Fistful of Talent

Avoid Hiring a HR Dud....

Whether you are hiring for a HR Manager/Director position or interviewing to become one, you want the same thing:

-If you are hiring - you don't want to hire a dud.

-If you are interviewing - you don't want to be perceived as a dud.

See the synergy?  Nobody wants to be the dud.  Funny how things seem to work out...

To that end, check out my list of the best behavioral questions to separate the players from the pretenders in the HR Manager/Director space.

Take a look and let me know what you think.  If you flame, just remember - I'm limited to around 1,000 words in the column, so I gotta make choices... You can always tell me what your top 5 Behavioral questions would be...

Candidates: If You Want to Make a Hit, You've Got to Make it Quick...

You know the drill.  When you hire for a living, you verify whether the person has the knowledge, skills and abilities to do the job the way you need it done, then you go by your instincts.  Do you want to work with the person?  Are they going to drive you crazy?  Liking the person and feeling the flow/connecting matters more than the science of interviewing would indicate.

One of the quickest ways to blow it in the interview and make hiring managers turn away from you is to talk ON AND ON.  As it turns out, the higher your career level, the more likely you are to give a 5 minute answer to a simple question.  After all, you've been in charge in the past, and people have been paid to listen to you, not the other way around.

Unfortunately, if you're in the job market right now, that's probably working against you.  More on reprogramming executives to network and interview from the New York Times:

“Mark grew up in an age when being understated about yourself was valued,” said Mr. Redmond, a partner who has been at New Directions since its founding 23 years ago. “At 53, he has to learn to tell his story and, like a marching band, toot his own horn.”

“Like a lot of senior executives, Mark was used to going on and on,” Mr. Redmond said. “He used to give speeches to thousands of people. When there was quiet, he was the one filling in the air.”

They practiced answering questions in 45 seconds.

“Jeff told me I could just talk 40 percent of the time,” Mr. Gorham said. Mr. Redmond had him write a one-page script. “We rehearsed to get it shorter,” Mr. Redmond said.

“Before calling,” Mr. Gorham said, “I must have rehearsed five more times at my office at home.”

Less is more in interviewing.  If you're a candidate, make sure you aren't rambling.  In and out in under 80 seconds for each question.  If you're working with a good interviewer, you'll get a follow-up question.  The best interviews sound like conversations, and that is a byproduct of both the interviewer and the candidate knowing what they're doing.

Which brings me to another interesting point to end this post.  Know any interviewers who talk 80% of the time?  I do.  Don't be one of them. 

This Candidate Wanted to Play the Game "Aggravation". Let's Roll 'em!

You all know the game. It's Aggravation. All players start out with 4 color coded marbles and the first player to get all four marbles to the finish line wins. If another player jumps over your marble - or if you make a stupid move - guess what? You have to start all over again - even if you are merely a couple of hops to the finish line. Seems fair right? You bet it is! 

In search, we have an opportunity to source candidates, and in most cases we present three qualified candidates to a client company. If, for whatever reason, the client elects to pass on all three candidates - guess what? We get to start over - just like the game Aggravation. It's OK if you understand the rules of the game - and if you have done your job, you should have other candidates in play to eliminate the need to completely start over. Seems logical - right ?

While Aggravation may not be the perfect analogy, let's use it as a backdrop for this doozie story ...please bear with me (thanks).

Recently, I interviewed a very qualified (passive) C-level executive that seemed to be quite interested in making a career move. My staff screened the candidate and he seemed to have all of the requisite experience for this role. Solid on paper, good tenure and overall a very impressive individual. Then it was my turn to speak to him. On the first call, I did a short phone screen and decided to move to the next round the following week with this candidate. All good - so far. The next interview started out fine, we had a nice exchange and then I let him know I had a few questions about his background, education and experience. DEAD silence. Once I started my interview, he totally clammed up. Then he asked a brilliant question: "Is this an interview"? WHAT? He was taking the fifth on nearly every question. OK - I started (silently) asking myself - does this guy need a lawyer to speak to me?  Short sound bites were really all I got from him. Nothing more.

OK ....I thought, let me take a few deep breaths and re-group.  

