by Janine Nicole Dennis | Apr 15, 2015 | Featured, Human Resources, Life, Women in Business, Women's Rights
Image courtesy of Flickr.com
As I turned on my computer yesterday and started to navigate my various social accounts, I found out that it was #EqualPayDay. It was a day for all of us to discuss the obvious issue with pay equity in this country. It also marks how far into the year women must work in order as much as their male counterparts earned in 2014. I’m always down for a good social campaign, but something about #EqualPayDay feels banal.
It is well documented that women are paid less than men in the workplace. We also know that black and latino women fare the worse with regard to pay equity. The bigger question is: what are employers going to do about it? It’s cute to hop on social media and tweet your support for the day, but again what is anyone going to do about it?
I am a solopreneur with a little over two years under my belt as a business owner. I can assure you when my time comes to hire a few good women to assist me with building my legacy they will be compensated adequately for their efforts regardless of gender, color or any other identifiable criteria beyond their control. That’s my vision for my company. I have powerhouse women friends who also own their own businesses and have dedicated themselves to filling in all the pay equity gaps women have had to deal with for eternity by offering: fair salaries, childcare and eldercare options, real maternity leave that isn’t confined to a 12 week FMLA allotment etc. You see, the end to the gender pay gap in this country has to start with good intentions. If you have little or no regard for a certain subsection of citizens or better yet the people you employ (who happen to be human beings like you) none of this will change.
Food for thought…
Women don’t just get screwed on salary alone, it is the entire package and delivery that creates economic disparity. Every unpaid medical or maternity leave, the inordinate costs of childcare and eldercare; and wages that have stopped increasing or do so marginally prevents us from being able to sustain ourselves and our families. According to a recent study by the Center For American Progress, over 50% of women work outside of the household and contribute to their families economic security.
I have been pretty transparent about my salary negotiation missteps over the course of my career. However, what’s really disturbing is that the “sisterhood” isn’t collectively on the same page when it comes to closing this gap. Out of the seven positions I have held over the course of my career, I have had one male boss. The rest have been women. In all circumstances, not one of them ever advocated or demanded I be paid my worth. They used to lie and tell me that they were pulling for me to get the raises I was fighting for, but it was hot air. It was never their intention to ensure that I was paid a fair wage for my efforts.
Here’s the bottom-line, if I work hard and provide quality outcomes I expect to be paid commensurate with the result. I don’t want to hear: “hang in there” “I’m rooting for you” “Budgets are tight” or “maybe next year”. Women want this to change now- not in 2049 or 2178.
I say all of this to say leaning-in never increased my salary, asking for more never increased my salary and it had little to do with my ability or lack thereof to negotiate. The system in many companies is not geared to serve the interests of women or minorities for that matter. The companies that care and want to see everyone succeed do so because they start with good intentions, consistent action and passion for establishing fair workplace standards.
I know many of you felt empowered yesterday, but what are you doing about it today in your own businesses? I’ll wait.
by Janine Nicole Dennis | Feb 4, 2015 | Business, Career, Featured, Human Resources, Talent Management
Courtesy of Pixabay.com
There is nothing more reassuring to a jobseeker than hearing that opportunity abounds in the company you are interviewing with. It isn’t the most important aspect for everyone, but for a good majority- it is the defining factor next to compensation and other candidate bait. There’s very little reason for candidates to doubt your claim of endless upward mobility. That is until they get burned. When they start a job and find out the yellow brick road to career greatness is more like quicksand; it leads to initial disappointment-but they haven’t lost hope in every employer yet. They start to search again and find another seemingly good company. To ensure that they don’t make the same mistake again, they ask your recruiter better questions during the interview process. They join your company with hope and promise beneath their wings; but this time there is a new set of tricks that halt their career progression. Now, it hits the candidate like a ton of bricks that there’s something wrong. Either they are really bad at choosing companies or they aren’t as great as they thought. To put it plainly it is utterly frustrating.
At a time where retention and talent management are all the rage, you would think companies would be more intentional about looking at practices that may be undermining their efforts.Whatever your sentiment is about how employees progress in the company, you have to agree that the following practices are pretty lame and counterproductive to your talent management strategy.
