Great Dialogue in our business is the cornerstone of our craft. And great dialogue has four distinct elements; Probing, Listening, Responding, and Alignment.

These four elements are like the chambers of the heart; each section or chamber is a unique and critical part of the communication process with both clients and candidates.

Listening is considered a soft skill, which is ironic considering that it is one of the hardest things you will ever do. If you don’t believe me, ask your significant other. Our purpose is to better understand active listening as an integral part of what is really behind the heart of great dialogue and why great communication drives great recruiting.

If I were to invite you to a two-day listening seminar, most of you would opt for a slow, painful death. Let’s face it, the skill of listening does not always get good press. It’s not one of the more exciting aspects of our jobs. However, nothing is gained by probing and qualifying unless we have first learned how to listen effectively. You see, the best interviewers aren’t smooth talkers: they are smooth listeners. Think about it. How much can you learn from what you are saying? Not much. You already know it, so by speaking, you’re repeating yourself. But everything the candidate says is potentially valuable.

The good news is that we can train ourselves to be good listeners. (Just ask any mother if she can discern her baby’s cry from others in a crowded nursery.) You can learn to tune in the important and tune out the extraneous. Think of how it feels when someone’s not listening to you. You feel ignored, unimportant. Instead of liking the other person, you think he or she is rude or self-interested. Conversely, people who feel they are being heard are easier to hire.

Six Tips To Become An Active Listener

By: Rob Mosley of Next Level Exchange

1. Listen without deciding.

Be like a polltaker asking questions impartially simply to get the information. Neither agree nor disagree. Show understanding by nodding or saying, “I see” or “I get it.” A response of, “I know just how you feel” may seem empathetic but may also elicit an angry, “How could you possible know how I feel?”

2. Use a neutral tone of voice.

Not monotone or robotic, but casual, light, free from heavy emotional baggage. The same tone of voice you would use to ask, “Is it raining?” You are not judging the rain; you just want to know whether an umbrella is called for.

3. Avoid listening autobiographically.

“Something just like that happened to me” ends the listening and sends the message that you want to tell your story instead.

4. Reframe to show understanding and to clarify.

“So what you’re saying is . . .” “I think I just heard you say . . .is that right?” There are many techniques that you can use.

5. Go through the doors that they open.

The listener actually guides the conversation by choosing the next subject to ask about. For example, let’s say you are listening to the hiring manager who has the following complaint: “Rob is always late with completing reference checks on candidates that I need at the end of our candidate’s interview process. He says it is because people in the office are constantly interrupting him.”

Example Listening Skills

Door 1: Rob. It sounds as though there might be an inefficient pattern here. What do you think could be done to help Rob?

Door 2: The client interview process. Why is it that Rob has to wait until the end of the interview process to take a first round of reference checks?

Door 3: Reference checks delegation. Is there someone in addition to Rob that might be able to assist in getting the reference checks completed in a timely fashion?

Door 4: The interruptions. It sounds as though Rob’s work area is very busy. What could be done to reduce his interruptions? There is also the universal door of the emotions the speaker is experiencing. “You sound really upset. What do you think could be done so you won’t feel that way anymore?”

6. Get closure.

Stay until the end of the conversation. If you begin to listen and then don’t let the candidate finish everything they want to say, you frustrate them and lose their trust.

Too many interviewers are ‘hearing,’ not listening. Active listening is a very specific set of techniques that do not just happen automatically. You must learn, train and practice at least some techniques to achieve competency in active interviewing. It will change the quality of your new hires and increase the number of candidates that will want to work for you.

The future of agency recruitment is all about the battle for candidates. Not so much clients. Talent is the epicentre of competitive advantage.

Candidate identification will get easier and easier. Candidate recruiting and hiring will get harder and harder. To the very cream of talent, privacy is the new advantage. The best candidates don’t put themselves out there any more.

We must accept, indeed embrace, the fact that recruitment is merging with marketing. Finding candidates is a science. Recruiting them is a seduction. It’s no longer about candidates ‘applying’. It’s no longer about getting their attention. We need to know their intention.

Technology in recruitment is not mostly about driving efficiency and automation. It should ensure a great candidate experience.

Don’t confuse candidate identification (via technology often), with candidate recruitment, via human beings (always), or candidate engagement (both). Most recruiters proudly talk about their database when the word ‘technology’ is raised. But, most recruiter databases are candidate graveyards!

If your company is made up of those lazy recruiters whose ‘strategy’ consists of posting and praying poorly written ads, or even LinkedIn InMail inundation, than you’re not only going to find yourself frustrated in the battle for talent, you’re likely to find yourself out of business. Companies will hire talent when they find it. We have to be the ones that find it for them.

