become evangelists for your organization.

...And when you don't have people willing to evangelize for your organization, you eventually become irrelevant.

The Quickest Path to Irrelevance: Compromise

What happens to products, services, or ideas when people compromise on them?

Irrelevance happens.

In continuing my series on how organizations make themselves irrelevant in the world, I've come to agree with this thought: that compromise on an idea, product, or service often times leads to mediocre things.

You might be raising your eyebrow now. Compromise leading to mediocrity? Blasphemy! Indeed, our whole modern culture is built around this notion of "tolerance." It's politically correct. It's less abrasive. It's less stubborn. It's more forward thinking.

I say it's backwards thinking...when it comes to certain things. For instance, when you have a WOW idea. Or when you have a vision of what could be, and you want to turn it into what will be.

Unfortunately, organizations sometimes prevent these WOW things from happening. I take that back...not sometimes...MOST times. Why? You get together with people. Ideas are thrown around. People have different agendas. Before you know it, the original vision or idea takes a backseat to what becomes a conglomeration of thoughts from everyone in the room. Then of course someone (aka the leadership team) has to approve the idea/product/service. More deliberation ensues. More crap gets added on to satisfy "them."

And then...what was a WOW idea becomes a compromised "huh?" idea. It's a "huh?" idea because after the dust settles from all the meetings and deliberations, the eventual customer for that idea looks at it and doesn't understand how it addresses a need in their life.

This happens in a lot of departments, projects, or BUs in organizations. And recruiting and HR departments are no exception to this. How many times have recruiting departments compromised on an ATS system in order to satisfy every single "stakeholder?" And how many times has that lead to a system...which originally was intended to make recruiters MORE efficient...that leaves everyone wondering who in the world picked this thing to begin with.

Even worse, what about when organizations compromise on talent? How many times has an organization looked over a talented candidate because HR says they're not within the "Sr. Associate payband?"

Day in and day out, I see how a lot of people make compromises. And slowly...their projects, BUs, or departments begin becoming irrelevant. Maybe that's why executives hate HR (recruiting included...let's admit it, they still lump all of us together with that term): It's made so many compromises over time that it's become irrelevant to an organization's strategic roadmap.

Maybe I'm way off here. So don't take my word for it. Just check out what others think.

Maybe you'll see that sometimes...it just doesn't make sense to compromise. Not when irrelevance is on the line.

Did you know...?

No, no...I'm not stopping my series on "The Quickest Path to Irrelevance." But as you all know (and I use the word "all" very generously here...hey, it's my blog), whenever I come across some interesting things, I have to share it.

Today's interesting thing is dedicated to those who like to follow news about search engines. Seth Finkelstein posted on his blog the other day a Top 10 list for things you may not know about Google (actually, this blog entry was not written by Seth, but rather by a guy named Philipp Lenssen). While some of you search engine geeks may already know a lot of these things, there's still probably one or two on the list that you never knew until now. And if you don't know anything about Google or search engines...well, this list will definitely shed some light on some useless facts. ;)

The Quickest Path to Irrelevance: A Case Study

I recently went through a bad customer service experience (technically, I'm actually still going through it), and it got me so riled up that I was compelled to blog about it as thoughts shot in and out of my head. In fact, I'm going to be doing a new series titled "The Quickest Path to Irrelevance"-- it's a series devoted to things that organizations do on a daily basis that takes them one step closer to...well, irrelevance.

Specifically, this whole experience got me thinking about the recruiting process...because when you boil it down, good customer service IS good recruiting.

For all intensive purposes, let's just say I recently purchased something from a well-known retail outlet (a $2 billion publicly traded firm with over 7,000 employees based in Italy). When I tried to return the item I purchased (because it didn't fit the intended recipient that I sent it to), the course of events that followed truly stunned me. And it is a case study of how NOT to treat customers.

The aforementioned retailer has a very strict return policy. Of course, the sales associates who happened to assist me on that day neglected to mention this fact even after I told them my situation (I was trying to purchase a gift for someone out-of-state). Long story short, when I tried to return the item after having it sent back to me, I was told I would be unable to because of the 14 day return policy.

So I told them to give me store credit. They said no; they didn't do that. I asked if I could get my money back. Again, they said no. So I asked them what I could do. They told me I could exchange it for something else in the store. Given the fact that I didn't want anything they had to offer at the moment, I asked what happens if I didn't want to exchange it.

They said I would have 30 days from the original purchase date to find something I want.

What really irked me was that during this whole process, I wasn't treated as a valued customer who's purchased clothes from this retailer in the past. I was simply given a scripted, robotic answer to all my questions.

And I wondered: at what point do you sacrifice customer service for the sake of efficiency and "store policies?"

I think this same question can be posed for recruiting processes. Think about it: candidates who go through an organization's recruiting process are essentially no different than customers. They experience your firm from the inside out. They are exposed to "representatives" of your firm (hiring managers, associates, etc.). After all is said and done, they're left with an impression after the whole experience.

The question is: do they leave with a good experience? Or a bad experience?

I've seen too many organizations who don't treat candidates like "valued customers." They shuffle people in and out of the recruiting process like they're billable resources. No deep thought is given to the experience. How does your front lobby look like as candidates walk up? Do you make them wait for half an hour before they see anyone? Is it apparent that your hiring managers don't prepare adequately for interview days?

All of these things (and dozens more) make an indelible impression on candidates. Just like customers when they walk through a store and experience its customer service for the first time.

The major retailer in this case still has a chance to redeem themselves even after all that I've been through. Unfortunately, when it comes to the recruiting process...it'll take a whole lot more than a refund (or free gift certificates) to win back people once you've left a bad taste in their mouths when it comes to their career.

What kind of customer service does your recruiting process have?

Interviewing a Web Developer

Seeing as how Web 2.0 is in full effect, I'm guessing many recruiters out there have been furiously interviewing candidates with various web skills (has anyone seen the ludicrous fees some of these web people are commanding? ...but I digress...).

Danny Palmer sent this link to me (thanks Danny), and I thought it was a useful tool for anyone having to interview web developers on a consistent basis.

The cool thing about this site is that not only does it provide good questions for a recruiter, but also hiring managers or others involved in the interviewing process.

Getting an International Perspective

If you ever find yourself needing to get some fresh perspective...one of the best ways to do this is to look beyond our borders. Why? In a lot of cases, our US-centered thought sometimes causes us to view things through a specific lens.

In my dealings with foreigners (and being Asian American myself), I've realized that people outside our country sometimes have drastically different ways to approach problems or make observations.

With all this said, I came across this one site that keeps track of blogs across the globe. Specifically, it focuses on "bridge bloggers," or people who are talking about their country or region to a global audience.

It's a pretty cool site (which was launched by the Harvard Law School interestingly enough) with good potential. At the least, it'll give us all a fresh perspective...and sometimes, that's all we need.

Generation Y: Coming of Age

I love when you think about an idea and someone comes along and adds an "!" to the end of it.

Here's a little snippet about someone who feels the same way I do when it comes to Generation Y...that Baby Boomers need to prepare to hand over increasing amounts of responsibility in organizations, whether they like it or not.

Maybe I'll get more "!" for other ideas as time moves along... ;)

The Art of Thin Slicing

Well...this might be a tad bit confusing, but here's the explanation: I sat down to write a blog entry last Friday, and never got around to finishing it. Until now.

So if you're curious about the Art of Thin Slicing, just scroll down.

Or, just click here. (you lazy person)