We're If you've followed
the advice provided in the previous four articles, you're now
finding more top active and passive candidates.
Finding top people is actually easier than hiring them (Part 2 and Part 3). Here's why:
First, they won't accept offers unless they're for bigger jobs
with better long-term prospects than their current jobs or competing
offers. That's why taking the assignment and preparing performance
profiles are so important (Part 1). You need to
understand real job needs to present a convincing case that the job
you're representing offers a true career opportunity.
Second, top people who are in demand generally want a nice bump
in compensation as an incentive to accept one offer over another.
The situation is worsened because these people are generally already
at the top end of their salary ranges for comparable positions.
However, you can alleviate these problems if you know how to use the
interview to shift the decision to accept an offer from one based on
compensation to one based on opportunity. This is what we'll cover
in this article.
First, you should retake the online recruiter
diagnostic to determine how you've progressed so far in
becoming a top 10% recruiter. Then, you should take our current Recruiting Challenges
2006 survey. Especially review the questions on recruiter
compensation. Once you learn how to use the interview to both assess
competency and negotiate offers, you'll be able to command
compensation for yourself in the upper half of the ranges shown in
the survey.
Many recruiters, and just about everyone in HR and OD, think that
the primary purpose of an interview is to assess candidate
competency. Yet, this is only one of many competing objectives, with
the most important being the need to use the interview to
demonstrate to your awesome candidate that she is not as awesome as
she thinks she is in comparison to the job you're representing.
Now that you know the ending, let me start at the beginning.
When I left Corporate America to become a third-party recruiter,
I was very good at finding and identifying top people for jobs I was
quite familiar with, including staff to mid-management spots in
operations, as well as engineering and finance/accounting jobs for
manufacturing and distribution companies. In those days, the key to
recruiter success was networking. While I could always find the
right people, many deals fell apart because the compensation plans
offered were not attractive enough.
To minimize this, I developed a two-pronged recruiting strategy.
The first was to get my hiring manager clients to shift their
decision to performance and potential rather than skills and
experience. Creating a performance profile
opened up these jobs to a broader range of candidates with high
potential, but with a slightly different mix of skills, lighter
experience, and generally lower compensation.
The second part of the strategy was to start convincing
candidates early in the recruiting process that compensation
shouldn't be the reason for evaluating or taking a new opportunity.
To accomplish this, I just asked candidates if they would be open
to explore a career opportunity if it could be demonstrated that the
job offered was at least 10-15% bigger than their current jobs, and
that it was growing 5-10% faster per year. I then went on to say
that this should be the basis for their decision to accept an offer
or not, even if the compensation increase itself was modest. This
point was stressed by presenting evidence that those people who made
compensation the primary reason for accepting one offer over another
usually were disappointed when they discovered that the jobs
themselves were not as substantive as they had hoped. Most accepted
the logic, and over 90% agreed to proceed on this basis. Now, all I
had to do was prove to them that the job offered both immediate
stretch and increased long-term growth.
I've written about performance-based
interviewing before, but to demonstrate job stretch you
need to be especially good at two parts: 1) conducting an in-depth
work history review; and 2) digging deep into the candidate's major
accomplishments. During the work history review, you need to find
out why the person changed jobs, how successful these transitions
were, the scope and scale of the jobs held, the person's trend of
growth over time, the types of work where the person excelled, any
recognition received for doing great work at each position, and the
types of people the person worked with, including the breadth of
management or project responsibility.
Since you'll be negotiating the offer on job stretch, during this
work history review you need to specifically look for areas where
the candidate is deficient in comparison to your job needs. This
generally involves factors like the size of the budget managed, the
team size, the chance to do and learn different things, the
complexity of the task, exposure to different types of people, and
the importance of the job in relationship to the overall company
business strategy.
But, telling (or selling) the candidate about these doesn't help
the negotiation process. It's far better if the candidate
internalizes or figures out for herself where she's deficient. One
way to pull this off is to challenge the candidate a little bit by
suggesting that while she has great skills in one area, the job
itself might be a bit of a stretch in another. Here's an example:
"While I'm quite impressed with your technical depth, this job
might be a real challenge for you in the areas of dealing directly
with our major clients in negotiating product requirement
specifications. Can you give me an example of a major accomplishment
in which you've done something comparable?"
If you have conducted an in-depth work history review, the
candidate will more likely trust your judgment and will see this as
an important skill to add to her resume. Better, she will shift her
attitude and attempt to convince the interviewer that she's capable
of handling the task. Now, you'll need to spend 10 minutes or so
digging deep into the accomplishment to validate the person's
skills. Even being a little skeptical helps, but, in the end, the
person will clearly understand the importance of the task and your
professionalism in understanding her capabilities. If you do this a
few times for other critical tasks, the candidate will clearly
understand where the job offers real stretch.
To create long-term growth, you can use a similar accomplishment
question, but with a twist. In this case, rather than challenging
the candidate, offer an inducement by tying the job to some major
company initiative.
Here's an example:
"One of our major challenges in this job is to lead the launch of
a new series of products. We're putting significant resources into
this product and assigning some of our best people to run it. Can
you tell me about your most significant product launch
accomplishment?"
Again, you'll need to spend about 10 minutes digging into this
accomplishment to understand the candidate's role, the challenges
faced, the decisions made, and how comparable it is to your needs,
the environment, the team, and the culture. As you do this, you
might uncover some areas where the candidate is a bit deficient
compared to your needs. Then, you can suggest that you have a bit of
a concern here, but probe further and see if the candidate has
overcome comparable deficiencies.
The key to all of this is to dig deep into the person's
accomplishments and then compare these to real job needs. If the
person is a top person and the job is significant, you should easily
be able to find areas that offer 10-15% job stretch and 5-10% job
growth. To do this properly, you must know real job needs and be a
pro at the interviewing process suggested.
To accept an offer with only a modest increase in compensation,
the person must be convinced that the job offers both immediate
stretch plus long-term growth. The interviewing method suggested
above starts this process. But, don't stop here. Recruiters can only
facilitate the process. The hiring manager and hiring team need to
become personally involved in the recruiting and selection process.
This includes spending extra time conducting this type of in-depth
interview, taking the candidate to lunch or dinner, handling
follow-up calls, and even making the offer some type of big event.
All of this helps, since the candidate not only must internally
justify the decision to accept your offer with less compensation,
but she must also justify it to her circle of personal advisors and
even to her boss when she turns in her resignation. To help this
along, give the candidate a marketing version of the performance
profile summarizing the major tasks, challenges, and opportunities.
Collectively, this is how you use the interview to switch the
decision criteria for accepting your offer from one based on
compensation to one based on opportunity. This is a critical process
you'll need to learn and implement if you want to become a top 10%
recruiter placing top 10% people.