Social networks and recruitment 2.0 : does it work well ?

Summary : Mixed results make people wonder on the relevance of social networks as recruitment tools. It all depends on what one mean by recruiment, because if it’s easy to measure the transactional side, recruitment processes are much broader and are made of diverse elements that can use social networks as catalysts. For reasons due to the job profile, the volume of people to hire or the scalability of the system, social networks won’t always be the right tool to recruit in the strict sense of the the word. But if we take all non-transactional activities into account (such as HR marketing), these tools can act like a process booster and also impact the quality of the final result. But businesses need to consider a broader range of activities and not focus on the number of people hired depending on the media.

A couple of weeks ago, french HR blogger Jean-Noël Chaintreuil wrote on the poorly kepts promise of social networks as a recruitment tool.  Did we get it all wrong ? Not a all. First, we need to know what we’re talking about.

Recruitment. If, for many people that are not involved in HR activities, recruitment means placing an advertisement, having interviews and chosing the right person, it’s in fact, a much more complex process. It’s about defining the job, sourcing candidates, choosing the right ones. We can also all what has to do with employer branding that reinforce the attractiveness of the enterprise and the quality of applications (because people know more things about the enterprise, its culture and values..). And even if considered as another process, onboarding programs that will help new hires to be at their best and make their first steps easier are very close to recruitment. As a matter of fact, if we consider that the goal is not to recruit someone but someone who’ll stay and find his/her place in the organization, onboarding programs are an essential part of the recruitment process.

Recruitment 2.0. There’s nothing really new on the nature of recruitment but on execution. As usual, when something turns 2.0, it’s about a better (qualitative and quantitative) use of the knowledge and relational capital of all the stakeholders (including the candidate) to improve the bandwidth of the process and the quality of the result. It comes in many forms. First, finding the means to have a better knowledge of the other and let the other know who you are (employer and personal branding). It also implies a move from mass communication to conversation. Then, it’s about using networks to have “better” applications that fit both the need and the corporate culture as well as a better sourcing. Here, it’s about trust/reputation and the power of weak ties. At the selection level, there are also ways to make the person be chosen not only by his future manager but also the people he’ll work with. To end, new onboarding and immersion programs will complete the traditional mentoring by peers networks.

Obviously, lots of businesses did not wait for the 2.0 era to put some of these things at work. What has changed is that, to make things work on a wide scale, new tools were needed. As a matter of fact, talking about networks to use the available human capital and knowledge is nice but when one can access to few people and is limited to strong ties, the promise is hard to keep. What leads to the next point.

Social Networks. When talking about networks, knowledge and weak ties in 2011, things often come to social networks. But, if we look at the past, social networks are not the only tool that have been (and still are) used to meet recruitment and HR goals. When we started to work on recruitment 2.0 with a couple of french professionals in 2004/2005, the trending topic was blogging. At this moment, media paid a lot of attention to “these bloggers who foun a job because they were active on the web”. To be more precise, most of these people already had a job, bloggint only helped them to meet the people and networks that offered them more appealing jobs in enterprises that were really wanting them for what they were. Then came enterprise HR blogs and, only then, social networks like LinkedIn became mainstream. Today, people talk about Facebook or Twitter even if the latter is not even seen as a network by its founders and is rather about a branding and influence strategy as blogs were before. But, in the end, that’s the same because it all melts in a global strategy.

Now, what do we mean by “recruitment on social networks” ?

[Read more...]

What to do with our Yers ?

Generation Y is now an actual concern for many organizations. Some see them as a danger, other as an opportunity but everybody wonder about how to tame this new population that make organizations tremble with fear. And one question is on all lips : how will businesses  adapt.

The issue came back to my mind when I came across this deck by Julien Pouget who had the kidness to gather some verbatims and “instant thoughts” at an event where he spoke. As Julien himself says, that’s only an “instant picture” and nothing more. But I often find these kinds of verbatim useful because they show us how people perceive things and this perception, should it be legitimate or not, argued or not, objective or subjective, actually exists so has to be taken into account.

