WorkPuzzle

How Do People Look For Jobs? Part 2

Earlier this week, I challenged you to spend some time learning what a person goes through when they look for a job, change companies, or investigate new career options.  By better understanding a candidate’s mindset, you’ll be more equipped to engage him or her during the recruiting dialog. 

As you spend time contemplating this topic, I thought it might be helpful to connect you with some companies that have put a lot of time and effort into growing their knowledge in this area.  To do this, we’ll take a look at a recent competition that you may have missed.   

For the last eight years, Electronic Recruiting Exchange (ERE) has sponsored their Recruiting Excellence Awards.  In essence, this organization highlights those companies that have successfully learned how to engage candidates. 

Like Super Bowl ads, some of these sites and ideas are a little over the top.  So, don’t think you have to “keep up with the Jones” regarding their methodologies.  Instead, as you look at these examples, focus on what these companies are saying about, and to, the candidates.  How are they engaging people who are considering a career change? 

And now, for the competition results (with my selection on what is most relevant for real estate companies).  The envelope please… 

1.  Best Company Career Website:   

RMS.  You may not have heard of this company, but lots of candidates know who they are.  One judge says that the RMS career website is “...hands down, one of the best sites I’ve seen.  Graphically and emotionally intelligent, not too heavy on graphic elements.  Tells the story.  Interaction.  Heads and shoulders above all of the other sites.”  

Check out their website:  http://www.rms.com/careers/ 

2.  Best Employee Brand:  

Sodexo.  This company quickly launched an enhanced employer brand aimed to be compatible with the new, consultative/solutions consumer brand.  In the 2011 fiscal year, Sodexo hired about 50 specialized and tough-to-recruit professionals within a few months. 

Doing so involved positioning the company as an expert in the energy field, which meant delving into such things as guest blog posts on websites for the energy industry, as well as having people speak at industry conferences.

Check out their website:  http://www.sodexousa.com/usen/careers/careers.asp

3.  Best Employee Referral Program

Improving Enterprises.  This is a great example of how even small companies can do great things.  Even after its recent growth (adding 50+ employees), this company has just 148 employees.

Briefly, the way its referral program works is this:  If employees refer someone, they get a point.  Points add up and are paid on a quarterly basis.  Points are considered when the software-developer distributes its profit share.  Top performers are recognized at Town Hall meetings.

It has a "Two by Tuesday" program designed, the company says, to mitigate “extremes in the ebbs and flows of recruiting.”  Every Tuesday, the company spreads the word regarding their most important openings.  People have a week to submit referrals.  There’s a race to be the one who refers the most, with daily updates provided.

The company might get 100 referrals in five days, with two or more hires made.

There’s a lot more...open houses, pizza parties, several mini-conferences on the weekends, Monday Night Football and Movie Nights...all aimed at having referred candidates show up.

Check out their website:  http://www.improvingenterprises.com/

4. Best College Recruiting Program

US Navy.  In 2011, the Navy implemented two new recruiting strategies that significantly improved the NUPOC program.  NUPOC — the Nuclear Propulsion Officer Candidate program — involves recruiting college students and graduates with science and engineering backgrounds for five-year positions to work on nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers.   

With the first program, the Navy funded trips for 121 educators to experience a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier or submarine, visit a submarine learning facility, and interact with sailors.  The goal was for faculty to then tell their students, and other professors, about these opportunities.

Also, the Navy Recruiting Command partnered with a group called the University Engineering Alliance — formerly the Big 12 Engineering Consortium — allowing the Navy to provide keynote speakers for engineering summits, nuclear experts for classroom presentations, and otherwise work with faculty to present material in classrooms.

In the end, 242 students were hired through the NUPOC program last year, and the accepted applicant’s average GPA was up 5% to 3.43.

Check out their website:  http://www.navy.com/careers/nuclear-energy.html

5.  Best Military Recruiting Program

AT&T.  AT&T provides localized job notifications to the Transition Family/Support Centers of all branches of the military.  In 2011, AT&T participated in more than 50 traditional and virtual military career fairs.