1) Bogus Job Postings– Here we have those highly-coveted positions where you have quietly identified your candidate of choice, but decide to waste your employees’ time, energy and emotions as they fawn over a job they have no possibility of attaining. The worst part about this is the imposition you put both your recruiters and candidates in. Both parties know how it’s going to turn out, but instead they have to go through the motions because you want it to appear that you conducted a competitive search.
2) Sneak-Attack Promotions- When you feel the need to confidentially promote employees followed by a celebrity-worthy press release announcing your decision- morale is going to plummet. It doesn’t say very much about your leadership ability, when you don’t think enough of your team to give them a chance to apply and interview for positions they are qualified to do.
3) Hold em’ and Fold em’- Are your managers undermining your employees’ ability to transfer by creating performance issues and personality narratives that never existed? This is typical when opportunity presents internally, but the manager does everything in their power to keep the employee from progressing further by sharing off-the-record performance fodder that influences the selection process. The problem with this is the employee catches on eventually and realizes they’ve been blacklisted.
4) The Relic on the Shelf- Poor tenured employee who has done well in becoming the go-to gal or guy in their department, but can’t seem to get any further. So you mean to tell me that this person who has been with the company for 30+ years with nary a bad performance review and happens to be fluent in the company rules, norms and culture is suddenly not good enough for any other opportunities in the organization or even their own department? Stop the madness!
5) Give Me More… more education, more experience, more skills, a third arm, the stem cells from your first child- I get it-you don’t have time to train and you need them up and running like yesterday. How do more KSA’s help when you haven’t established what is absolutely essential to your operation? In addition, why is it necessary when you have promoted and continue to promote people with no credentials? If you’re going to ask someone to go back to school or learn more, the request needs to be consistent and operationally-warranted. Last time, I checked Jesus Christ already has a job.
Here you have five scenarios where there is likely a disconnect between your intention and practice. The moral of the talent management story is this: if someone isn’t performing well, don’t promote them. However, have the decency to have a conversation about how they can fix it. When they do fix it, don’t hold their past performance mistakes and deficits over their head indefinitely. Strike a balance between what you want and what is needed. You may think you “need” someone with a PH.D and the ability to read minds for that receptionist role, but does it have to be so?
For God’s sake be thankful for your tenured employees, if not for them many of your triumphs and financial gains would not be possible. If they aren’t trained to the standard of the current workforce, blame yourself for not investing in them and insisting that they continue to grow professionally. Speaking of growth, stop hiding and withholding opportunity from your workers. Be transparent about present and upcoming opportunities. Allow your employees to apply for internal opportunities aligned with their backgrounds and interests. The best case scenario is you could find out you have been missing out on some unknown strengths of your employees. The worst case…you hire the right person and your employee carries on knowing that you at least gave them a chance.
Lastly, no more bogus searches. External and internal candidates alike know when you are full of sh%&! Stop putting out external postings knowing you want a qualified internal candidate and stop posting internal positions knowing there’s a VIP in mind. Interviewing for a job is stressful and we have all been there. There is nothing considerate about making someone go through the scrutiny that is synonymous with the interview and selection process for no reason. Being honest about opportunity is just one more way of building rapport with your employees. It also ensures that prospective employees aren’t deterred from joining your company because you haven’t committed to a consistent and fair talent management strategy.
by Janine Nicole Dennis | Jan 13, 2015 | Featured, Human Resources, OFCCP, Policy
Courtesy of Wikipedia
By the fall of 2013, those of us in the federal contractor community were made aware of some significant changes coming down from the OFCCP. In good old OFCCP fashion, we were inundated with several new directives that were proposed with very little guidance to employers. Of course all of the major employment law firms went to town developing webinars and the like. Unfortunately, those did little to ease employer’s pains and added to the growing number of contractors in a vegetative state over the new compliance requirements. In January of 2014, I went to a conference in San Francisco to give a concurrent session as well as lead a roundtable on diversity and inclusion. During my roundtable, I asked for a show of hands as I attempted to ascertain how many federal contractors I had at the table.
What I found fascinating was all of the participants were federal contractors and when asked if they started reviewing and planning to comply by March 24th of 2014 as stipulated-they all gave me a resounding “no”. I attempted not to look astonished but nevertheless I continued sharing tidbits about things I was doing to get ahead of the new outreach and recruitment efforts analysis requirements. They all swore they were going to be on top of it when they returned to the office. I certainly hope that was true.
