As a 3^rd party recruiter I’m accustomed to sometimes having to push the process forward from time to time, but typically once a company has actually made an offer HR is all on board with the process and moving full speed ahead as to satisfy their customer (the hiring official) and their future employee.   

Unfortunately what we just went through was far from ideal.  Last month as we were closing two placements we seemed to have HR actually working against us.  I know they weren’t, but the candidates and managers had agreed on start dates and drug tests, background checks, temporary living arrangements, TN visa’s and everything else needed to get done so that candidates could resign and give their two weeks notice.  Unfortunately we had people who went AWAL for days during the process (when they were at the office), couldn’t get routine information to the candidate (a job description for the complete the Visa application) and even when they knew candidates were waiting on information proceeded to either not provide the information to them at all or sent it along the slowest path possible.  So I ask where is the sense of urgency to get things done NOW?

I’ll chalk this experience up to the ending of a bad year and the holiday season crunch, and I’m hopeful that this is strictly an anomaly and not a trend with HR’s unwillingness or ability to work with outside agencies growing worse.

In your current position you’re constantly making sure your boss, peers and clients/customers are pleased with your work, attitude and effort.  So aren’t you really interviewing everyday by default?  I certainly believe so, in fact I think if more people looked at their job in this light they may put in just a little more effort, be just a bit more attentive to the needs of their boss/peers/clients and maybe (just maybe) have that extra effort allow them to be just that more effective in the current job.

As the Q& A session was about to come to an end Krugman answered a question about the pros and con’s of a single global currency.  Now I won’t bore you with all the details, but in discussing the con’s he equated Spain with Florida (as they both had their real estate bubble’s burst) and that Spain will have many years of deflation due in part to a single EU currency, their inability to devalue their currency and other social, cultural and language barriers preventing them from moving to other EU countries while Floridians can simply pick up and move to areas of the US with more job opportunities and growth.

So if you find yourself unemployed (or underemployed) do what’s good for you and your country and move.

Since cloning humans is still science fiction I’d love to tell to run away from this job order, but we know you can’t….because they’re a client.  So do yourself a favor and reaffirm the realities of the market place with the client, remind them that while you’ll be striving for that “perfect” fit that no two people are alike, and that they need to be realistic about candidates and compare them against the job description and not your prior placement when determining their viability.  In short if you can get your hiring official to look at your candidates realistically, then you can make this placement.

Sure you’re thinking that why wouldn’t a company bring back a former employee if they were still available? In reality there are many reasons…they were the weak link on the team, the skills needed now no longer match those of the departed and finally more often than not because they got an employment divorce.  As we all know divorce can be emotional and messy and most candidates and companies don’t know how (much less want) to cross the divide created and to do what’s necessary to get back together. 

So why does this manager wish to do so?  Because even though the employee had been an employee with the company for his entire career (26 years) he didn’t get mad about them letting him go.  In fact, he told his boss that he completely understood and that if he was the one making the decision that he’d do the same thing.  He then went on to compliment his boss’ work upon his departure to both his boss and the VP above that. 

Now I’m sure most people wouldn’t go quite this far and handle their own layoff with the grace of this individual, but it doesn’t mean we all shouldn’t handle the situation better.  Especially since you never know when your company might come calling again. 

However Interview etiquette is the ability to not come off like an A. Jerk B. idiot C. egomaniac D. all of the above.

Needless to say in all my 22 years in this business I’ve had (like most of you) some strange interview situations, but I don’t think any candidate that I’ve prepped for an interview has managed to stumble over as many typically easy interview obstacles as the one last week. In one 3 hour session my candidate managed to get caught snacking on a pop-tart in the middle of the interview, have his cell phone ring (on three separate occasions) and not show up in the appropriate interview attire.

So while the good news is that his skills outshone his behavior and he’s still under consideration questions about his personality and just what he’d be like as a teammate remain and in the end they may prove pivotal in their decision to hire him or not.

So for the record: No cell phone during the interview, no food or drink (unless they offer it to you), mind your manners, dress the part (business attire for professionals), bring a portfolio to take notes, show up early and send a thank you note to the hiring official (emails ok for speed).

The feedback process ideally provides:

· All parties with a greater depth of understanding of the interest and sincerity of all those involved and their desire to move forward.

· Allows all parties to understand areas of concern or that still need to be addressed during the remainder of the interview process prior to any offer.

· Provides everyone with the knowledge of the appropriate path forward even if it’s no longer moving forward at all.

The final result of feedback and the real payoff for everyone is that when positive feedback is given and received it makes all parties more interested (yes just like in dating), and therefore the best candidates and companies willingly provide in depth feedback because it’s in their own best interest and not just that of the recruiters.

So the good news is that even while they are gainfully employed these passively active candidates are willing to engage a recruiter in a conversation to better ascertain if this could be a better option for their career. The bad news, especially for those recruiters & companies still relying on job boards, is that they still don’t look at job boards, still aren’t actively pursuing jobs and still need to have a better job/opportunity showcased to them to actually recruit them.

Now I completely understand that companies have to do what is necessary to stay in business, but some of these moves have either been handled poorly or are simply not playing well with the employees to the point where they are all very interested in leaving. So as we begin to see the market improve over the next six months I think we will continue to see companies’ loose longtime employees who feel that their plates have been broken and simply want to start anew with another employer that they feel they can trust.

As we know during a downturn in the economy many candidates that have been impacted through workforce reductions are actively seeking roles and are all too willing to send resumes to companies through job boards and directly through company websites, and this has created the impression within many companies (HR/internal recruiters/hiring managers) that they have a tremendous variety in the selection process. Unfortunately the reality is that they are only accessing a small percentage of the potential candidate pool. So even while many good companies are still growing and adding to staff many employed candidates are simply sitting on the sidelines unwilling to put themselves out there and waiting the economy out and looking ahead to better times. The irony here is that companies want to see these people and have the opportunity to hire them, but have no way to access them without really recruiting and let’s face it if you have 100-200 resumes on your desk how much time do you have to really recruit when you have to screen all of those resumes? Not much! So while the normal tendency has been for companies to run the search first before going outside to 3^rd party recruiters we are now seeing an increase in our clients willingness to engage a recruiter to work simultaneously with the internal staff and so to speak “let them compete” for the placement. Sure companies don’t want to pay fees with such scrutiny on the bottom line, but they also want to insure that they get the best talent and the only way to have that happen is to view all of it at the same time.