Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer, On Friday August 6, 2010, 11:20 am EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Companies showed a lack of confidence about hiring for a third straight month in July, making it likely the economy will grow more slowly the rest of the year. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.5 percent.

Private employers added a net total of only 71,000 jobs in July, far below the 200,000 or more jobs needed each month to reduce the unemployment rate.

The modest gains were even weaker when considering a loss of government jobs at the local, state and federal levels in July that weren't temporary census positions. Factoring those in, the net gains were only 12,000 jobs, according to the Labor Department's July report Friday.

Investors reacted by selling stocks and shifting into more conservative Treasury bonds. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note, which helps set rates on mortgages and other consumer loans, fell to 2.85 percent from 2.91 percent late Thursday. Major stock indexes all fell and the Dow Jones industrial average dropped more than 130 points in morning trading.

The department also sharply revised down its jobs figures for June, saying businesses hired fewer workers than previously estimated. June's private-sector job gains were lowered to 31,000 from 83,000. May's were raised slightly to show 51,000 net new jobs, from 33,000.

"There is still a labor market recovery, but it's a very, very weak one," said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight.

The slow pace of hiring will weigh on the recovery, he said, with economic growth in the current quarter likely to come in even lower than the April-to-June quarter's already weak 2.4 percent.

Overall, the economy lost a net total of 131,000 jobs last month, mostly because 143,000 temporary census jobs ended.

The "underemployment" rate was the same as in June, at 16.5 percent. That includes those working part time who would prefer full-time work and unemployed workers who've given up on their job hunts.

All told, there were 14.6 million people looking for work in July. That's roughly double the figure in December 2007, when the recession began.

Even if hiring picks up, it will take years to regain all the jobs lost during the recession. The economy lost 8.4 million jobs in 2008 and 2009. This year, private employers have added only 559,000 new hires.

Friday's report is being closely watched by the Federal Reserve as it considers ways to energize the recovery. The report could persuade the Fed to take new steps to boost the economy and keep interest rates at record lows when it meets next week.

Without more jobs, consumers won't see the gains in income needed to encourage them to spend more and support economic activity. Even those with jobs may not feel confident enough to ramp up their spending.

That's important because many of the trends driving economic growth earlier in the recovery are fading. Companies boosted production in the winter and spring to rebuild inventories that were depleted in the recession. But those efforts won't last much longer. And the impact of the federal government's stimulus package is also declining.

The economy grew at 5 percent in the fourth quarter last year and 3.7 percent in the first three months of 2010. But that slowed to 2.4 percent in the April-June period. That's not fast enough to generate many jobs and reduce the unemployment rate.

Many companies appear to be getting more out of their current employees rather than adding new staff. The average work week increased by one-tenth of an hour to 34.2 hours, the department said. That's up from about 33 hours in the depths of the recession.

Average hourly pay also rose 4 cents to $22.59, up 1.8 percent from a year earlier. That, along with the increase in hours worked, could provide some boost to spending.

The number of temporary jobs fell by 5,600, the first drop after nine months of gains.

Employers usually hire temp workers if they need more output but don't want to hire permanent employees. But "firms aren't even adding temporary workers right now," Gault said.

Manufacturers added 36,000 jobs in July, slightly above its monthly average this year. Those gains were aided by General Motor's decision to keep its plants running last month. Usually it closes them and temporarily lays off employees to retool for the new model year.

Construction firms cut jobs for the third straight month, losing 11,000, while financial firms shed 17,000 workers.

But retailers added 6,700 jobs. And the leisure and hospitality industry hired 6,000 additional staffers.

Corporate net income rose sharply in the second quarter, but businesses aren't yet using the proceeds to ramp up hiring. Companies in the S&P 500 index reported a 46 percent increase in net income for the April-to-June period, compared to a year earlier.

But many employers are uncertain about the direction of the economy. Some are concerned sales will slow once government stimulus and other temporary factors fade. Others fear what will happen if federal income taxes are allowed to rise next year as tax cuts enacted by President George W. Bush expire.

"People have a long worry list they're looking at," said Ethan Harris, chief economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Some companies are adding permanent workers. The hospital chain HCA Inc. has 8,300 open positions, company spokesman Ed Fishbough said. That includes nurses, physicians and information technology professionals needed to build HCA's ability to handle electronic medical records. HCA employs about 190,000 people.

But layoffs are also continuing. FBR Capital Markets, an investment bank based in Arlington, Va., cut its work force by about 15 percent in early July to about 500 employees, saying it needed to reduce costs.

AP Business Writers Stephen Bernard and Tali Arbel in New York contributed to this report.

Fired is the New Retired - The idiocy of axing older employees.

By Ellis Cose NEWSWEEK
Published Oct 29, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Nov 9, 2009

This may be the worst time in the last 60 years to be old and looking for work. Some 6.8 percent of workers over 55 are unemployed (not as bad as for younger workers, but still a historic high). You have to go back to 1949 to find employment stats nearly (but not quite) as bleak as they are now. The bad news does not stop there. On average, it takes employees over 55 roughly 33 weeks to find new jobs, nearly seven weeks longer than for younger workers, and nearly 13 weeks longer than it took just two years ago. Bad as things are, the Supreme Court has made them even tougher—at least for those who believe they are victims of age discrimination and are inclined to try to prove it.

The court's 5-4 ruling last June came in response to a suit filed by a demoted employee, Jack Gross, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967. It was not sufficient, concluded the majority, to show that age was among the reasons for an employee's bad treatment; age had to be the reason. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens called the decision "unnecessary lawmaking." The majority, he said, misread Congress's intentions. Last month, in introducing legislation to nullify that decision, Senate Judiciary Committee chair Patrick Leahy also accused the court of thwarting congressional intent.