This company's recruiters reach out to military transition offices, Army alumni programs, and elsewhere.  They created a program where veterans working at AT&T provide job search assistance to veterans applying for AT&T jobs.

Perhaps most importantly, it’s educating hiring managers and recruiters on the value of veterans, how to make heads or tails out of military jargon on resumes, and on the myths about veterans’ ability to integrate into corporations.

Check out their website:  http://att.jobs/military 

Hopefully, the work that these and other companies have done will inspire you to consider how you can better engage those who are considering a career change.  Who knows, maybe you’ll land your company on one of these "best of the best" lists in the years ahead...

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

How Do People Look For Jobs?

As real estate professionals, I’m sure that most of you have put countless hours into trying to understand the process a person goes through to buy or sell a house.   

I’m sure you’ve even documented “trigger events,” such as a job relocation, a change in marital status, financial changes, etc...all of life's events that cause a person to start moving forward in the process.    

Absent a trigger event, you undoubtedly also teach the agents you manage the importance of maintaining a relationship with a large group of people who are potential buyers and sellers, who may be at different stages along the pre-sales continuum. 

As a real estate agent, it only makes sense to become an expert in what people experience in the process of buying and selling a house.  After all, it’s much of what an agent’s livelihood depends upon. 

Fast forward in your career... Now you’re a manager who is responsible for hiring new agents and retaining those who generate revenue for your office.  Let me ask you a question: 

Are you an expert in the process a person goes through to find a job, change careers, or determine when it is right time to leave a company? 

If you think about it, the mastery of this body of knowledge is much of what your livelihood depends upon!  I would encourage you to become a student of this topic.  And, as you do so, focus on sources outside the real estate industry. 

How do you find these sources?  I’ll give you some specific ideas later this week in my next WorkPuzzle posting.  But, to whet your appetite, here are a couple things I ran across this week that helped to build my knowledge on this topic: 

Job Board Research.  Last summer, the International Association of Employment Web Sites or IAEWS, conducted a benchmark study for job boards, and the results were just published last month. 

Part of this study focused on candidate behavior and found that 75% of the people who visit/use job boards and career sites are “window shoppers.”  These “window shoppers” are individuals who do not register on the job board’s site, rather, they come and go without applying to any jobs. 

What does this mean?  Well, the first lesson to be learned is that there are a lot of people who start a job search long before they are willing to make commitments and put noticeable action towards the process (ie. they are not desperate, but are starting to consider a change).  Supplemental research shows that that this talent pool tends to contain the highest quality candidates! 

The second lesson here is that huge opportunity exists for hiring managers who learn to how to coax people in this group to engage in their employment process.  The study cited that the average job board gets between three and five responses/applications from each job posting.  This metric can and should be used to measure your effectiveness at engaging candidates from this important group. 

Understanding Entrepreneurs.  You probably know intuitively that those individuals who make the best real estate agents have an entrepreneurial bent.  But, do you know how entrepreneurs (especially younger ones) think?  It seems it would be a good idea to spend some time learning about this topic if you hope to attract these types of individuals to your team. 

Well, you’re in luck!  Reid Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn, just co-authored a book on this topic.  Here is part of a summary that was recently published in 800-CEO-READ: 

“Reid Hoffman and Ben Casnocha’s The Start-Up of You: Adapt to the Future, Invest in Yourself, and Transform Your Career makes the point that that all humans are entrepreneurs.  At some level, each of us has the will to create and survive. 

When you start a company, you make decisions in an information-poor, time-compressed, resource-constrained environment.  There are no guarantees or safety nets, so you take on a certain amount of risk.  

In today’s work environment, the same challenges tend to characterize a traditional job -– you never know what’s going to happen next.  Information is limited.  Resources are tight.  Competition is fierce.  The world is changing.  

This means you need to be adapting all the time.  And if you fail to adapt, no one – not your employer, not the government – is going to catch you when you fall.”  

If this is what people are experiencing in the workplace, are you able help your candidates identify and articulate these fears and concerns?  If so, you’ll be much better equipped to communicate how a real estate employment opportunity may be the best option for some people.   

Later this week, we’ll take a look at a few specific companies that have figured out how to engage candidates successfully.  I think you’ll be surprised by what you'll learn.  