I once again explained our process to him (3rd time's a charm - right?). It's an in-depth interview followed by a video interview, candidate questionnaire, personality profile, phone interview with my client and if all goes well......an in-person interview. The BIG Dance. He abruptly informed me that he was no longer interested in the full process and was opting out as a candidate. OK - weird, strange, unusual - but OK. I (quickly) got over it and was (perfectly) fine with his decision. I thanked him for his time and we parted ways. I wish that had been the end of the story. But (like Billy Mays says) wait - there's more. 

Mr Passive (totally unprofessionally) decided this was a great opportunity and clearly a job he wanted to pursue. You know where this one is heading. Yep - he wanted to go straight to the BIG Dance alone. He contacted the hiring manager behind my back and sent a warm (loving) e-mail with his resume stating 'I hear you may be looking for a new (fill in the blank) and I just wanted to reach out and introduce myself and send you a copy of my resume". Bad move. The hiring manager (immediately) forwarded the e-mail to me (LOVE IT) and asked me to check out the candidate to see if he would be a fit for this position. All of a sudden, this became a very interesting situation.  

Back to Aggravation for a moment? I had the honor and privilege of reconnecting with this genius to let him know there had been a rules violation and it was time for him to go back to the starting line. Aggravation! I don't make the rules - I do try to make the process consistent and fair for all candidates. So - when you pull something like that, it's time to pick up all the marbles and go back to square one (the starting line). START OVER. That's Aggravation.

No actually it's Game Over.   

Editor's Note - Tim Tolan is a partner at Sanford Rose Associates and specializes in Executive Search in Healthcare IT.  He's a closer, and you really don't want to call him unless you're ready to bring out the bazooka to bag some big game...          

KICK THE GRADUATE - Help a Kid Improve This Resume/Career Plan...

New feature today called "Kick the Graduate", where you (the reader and FOT team member) get to judge the career goals and positioning of a new graduate as they aspire to land a choice job in the Talent game right out of undergrad or graduate school.  First up is Nathan Mallory, who penned the following note to me over at the Capitalist:

"I am not writing to you to apply for a job, nor in the hope that you might be able to find one for me.  I am a 28 year old recent JD/MBA graduate searching for a job to begin my career, and in a moment of frustration at my lack of success I did a Google search and found your "HR Capitalist" blog.  My reason for writing this email is seeking any advice you could offer regarding my lack of success.  You seem to be knowledgeable, friendly and sympathetic to some of the problems facing job seekers, so it is my hope you can spare me a few minutes, or at the least receive a few moments in your day not dealing with your own desperate job candidates.

I am pursuing a career in the video games industry, armed with several decades of school, two graduate and two undergraduate degrees.  I have applied to positions at fifteen or so companies, for jobs ranging from Associate Producer to Legal Assistant, and not a single one has sent even a follow-up email or telephone call.  The result is that after much searching and a few moments of desperation, I am right back where I started, not knowing whether my resume is bad, my cover letter is unprofessional, or whether I am unqualified due to lack of experience or over-education.  (As a side note, it amazes me to think that a company could simultaneously disqualify you for having too much education but not enough experience.  It's very frustrating for a new grad.)

I've attached copies of a resume and cover letter typical of the kind I have sent out.  I would be extremely grateful if you could take a look at them with your HR expertise, and let me know if I am doing anything horribly wrong.  That said, I'm not ignorant of the recurring theme from your blog that you do not appreciate anyone wasting HR's time, so I will not be upset if this request falls squarely into that category."

Ordinarily, I don't do advice in response to reader mails on this blog or the Capitalist.  However, when a JD/MBA presents himself for help into an industry like the video games industry, I can't resist offering him up (with his permission) and allowing you to tell him the following:

--How he can modify his resume to maximize his chances of landing any job, including one in the video game industry,

--What he needs to have available in addition to the resume to maximize his chances of landing an entry-level spot in the video game industry,

--What you would tell him about the realism of his dream to land a spot in the video game industry, and any alternative career objective at this stage in his career that you would recommend, plus

--Anything else you got....

Make sense?  Pop up Nathan's resume by clicking here, and help the graduate out by hitting him up with your notes in the comments section of this post. 

Kick the graduate/Help the graduate.  Same thing.  Shoot straight and give him the tough love if he needs it... I've got Jason Pankow, who gets paid for talking to enthusiastic kids for XBOX, warming up in the bullpen to come in once everyone else throws their best pitch...

Resume Writers - One Business That's Up in a Bad Economy, And You Thought Wall Street Was Unregulated...