It is useful because it gives us both a chronological development sequence as well as outlining distinct and practical leadership attributes. Here is the progression:

Level 1: Achiever

Collins describes this individual as highly capable making productive contributions through individual talent, skills and know-how, as well as honed working habits.

Level 2: Cooperator

We see this leader as a team member who works effectively with others in group mode, jointly contributing to the team’s goals.

Level 3: Organizer

Now, the individual rises to learn management competencies, in organizing people and resources effectively to the pursuit of objectives from on high.

Level 4: Visionary

At this level we see a leader who has the ability to unite people to vigorously pursue a clear and compelling vision; stimulating the collective and catalyzing their commitment to high performance outputs in attaining the dream.

Level 5: Sculptor

This Is Collins key contribution: he discovered that some few business leaders could build “enduring greatness through a paradoxical combination of personal humility plus professional will”.

Now we add what we see as two yet higher levels of leadership development:

Level 6: Humanitarian

This is the skill and attitude to transcend “self” and our personal empires (including the sculptor’s empire). Here we find the empathy and objectivity to see and feel from the perspective of other cultures and individualities’ needs, wants, burdens and hopes. The humanitarian is able to translate this learned “outgoing concern” into unifying words and subsequent movements, on scales both small and big.

Level 7: Liberator

This emancipator goes beyond support from followers to personally lead those followers to relieve the troubles and burdens of an oppressed group. Usually this leader can bust the compromises an industry or government imposes on people. Most often this is done through strategic innovation. Because innovation, at least at first, does not directly affect the status quo, it often begins quietly, going unnoticed until its impact begins to build momentum. At that point, the energy behind the innovation begins to change the world and its old burdensome ways – – people are liberated from the oppression. Liberators are leaders who have developed the know-how and attitudes to bust all sorts of imposed compromise.

Above we have, an outline, a thumbnail sketch of leadership development in the context of humility and vision.

Here is ten of his “Principles” of hiring:

1. Think through what values, abilities, and skills you are looking for.

2. Weigh values and abilities more heavily than skills in deciding whom to hire.

3. Write the profile of the person you are looking for into the job description.

4. Look for people who have lots of great questions.

5. Make sure candidates interview you and Bridgewater.

6. Don’t hire people just to fit the first job they will do at Bridgewater; hire people you want to share your life with.

7. Look for people who sparkle, not just “another one of those.”

8. Hear the click: Find the right fit between the role and the person.

9. Pay for the person, not for the job.

10. Recognize that no matter how good you are at hiring, there is a high probability that the person you hire will not be the great person you need for the job.

Here are seven more tips for hiring:

1. Remember that people tend to pick people like themselves, so pick interviewers who can identify what you are looking for.

2. Understand how to use and interpret personality.

3. Pay attention to people’s track records.

4. Dig deeply to discover why people did what they did.

5. Recognize that performance in school, while of some value in making assessments, doesn’t tell you much about whether the person has the values and abilities you are looking for.

6. Ask for past reviews.

7. Check references.

From Principles by Ray Dalio, CEO of Bridgewater

http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgewater-Associates-Ray-Dalio-Principles.pdf

Learn more about hiring at http://pe-trick.com/

We do our very best to communicate in a clear, easy to understand manner – - the simpler the better. We don’t keep people in the dark; neither do we hide behind silence (“I am important and hard to reach”) or email or some other automated avoidance behaviour. We try to give context and reasons why we say what we say. We have a limited amount of time but we do make great effort to be on the phone with everyone who wants to talk to us – - even if we do have to be brief. In that way we focus on what’s important and what is a waste of time so we can all channel our energy to the right places.

Simplicity is sometimes found in complexity. Put things as simply as possible but no simpler we are told. Looking for simple cause and effect in human beings and their organizations just doesn’t work and we often don’t know why. To effect change there are often a number of factors at play and they all have to be dealt with at once. The dynamics of a situation like vector forces are interactive and mutually self-reinforcing (positively or destructively). Sorting out what influences what is often an exercise in futility but knowing what factors are in play is important. To effect human change all of the key factors have to be dealt at once, not sequentially or one at a time. Taking partial or incremental steps is often insufficient and therefore only leads to discouragement.

The simplicity in complexity comes from the actions we take. We need to be very explicit in the action steps that are necessary to solve a problem or challenge. Everybody needs to be extremely clear on the overall plan, what their role is in the plan and why. The vision and the solution steps need to be over communicated until clarity is reached. Clarity starts with “why” and finishes with what “obviously” needs to be done. It needs to be said over and over and over again until everyone understands. Leadership is about straightforward purpose and finding everyone “a place in the choir”.