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Convincing Candidates It’s the Right Time to Begin a Real Estate Career

I just returned from a trip to the East Coast where I had the opportunity to spend some time with the owners and executive teams of several of our clients.  While my mission was to give presentations on the best practices of both new and experienced agent recruiting, I think I brought back more information than I provided...as is often the case.   

One of the common themes I heard as I listened to the recruiting challenges and obstacles that hiring managers face is that an increasing number of candidates are facing financial challenges with regard to starting careers as real estate agents.   

On the surface, it appears that the problem lies in the fact that candidates are just short of cash... However, as I started to question this premise, I quickly learned that the problem is more complex.  The real issue has to do with perception.  

From the candidate’s perspective, the risk-to-reward ratio in the real estate industry has risen to an unacceptable level. 

Let me explain.  When the real estate industry was growing aggressively in years past, the perception was that a significant amount of money could be made by venturing into this career field.  While the risk (start-up cost, lost opportunity of doing something else, potential of failing as an agent, etc.) was just as substantial back then as it is now, the chance of a potential payoff was much higher. 

So, the perception of declining rewards is the real problem.  Financial backing has a way of surfacing when a person believes a considerable reward can be reasonably attained.  This is why there is more than $1 trillion in education loan debt in the United States.    

So, how do you convince a skeptical public that opportunity still exists in the real estate industry? 

One way to do it is through the use of data.  To show how this can be done, I’d like to introduce you to Tom Prall.  Tom is the owner of Carpenter Realtors, a very successful 30-office real estate company in Indianapolis. 

If you walked into Tom’s office, you’d see stacks of research on his desk that he skillfully uses to guide his company.  If you went to one of his sales meetings, you’d be handed paperwork that meticulously describes, from a data perspective, the business reality of what is going on around you.  And, if you’re engaging Tom in a conversation, you best have some data to back up your assertions—otherwise it gets a little uncomfortable.  

In a recent email exchange, I told Tom that some candidates are losing hope in the career potential that real estate has to offer.  Shortly thereafter, I got a phone call that started… "Ben, I don’t think you’re looking at this correctly…"

During the course of our phone conversation, Tom laid out a case that now is the time for young candidates to embark on a real estate career.  The case was built on an analysis that included the total number of transactions, total number of agents, and per agent productivity averages for the Indianapolis market.   

The analysis also included trending from a peak in the market in 1979 that closely resembled the peak in the market in 2006.  He also tracked what happened during the subsequent six years in both cases. 

Something interesting emerged in Tom's analysis:  There is a tipping point when the per agent productivity averages start to grow by more than 10% year over year.  In the Indianapolis market, there are indicators that strongly suggest this tipping point will be crossed in 2012, thus making it a advantageous time to begin working as a new real estate agent.  The “economic wind” will likely be at a candidate’s back for the first time in six years! 

I believe Tom has figured out something very important:  

If you’re going to be successful at hiring under today’s market conditions, you need to be able to make a compelling case that the “reward” in the risk-to-reward ratio is both real and significant. 

If you’re accustomed to using anecdotal evidence, dated testimonials, or even cute stories about agent hires of the past, you may find yourself coming up short when it comes time to convince the best and brightest to join your team.  Like Tom has illustrated, be ready to have a serious, data-driven, business discussion about the financial prospects of becoming a real estate agent. 

By doing this, you’ll be better prepared to defuse the objections candidates have about start-up costs and initial risks.  If the reward part of the equation is compelling, candidates will again become motivated to find the money to get started.

Here's some homework for you.  Create one of two presentation items (a graph, a chart, an illustration, etc.) that demonstrate that now is the right time to become a real estate agent.  Print these items out and be ready to use them during your next interview. 

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

MEASURING ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKING INFLUENCE—PART 2

Have you ever heard of Kred and Klout?  No, they are not your long lost Norwegian relatives.  They are new online social networking sites that are attempting to measure a person’s online influence.

Both for these companies (and a few others as well) have created scoring systems that attempt to put a value on the combined online influence a person has on various online social networks.  The Klout scores work on a scale of 1 to 100, while the Kred scores range from 1 to 1,000.  In both cases, the higher the score, the more influence the person has established online. 