My buddy Peggy Andrews over at The Career Encouragement Blog dropped me a note late last week wondering how I felt about resume shops that charge one or two thousand large to rework someone's resume.  Great question. My response is pretty consistent with how I feel - I can't claim to be a resume expert, but I see a lot of resumes, and I'm not sure you have to pay 1-2K for executive level advice.

Does anyone else get that slightly creepy feeling when you look at the sites of some of the folks who claim to be experts at creating resumes for candidates?  I know there are some good ones out there, but every time I go to a cut and paste, lame web site and see someone claiming to be an expert, I get that sinking feeling in my stomach, for some of the folks who are probably grabbing at the services.

Apparently, my instincts are correct.  From the Wall Street Journal Careers Section:

"Hoping to find an Internet marketing spot fast, Christopher Cicero hired a professional résumé writer last winter. He paid her about $500 and completed her 20-page worksheet. She promised to polish his résumé soon.  The revamped document didn't arrive for nearly four months, however. And Mr. Cicero disliked the result. He believes the résumé failed to describe his accomplishments because the writer never interviewed him. "She didn't know who I was or what I was looking for," the Westchester, N.Y., resident complains. So he switched writers.

Anxious applicants increasingly use professionals to assemble impressive-looking résumés, forking over as much as $2,000. TheLadders.com expects its 100 writers will prepare more than 20,000 résumés this year -- quadruple the number in 2006, the year its service began, reports Marc Cenedella, president of the Web site for high-paid candidates.

To say the quality varies widely is an understatement," says Louise Kursmark, a veteran résumé writer in Reading, Mass., and co-founder of a writer-training academy.

Careful shopping will help you dodge rip-offs by résumé writers. It's wise to review their work, making sure samples look customized, and not like cookie-cutter templates. Then, contact satisfied customers and verify claims of professional prowess. Five U.S. associations certify résumé writers, but "some are more rigorous than others," notes Ms. Kursmark in her 2008 directory of writers.

She earned the "master résumé writer" title from Career Management Alliance, for instance, by showing she had five years of paid résumé-writing experience, submitting a diverse portfolio of résumés and completing an exam. Every two years, she must be re-certified, which includes submitting a two-page essay and five résumé client presentations.

OK.  I know there are some good ones out there, and I guess my choice would be that they have some type of experience in the industry (recruiter, HR pro, power manager who has hired), rather than the only credential being a masters in English.

Another tipping point for me regarding identifying resume writers who can't help you?  Ask them for pro bono advice in terms of a career marketing strategy. If they tell you that they only do resumes, run like hell.  They either don't care or don't have the experience to help you customize the resume in a meaningful way.

God help the folks who do an internet search and secure these services randomly.  I need to carve out some time to pay it forward and volunteer somewhere based on the economy.

My buddy Peggy Andrews over at The Career Encouragement Blog dropped me a note late last week wondering how I felt about resume shops that charge one or two thousand large to rework someone's resume.  Great question. My response is pretty consistent with how I feel - I can't claim to be a resume expert, but I see a lot of resumes, and I'm not sure you have to pay 1-2K for executive level advice.

Does anyone else get that slightly creepy feeling when you look at the sites of some of the folks who claim to be experts at creating resumes for candidates?  I know there are some good ones out there, but every time I go to a cut and paste, lame web site and see someone claiming to be an expert, I get that sinking feeling in my stomach, for some of the folks who are probably grabbing at the services.

Apparently, my instincts are correct.  From the Wall Street Journal Careers Section:

"Hoping to find an Internet marketing spot fast, Christopher Cicero hired a professional résumé writer last winter. He paid her about $500 and completed her 20-page worksheet. She promised to polish his résumé soon.  The revamped document didn't arrive for nearly four months, however. And Mr. Cicero disliked the result. He believes the résumé failed to describe his accomplishments because the writer never interviewed him. "She didn't know who I was or what I was looking for," the Westchester, N.Y., resident complains. So he switched writers.

Anxious applicants increasingly use professionals to assemble impressive-looking résumés, forking over as much as $2,000. TheLadders.com expects its 100 writers will prepare more than 20,000 résumés this year -- quadruple the number in 2006, the year its service began, reports Marc Cenedella, president of the Web site for high-paid candidates.