At a Judiciary Committee hearing focused on recent Supreme Court workplace decisions, Jack Gross told his story. (The committee also heard from a former Halliburton employee who says she was raped by coworkers in Iraq but was denied the right to sue because she had unwittingly signed a binding arbitration agreement.) Born in 1948 in a small Iowa town, Gross grew up imbued with the value of hard work. As a schoolboy, he labored at numerous jobs despite the constant pain of ulcerative colitis. As an adult, he found work with Farm Bureau Life, an insurance company, and eventually became a vice president. But in his 50s, he was abruptly replaced by a younger woman. The company, he surmised, was systematically trying to weed out older workers. A jury found in his favor but an appeals court vacated the verdict. The case eventually made its way to the Supremes, whose decision "mortified" him.

The AARP was similarly disturbed—especially in light of statistics showing a 29 percent jump in age-discrimination complaints from 2007 to 2008. Dan Kohrman, senior attorney with AARP, concedes that the numbers don't necessarily prove a commensurate rise in age discrimination, but he insists they show something bad is going on. During hard times, he says, many employers resort to "crude practices" that drive older workers away. They may force supervisors to rank employees on subjective criteria—such as mental "flexibility"—that are essentially a license to discriminate. Or they generate paperwork alleging drops in performance that have no clear explanation.

Linda Barrington, an economist with the Conference Board, agrees that older workers are often stereotyped. Obesity," she observed, "is more of a health-care cost than age for those between 30 and 50." And older workers show every bit as much stamina as younger workers when called upon to put in long hours. Yet in all too many cases, employers see age as a much larger liability than it is.

Earlier this year, after another Supreme Court ruling made it harder for women to fight discrimination in pay, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to restore rights many legislators assumed they had already protected. Congress ought to do the same for older workers, who should be given every legal weapon they need to fight discrimination. But even if that happens, age discrimination will not simply go away. Very few workers have the resources to bring a case to court. As Joanna Lahey, an economist with the Rand Corporation, has noted, "the majority of people who sue under the ADEA are white, male middle managers or professionals." And even if more people did have the financial resources to sue, many who are discriminated against don't have the smoking gun that will prove their case. They may just know the job or promotion they wanted went to someone else.

The larger problem, as Barrington points out, is how we tend to view people, the stereotypes we impose on workers of a certain age. It would be great if correcting that were as simple as changing a law. Instead, we face the more daunting task of changing ourselves.

Find this article at http://www.newsweek.com/id/220144 © 2009

10 Ways to Be Liked in Your Job Interview

by Jonathan Littman and Marc Hershon

No matter your resume and talents, if you mess up a job interview you won't get that position. In today's tough economy you need every possible edge. As authors of the new book, "I Hate People! Kick Loose from the Overbearing and Underhanded Jerks at Work and Get What you Want Out of Your Job," we see it as a simple equation: You want to be liked -- not hated.

Here are 10 simple things to do that will dramatically increase your chances: from wearing the right expression, to knowing what not to say, to never ever breaking a sweat.

1. Don't be a "smiley face."
Excessive smiling in a job interview is seen for what it is -- nervousness and a lack of confidence. A smiley-face person exudes phoniness, which will quickly be picked up by the interviewer. Instead be thoughtful and pleasant. Smile when there's something to smile about. Do a practice run in front of a mirror or friend.

2. Don't be a small-talker.
Your job is to be knowledgeable about the company for which you're interviewing. Random facts about last night's episode of "Dancing with the Stars" or your favorite blog will not get you the job. Never feel you have to fill an interview with small talk. Find ways to talk about serious subjects related to the industry or company. Pockets of silence are better than padding an interview with random babble.

3. Don't sweat.
You can lose a job by wearing an undershirt or simply a little too much clothing. Sweaty palms or beads on your forehead will not impress. You are not applying to be a personal trainer. Sweat will be seen as a sign of weakness and nervousness. Do a practice run with your job interview outfit in front of friends. The job interview is one place you definitely don't want to be hot.

4. Don't be a road block.
Interviewers are seeking candidates eager to take on challenging projects and jobs. Hesitance and a nay-saying mentality will be as visible as a red tie -- and seen as a negative. Practice saying "yes" to questions about your interest in tasks and work that might normally give you pause.

5. Don't be petty.
Asking the location of the lunchroom or meeting room will clue the interviewer into your lack of preparation and initiative. Prepare. Don't ask questions about routine elements or functions of a company: where stuff is, the size of your cube, and company policy on coffee breaks.

6. Don't be a liar.
Studies show that employees lie frequently in the workplace. Lying won't get you a job. In a job interview even a slight exaggeration is lying. Don't. Never stretch your resume or embellish accomplishments. There's a difference between speaking with a measured confidence and engaging in BS. One lie can ruin your entire interview, and the skilled interviewer will spot the lie and show you the door.

7. Don't be a bad comedian.
Humor tends to be very subjective, and while it may be tempting to lead your interview with a joke you've got to be careful about your material. You probably will know nothing about the sensibilities of your interviewer, let alone what makes them laugh. On the other hand, nothing disarms the tension of a job interview like a little laughter, so you can probably score at least a courtesy chuckle mentioning that it's "perfect weather for a job interview"!

8. Don't be high-maintenance.
If you start talking about the ideal office temperature, the perfect chair for your tricky back, and how the water cooler needs to be filled with imported mineral water, chances are you'll be shown a polite smile and the door, regardless of your qualifications. Nobody hiring today is going to be looking for someone who's going to be finicky about their workspace.

9. Don't be a time-waster.
At every job interview, the prospective hire is given the chance to ask questions. Make yours intelligent, to the point, and watch the person across the desk for visual cues whether you've asked enough. Ask too many questions about off-target matters and you'll be thought of as someone destined to waste the company's resources with insignificant and time-wasting matters.

10. Don't be a switchblade.
Normally the switchblade is thought of a backstabber, often taking credit for someone else's work. In an interview setting, the switchblade can't help but "trash talk" his former employer. If you make it seem like your former workplace was hell on Earth, the person interviewing you might be tempted to call them to find out who was the real devil.

Copyright 2009 Jonathan Littman and Marc Hershon, authors of "I Hate People!: Kick Loose from the Overbearing and Underhanded Jerks at Work and Get What You Want Out of Your Job"

Jonathan Littman is the author of "I Hate People!" and numerous works of nonfiction, including "The Fugitive Game," "The Watchman," and "The Beautiful Game." He is a columnist for Yahoo! Sports.