As I mentioned in our last discussion, marketers are very interested in finding and working with people who have a lot of online influence.  If you can get a highly influential person to support your product online, good things can happen...this has been the case for some time.

The idea of a hiring manager researching a person’s online activities is not a new or uncommon idea either.  Dr. John Sullivan makes this point in a recent ERE article:

“It is now quite common to find, assess, and do reference checks on candidates using Google searches, LinkedIn, and Facebook profiles, and the assessment of work samples that can be found online.  In fact, a Microsoft-sponsored survey conducted by Cross-Tab found that 79% of HR and recruiting professionals responded that they currently use online reputation information as part of their hiring process.”

What is new is an attempt to measure this online influence in a way that one person can be easily, quickly, and fairly compared to another person.  The jury is still out on whether such a comparison can truly be fair, but we’ll leave that for the HR technicians to debate.

What I do think is worth noting is a potential connection between an individual who has a high Klout or Kred score, and the skills and capabilities that can be very useful in the real world.  Dr. Sullivan catalogues some of these talents:

1. Communications – they have shown that they are effective and frequent communicators
2. Relationship building — they are successful at attracting and building relationships with others
3. Influencing – they have the ability to influence others and to get others to read and spread their messages
4. Reputation — their reputation, credibility, recommendations, and ability to produce “Liked” content means that they will be listened to
5. Reach – their extensive contacts, friends, followers, and subscribers means that any messages they send will reach thousands
6. Branding – individuals with high social media scores have demonstrated they know how to build a personal brand and that knowledge may be transferable to product branding
7. Crowdsource solutions — their extensive network means that they will be able to quickly “crowdsource” answers to problems that they encounter
8. Writing ability — individuals who have a long blog history have demonstrated both their writing style and ability
9. Knowledge of technology — they have demonstrated that they are on the leading edge of social media technology
10. Adaptable – they are capable of continually adapting to the rapidly changing social media environment (if they have maintained their scores over a period of time)

Are these the skills that you’d like in the next agent you hire?  I can’t say that I’ve seen a more complete list of the characteristics that would make someone successful as a real estate agent!  If an online social networking score reliably benchmarked these skills, then you may have just stumbled onto the Holy Grail of real estate recruiting!

Like most things that sound too good to be true, there are a few caveats worth noting.  First, these measurement systems are in their infancy.  Ask around the office and see how many people have a Klout score.  Probably none.  Now ask how many have Facebook pages.  Probably most.  Facebook became a lot more interesting and useful once everyone was using it.  

The same is true for a Klout score.  Until a majority of candidates standardize on a common scoring system, use the system, and are willing to reveal it during the recruiting process, the concept will have limited value.

Secondly, these scores can be manipulated.  By nature, each provider will have weaknesses in their approach to capturing and evaluating the data.  And, just as search engine optimization techniques are used to manipulate web page rankings, these weaknesses will be exploited by some candidates in an effort to increase their scores.

For now, have some fun with this concept.  Go to one of the sites, register, and find out how influential you are in the world of online social networking.  Then, keep your eyes on this concept... If it grows, it may become very useful.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Measuring Online Social Networking Influence

As many of you know, the Tidemark team is a little nutty when it comes to the concept of measuring things. It is our belief that if something can’t be measured (in the business world), it doesn’t have much value. Without metrics, it is not possible to reliably optimize any business process and consistently make improvements.

This is one of the reasons I’ve personally struggled with making a connection between social networking activities and recruitment sourcing. And yet this is the most common question we get from our clients: "When are you going to figure out how to source more candidates via social networking?" I wish I had an easy answer to that question, but there are still some complexities that cloud the issue.

Traditionally, candidate sourcing is a marketing activity that depends upon gaining access to a large number of people who are “congregating” online for a common purpose—i.e. improving their employment prospects.

Because candidates typically gather in common online locations (a job board, a career information site, a professional society, etc.), there are “media pipes” that allow marketers to get their recruitment messages to these individuals. Getting the right message to the right group at just the right time is the challenge of recruitment sourcing. To be successful in this environment, we’ve learned to tweak content…measure…tweak delivery…measure…tweak timing…measure, etc.