Simplicity takes a great deal of effort but there is little that is more worthwhile.

In the first step we evaluate the worthiness of our opportunities. How great will our gain be as we choose one project or another? Collaborating for the sake of collaboration is a rabbit chase defocusing and frustrating everybody. We need to pick areas that will solve our customers’ (external and internal) deepest frustrations. Value needs to be created both qualitatively (improve functionality or usability) and quantitatively (increase cash flow).

Secondly we need to spot barriers to our collaboration. People don’t collaborate well for a number of reasons; there may be a lack of motivation or willingness and a large number of people simply lack the innate ability to collaborate easily. Four of the most common barriers are (1) an unwillingness to reach out to other people, often from a cultural not-invented-here syndrome; (2) staff are unwilling to provide help – they hoard their resources; (3) workers are not able to find what they are looking for, they don’t know how to search; (4) people are not able to work with others they don’t know well either because of social skills or attitudes. Rather than jumping too quickly into an assumption about what is interfering with collaboration, the barriers simply need to be identified and listed.

Then in the third step we tailor our solutions to turn down those barriers. Different barriers require different solutions. Often the solution is found in lifting workers into a state of unity by articulating the dream or vision, setting out common goals and preaching the strong value of cross organizational teamwork. That means moving our staff from their narrow interests towards our common mission. In most cases the high achievers have to be moved towards shared achievement, while the social butterflies have to be moved towards achieving measurable results. If employees cannot or will not learn to both make cross organizational contributions as well as focus on their own individual performance, then they probably need to be replaced. There are some who are naturally both collaborators and individual achievers but most require at least some skill acquisition. They might need to learn how to build nimble interpersonal networks across the company while others need to learn what the thrill of achievement is all about.

Good collaboration emphasizes both performance from decentralized work and performance from collaborative work. Everyone can grow to be more collaborative leaders from the example they set and the attitudes they transmit. Just a little guidance is needed in most cases. We need to cultivate collaboration around us by transforming ourselves, our organization and the people working with us. Collaboration or mutuality leads to everybody’s better performance. Our job is to unite together towards our common mission. We need to think about what Peter Drucker said:

“Management is about human beings. Its task is to make people capable of joint performance, to make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant. …. Every enterprise requires commitment to common goals and shared values. Without such commitment there is no enterprise; there is only a mob. The enterprise must have simple, clear, and unifying objectives. The mission of the organization has to be clear enough and big enough to provide common vision. The goals that embody it have to be clear, public, and constantly reaffirmed. Management’s first job is to think through, set, and exemplify those objectives, values, and goals.”

One subset of collaboration is Great Collaboration, or as Warren Bennis calls it, Great Groups. Recruiting the right genius for the job is the first step in building great collaboration. Great groups are put together by leaders who are unafraid of hiring people better than themselves. In such recruiting they look for two things in particular: (1) industry excellence and (2) the ability to work with others.

A connoisseur of talent looks both for intellectual gifts and the ability to work collaboratively that it is people who “play well in the sandbox with others”. Such recruits may not be of high stature but they consider themselves to be some kind of “an enviable elite” however overworked and underpaid these greatly gifted people might happen to be. There are definitely the best person for the job at hand. Further they are usually young in their 20s or early 30s. Their enthusiasm, optimism and ignorance (or lack of experience) means they do what everyone thought couldn’t be done. Such unseasoned recruits “do not usually know what’s supposed to be impossible”.

Virtually every great group also has a strong visionary head along with a champion or two who can clear the obstacles of stifling bureaucracy and corporate politics. The “dream” is the engine that drives the group. The visionary details the task and its meaning; the champions keeps the recruits free to do their best most imaginative work. The focus is not on money or other tangible rewards but rather “the project is all” that matters. They fall in love with it. The thrilling process of discovery to bring new insights is everything. For the participants that process is its own ultimate reward. They live for the excitement of pushing back the boundaries, of doing something superbly well that no one has ever done before. Such genius is rare and the chance to exercise it in a dance with others is rarer still. These collaborating knowledge workers cannot be managed but can only be facilitated, guided and inspired. The leader finds greatness in the group and in turn helps members find it in themselves. Together they are able to achieve something that no one could achieve alone. “None of us is as smart as all of us.” These great groups reshape our world in very different and enduring ways.

If only we could cooperate together better at work, it just might be a better place to have fun and be more productive. But as we all know collaboration doesn’t come easy anywhere, anytime. Do you understand why?