Marc Hershon is the coauthor of "I Hate People!" and a branding expert who helped to create the names for the BlackBerry, Swiffer, and many other influential products.

Celebrating 2-Years of Bringing People Together!

In July 2007 we started Direct Search Alliance to set a new standard in the "Recruiting for Recruiters" segment, which is largely made up of fragmented independent executive recruiters who are former industry professionals working on their own.

Leveraging best-in-class database management and communications technology, as well as the rapid growth of premier business information search engines and businesses-oriented social networking websites, we have built the largest confidential network of Staffing and Human Capital Industry professionals in North America.

How we provide this new standard is centered on making new and sustaining valued relationships with working professionals day after day. We might leverage "information technology" to create a platform from which we work, but what makes our approach truly unique to the industry is in our collective efforts to reach out to top performers directly by phone or with personal correspondence to develop relationships over time with industry talent, both broadly coast-to-coast and deeply within local markets.

We bypass the typical employment sites and find people who aren't looking for a job, but are interested in hearing about new opportunities and welcome a career partner with connections inside the top employers to work for.

In the Staffing & Human Capital Services Industry, we have multidisciplinary depth and breadth across Commercial and Professional Staffing, Place & Search, Outplacement, Human Capital Management Services and Outsourcing segments.

Our organizational mission is to represent, serve and inspire talented individuals in connection with business performance as well as career progression. We believe that it is people who drive business success, and it is our job to bring people together.

Join us in celebrating our anniversary. Cheers to our team: Leslie, Kisa, Craig, Lisa, Carrie, Jen, and Amy! A heartfelt thank you to our clients who have supported our growth with exciting and challenging opportunities, and sincere appreciation to our candidates who have brought us diverse skills and talents, making us proud and more knowledgeable.

Despite Layoffs and Hiring Freezes, The War for Talent is Not Over

According to a renowned study conducted by McKinsey Co., the most important corporate resource will be talent. It's also the resource in shortest supply, most of all in tough economic times. Are you ready to fight for your fair share?

An underlying fact in the American workplace is the shortage of qualified workers available to fill jobs. The principal business challenge of recruiting, retraining and inspiring talent continues, even in a slumping economy - just like in good times - as employees retire, quit, are terminated, find a new job, enroll in school or move away.

With layoffs the remedy for economic ills, it is often mistakenly thought that hiring is linked to economic growth. Statistically; however, economic growth makes up only about 5% of overall hiring actions in the U.S. Turnover is the overwhelming and primary reason for the majority of a company’s need to hire.

When headcount is monitored closely and managers must “made do” with less people, poorer performers are less tolerated and are “performance managed” out. As such, managers look for top performers from outside the company to ensure their teams are able to perform at high levels in challenging times.

At the same time, in a weak economy, top performers seek out opportunities they perceive as recession-proof causing employers to compete against rival employers.

Under a hiring freeze, overall headcount is targeted to remain at an established number. In these circumstances, when an employee leaves, managers still must make “backfill” hires to cover key positions.

After a period of reactionary cutting and freezing, hiring activity will return to a level of normalcy, business as usual. Then, employers will find that that they are lacking talent in a competitive job market—the market for “employed” top performers.

During times like this, employers will be flooded with candidates from which to choose. A nice change…or not? Hiring managers are well advised to proceed with caution as you contemplate hiring from the pool of available “active” candidates—recently available due to layoffs. Likely, these candidates are “first wavers” who in a robust economy “flew under the radar” and now find themselves “redundant” in an economy that requires top talent to produce results. This doesn’t mean all unemployed or job-seeking candidates are bad or mediocre, but for many, it is indeed the fact.

As the numbers of candidates on the market increases it becomes increasingly difficult to “separate the wheat from the chaffe” and choose the people that are of high quality from a group of mixed quality.

Does it make sense then to continue to employ the services of a search firm to find talent for your organization? Consider that a professional executive search firm is in constant contact with candidates and hiring managers across the segments in which they specialize. This “constant contact” is with “passive” candidates who, when facing economic instability, are more likely to entertain a new opportunity if presented by a known, trusted advisor.

The bottom line…great people are hard to find in even the best “employer's market” circumstances, and only great people are a good investment when resources are dear. An investment in a search fee pays dividends when a new employee not only joins your organization, but contributes with the high level of skill, talent and character commonly found with employed, “passive” candidates who “fly under your radar.”

Direct Search Alliance is exclusively a direct recruiting firm, targeting passive candidates (we do not use ads or postings of any kind; we source top talent directly by researching the market and reaching out to working processionals to develop relationships and share connections). We are the Staffing Industry’s best resource, with multidisciplinary depth and breadth across Commercial and Professional segments, to source a top performer for your organization in 2009.

Season's Greetings

To our Client and Candidate Business Partners and Friends, all of us at Direct Search Alliance extend our sincerest best wishes for a happy Holiday Season.

May the New Year bring optimism, innovation, the coming together of talented people, support from colleagues and leadership, aspiration to overcome difficulties, and the power to make the best of trade and industry in the marketplaces we serve.

Teamwork brings everything together.

2009, a time to hope for peace and think green. A time to step it up in the face of adversity. A time to renew the spirit of service and go to work.

Market Conditions Change - Good Advice Doesn't

SPECIAL REPORT

'Greatest economic challenge'
Obama sets sights on economy - vows to confront global financial crisis
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- President-elect Barack Obama said Friday that the United States is "facing the greatest economic challenge of our lifetime."

The economy ranked as the top concern among voters. The issue...Jobs.

Layoffs and hiring freezes announced by Companies in the broader economy can ripple throughout the Staffing Industry by causing management to cut back on their costs by "making do" with less staff, and this can make it harder for these companies to maintain market share, fueling the ongoing decline in revenues and profits.

Given the weak labor market, only the most skilled, talented and motivated employees will uncover and leverage opportunities to contribute. The economy may be weak, but it is not without prospects.