While this process is challenging, the constant in this equation is that people tend to congregate online around a topic of interest to the group. In the online social networking arena, different rules apply. In this framework, people congregate online around relationships. And these relationships are often very eclectic.

For example, what does my grandmother have in common with my college roommate? Probably not much, other than the fact that they both know me. You can probably see why crafting a marketing message that would be of interest to both individuals would be near impossible. In addition, how could someone measure something so disconnected and random?

I’m still not sure there is a great answer to that question, but there are some really smart folks in several start-up companies who are beginning to ask these questions. And, in the process of trying to find solutions, they are identifying and tracking metrics that may help harness the marketing potential of the social networking medium.

The metric that these companies are trying to track is “influence.” By influence they mean--the propensity that a large number of people listen to what a certain person has to say. Or, in some cases, it doesn’t have to be a large number of people. It can be a small number of people who very passionately listen (and in essence follow the direction of) to an influential individual (if you happen to remember the Hale-Bopp Comet cult in late ‘90s, you have the idea).

Of course, the first variety of influence has been going on in pop-culture for a long time. When Oprah tells her audience that she is enjoying some book by an obscure author, the sales of that book explode. When Tom Cruise orders a beer with a shot of Patron tequila in the movie Vanilla Sky, not only does this mixed drink become popular, but also Patron soon starts to outsell other tequila brands in the United State by an 8 to 1 margin.

Obviously, most normal people do not have this kind of influence. But with online social networks, even "normal people" do have some influence. In fact, it turns out that some normal people (i.e. non celebrities) have a lot of influence...so much influence that they are starting to attract the attention of marketers.

In my next post, I’ll tell you about the companies who are doing the pioneer work in this area. Also, we’ll discuss how people who have a lot of influence in the world of online social networking may be some of your best hires.

Until then, put some thought into this question: Of the agents in your office and/or those in your professional network, who do you believe has the most influence?

Once you have this person in your mind, ask yourself: Has this person influenced any of the decisions you’ve made about products you’ve purchased, activities in which you've participated, or other ways you’ve spent your time and resources? If so, how did they do it?

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Employment Trend: 2 out of 3 New Jobs Go to Men

I came across an article earlier this week in USA Today that really has me thinking.  Here is the basis of the data that was being reported:

“Men are claiming more than two-thirds of the private-sector jobs created as the economy recovers, reversing a long-running trend that came within a whisker of giving the USA its first-ever majority-female workforce.

In a wrinkle that puzzles economists, one important driver of the trend is that hundreds of thousands of men are showing up in retailing, once considered a source of jobs for women.

Nearly 1.28 million men gained jobs in the 12 months that ended in November, compared with 600,000 women, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).  Although men have returned to work in greater numbers in goods-producing jobs and service-related businesses, they're not returning to still-stagnant construction industries.

Instead, retailers have added 216,900 men — about five times as many as have been added by traditionally male financial services companies — vs. about 9,000 women.  Also, manufacturers have added more than 250,000 men and cut 33,000 women.”

What do you make of this?  Honestly, it seems to have a lot of people puzzled.  The Bureau of Labor Statics (BLS) has no idea why this is happening (“We haven’t studied why jobs are skewing male”), and the plethora of consultants who weighed in on the topic have not come to consensus on the cause either.  The online commentary regarding this article is fairly interesting, if you care to dig into it further.

Maybe someone will figure this out in the weeks ahead.  For now, I would like to focus on one issue that was clear in the research:  Men are beginning to take jobs in fields that were traditionally dominated by women.  While the retail sector was primarily highlighted in this article, this is also happening in “service-related businesses” as well. 

For the real estate industry, I believe this trend could have a positive impact.  Why?  Because many real estate companies continue to be plagued by the “part-time” mentality that limits the people who consider working as a realtor.

Of course, this mentality has its roots in what the real estate pioneers often called “housewife hiring” back in the ‘60s and ‘70s.  While that stereotype has faded over the years, it left a legacy that being a real estate agent was often best suited for those (males or females) who were in a relationship where the other partner could provide a steady income and medical benefits.