That was then and this is now…
We are now nearly one year into the new compliance and I still hear murmurs of companies not getting in OFCCP shape. If you haven’t started or are taking your sweet time- wake up! The audit list now has 22 items you will be responsible for. Get ahead of it now and lessen your pain when you inevitably receive your notice.
My fellow HR colleagues usually hate me for this-but I believe that much of the pain felt in complying with OFCCP regulations is due to how we approach it. When you see these regulations as onerous ( and I agree some of it is) and fail to see what you get in return for your compliance (which is government money)- you will ultimately procrastinate in doing what is needed. If you treat hiring of minorities, females, individuals with disabilities and veterans as quotas, you will always be in a rut of trying to explain why your AAP goals don’t budge year to year. When you receive government money it is only right that you be held to a higher standard with regard to how you do business. If you take a little bit at a time and approach the requirements as both a business imperative and priority-it will become less burdensome.
Here are five pieces of OFCCP compliance that employers are slacking on:
1) Is your outreach and recruitment efforts rooted in quality or quantity ? You need to be consistently auditing your diversity outreach and recruitment process to see what works and what doesn’t. If you identify outreach activities that aren’t yielding candidates or hires- you need to be proactive and cease utilizing that outreach.
2) Have you revised your self-identification forms yet? According to the new regulations, you need to be asking applicants to self-identify both pre and post offer. This includes updates to include self-identification for Individuals with Disabilities (IWD). Get your OMB-Approved form here.
3) How are you handling reasonable accommodation requests during the hiring process? Be sure that your ATS works well with assistive devices and technologies in an effort to ensure that individuals with disabilities are give equal opportunity to apply and be considered for vacancies.
4) Have they added your EO clause to all subcontracts? Get purchasing involved! This is another requirement that contractors are overlooking. Equal Opportunity clauses must be added to subcontracts, along with language that explains subcontractors obligations as a federal contractor.
5) What’s your hiring benchmark? The 7% goal for IWDs’ is a lofty goal for many businesses. My advice is set your benchmark and make sure it is attainable. If you set it at 5-6% you are just slightly below 7% and it looks admirable that you attempted to get close. It remains to be seen whether contractors will be penalized for playing it safe here.
Now that you have some food for thought, prepare yourself by doing mock audits. Also, encourage your recruitment teams to regularly audit their activities and raise any issues ahead of time so you can tweak things prior to an onsite or offsite audit. Good luck!
by Janine Nicole Dennis | Dec 15, 2014 | Featured, Human Resources, Life, Society and HR, Talent Management
Disclaimer: This post was co-written by Steve Levy of the uber awesome, Recruiting Inferno blog and Janine Truitt, Chief Innovations Officer of Talent Think Innovations, LLC and Founder of The Aristocracy of HR.
If you haven’t recognized the surge of conversations and bickering about race lately you have either been ignoring it or have living under a rock. For most people, having a discussion about race relations is the equivalent to standing in a public place with twenty people where there is a remarkable stench, but no one wants to be the one to say aloud that the room stinks. Talking about race stinks, but it has to be done.
Despite the front-page awareness brought by the deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO and Eric Gardner in Staten Island, NY, there’s one place that has yet to directly embrace the discussion.
The workplace.
For all the sensitivity training mandated by corporate Human Resources with their PowerPoint decks and contrived “can’t we all just get along” group exercises, practically all diversity and inclusion sessions can be boiled down to lyrical statements such as these from the Diversity and Inclusion in the VA Workforce presentation from Department of Veterans Affairs:
Diversity is the mosaic of people who bring a variety of backgrounds, styles, perspectives, values and beliefs as assets to the groups and organizations with which they interact
The “melting pot” theory of American society has evolved, instead consider a vegetable soup metaphor
Members of various cultural groups may not want to be assimilated, they want their tastes, looks and texture to remain whole.
These present a sanitized and easy-to-deliver message that diversity and inclusion can be learned by all employees in a few hours.
Yet they never mention the phrase, Race Relations.