Staffing Industry employers might be well served by taking a hard look at the capabilities of their employees and how they are deployed. To preserve a place in the market and prosper for longer term benefit, only the best and brightest should be "on the team," so to speak, in revenue generating assignments.

Tolerating mediocrity is risky. Finding talent is difficult with the unemployment rate increasing. As the numbers of candidates on the market increases it becomes increasingly difficult to “separate the wheat from the chaff” and choose the people that are of high quality from a group of mixed quality.

Does it make sense then to continue to employ the services of a search firm to find talent for your organization? Consider that a professional executive search firm is in constant contact with candidates. This “constant contact” is with “passive” candidates who, when facing economic instability, are more likely to entertain a new opportunity if presented by a known, trusted advisor.

The bottom line, great people are hard to find in even the best “employer's market” circumstances, and only great people are a good investment when resources are dear. An investment in a search fee pays dividends when a new employee not only joins your organization, but contributes with the high level of skill, talent and character commonly found with employed “passive” candidates who “fly under your radar.”

We can help make an investment in finding and hiring talent produce sustaining, material results. Recognizing that in times like these, cost is a factor, we are offering cost-savings options to initiate the search for top talent.

1. Stretch Your Budget with Extended Payment Terms
Have the option to make that critical hire in the near-term and spread payment over time. This "layaway" plan allows you to manage the impact on your budget and begin to realize a return on the investment in talent before making the full investment. Pay in 3-equal payments after the start date: 10-days, 45-days and 90-days.
Extended payment terms do not apply with any other discounts.

2. Take advantage of our Search Sale
Make a hire and receive 25% off the search fee. Even in a challenging economic market, customer-facing, revenue-generating and leadership talent are essential. If you have to make that one great hire, make it at a deep discount.
25% off applies only with standard payment terms of net 10-days.

3. Choose the Best of Both Time & Money
Focus on your core business and let us find you a top performer. Take a 15% discount off the search fee, pay only half the fee 10-days after the start and hold on to the balance for 60-days. Manage your cash and benefit from revenue-producing productivity.

Direct Search Alliance is a Search and Talent Consultancy specializing in the Staffing, Professional Services and Outsourcing Industries. I invite you to visit our website and blog to learn more about our company. Click the links below to download online brochures.

Barack Obama Becomes the 44th U.S. President

The economy ranked as the top concern among voters who cast their ballot for Barack Obama, elected President Tuesday night.

The issue...Jobs.

A total of $100,032,604 was spent to broadcast 52 ads related to the presidential campaign on the issue of jobs from April 3 to Oct. 27, 2008, according to statistics compiled by Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political advertising expenditures.

Layoffs and hiring freezes announced by Companies in the broader economy can ripple throughout the Staffing Industry by causing management to cut back on their costs by "making do" with less staff, and this can make it harder for these companies to maintain market share, fueling the ongoing decline in revenues and profits.

Given the weak labor market, only the most skilled, talented and motivated employees will uncover, discover and leverage opportunities to contribute. The economy may be weak, but it is not without prospects.

Staffing Industry employers might be well served by taking a hard look at the capabilities of their employees and how they are deployed. To preserve a place in the market and prosper for longer term benefit, only the best and brightest should be "on the team," so to speak, in revenue generating assignments. Tolerating mediocrity is risky. Finding talent is difficult with the unemployment rate increasing.

We can help make an investment in finding and hiring talent produce sustaining, material results.

Direct Search Alliance was established by Staffing Industry leaders to provide an alliance between America's best employers and executive, management and professional people already successful in their role and area of specialization.

Our organizational mission is to represent, serve and inspire talented individuals to nurture and propel business performance.

Selling in a Down Economy

You may need hunters rather than farmers.

Here are a few thoughts for growing your sales organization in these challenging times.

First, stop accepting excuses for lack of performance… even if they have a basis in truth. It’s always easier for someone to blame the economy, the competition, the lousy sales leads, or even their own company than it is to accept responsibility. The fact is that successful people find a way to succeed regardless of the circumstances. Hardly anybody actually likes to prospect, but hungry successful salespeople who need to generate revenue will become prospecting animals. Are your salespeople making enough calls to generate the business you need? Are they doing everything possible to succeed?

In better times, many salespeople focused on telling prospects about the benefits and advantages of their company’s products or services. They sent lots of proposals and followed up consistently. Business was good. But as soon as the economy slowed, this approach stopped working. The reaction was often to cut price and to add extra value (often by throwing in extra functionality) in an attempt to close deals. Margins eroded and the sales pipeline slowed to a trickle. The very salespeople who seemed like Supermen in the good times now act like kryptonite is in their office.

There are two basic questions that need to be addressed in order to turn around a languishing sales organization.

First: do you have the right people?

Many successful “salespeople” really were more like account managers who farmed their existing client base very effectively. These “farmers” are patient and will say, “Wait until the economy turns around”, or “Nobody is buying right now”. Salespeople who are excellent account managers are not necessarily willing and able to prospect for new business (i.e. become hunters). Find those who have both a strong desire for success and a commitment to do whatever it takes, then get rid of the rest!

The second question is: do your people have the abilities and skills to compete in a tough selling environment?

Many sales organizations, especially those selling technology during the boom times, failed to develop the selling skills of their sales team. Some salespeople were functioning too much as order takers and simply didn’t need to prospect in order to meet their targets. Marketing generated an abundance of leads so the biggest challenge salespeople faced was simply following-up on what was handed to them. Everything was wonderful until the economy took a turn for the worse. Many formerly successful salespeople simply don’t have the skills to compete in this new economy, or they aren’t willing to do what it will take to be successful.

In order to answer the above two questions, consider evaluating your existing organization using some sort of objective assessment methodology. Like any good change process, establishing the current condition is essential in determining an action plan for future change. Knowing strengths and weaknesses of the sales team allows for an action plan to be developed. It is entirely possible that some on the team simply will not be effective in this new economy, so making personnel changes may be the first step. If training is needed, it should be targeted to address those issues that will have the greatest return on investment. For instance, if salespeople are too easily cutting price, then some intensive focus on a good budget step would be prudent. If they send out lots of proposals but don’t close enough, developing their questioning skills and closing strategies would be appropriate.

