I am busy and probably have ten other things on my plate in addition to reviewing resumes and screening candidates. You have no more than 10 seconds (and in many cases less) to grab my attention. That’s it. So how are you going to grab my attention?
Most resumes today are housed in large resume databases. Most searches of those databases are done by HR generalists and recruiters that while skilled in the art of staffing, are not fully versed in all of the positions that they recruit for. How can they be? That is the dilemma that you face. Your solution is…?
I am busy. At this moment, I only care about what I am looking for. You either have the skills and experience I need or you don’t. As I am reviewing your resume very little else matters to me. Can you help me fill my need?
Sorry, but your marital status, age, weight, high school attended and love of butterflies really doesn’t interest me. In fact, it has me wonder why you would think I cared in the first place.
The look and feel of your resume does matter. With all of the books, articles and general information about writing resumes available, if your resume isn’t well formatted and visually pleasing, consider the red flag raised.
Typos = Careless = Poor Quality = NO THANK YOU.
I rarely read cover letters. I will read the email message that accompanies a resume. If your resume doesn’t pique my interest in the allotted 10 seconds I will NEVER read your cover letter. Couldn’t you address whatever you want to say in the cover letter in the resume itself?
Unless you are in academia the only purpose of your resume is to generate an interview. If your resume is not generating interviews it is not well constructed or you are not targeting the right jobs. Don’t use what doesn’t work.
I would be happy to offer some simple and pragmatic solutions to all of the scenarios and questions posed above. Just ask…
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Reading the Economy
Having now been in the learning and performance improvement business for 25 years I am now experiencing the third major market downturn. Interestingly, each market downturn has followed a similar business cycle:
Full Steam Ahead: All is well with corporations and the economy. Corporate profits abound with ample budgets for investment and expansion and personal income increases. In almost every instance during this phase of the market cycle, the demand for talent is greater than the available talent pool and corporations are fully staffed with full-time employees and outside consultants.
Trouble Brewing: Market uncertainty raises its ugly head as corporate profits begin to lag, rumblings of layoffs and downsizings begin, and corporate budgets are re-evaluated and pared. Normally, outside consultants are the first to be impacted as assignments or projects are either ended or not extended. The number of full-time opportunities begins to decrease and the available pool of talent begins to increase.
Market Crisis: Business takes a marked downturn with consistent stories of significant corporate losses, layoffs, and cut-backs. The general mood in the economy is one of concern and worry as the prevailing economic indicators point to a recession or stagflation. Full-time staff levels are cut and organizations re-evaluate their organizational priorities. Full-time positions are few and far between with a large number of qualified candidates vying for the few positions available. Critical projects requiring additional resources are most likely to be filled with contractors or outsourced to third-party vendors. Salaries for these positions decrease in relation to supply and demand market forces.
Signs of Life: The prevailing conversation in the business world is one of a market rebound and improving business climate. While conditions in the economy are beginning to look better, most corporations are wary of adding to their permanent headcount. The number of full-time positions begins to increase slowly with most new initiatives being staffed with outside consultants or outsourced to third-party vendors.
I find a large percentage of professionals that we encounter are not mindful of the climate in the marketplace until it is too late. Each of the phases listed above require different actions to ensure ongoing income and employment.
This mindfulness is also important for consultants and business owners. As a case in point, during the last significant market downturn, we placed a heavy marketing focus on the pharmaceutical and health care markets. These industries are historically less impacted by market recessions. It proved the correct strategy as our revenues remained steady at a time when most competitors suffered significant decreases in sales and several competitors left the marketplace entirely.
Full Steam Ahead: All is well with corporations and the economy. Corporate profits abound with ample budgets for investment and expansion and personal income increases. In almost every instance during this phase of the market cycle, the demand for talent is greater than the available talent pool and corporations are fully staffed with full-time employees and outside consultants.
Trouble Brewing: Market uncertainty raises its ugly head as corporate profits begin to lag, rumblings of layoffs and downsizings begin, and corporate budgets are re-evaluated and pared. Normally, outside consultants are the first to be impacted as assignments or projects are either ended or not extended. The number of full-time opportunities begins to decrease and the available pool of talent begins to increase.