To say the quality varies widely is an understatement," says Louise Kursmark, a veteran résumé writer in Reading, Mass., and co-founder of a writer-training academy.

Careful shopping will help you dodge rip-offs by résumé writers. It's wise to review their work, making sure samples look customized, and not like cookie-cutter templates. Then, contact satisfied customers and verify claims of professional prowess. Five U.S. associations certify résumé writers, but "some are more rigorous than others," notes Ms. Kursmark in her 2008 directory of writers.

She earned the "master résumé writer" title from Career Management Alliance, for instance, by showing she had five years of paid résumé-writing experience, submitting a diverse portfolio of résumés and completing an exam. Every two years, she must be re-certified, which includes submitting a two-page essay and five résumé client presentations.

OK.  I know there are some good ones out there, and I guess my choice would be that they have some type of experience in the industry (recruiter, HR pro, power manager who has hired), rather than the only credential being a masters in English.

Another tipping point for me regarding identifying resume writers who can't help you?  Ask them for pro bono advice in terms of a career marketing strategy. If they tell you that they only do resumes, run like hell.  They either don't care or don't have the experience to help you customize the resume in a meaningful way.

God help the folks who do an internet search and secure these services randomly.  I need to carve out some time to pay it forward and volunteer somewhere based on the economy.

The Plusses and Minuses of Rehires...

I am going to take a page out of the Kris Dunn handbook, today. 

I am a big Seattle Mariners fan.  Like many people in Seattle, I am a transplant to the city. I jumped on the Mariners bandwagon in 2001, the year they picked up Ichiro and won 116 games. 

In 2000, the Mariners traded their "home town hero" Ken Griffey, Jr.  Coming late to the game, I have a slightly different opinion of whether or not the Ms should fork over millions of dollars for an aging outfielder who so unceremoniously complained about everything until the team traded him.

All the recent rumors of a 2009 Griffey acquisition have me thinking about rehires.  It's not uncommon to hire someone back into your company.  It's easy to see the advantages to rehiring someone.  They know the culture, they know the tools, and they know the key players.  But, we should always exercise some caution.  These people left for a reason.  That reason can be one of a million things.  But, it's important to make sure that the reason is either now irrelevant or that it's not a concern to the candidate, anymore.

We should ask potential rehires, "Why did you leave?"

If they respond with, "Well...I was concerned that the new ballpark was too big and I couldn't hit home runs," this may be a flag if your company works out of the same ballpark.  We don't want to bring a person back if they are still unhappy with their work environment.  If they left due to a poor manager, is that person still in the chain of command?  If they left due to limited upward mobility, what does their career path look like, now? 

We should ask, "Why are you leaving your current company?"

If they respond with, "The company doesn't want me anymore because I cost too much money for what I contribute," you should be concerned if he is trying to negotiate an $8 million dollar offer from you.  At many companies, there is often a perception of "I have to leave to get a good raise."  While pay is a legitimate reason to want to change companies, how long will it be before you are potentially, once again, not paying the person enough to keep them?  5 years?  1 year?    

Finally, we should ask, "Why do you want to come back?  What is different now from 9 years ago?"

If their response is, "The fan base from my last companies have turned against me, so I want to return to the comfort of the blindly loyal fan base I have here," then you can hold that in your pocket when they tell you they want to make $5 million more than you want to pay them. 

Rehiring Griffey could be huge!  With him, we could get a rehire like Steve Jobs.  Someone with a huge name, who has done a lot for the franchise, and who will bring in lots of money.  Or, as a friend told me, you could get an ex-girlfriend.  It's easy to remember the good times. 

But, soon after, you're reminded of why it didn't work.  

Editor's Note - Jason Pankow is a Senior Recruiter for Microsoft’s Xbox LIVE and Xbox Software groups.  Jason supports the Interactive Entertainment Business at Microsoft, bringing in technical, as well as creative, talent to Redmond.  Look him up on Xbox Live, where he'll ring you up for a triple-double as Steve Nash on NBA 2K8 or kick it old-school via a 7-digit score on Galaga...   

Stalker-Like Candidate Behavior? The Hand-Delivered Thank You Note...

Topic - Thank You Notes....

Question #1 - Are they necessary any more?

Question #2 - Do you penalize someone for sending an email thank you over a handwritten thank you note?  Which do you think your hiring managers prefer?

Question #3 - How would you feel about someone showing up on your doorstep a day or two after the interview to deliver a hand-written thank you note?