Additionally, a growing organization should look to systematize the selling process. Determine your best sales practices and then make sure the whole organization consistently follows those practices. What are the best ways to find new leads? How do they get qualified quickly? How are budgets determined? When and how will the decision be made? Answer all these questions BEFORE you spend a fortune on software. Contact management, sales automation, and customer relationship management (CRM) software is abundant and readily available for virtually any size sales organization. Unfortunately, software alone will not fix a weak sales process or a weak sales team.

Lastly, take the time and energy to hire salespeople who not only can sell, but WILL SELL for your company. When looking at those impressive resumes be sure to ask lots of questions about how much prospecting the salesperson did in the past. Many top salespeople inherited accounts and grew an existing base. If that’s what you’re offering them, then they may be a good fit, but don’t expect this former superstar to necessarily cold call and prospect consistently for new business. Again, use good evaluation tools to screen for those attributes that will insure success in your organization. Never hire based strictly upon your “gut”.

Put it all together and you’ll probably find that selling in a down economy really isn’t much different than selling in a good economy. Hire the right people, provide them with great training and tools, and don’t accept excuses. So when the economy picks up again don’t forget the fundamentals. Winners succeed because they are prepared more than others and are committed to be the best. Good Selling!

-- by Kevin Hallenbeck

Talent Surplus – Not!

The U.S. Department of Labor reported that year-to-date totals of layoff events (12,542) and related initial claims (1,274,765) in 2008 were the highest January-August totals since 2003. Over the year, jobless rates were up in 47 states and the District of Columbia and down in 3 states. The national unemployment rate rose to 6.1 percent in August, 1.4 percentage points higher than a year earlier.

Does this mean that the scarcity of talent has become less and talent is readily available for the few openings employers have come up in this uncertain economy? To answer this question, first answer these questions:

1. With declining revenues and fewer opportunities on the horizon, is every employee’s contribution even more important to the success of your business and to justifying the role in your organization?

2. If you have made reductions in staff, have you considered performance as one of the deciding factors respecting who to let go, and released the lesser producing employees first?

If you answered yes to either question, take pause as you contemplate hiring from the pool of available “active” candidates. Likely, these candidates are “first wavers” who in a robust economy “flew under the radar” and now find themselves “redundant” in an economy that requires top talent to produce results. This doesn’t mean all unemployed or job-seeking candidates are bad or mediocre, but for many it is indeed the fact.

As the numbers of candidates on the market increases it becomes increasingly difficult to “separate the wheat from the chaffe” and choose the people that are of high quality from a group of mixed quality.

Does it make sense then to continue to employ the services of a search firm to find talent for your organization? Consider that a professional executive search firm is in constant contact with candidates and hiring managers across the segments in which they specialize. This “constant contact” is with “passive” candidates who, when facing economic instability, are more likely to entertain a new opportunity if presented by a known, trusted advisor.

The bottom line…great people are hard to find in even the best “employer's market” circumstances, and only great people are a good investment when resources are dear. An investment in a search fee pays dividends when a new employee not only joins your organization, but contributes with the high level of skill, talent and character commonly found with employed “passive” candidates who “fly under your radar.”

Passive Job Seeker Recruitment

Guess what? All the good candidates are working. Luckily though, you’re not limited to just the 4-5 percent of Americans who are currently unemployed. Which is good, since only 20 percent of the unemployed are actively seeking jobs. The rest of the unemployed are truly unemployable. So where do you turn? Passive candidates.

Passive candidates are those individuals gainfully employed by your competitors. They are likely loyal, happy experienced employees that are not necessarily looking to change companies and would need a solid reason to leave. And if you get their attention, you’ll have to work fast. They’re not willing to spend much time in the interview and hiring process (though they may take their sweet time making a decision).

Why specifically target passive candidates in the first place? Why not keep with your traditional recruiting through mediums such as classified listings and job postings, and assume it will reach the best candidates? First of all, 80 percent of any company’s recruiting budget is spent on traditional activities – meaning there are a lot of companies reaching out to candidates in the same fashion. Each minute of every day there are about 294,000 recruiters logged into online job boards grabbing active candidates and battling for the ever shrinking labor pool. Those who are in the market for a job may or may not notice those ads and apply with your company.

Those who aren’t in the market – passive candidates – aren’t looking and are thus completely unaware of your presence in these traditional outlets. It’s similar to being in the market for a new car. All of a sudden you start looking and noticing cars on the road. If you are not in the market for a new car, you’re not “aware” of advertising. The same goes with job hunting. If you’re in the market for a new job – you’re aware. Reaching passive candidates takes a different approach.

The first step is having a quality recruiter who will be able to make a positive and lasting impression. You need someone who not only understands your industry and what competitors are offering, but also has a keen understanding of what the passive candidate wants. A good recruiter for passive candidates needs to have the ability to sell the position, and outsell their current employer. Part of this is the ability to build strong relationships so the candidate not only remembers you and your company, but also trusts you and will refer others to you in the future.

Speaking of referrals, this is one of the best sources for passive candidates. Who do your internal associates know? What about your vendors and customers? Chances are someone you know has a business or personal relationship with the ideal candidate for your company. Establish an incentive program for referrals and see your candidate pool expand.

Another great recruiting method is encouraging your employees to attend networking events and association meetings. While picking up sales leads, have them keep their eyes open for potential associates for your open roles. This builds direct contacts in your industry or one very closely related, and breaks the ice of unfamiliarity. Remember that even event speakers and experts are not off limits for recruitment. While you’re at it, don’t be afraid to go after the employees of your competitors. Fact is, they’re doing the very same thing. Finally, utilize online networking sources such as LinkedIn or Pulse.

You know who to target and where to find them, but how do you reach them? Approach it with the knowledge that they’re not looking to move. Be sure to avoid asking why they’re interested in working for your company – they’re not. Do discovery first. What would potentially motivate them to move? What professional needs do they have that are not being met? What are their future goals? Then sell the opportunity based on how your position and the company culture fulfill those initiatives.