Market Crisis: Business takes a marked downturn with consistent stories of significant corporate losses, layoffs, and cut-backs. The general mood in the economy is one of concern and worry as the prevailing economic indicators point to a recession or stagflation. Full-time staff levels are cut and organizations re-evaluate their organizational priorities. Full-time positions are few and far between with a large number of qualified candidates vying for the few positions available. Critical projects requiring additional resources are most likely to be filled with contractors or outsourced to third-party vendors. Salaries for these positions decrease in relation to supply and demand market forces.
Signs of Life: The prevailing conversation in the business world is one of a market rebound and improving business climate. While conditions in the economy are beginning to look better, most corporations are wary of adding to their permanent headcount. The number of full-time positions begins to increase slowly with most new initiatives being staffed with outside consultants or outsourced to third-party vendors.
I find a large percentage of professionals that we encounter are not mindful of the climate in the marketplace until it is too late. Each of the phases listed above require different actions to ensure ongoing income and employment.
This mindfulness is also important for consultants and business owners. As a case in point, during the last significant market downturn, we placed a heavy marketing focus on the pharmaceutical and health care markets. These industries are historically less impacted by market recessions. It proved the correct strategy as our revenues remained steady at a time when most competitors suffered significant decreases in sales and several competitors left the marketplace entirely.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
The Iraq War: A Lesson in Poor Performance Management?
In watching General Petraeus’s recent testimony on Capital Hill I was struck once again by how varied the assessments were of the United States’ progress in the Iraq War. Partisan politics was again on display as most Democrats asserted the troop surge a failure while most Republicans viewed the surge as a success. Clearly different standards exist in terms of the conditions of satisfaction for assessing the surge as a failure or success. And so the debate rages on…
What I found most interesting is how the 18 Iraq Benchmarks were not a major topic in the discussion on our progress in Iraq. These 18 Benchmarks, as defined in the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bill (H.R. 2206) and signed into law on May 25, 2007 indicated that the “…United States strategy in Iraq, hereafter, shall be conditioned on the Iraqi government meeting benchmarks, as told to members of Congress by the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”
It would stand to reason that any assessment on success or failure would have to be predicated on a review of the progress in meeting those 18 Benchmarks. But when was the last time you recall hearing about these benchmarks? How many of these benchmarks do you recall?
It would not be a bad idea for representative of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to visit Capitol Hill and the Defense Department. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management definition of Performance Management includes:
What I found most interesting is how the 18 Iraq Benchmarks were not a major topic in the discussion on our progress in Iraq. These 18 Benchmarks, as defined in the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bill (H.R. 2206) and signed into law on May 25, 2007 indicated that the “…United States strategy in Iraq, hereafter, shall be conditioned on the Iraqi government meeting benchmarks, as told to members of Congress by the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”
It would stand to reason that any assessment on success or failure would have to be predicated on a review of the progress in meeting those 18 Benchmarks. But when was the last time you recall hearing about these benchmarks? How many of these benchmarks do you recall?
It would not be a bad idea for representative of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to visit Capitol Hill and the Defense Department. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management definition of Performance Management includes:
- planning work and setting expectations,
- continually monitoring performance,
- developing the capacity to perform,
- periodically rating performance in a summary fashion, and
- rewarding good performance.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Differentiation: Pragmatic or Cold-Hearted Management?
I recently uploaded some books on CD onto my iPod. In listening to Jack Welch’s Winning, he discusses the concept of differentiation where he advocates that organizations segment their people, business lines and products into three groups and that each should be treated differently:
The book reminded me the time I was invited to fly down to my client’s headquarters and give a presentation on KnowledgeStaff’s capabilities to their Learning Board. The board was comprised of the various learning leaders throughout their enterprise. The presentation was to be given during the lunch break of their Annual meeting however I was invited to sit in on the morning session.
After the introductions, the head of the Learning Board asked all members to write down the names of the bottom 15% of their organizations. These were individuals who had been involved in professional development conversations throughout the year but had just not risen above the 15% threshold. The names were compiled and it was clear that these employees would soon be seeking new employment.
I was struck by the businesslike tone of the meeting to this point which bordered on ruthlessness.