From Dennis Smith at The Fordyce Letter:

"Honestly, it’s intriguing. And really, I’m just curious…since when did “the experts” stop telling candidates to send thank you notes? Sure, I say that jokingly, because, even though I’ve only been at this for 12 years, it’s pretty much been like that since I joined the recruiting ranks. The Career Coaches instruct the job-seekers to follow-up with a well-written thank-you card, and, once-in-a-blue-moon somebody will walk the road less traveled and do something that blows me away.

In this case, the candidate followed up with an email within an hour of the interview, saying that she’d be delivering an appropriate thank-you. Sure enough, the next day she stops in the office with the likes of a thank-you card that, honestly, is likely the most well-written and appropriate card I’ve ever received.

Nicely done."

Here's my take - I agree with everything Dennis says in the clip above, but I'm not sure how the rest of the world feels.   First up, it takes a special candidate to walk in and deliver a handwritten thank you note.  The main thing a candidate needs to pull that off?  The verbal skills to understand what to say when delivering the note.  If a candidate has the verbal/presentation skills to pull it off, then it's a golden opportunity.  Most don't, and that's why they don't try it.

Here's my big question - what if the manager receiving the note doesn't have the presentation/verbal skills to handle the interaction?  Is that the point where it becomes a negative for that candidate, with the socially uncomfortable manager getting the stalker vibe from the interaction where none exists?

Thoughts?  Luckily, I believe the candidate with the skills to do this would not deliver a handwritten note unless they felt a strong connection to the manager with whom they interviewed.  If the manager didn't connect (because they didn't have the connection skills), then this golden candidate probably never delivers that note, even though they have the chops and ability to pull it off.

Too bad....

Video Resumes: OK Only If You're Ready To Push Your Chips "All In"

To Video Resume or not to Video Resume. That is the question. (At least today it is, right?)

With today’s growing convergence of social media and citizen journalism, one might suggest that the  video resume is a natural progression of sorts. Perhaps it is, but the purpose of this post isn’t to speculate on whether the video resume will ever really take off among the pragmatic market or not. It’s also not about the usual suspects we see so often surface in these discussions: legality, potentiality for discrimination, etc. Today,let’s turn the cube slightly and consider things from a market psychology perspective.

Ultimately, the insatiable appetite for ‘more and more technology’ in the HR and Talent Acquisition world has created a scenario where it’s difficult for a candidate to warrant any form of consideration for an open role. There is perhaps no other sector in the business world that has 'bought in' (hook, line, and sinker) that solutions can only be found through new technologies.

For example, most ATS’ and Sourcing Tools that scrub the major job boards are keyword-driven. If the candidate’s resume isn’t ATS or Sourcing Tool “optimized”, it winds up being sucked into the black-hole, never to be seen by an actual pair of human eyes. As Charles Darwin might say, applying through a job board or career site today is more about “Survival of the Keyword-ist”, as opposed to “Fittest”’ . . . which is quite ironic given how much conversation centers around the nebulous notion of ‘fit’ in the first place. It’s only logical that some candidate populations not be complacent in trolling job boards as their only method to identify new opportunities and market themselves.

However, if there is anything we learned from Aleksey Vayner “Impossible is Nothing” debacle, it’s that a pompous, self-promoting infomercial can be much more damaging than a terribly bland, paper-resume. Vayner’s video resume became so virally circulated and ridiculed on the Internet that the very notion of the video resume still sports a black eye to this day, two years later. Frankly, this isn’t fair . . . but as we all know, perception is reality when it comes to market dynamics.

Personally, my marketing side absolutely loves the allure of candidate differentiation – what better way to separate from the ‘pack’ (or moreover, pile) than to create a resume that actually stimulates more senses through audio and motion video than the usually vanilla 12-stock paper, right? However, my purely business side quickly counterbalances. Let’s face it: Video resumes are the real value proposition of ‘Career Consulting’ firms that charge candidates to ‘assist’ with their job search. So even when produced flawlessly, the video resume itself is associated with active job seekers who are not necessarily marketable enough to engage the ‘no-cost’ services of an Executive Recruiter. These savvy ‘Career Consulting’ or ‘Career Advancement’ firms employ the strategy of contacting everyone that places a resume on the large job boards – it’s a numbers game because there will always be candidates who are willing to pay for such ‘cutting-edge’ services without realizing the true perceptions and stigmas associated. As in other cases, information asymmetry benefits the seller instead of the buyer.  And yes,while there are many up-and-coming solutions that empower the candidate to personally create their own video resume, the same negative stigma and perception still exists.