Next, be flexible. You want this person but he or she does not have to give you the time of day. Lose the tailored process, avoid assessments and applications, and bend over backwards to schedule convenient interview times. Now is not the time for reference checks either. Confidentiality is of utmost importance if you want a chance at securing this candidate.

Once you decide you want them, make an offer quickly. Encourage their potential manager and peers to make follow-up calls. The decision to change jobs when they’re not unhappy is a difficult one. Help make their decision to leave easier. Follow these practices, and the quality of your new hires will improve.

The source of this article is Pro Staff - Special Advertising Supplement to Workƒorce MANAGEMENT

Do the Math - Why Recruiters Are Worth What They Charge

Why are hiring managers so tightfisted when dealing with what is so commonly thought of as the “heartbeat” of their companies ... top-talent?

Companies think very little about paying the often excessive fees charged by their outside accounting and legal firms ... or even to the gaggle of consultants who promise cost-cutting and streamlining miracles in other areas of operations.

Yet, when faced with brain drains, talent deficiencies or the need to replace one employee with a better one, their thoughts too often turn to frugality. This belies and contradicts their stated objectives to "hire the best." Of course recruiting fees can vary from firm to firm but, when they do, you will almost always find that those on the low side are sure to exclude some very key ingredients of the process all of which are vital to providing the indispensable services necessary to satisfy the needs of the employer.

So why are recruiters worth what they charge? Just a few of the often unspoken reasons are:

Expertise
Nobody knows the employment marketplace better than a professional recruiter. . . nobody! In house human resources, no matter how effective (or Internet-savvy), view the marketplace through an imperfect or misrepresentative prism and tunnel vision is a frequent occupational hazard.

Just as physicians are cautioned against treating members of their own families, so too is it folly for an in-house H/R professional to believe that they have an undistorted and unbiased picture of the employment landscape. They are vulnerable to the pressures of internal politics and cultural dimensions which do not hinder the outsider.

Street-smart recruiters already know the neighborhood, including the unlisted addresses so often overlooked by the insiders.

Cast a wider net
A professional fisherman will always have more to show than a weekend angler. Recruiters are in the marketplace day in and day out. They know the unfished coves, reefs and inlets that are unknown to others. The job-hunter bookshelves are filled with lore about the “hidden job market.” The same holds true for professional recruiters who have a detailed roadmap to the hidden talent sources which will never be accessed by newspaper ads, alumni associations, applicant databases, the Internet or any of the other more familiar sources of people.

There are occasional pearls through these sources (and someone inevitably wins the Publisher’s Clearinghouse Sweepstakes too) but you have to shuck an awful lot of smelly oysters to find them. Recruiters only give you oysters proven to contain pearls. Your only job is to determine which pearl is the best. Want to catch what you’re fishing for? Hire a guide!

Cost
There is a misconception among employers that the cost of a hire equals the cost of the ads run or postings on the Internet designed to attract the person hired. Nothing could be further from reality.

Try adding these to the true cost and you’ll see just how cost effective an outside recruiter can be:

Salaries and benefits of the employment/recruiting staffs plus those of the line managers involved in the hiring activity (who are not productive in their normal job pursuits when they’re out recruiting); travel, lodging and entertainment expenses of in-house recruiters; source development costs; overhead expenses including (but not limited to) telephone, office space, postage, PR literature, applicant database maintenance, website costs, reference checking, clerical costs to correspond with the hundreds of unqualified respondents and more.

Unbiased third party input
Contrary to what some believe, recruiters don’t try to put square pegs into round holes. A recruiter’s stock-in-trade is their integrity and their reputation for finding someone better than a company could have found for themselves.

For a mid to senior-level executive, the average recruiter may develop a long list” of a hundred or more possibilities. Each must be called and evaluated against the position specifications as well as the personality “fit” with the company and the people with whom they will ultimately work.

Once this is winnowed down to the “short list” an even more intensive interviewing process begins to narrow the search to a panel of finalists for review by the client...

It is highly unlikely that a professional recruiter will be plowing new ground with your opening.

They deal within spheres of influence far more familiar with your needs than any internal recruiter and, more often than not, view the finalists as people who are competent to solve client problems rather than just fill an open slot in the organizational chart.

Because they want to do business with you again and again, they are looking for (and challenging you to excellence by hiring) the “truly exceptional” rather than the “just satisfactory” so often settled for by in-house hirers.

Confidentiality
Advertising or otherwise publicly proclaiming an opening, aside from its cost and demonstrated ineffectiveness for sensitive senior level openings, often creates anxiety and apprehension among the advertiser’s current employees who wonder why they aren’t being considered or worry about newcomer transition problems. Just as often it alerts competitors to a current weakness or void within the company.

Speed
The recruiting process is always faster through a search professional who is continually tapped into the talent marketplace than one having to start the process from scratch,. For every day that a key opening remains unfilled, a company’s other employees must grudgingly do double duty. And this doesn’t factor in the profit opportunities or competitive advantages lost to a company because a position remains unfilled or is done on a part-time basis by others less qualified.

Post-Hire Downtime - Not only is speed an essential part of the professional recruiter’s process, the ability to locate a person who can immediately “hit the ground running” with a minimum of “ramp-up time” saves time after the hire. All too often, a hire selected through less effective sources offering a smaller talent pool requires several months of expensive training and orientation.

Reality
Professional recruiters often recognize and have a duty to inform clients that they may be mistaken as to the type of person sought, the salary required to attract them or the possibilities that the solution might just lie in areas outside the traditional target industries.., something an internal recruiter is politically disinclined to do. Too many hirers fail to understand that a professional recruiter’s primary function is not necessary to fill a slot but to provide the right candidate to solve a problem.

Negotiation
As a buffer and informed intermediary, the professional recruiter is better able to blend the needs and wants of both parties to arrive at a mutually beneficial arrangement without the polarizing roadblocks which too frequently materialize in face-to-face dealings, especially in this “show me the money” economy.