Those who can understand a few words in french may be interested in the deck, that’s why I share it all the same.

According to my own perception of this generation, here are my takes :

• on a cognitive perspective, they are different from previous generations. They are made to work in the world we live in and intead of managing the Y case I think that businesses that will learn from them will make impressive improvements. Anyway, one day they’ll be the majority so better start now, all the more since they have the right DNA to be successful in an information world. That does not mean they should either deserve a red carpet and that they have nothing to learn from older people.

• an ambiguous relationship with work. If I rely on the informations gathered by Julien, they don’t want to work themselves to death and, most of all, they don’t understand the enterprise world. It confirms what some other surveys already demonstrated [fr] : the shift from a world of entertainement to a world of work is very hard for them, they don’t master the codes and the challenges and, most of all, they don’t care about that.

They want to work as less as possible, are more interested in holidays than in the content of their job and want everything to come to them without making any effort. They want to find a job and that’s why they are curious about integration into the workplace, but they don’t want their job to impact their private life.

I was looking at this deck with a 40yo manager, a kind of manager 2.0, networker, facilitator, who is very comfortable when it comes to working with Yers. He told me “their DNA is useless if they don’t quickly refocus and the beginning of their career may be a violent shock. If they don’t care, the future will remember them as Generation S…for Slumped”. Direct but lucid.

• Revolutionary ? Not at all. Rather apathetic. But, as I was recently told, “let’s see the impact of the crisis on a generation that have always know growth and had high expectations. You know, when they’ll find themselves as everybody, with a rent to pay and engagements to assume, when the real world will catch up with them, they’ll become pragmatic by need, as it happened to all the previous generations”.

• Should we generalize ? In my opinion, not at all. I recently gave a class at HEC (French best business school) and I can tell you the students were tonic, interested, smart and aware of the challenges they’ll have to face in the workplace. A also know Yers from overseas where I have relatives, and I don’t feel they fit this description either. Moreover, how could they demand a 35h workweek, more and more holidays, concepts that does not exist in their world. More, all the studies I read that showed their unsuitability for the workplace were european (and even worse…from french speaking countries) and it’s obvious that Yers are not the same everywhere. I could even tell you about a texbook case : the comparison bewteen a teen that spent his first 10 years in the US and then moved to Europe and his cousin who stayed overseas. Let me tell you they  are much less alike than they were a few years ago.

In my opinion, Generation Y is not uniform, neither is the attitude we should have toward it. Businesses have to learn how to take the most from their specificities while refocusing them when needed. Internships will have to become a true discovery, adaptation, acclimatizatin period. A two ways mentorship between two generations that have a lot to learn the one from the other will be essential. Many people say businesses have lot to lose if they don’t adapt to Yers…let me add that Yers have even more to lose if they don’t adapt to the constraints of the workplace. Saying that…the debate become more balanced.

Anyway, we should be aware of not adoption extreme solutions : denying what they are or adopting a submissive attitude toward the Y monster.

HR 2.0 as an ongoing process

This post is the continuation of the one I wrote on the central role HR have to be given in the change process businesses need to undertake to grow in the current economy.

Most often, identifying a need implies that a project has to be undertaken. A project is made of a number of known and planned actions. Is the need about training, a training program will be undertaken. A need about HR marketing (retaining staff members, improving employer’s brand) ? It will be a communication project. Etc..

HR 2.0 or, not to mix things, adopting social computing tools from the web 2.0 to serve an HR strategy imply a new way of doing things. I don’t say it has to replace all what’s being done now, it has rather to be seen as something complementary.

In the above mentioned post I wrote that HR people will have to learn how to deal with the fact we were mainly talking about things that have an impact n HR and that are not into their hand but in line manager’s. HR having to pilot managers, provide them with a framework but not having to be directly involved in end actions.

Here are a few examples.

[Read more...]