Furthermore, consider yourself a simple question: Assuming you’re a rational-minded, strong producer who is currently gainfully employed, would you feel comfortable forwarding a video resume in the hopes you might ascertain an interview? Probably not. Would you allow someone other than yourself to forward on this video resume to people who may be several degrees away from the actual hiring manager? Probably not. Would you worry that you might wind up on YouTube, thereby potentially findable by your current employer (or who knows who else)? Probably yes. Unless a candidate is utterly decisive in the fact that they’re leaving their current position, they would be well-served to deeply consider the risk of going “All-in”, because that’s essentially what they’re doing once they circulate a video resume. Maybe they win a huge pot, but maybe they’re busted and go home broke - Risk aversion must be considered.

Now, if a candidate is to that point that they’re willing to push all their chips in, there are some "worst practices" we can glean by standing on the shoulders of Video Resume Giants that have come before us. With special thanks to Vayner and “IvyGate”, here is a list of 8 things NOT to include in the video resume:

A. Don't banter about your philosophies of what defines "success".
B. Don't include clips of yourself lifting weights in short shorts.
C. Don't show clips of yourself doing anything that might resemble X-Games stunts.
D. Don't say anything along the lines of "Ignore the Losers".  (Did I really have to mention this one?)
E. Don't include clips of yourself doing any form of dance moves (Whether ballroom or hip-hop, it's the wrong place).
F. Don't show clips of yourself executing any Martial Arts maneuvers, to include breaking bricks.
G. Don't put anything resembling the following after your name: "CEO and Professional Athlete".
H. Don't proclaim yourself as "A model of personal development and inspiration to those around you".

In the end, it’s important that candidates know what they’re getting into, that they understand the risk-reward equation, and that they keep it professional.  But hasn’t that always been the case?  As they say, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”

Tom Brady - Posterchild For Why Video Resumes Are A Bad Idea...

If you are thinking about doing a video resume as a candidate, stop.  You're not George Clooney or Jennifer Anniston.

If you are thinking about using video resumes as a hiring manager, stop.  You'll limit yourself by seeing what the talent looks like WAAAAAY too early in the process.

As this Workforce Recrutiing article says, video resumes - no, video interviews - maybe...

When you are early on in the recruiting process, it's a stack of resumes.  The possibilities are endless, and you'll carve your 100 resumes down to 15 viable candidates.  You'll get excited about the talent as you pick up the phone to have initial phone screens with the candidates.  Some you'll click with, others you won't.

That's OK.

You'll bring the ones with whom you click in for interviews.  As you go out to your lobby to greet them, at least half will suprise you by not looking like whatever you had in mind.  Here's the cool part - the fact that you have already dug into their resume and heard their communications skills/energy over the phone will allow you to give them a chance, even if they don't look the part.  That's how folks who aren't models get hired and thrive in organizations.

If you started with the video resume, those folks never make it in the door.

Case in point, the picture below of NFL megastar Tom Brady before he was drafted.  If you were recruiting for a NFL star and were presented with this snapshot, would Brady have been called in for a live interview?

I thought not. 

All I'm saying is give every candidate a chance - just say no to video resumes and photographs......

If you are thinking about doing a video resume as a candidate, stop.  You're not George Clooney or Jennifer Anniston.

If you are thinking about using video resumes as a hiring manager, stop.  You'll limit yourself by seeing what the talent looks like WAAAAAY too early in the process.

As this Workforce Recrutiing article says, video resumes - no, video interviews - maybe...

When you are early on in the recruiting process, it's a stack of resumes.  The possibilities are endless, and you'll carve your 100 resumes down to 15 viable candidates.  You'll get excited about the talent as you pick up the phone to have initial phone screens with the candidates.  Some you'll click with, others you won't.

That's OK.

You'll bring the ones with whom you click in for interviews.  As you go out to your lobby to greet them, at least half will suprise you by not looking like whatever you had in mind.  Here's the cool part - the fact that you have already dug into their resume and heard their communications skills/energy over the phone will allow you to give them a chance, even if they don't look the part.  That's how folks who aren't models get hired and thrive in organizations.