Prioritizing company resources
It is often amazing to see how much of a company’s revenues are squandered on non-productive perks while penny-pinching on what is every company’s lifeblood. . . talent acquisition. Enlightened executives learned long ago that the fee paid to a recruiter is a shrewd strategic investment, not an extraneous expense.

Do the Math
Here is a good example:If your company has A territory vacant for 2 months and this territory produces 1.2 Million dollars per year, your company has lost $200,000 during the time the position has been vacant

Ex. $1,200,000/12 months = $100,000 per month. If the territory is open for 2-months you have lost $200,000!

So, the investment that you would make to a recruiter for quickly finding top qualified individuals is far, far less compared to allowing the territory to remain open. It becomes even more apparent when you factor in the amount of time, energy and money spent on all the in house efforts.

Content thanks to Porter Group, Inc.

How Much Does it Really Cost to Hire - or not to Hire?

In a recent article in 'The Interbiznet Bugler', it is stated that the Saratoga Institute, often seen as the ultimate source of HR thinking, typically describes "cost per hire" as the sum of administrative costs and expenses, and Infomart-USA, a hiring practices auditing company, estimates the national average at about $4,400. They consider the elements of cost per hire to be the following:

• Advertising
• Agency fees
• Employment fairs
• Employment office salary expense
• Employment office facility expense
• Estimate of time spent in training
• Recruiter travel expense
• Internal recruiter expense
• Internal recruiter labor expense
• Referral Bonus
• Recruiting & Training expense
• Uniforms

The means used to calculate the administrative cost per hire is deeply understated. So what is the real cost per hire - or more importantly, per not hiring?

Opportunity Costs

The cost of a hire is the money lost because the hire wasn't made. Well recognized in MBA programs and broadly understood throughout the rest of the organization, the simple concept is "opportunity costs."

At its most basic, the opportunity cost associated with a particular hire is the productive revenue lost because the hire wasn't made. Here's an easy way to get your arms around the real cost per hire in your organization.

1. Take the annual sales of your company (or division) and divide it by the number of employees. This is the annual revenue per employee.
2. Divide that number by 250 to get the daily revenue per employee.
3. Multiply daily revenue per employee by the number of days it takes to hire an employee.
4. If you want, add the dollars spent by the Recruiting Department (it's a minor fraction).

This is the real cost per hire. Generally it's 5 to 10 times the administrative costs.

Using an outside recruiter to fast-track hiring of sales talent is good business as it costs far less than not hiring and is an investment in your organization’s growth. When economic times are challenging, sales-focused employees are the resource best leveraged to protect market share—in a shrinking market, taking share away from your competitors is priority one, superseding cost containment measures. Fielding sales talent is an initial success that lays the groundwork for achieving growth objectives. Tapping into a network of industry sales professionals puts growth-minded managers on the offensive.

Don't be Slow, be Strategic in Hiring Talent

Why is it taking longer than ever to find, and land, revenue-generating professionals with the skills and talents to drive results? In a recent hiring survey, more than two-thirds of the respondents said they expect their companies to be bringing on new revenue-generating staff additions within the next 12 months, and 88% said their employers were experiencing a skills shortage.

The demand is there, but where are the candidates? Only 9% of revenue-generating workers polled said that they’re actively looking for a job, and 63% reported feeling secure or very secure in their current position.

Even when candidates are available, a lack of preparation by hiring managers or a disconnect between business drivers and internal processes can compromise company performance.

For any industry which is currently facing talent shortages in revenue-generating positions, the pertinent question remains: does the time-to-hire make a difference to the quality of talent being inducted into an organization?

Recruitment experts agree that the hiring time is critical for finding the right candidate. The reason is obvious. Often because of undue time lags between identification of candidates and making the selection, a good candidate may lose interest in that specific role and take up another opportunity.

SPEED (or the lack thereof) is a strategic factor in the competition for talent. When talent acquisition is an organizational strength, you start by overwhelming candidates with responsiveness.

Here are the spots in the recruiting process where the need to manage speed is critical:

1. Solicit candidates only when you have the time to and interest in screening them. For prospects that fit your general position requirements, set the initial step within 48-hours of submission.

2. Organize process steps to fast-track internal bottlenecks. Once the initial screen is completed and you decide to move the candidate to the next stage—momentum is on your side! Plot steps to the final interview and schedule these all at once, within 24-hours of the initial step.

Example: if the initial step is a telephone screen, and the final step is an interview with the senior manager; but in-between there is an interview with 1) the hiring manager, 2) a peer, and 3) a next-level manager—book set times for all of the 3 “middle steps” in this example, within 2-days of each other. You can always cancel if the candidate proves to be less than anticipated, but you cannot regain lost time between steps tying to schedule “on the fly” as the process unfolds.

3. Manage expectations as you move to the offer stage. Give timely and honest feedback to, or about, candidates following each step. Ideally, you want to do a blitz round of interviews and get to the final stage shortly thereafter. If there is any holdup in the process, you have to sell the candidate on the company and the fact that you still love them as the right fit for the job in question.

4. Anticipate administrative and/or organizational requirements to get to the offer stage. Don’t wait until after the final interview to initiate administrivia like reference checks, pre-employment screenings, approval forms, offer letter/new hire paperwork turnaround, etc. At the same time you schedule the final interview, start the organizational wheels turning to ensure a minimal lag time before you can make a firm offer.

Interested candidates are a perishable resource – start the process too soon or have a delay after a phone interview or a face-to-face meeting, and you have problems. Candidates start having confidence issues in you as an employer of choice, and even if you eventually hire them, the delays can cost you negotiation leverage as you go through the offer stage.

Learn how to juggle the timing needs of the company and the candidate in the hiring process, and you'll get better talent than you deserve.

It's January 2, 2008 - Where is Your Sales Talent?

With reports of workers losing faith in the economy and employers forecasting flat or reduced hiring in the New Year, it is that time of year when we ask the question..."What is the economic forecast for the Staffing industry next year"?