If the real estate industry is going to leave behind the part-time agent legacy and become a career field that predominantly employs full-time workers, this employment trend may push things along more quickly.

In essence, the more people (male or female) are looking for employment outside the traditional gender-based paradigms, the more people will consider non-traditional employment.  This means more eyes on the real estate industry...the largest non-traditional employment sector in the economy.

In the world of recruitment sourcing, we call this “churn.”  And employment churn (regardless of the reason it’s happening) is a good thing for a candidate base that has been experiencing some stagnation over the last few years.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

The Value of Great Questions - Part 2

In my last blog entry, I discussed the value of not just asking questions…but rather, asking great questions. I qualified the “great questions” as ones that add value, present your knowledge in terms of knowing your candidate, and show your attentiveness. Today, with the help of a blog written by Colin Wilson, I want to give you some general rules of thumb.

Allow for Warm-Up Time

At the beginning of a meeting or interview, take time for chit-chat. Casual banter is not work-related and allows for a more relaxed environment. Chit-chat time is an opportunity to build rapport and will help you gauge a candidate’s communicative style and perspective.

Label the Question

Labeling a question before you ask it positions the question in the respondent's mind. By “labeling,” I mean that you first tell the respondent that you are going to ask them a question on a certain topic, and then you ask the question(s). By giving them notice of the topic, it will give them a split second or two to consider a deeper response. More importantly, by explaining why you are going to ask a certain question(s) you will put the candidate at ease. This strategy is much better than the alternative, which leaves them guessing and uneasy…a situation that could ultimately lead to avoidance.

Example: "To gain a better understanding about your background, I would like to ask you some questions about your prior work history."

General Questions before Specifics

It is important to get an understanding as to why the candidate is sitting in front of you. Why, specifically, are they there? This is important information before you get into specific detail in an interview. There are three steps to this process:

1. Ask broad open-ended questions about areas of possible interest. Example: "Tell me about life outside of work...what hobbies or other interests do you have?"
2. Determine the priority areas…where do you, as the interviewer, need to direct the interview?
3. Ask probing questions about the broad topics that interest the candidate. Example: "How were you introduced to (specific activity)?"

Avoid too many Closed Questions

Asking too many close-ended questions (yes/no questions) will come across as if you are interrogating the respondent. That is not a place most people want to find themselves. If you need to ask a series of yes/no questions, let the candidate know that you are going to do so.

Example: "Next, I'd like to get some basic information from you... Are you financial prepared to start your real estate business? Do you have the time that is necessary to dedicate to getting your license? Does your family support your decision?"

Use the Person’s Name

People enjoy hearing their names. Therefore, use their name throughout the discussion, while taking care not to over use it. Without the use of the person’s name, the interview could come across as being very impersonal, which consequentially does not build rapport.

Avoid Negative Questions

Negative questions may put the respondent on the defensive and become a barrier to building rapport. Such questions may very well make the candidate feel ignorant, incompetent, guilty, wrong, etc... These feelings will most certainly inhibit your efforts to build a relationship with the candidate.

Example: During an interview with an experienced agent, DON'T ask, “Why did you fail to close so few transactions in the last two years?”

Effective Questioning can provide you with the opportunity to help crystallize a candidate’s thinking and will help you build rapport and trust by demonstrating that you understand and value their opinions. Additionally, as you move through an interview, and ask your great questions, you may very well begin to use their language, which is another block in your “relationship building.”

---

Editor's Note: Lee Gray is the Senior Account Manager at Tidemark Inc. Lee is a guest contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

The Value of Great Questions - Part 1

I have often said that recruiting is essentially selling. When you have the good fortune of having a qualified candidate sit before you, you are in a position to inspire. Don't waste that opportunity; “Sell” yourself, your office, and your brand. Part of any good sale involves understanding the customer as a person, including their wants and needs. The same holds true when interviewing candidates.

Colin Wilson, a strategic business and leadership consultant in the UK, published a blog that addresses the value of asking great questions…however, his perspective is in the sales world. I couldn’t help but read the entire blog with recruiting (or in my world “relationship building”) in the forefront of my mind. Certainly, everything that I say here is applicable to your agents in their sales process and feel free to share, but I was surprised at how applicable the article was to the hiring process as well.