In some instances, participants are even asked to shout out words and phrases that further marginalize the recipients, like:
Jews are great with money; Blacks are great at sports.
Feel better now? Great, now get back to work and make some money you silly goose…
The bigger question is where has all of our diversity and inclusion training gotten us? As HR people, have we had the truly difficult conversations surrounding race or have we just chosen to do what’s comfortable for everyone involved – the 50% solution?
I can comfortably say we have done the latter. We’d much rather have employees overhear the whispers in cubicles or the clandestine rumblings about race at the water cooler than to have an open and honest discussion in the context of our corporate mission and values.
When we speak about diversity and inclusion in the workplace, we usually give it the backdrop of tolerance. We can’t make people love one another but is tolerance of one another enough? Our sentiment is that just as parents teach their kids about racism so does a company “teach” its employees how to treat those from other races within the company.
However, you can’t have bigots “protectively” draped in the veil of Human Resources prancing around your organization. It doesn’t work to insulate racially insensitive behavior because as we are witnessing, racism always manages to rear its ugly head. Take Sony Pictures: None of those fools saw a hacking of their emails coming and so they happily cracked racial jokes about the President of the United States along with bashing other notable artists. Where was HR?
It will be interesting to see if and how their HR department deals with the racial joking in the context of any policies they have on the books. The likely scenario will be that the public will play the role of HR and “force” Amy Pascal to resign because the public remedy of chopping off the head of the stinking fish – at the expense of fixing the deeper reason for the stench – carries more weight to company “leadership” than addressing the issue as a violation of a company policy which of course is predicated on the presence of an actual company policy that deals with racially charged actions.
Working in HR, we have found out that policies stating that there is “Zero Tolerance” for discrimination and/or racist discussion in the workplace are bull. While most companies have them to cover their behinds, HR issues such as internal inequity run rampant with minorities making disproportionately less money than their white counterparts (want more? search for “do minorities earn less”). Zero Tolerance policies notwithstanding, employees in general are free to spew their racial epithets company-wide, because they can without any significant repercussions. Heck, kindergarten children who point “finger guns” at other classmates are suspended more frequently than employees sending around racially-insensitive emails!
We have a major issue in the US around race and it has been fermenting in business and the workforce for a long time. You can thank race relations for your EEO-1 reports, for your Affirmative Action Plans, and for all the data you have to collect to prove your applicant pools have adequate ethnic and racial representation.
The world is laughing at us.
As our colleague and friend, Ron Thomas recently said in his article “Breathe Deep” about the world’s view of business and HR: “Every race imaginable, every language imaginable and everyone is too busy with their lives to get caught up in this racial mindset. We are too busy doing business to get caught up in this US kind of thing.” His point-of-view is framed by his relationships with business leaders in Dubai where he currently lives and works.
Here’s a thought…
If it is explicit (meaning in policy and action) that racism and/or discrimination will not be the basis for any business decision in company “X”, employees have three choices, (1) they can resign and find a company where their bigoted ideas are supported; (2) they will act accordingly and ensure that all people are treated fairly; (3) or they will be fired. Zero Tolerance should really mean Zero Tolerance.
However, anti-racism policies alone are not sufficient to solve the core problem. The real issues are Action and Accountability. Given the events of gross police misconduct in Ferguson, MO and on Staten Island, NY, are HR and C-suite leadership any more encouraged to offer corporate solutions for addressing race relations in the workplace? It is important to throw both company leadership and HR out in front because it stands to reason that the current model of HR wouldn’t write a policy or create education that will change this racial trajectory if it isn’t supported by leadership.
Much of the undercurrent of annoyance and fury surrounding the recent killings of black men in the media are not just about the killings, but how it is rooted in a build up of injustices felt in every corner of society by every category of a workplace EEO-1 report. Monochromatic leadership with monochromatic workforce planning when combined with the fear or inability to discuss complex socio-economic issues has led to an uneven playing field when it comes to the differences of upward mobility and opportunity for both whites and blacks.
We’ve steered clear of the word minorities as it is an all-encompassing “safe word” that frankly allows us in HR to downplay the impact our policies, procedures and ideals have on specific groups of people. With Diversity and Inclusion training, task forces, affinity groups, and even people of color on Boards of Directors, it sure sounds like we’re being inclusive when in reality the sanitization and compartmentalization produces even further misunderstanding and pushes conversation farther back into the closet.