Considering the Staffing industry market is near to $90B, I ask..."Isn't it really about how we approach the marketplace"? When an industry is growing it is easy to increase your business, just jump on the economic escalator and focus on delivery. When the market is retreating it is not so easy, but with a multi-billion market at hand, it should be with the right strategy and tactics.

Many staffing firms leveraged the "escalator effect" to boost profits by leaving revenue-generating field positions open for extended periods or not investing in sales talent in all territories to reduce the cost base against market-driven revenue increases. This works in the economy that is now in our rear view mirror; however, in 2008 the pleasant escalator ride will fast become more like an unpleasant battleground for the firms caught with gaping revenue-generating vacancies.

The battle will be over market "share" and the strategy for 2008 will center on influencing hiring managers, human resources and procurement to change providers - in other words, the growth leaders of 2008 will take away business from their competitors.

The tactics are simple, yet difficult for most companies to execute. To win, the participants must have on the field a well-trained, prepared, and talented sales force before their competitors. To do so, companies must step back from cost management at the expense of deploying a business development workforce. With demand declining, cost containment on the personnel expense line will neither offset the revenue downturns, nor spur increases that have vaporized in the changing economy.

Investment in revenue-generating people is risky in an organization where headcount management, productivity per headcount metrics, compliance and delivery solutions has dominated profit-making strategies. But, as I will explore further in the New Year, there are some leverage points to mitigating the risk of playing to win in 2008:

Reduce "time to hire" for open revenue-generating positions- If you measure the total number of days selling branch management and/or sales representative, executive recruiting, blended-desk positions remained unfilled in 2007, you will likely be quite shocked. Count the markets that you have poor, limited or no sales representation and you will likely become frightened at your prospects for the New Year.

Consider additional sales representation in hot segments/markets- Deployment does not have to be uniform, focusing resources in "hot spots" proves to be cost-effective. You can plan for hiring sales talent in waves to spread out costs against results, but don’t wait too long—the economy changes quickly for the leading-edge Staffing industry—you are already “behind the 8-Ball” so to speak.

Make people the metric- Start holding field managers accountable for filling revenue-generating positions with a sense of urgency by measuring days open, averaging-in open slots with current productivity measures to detect lost opportunities, and recognize the tactical leaders who field a team in play early on in 2008.

Reduce on-boarding time- Revamp your hiring process in terms of steps and priority to cut by half the time it takes to recruit, assess background/fit and make an offer. Use internal, corporate and external resources to grab up talent before your competitors acquire the best of a limited pool of top-performers.

Accelerate training time- Compress training for revenue-generating roles to a boot-camp, immersion-style of delivery to reduce by two-thirds the time it takes to make a new hire ready and competent to face customers persuasively.

Create networks for sales talent- Promote a sales culture with newsletters, chat rooms, blogs, meetings, conference calls, webinars, contests, rankings, and recognitions to bring together the sales team for motivation, further development and peer mentoring.

The greatest challenge to overcome in a retreating economy is not whether a company can grow against prior-year economic-driven benchmarks (which it can). The greater challenge is can industry leaders operationally turnaround their laissez-faire attitude regarding fielding sales talent and make the necessary shifts to strengthen their company’s sales culture, sales-support platform and scope of sales “coverage” across their market footprint before it is too late for cost reductions to protect earnings and shareholder value.

How to Work With Contingency Recruiters

Assuming you’ve spoken to a few recruiters or agencies you feel are best suited to meet your needs, the most important piece is keeping their interest in filling your open jobs. The top-tier of recruiters isn’t struggling to find job orders or clients with whom they’ll work. Instead, they tend to focus their recruiting efforts on clients they enjoy working with and where they have the highest likelihood of success. How can you make your positions a top priority? Here are some tips on how you can ensure that your openings are a priority to the contingency recruiters you'd most like to work with:

Sell it; don’t just tell it: When you are discussing your hiring needs with a good recruiter, don’t forget that you need to sell them on you, your company, and your hiring process. Be sure to stress your urgency level, the speed and efficiency of your hiring process, and the selling points as to why candidates they present will want to work at your company. Provide recruiters with electronic copies of internal job descriptions, incentive program documents and benefits summaries--these are selling tools for recruiters.

Choose recruiters based on ability and experience rather than solely on cost: Otherwise, you may end up working with a lower echelon recruiter. Recruiters who charge rock-bottom fees may be good for some job orders, but if you are highly selective or have difficult positions to fill, you might have to ‘sweeten the pot’ to make it more appealing. Top performing recruiters don’t work for bargain basement fees and they have little incentive to work on a job order when the payment terms are not advantageous or adhered to.

Responsiveness and feedback are essential: The ‘A’ list recruiters require feedback from you for candidates that are off the mark, and not just for the candidates that are the right fit. Failure to give feedback on submittals is the number one reason that top contingency recruiters stop working on behalf of any given client. These recruiters need to know how far off target they are in order to better hone their aim. Be sure your feedback is detailed and specific. If you’ve given this level of feedback repeatedly and you still aren’t getting candidates that are a fit, it’s time to evaluate whether you are truly working with an ‘A’ list recruiter, or if there is some other problem or issue in your expectations or hiring process.

Follow-up with your best recruiters on a regular basis: You need not wait until they send you a candidate for you to contact them. In fact, a proactive call from you to your top recruiters asking what you can do to help them is one of your strongest tools to keep outside recruiters motivated to work for you, even if they aren’t making placements yet. Your call to them shows that you have a sense of urgency and that you value their time and effort. In this call, you can give examples of candidates you’ve interviewed, or any other information that will help them hone-in on the ideal candidate.

The most important lesson is that there are great recruiters in the market. Your goal is to proactively locate them through any means necessary, sell them on why they should work for you, and continue to engage with them. And, throughout your candidate search, make sure to keep them in the loop on any changes and updates, as well as to subtly ‘sell’ them on working your job orders.

Hiring in all niche markets is getting tougher in this tightening candidate market. Make sure your company has the reputation of being good to work with in the outside recruiter community so you can attract and retain the best third-party, or contingency recruiters, to help you meet all your hiring needs with the best talent in the market.