If you started with the video resume, those folks never make it in the door.

Case in point, the picture below of NFL megastar Tom Brady before he was drafted.  If you were recruiting for a NFL star and were presented with this snapshot, would Brady have been called in for a live interview?

I thought not. 

All I'm saying is give every candidate a chance - just say no to video resumes and photographs......

If you are thinking about doing a video resume as a candidate, stop.  You're not George Clooney or Jennifer Anniston.

If you are thinking about using video resumes as a hiring manager, stop.  You'll limit yourself by seeing what the talent looks like WAAAAAY too early in the process.

As this Workforce Recrutiing article says, video resumes - no, video interviews - maybe...

When you are early on in the recruiting process, it's a stack of resumes.  The possibilities are endless, and you'll carve your 100 resumes down to 15 viable candidates.  You'll get excited about the talent as you pick up the phone to have initial phone screens with the candidates.  Some you'll click with, others you won't.

That's OK.

You'll bring the ones with whom you click in for interviews.  As you go out to your lobby to greet them, at least half will suprise you by not looking like whatever you had in mind.  Here's the cool part - the fact that you have already dug into their resume and heard their communications skills/energy over the phone will allow you to give them a chance, even if they don't look the part.  That's how folks who aren't models get hired and thrive in organizations.

If you started with the video resume, those folks never make it in the door.

Case in point, the picture below of NFL megastar Tom Brady before he was drafted.  If you were recruiting for a NFL star and were presented with this snapshot, would Brady have been called in for a live interview?

I thought not. 

All I'm saying is give every candidate a chance - just say no to video resumes and photographs......

"I Need More Time" says the Candidate...

I'll set the stage: The candidate you've presented is "just perfect". You know it, your client knows it and (in some cases) unfortunately, so does your Superstar. We often test the candidate's motivation in a search and ask them to participate in a variety of activities to ensure we are investing time (and more importantly, our client's time) in someone who is genuinely interested in taking things to the next level. 

Clearly, there are signs you should watch for. You need to make sure you are constantly testing the candidate's motivation to validate everything is on track (or not). It's our job to provide the checks and balances in the search process to make sure we are not wasting everyone's time. After all, if there is no commitment from the candidate to forge ahead, it doesn't make sense to stay engaged - right?

Well... you go through your normal screening, interviewing and spend face-to-face time with a candidate (you know in your gut) that he/she has all of the "right stuff". It's time to move to the next phase, and they apply the brakes (I don't mean gently) and everyone feels it. Follow-up interviews get postponed, the reference process gets delayed... and on and on and on... you get the point!

YIKES. 

What gives? You know you went through the position profile in detail with the candidate, and all parties agree there is clearly more than just a fit. The profile meets and exceeds the need on both sides of the table - it's all good. Right? You test the chemistry and feel the love between the candidate and the client. They both feel the same way. It's a perfect match!

Here's the challenge folks... We (you and me) are not all wired the same way. Like it or not, that's the way it is:-(

Some of us are "ready-shoot-aim"  types, while others are much more deliberate and analytical in any major life decision they make and guess what? The last time I checked, changing jobs still ranked as one of the most stressful life events - in the top 5! Some people just require more time. You may not like it, and your client may be scratching his/her head and wondering what gives? This is where you need to understand the situation for what it is and take some time to stand back and let your candidate conduct the proper amount of diligence that they deem necessary in order to get to YES.

Pushing (too much) for the benefit of your client or your wallet can start a downward spiral in your search that may be difficult to overcome. Guide, offer advice, listen, answer questions and by all means be there for your candidate and take a real honest approach to making sure they are ready to pull the trigger. The process of closing the candidate needs to be delicate and natural and NOT just because you (or your client for that matter) have some self-imposed time-line (did I mention a recruiter's commission - didn't think so) you feel you have to meet. 

Remember...we are not all wired the same way. That will never change. Stop for a minute the next time you feel candidate resistance in your search process. He/she may be trying to tell you something or you may uncover an objection that can easily be overcome.

Sometimes you just need a little more time to bring your search to a successful conclusion.

Editor's Note - Tim Tolan is a partner at Sanford Rose Associates and specializes in Executive Search in Healthcare IT.  He's a closer, and you really don't want to call him unless you're ready to bring out the bazooka to bag some big game...