Each member of the Board was then asked to write down the names of the top 10% of their organizations. The names were gathered and the Board then reviewed all of the current openings throughout the enterprise to see if any of these individuals merited a promotion to one of these positions. In several cases names were matched with the open positions and conversations were scheduled with the employee.
The head of the Learning Board then asked each member to write down the name of any member of their organizations that the company could not afford to lose. Several names were listed and within a matter of about 30 minutes, four new positions were created.
Finally, a discussion began on the succession planning of members of the Board. The discussion included a conversation on the career advancement of several members and who within the organization could possibly fill their shoes. That portion of the meeting concluded and I began my song and dance during lunch which thankfully went very well.
On my flight home I played back the meeting over and over. It was very clear to me that this organization was not ruthless but instead firmly committed to excellence.
I highly recommend Winning. Jack Welch does a very good job of introducing the importance of implementing a solid performance management program where goals and expectation are clearly defined and where ongoing conversations are had to continually evaluate individual and organizational performance.
What do you think? Is differentiation pragmatic or cold-hearted management?
- Top 20%: should be highly praised and showered with rewards for their fine accomplishments
- Middle 70%: are incredibly valuable to the organization and should be trained, kept engaged and motivated. The focus should be on moving potential high performers into the Top 20%
- Bottom 10%: should be removed from the organization
The book reminded me the time I was invited to fly down to my client’s headquarters and give a presentation on KnowledgeStaff’s capabilities to their Learning Board. The board was comprised of the various learning leaders throughout their enterprise. The presentation was to be given during the lunch break of their Annual meeting however I was invited to sit in on the morning session.
After the introductions, the head of the Learning Board asked all members to write down the names of the bottom 15% of their organizations. These were individuals who had been involved in professional development conversations throughout the year but had just not risen above the 15% threshold. The names were compiled and it was clear that these employees would soon be seeking new employment.
I was struck by the businesslike tone of the meeting to this point which bordered on ruthlessness.
Each member of the Board was then asked to write down the names of the top 10% of their organizations. The names were gathered and the Board then reviewed all of the current openings throughout the enterprise to see if any of these individuals merited a promotion to one of these positions. In several cases names were matched with the open positions and conversations were scheduled with the employee.
The head of the Learning Board then asked each member to write down the name of any member of their organizations that the company could not afford to lose. Several names were listed and within a matter of about 30 minutes, four new positions were created.
Finally, a discussion began on the succession planning of members of the Board. The discussion included a conversation on the career advancement of several members and who within the organization could possibly fill their shoes. That portion of the meeting concluded and I began my song and dance during lunch which thankfully went very well.
On my flight home I played back the meeting over and over. It was very clear to me that this organization was not ruthless but instead firmly committed to excellence.
I highly recommend Winning. Jack Welch does a very good job of introducing the importance of implementing a solid performance management program where goals and expectation are clearly defined and where ongoing conversations are had to continually evaluate individual and organizational performance.
What do you think? Is differentiation pragmatic or cold-hearted management?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
If the RECESSION hits…
Over the past 5 years much has been written about the movement to try and quantify the value that Learning and Development provides to the organization. The ROI and Measurement movement has produced seminars, books, new methodologies, and new career opportunities.
As the evidence of recession continues to build some late adopters are scrambling to put some facts and figures in front of the decision makers that may, at this very moment, be reviewing organization charts to determine where the cuts, if necessary, will be made. These late adopters are probably too late.
The questions I pose are:
Will the efforts of the past several years to validate the value of Learning and Development pay off?
Will Learning and Development organizations, traditionally viewed as an expense line item, suddenly be viewed as profit producers?
Will the cutbacks that have occurred in rough economic time within Learning and Development be as severe or will senior management have a new regard?
These questions remain unanswered however it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
As the evidence of recession continues to build some late adopters are scrambling to put some facts and figures in front of the decision makers that may, at this very moment, be reviewing organization charts to determine where the cuts, if necessary, will be made. These late adopters are probably too late.
The questions I pose are:
Will the efforts of the past several years to validate the value of Learning and Development pay off?
Will Learning and Development organizations, traditionally viewed as an expense line item, suddenly be viewed as profit producers?
Will the cutbacks that have occurred in rough economic time within Learning and Development be as severe or will senior management have a new regard?
These questions remain unanswered however it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