To understand we have to look at corporate culture. Some workplaces encourage cooperation but perhaps many more promote a spirit of competition. A classic example of this was the two cultures at Sony and Apple, when the iPod was being developed. At Apple there was a clear goal in mind with each division devotedly focused on that single goal. Information sharing was high and there was clarity of purpose as each group went about their business. At Apple collaboration pre-existed their products and in fact flourished as they went about their work. By contrast each of Sony’s divisions had its own ideas about what to do on its product Connect It was as if they were contraindicated (to borrow a medical term) to each other; they were so conflicted in how to develop the product they seemed to work against each other. Sony’s mess turned into a market disaster whereas the iPod became one of the success stories of the decade. The iPod’s progression transformed Apple from an average company to an amazing story. The fruit of their collaboration became a world changing product that has become an ordinary part of everyday life for so many around the globe. Sony’s people worked against each other; Apple’s people energized each other and have been producing amazing products ever since then.

The first lesson about collaboration is that it occurs in a corporate culture that is by design operated in a spirit of cooperation – - an environment where people want to work together, take pride in what they do together and celebrate in big and small ways at each progressive inch of their successes. Creating a safe and secure workplace also supports this culture, which is why many companies turn to https://fastfirewatchguards.com for reliable fire safety and protection services.

The whole reason to hire a search firm when we have an opening to fill or a position to plan is simple. We want them to unearth the one very best candidate in the marketplace that will make a true difference in our company. Procuring such people requires a very high skill level not ordinarily found inside our company or for that matter outside. Not only do the individuals need to be located but they also need to be reassured how beneficial a move would be by someone who offers emotional support and objective advice; a candidate needs to be advised by someone who cares. The hiring company likewise also needs objective advice about their choices and the meaning of those choices. They also need the carefully chosen words of an intelligent, articulate advocate who can advance the corporate client’s case. There is a balance between seizing the initiative and exercising appropriate risk management as the right person is sought out.

Fortune Magazine has said that there are “competent executives everywhere whose performances are underrated and unrewarded standing a better chance than ever before being noticed and courted by someone else”. There is a reason why the best people change firms and and it rarely has to do with money. Good executive move for opportunity and the satisfaction to be a top performer, to live with purpose and collaborate with a winning team

When a critical role goes unfilled, it can have a huge impact on company growth. You’ll need to have a plan in place to cover the job duties for the position while you are recruiting for it as efficiently as possible.
When the perfect match is not on the shelf, companies are left with no option other than hiring a headhunter who can find the best employee for the vacant position.

Just being good at the moment is not enough to stay on top of an industry. New ideas must continue to be sought out and implemented. To not be implemented or not implemented fully is innovation idea folly!
.
Let us look at the cellular phone industry. Motorola was initially an industry leader and dominated the market. Then Nokia took over industry leadership. Blackberry came by and blew away the narrow-minded efforts of Nokia. But then Apple virtually bankrupted Nokia. Now Samsung’s Galaxy is giving Apple a stiff run for its money as it gives end-user stakeholders (SH) many new delightful and frustration reducing features.

How is Samsung achieving impact? By putting out a new size of device that is bigger than a cell phone but smaller than a tablet. The tablet is just too big to carry around most of the time while the phone is too small to be able to work on like a computer (although smart phone users do it albeit in a somewhat frustrating way). Apple’s policy of not going to that type of an intermediate size is hurting them.

How did Apple grab Blackberry’s market? The SH had an initial need for security of intra-corporate communication but Apple is able to provide that kind of security and yet do so much more. Blackberry concentrated on incremental improvements to its product instead of seeing the grand picture of what was possible to do with the communication device such as turning it into a computer now known as a smart phone. The ability to carry around a computer in a very portable and easy fashion without aggravation removed a deep-seated frustration for the general public and far exceeded the simpler desires of a very narrow business market.

Similarly, Nokia took advantage of Motorola’s very narrow focus on its current economic/performance engine while it’s inability to make radical or disruptive change was ignored. Nokia moved out into a new S-curve, a new performance engine: a small and sleek highly comfortable device replacing a big and bulky monstrosity-to-use cell phone even though those same cell phones were becoming incrementally smaller.

When stakeholders’ deep-seated frustrations are ignored somebody will fill the gap with a frustration-reduction solution. When the SH requirement or need is critically important to what they commonly do, then the rate of acceptance of a frustration-reduction device will be exceedingly rapid and produce huge new markets. Detecting both critically important SH activity that is being met with a matching deep frustration is the basis for radical or disruptive innovation. When such detection techniques are repeatedly used then a world-class innovation company will come on the scene and become exceedingly difficult to displace or compete against – – they become a stakeholder’s dream company.

So who seeks to intimately know the critical frustrations of a company’s many stakeholders?