There are three tenets that I realized from this article:

1. Value. Your value to your candidate is not measured by what you know, but by the questions you ask. You add value by making your candidates think. Add value to your candidates’ experience during the interview process, and endear yourself as their potential manager.
2. Knowledge. Knowledge is power, and the more you know about your candidates' wants, needs and obstacles, the more likely you are to get the hire…or in the case of an unlicensed candidate, the more likely you are to inspire them to take the next step. How are you able to help them navigate obstacles if you don’t know what the obstacles are?
3. Attentiveness. Asking questions of the candidate puts them at the center of your attention and demonstrates that you care enough about them to inquire. You are looking to learn more about their problems, more about their opportunities and most importantly, you are getting them to think.

Here's a general rule of thumb -- You should look to speak no more than 30% of the time during the interview. In my next blog, I will cover some basic rules to apply during an interview.

---

Editor's Note: Lee Gray is the Senior Account Manager at Tidemark Inc. Lee is a guest contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Challenges that Real Estate Managers Face: WorkPuzzle Manager Survey Results—Part 3

Recruiting and retaining talented agents is the most challenging part of the real estate manager’s job.  How do I know that?  The data in the WorkPuzzle survey was most clear on this topic.

There was large consensus that the top priority, as communicated by owners and managing executives, for the first-level manager in real estate companies across the county, is recruiting.  The second priority is retention.

However, when managers were asked what job function they perform best, only 9% said recruiting.  In addition, when managers were asked what part of the job they hear the most complaints about…75% said recruiting.

Let that sink in a little bit...

In essence, what managing executives want the most, first-level managers are the worst at delivering.

This prompts two important questions:  Why is this happening? ...and... How can this gap be reconciled?  I’ll address both issues.

1.  Why do real estate managers hate recruiting?  Quite simply—it is difficult work and the results come very slow.  As discussed in previous WorkPuzzle blogs, both the demographics and the economics of real estate recruiting make it increasingly difficult.

For experienced agent recruiting, the bottom 60% of the typical real estate company is either nonproductive or marginally productive.  The top 20% are very difficult to dislodge because they are well-respected and making money.  This leaves 20% of experienced agents who are eligible to be recruited.  Due to short supply, the competition for these agents is very intense.  If you are lucky enough to recruit some of these folks, they are typically acquired at low margins (ie. unfavorable splits).

For “new to real estate" recruiting, the risk-to-reward ratio that used to consistently attract new talent into the industry is no longer a compelling draw.  As house values have plummeted and transaction volumes have waned, an increasing number of candidates can do the math.  Starting a real estate career has significant risks and the payoff is not what is used to be.

2.  How can real estate managers be successful at recruiting in spite of the obstacles?  Quite honestly—there is no simple answer!  This is what we spend much of our time in WorkPuzzle discussing because it’s a complex problem.  So, here’s a plug to read past discussions and become an email subscriber if you haven’t already done so.  With that said, here are some patterns that I’ve noticed among companies and individual managers who recruit more successfully than others.

Compartmentalization.  This piece of advice is for managing executives who have the latitude to adjust workflows.  If a manager’s job description requires many different roles (ex. recruiting, training, coaching, building office culture, etc.), the role that has the least amount of short-term feedback will naturally get pushed to the bottom of a person’s priorities.  It takes an extremely disciplined person to overcome the inertia of human nature.

If the recruiting function (or parts of the recruiting function) is broken out as a separate role and a limited number of individuals are solely responsible for the execution of this role, the job gets done more reliably.  Why?  Because there are no easy, “sugary” tasks for the manager to fall back on.  The new reality is the difficult job at hand—making the recruiting process work.  Also, there are some managers who have more natural talent for recruiting.  Letting them focus that talent without distraction is a win-win.

Focus at the task level.  If your organization is not willing or able to compartmentalize the recruiting function, you may have to continue to work inside an environment with competing priorities.

If this is your reality, I would encourage you to stop looking at the recruiting part of your job from a transactional perspective.  Because many managers used to be agents, there is a tendency to look at the recruiting process like a home sale.  Did the transaction close or not?  Do I have the listing or not?  Is financing approved or not?  Is this candidate going to work in my office or not?

While there is certainly a time to “ask for the order” in a recruiting discussion, the normal, day-to-day pace of the recruiting process (as a whole) moves slowly and meanders.

Managers who recruit successfully have a large number of candidates in their pipelines (so that no one candidate makes or breaks them), and they focus on completing the tasks of recruiting rather than focusing on the end result.  The transaction focus shifts from, is the person hired (end result) to, is the next task in the recruiting process for this candidate complete?

I hope you’ve enjoyed gaining some perspective on how your peers view the challenges of being a real estate manager.  It’s a tough job and many of you could use the encouragement.  

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

The 10 Dumbest Things (Real Estate) Recruiters Do

Electronic Recruiting Exchange (ERE) and Dr. John Sullivan recently surveyed hundreds of corporate recruiters in the ERE network, on Twitter, and at the recent SMA symposium in Seattle on this humorous, self-debasing topic. The recruiters were given a list of 30 "dumbest things recruiters do" from which to choose. Here were the top ten...

10. Poor Recruiting Presentation (graphics, website presentation, etc.). Potential applicants assume that the company puts its best foot forward when it comes to recruiting. So when they compare your dull presentation with your competitor’s more compelling presentation, they will simply apply elsewhere.

9. Not taking advantage of referrals. The best-practice firms approach 50% referral hires (the percentage of all external hires who come from referrals). Failing to fully use referrals means that you will miss out on a large number of high-quality pre-screened, and pre-sold candidates.

8. Not learning about your competitors. Obviously, if you can’t speak “their language” and you don’t understand their problems, it will be more difficult to communicate with, to sell, and to build relationships with candidates.

7. Treating all candidates the same. Higher-level agents require a different level of service, knowledge, and relationship-building. So, using the same process that you use for lower-level candidates will result in fewer returned calls, a higher candidate dropout rate, and lower-quality hires.

6. Not striking while the iron's hot. When a crisis occurs in the lives of your best prospects, the best candidates are gone quickly. A drawn-out process or slow decision-making means losing the best.

5. Assuming interviews are accurate. Interviews are traditionally weak predictors, but poorly executed interviews dramatically increase the chances of making a major hiring error. Poorly designed interviews may also turn off top candidates.

4. Lack of focus on revenue. Focusing on candidates who will have minimal revenue impact will reduce business (P&L) results. Think like a businessperson--focus on the candidates who will produce the most company dollar for your company.

3. Not identifying "ideal agent" criteria. If you don't know what you're looking for, it is difficult to recognize it when it when it becomes available. Many hiring managers just pay attention to the candidates who are easiest to engage.

2. Not tailoring your recruiting marketing and candidate-selling approaches to the decision criteria of top candidates. Because the most talented agents have choices, they will simply wait until an opportunity comes along that precisely fits their requirements and expectations.

and the #1 dumb thing that recruiters do...

1. Not managing the candidate experience. The candidate experience is the perception of the sum of interactions with an organization throughout the hiring process. It includes every communication, the design of the process, the fairness of process elements, the quality of information exchanged, and the honesty with which questions and concerns are addressed. Providing a poor candidate experience can have many negative consequences, including an increased candidate dropout rate, negative word-of-mouth, and decreased loyalty to the overall brand.

While this survey was focused on corporate recruiters, it is amazing how many of these issues directly apply to the real estate recruiting process, particularly the #1 dumb thing that recruiters do... As we've highlighted in recent WorkPuzzle posts, poor follow-up after the interview is the most common symptom of poor recruiting results.

I guess it could be said that recruiting is...recruiting, no matter what industry you find yourself working. And the principles that produce results-- managing perceptions, knowing what you're looking for, maintaining focus on desired outcomes, and treating people with respect-- are surprisingly similar.

Make sure you're not one of the hiring managers who makes the mistake of believing these pitfalls don't apply to you. You may find yourself contributing to a list of the ten dumbest things that real estate recruiters and hiring managers do...

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.