Both of us have very strong ties to law enforcement; we’re quite aware that the job is dangerous and we do worry about our friends and family coming home every evening. We also know how hard-working, conscientious, and fair most of them are. It’s a small percentage of police officers who cross the lines into racist action, much in the same way we suspect that a similar percentage of companies create a culture of racism with divisive C-level leadership and non-existent HR oversight.
While “leaders” have created the problem, within the workplace, HR should have the knowledge, influence, and ability to change the deeply ingrained culture that is responsible for enabling the racism. Our thesis is that racism in the workplace continues to undermine the very purpose for why we exist in organizations and in so many instances HR has taken the easy way out.
It is time for a change.
When the death of black men in Ferguson, MO, on Staten Island, and in stairwells takes place so easily, then it really does become time not for a national discussion of race in America but a national call to action and change of culture. Surely we’re not naive to believe that either discussion or action will eliminate bigotry but since we’re in a profession that purportedly cares about the workplace, it is time to mobilize a new Human Resources to create new deliverables about Race Relations.
The workplace is not a community that sits on an island cordoned off from society but is in fact a microcosm of society. HR has failed either by fear, ignorance, or some bizarre take on professionalism to address racism in the workplace. If employees are the heartbeat of the company, then for certain HR is the pacemaker – and it’s time for some serious surgery.
People are now marching on the streets across the country – and it’s calling attention to racism in America but it’s time for HR to march into boardrooms. It’s time for HR to lead the discussion on racism at work, not as means for attaining a certificate of completion for diversity training but with a goal of creating a culture and all the necessary elements to root out racism in the workplace. It’s time for HR to look its recruiting and retention practices to see if we’re “bringing” racism into the workplace with bad hiring and “promoting” racism with bad management.
If all this talk about racism makes you uncomfortable to think or speak about, think of your “valued” employees who endure these racially-charged emails, water cooler jokes, and I-know-why-you’re-here smirks because you failed to create a culture that supports the value they bring to your company. If your talent chooses to leave or you can’t attract the best and the brightest because your company’s HR policies, procedures, and people aren’t fair and supportive, do you know what that makes you?
Unemployed.
by Janine Nicole Dennis | Dec 4, 2014 | Business, Featured, HR Innovation, Human Resources
I had the privilege of being invited to the first ever IBM and Purematter Thinkathon: Hacking The Future of Work event in New York City last month. It has taken me this long to properly synthesize all of my thoughts and experiences from the event.
Why Hack The Future of Work…
The purpose of the “Thinkathon” was to get 30 people who influence the world of work in one room over three days to discuss the future of work. Over the course of these three days we were met with mind-bending presentations from IBM’ers as well as other notable keynotes. We also spent time in groups discussing how we see things like workspaces, communication, talent, technology privacy etc. working in the future.
Of the notable keynotes, was a woman by the name of Faith Popcorn. She was charged with providing the group with a glimpse of the future of the work circa 2025. While I believe we all came into this presentation with our eyes wide open and ready to be schooled, many of us became a little disheartened with what we learned of the future. In this keynote, 2025 was a vision of robots having governance over pretty much everything, simulated living/working, and the disappearance of careers. It’s important to note that Faith Popcorn is known for making wily predictions that come to pass 95% of the time (check out some of them here). As someone who has a passion for the human touch in business, I felt like someone punched me in the gut listening to her go on about a world 100% driven by robots and technology.
Based on her view of the future of work, the human touch is extinct and we all live and work in a simulated, computer amplified world. The idea that humans relinquish more and more control as technology advances presents a pressing question for HR professionals. If careers are obsolete, and people can work via simulated workspaces with a bevy of robots running about our communities and companies- what will HR’s role be?
Jay Kuhns, fellow HR expert and I with IBM employees and VIP Futurists at the IBM Design Camp. Photo courtesy of @kwheeler
The facts are…
HR will have to transform more rapidly in the next 10 years than it has the past thirty to keep up with societal and technological advances should Ms. Popcorn’s predictions hold true. Will there be whole HR departments run by robots in 2025? I don’t think so, but do I believe that we will see more and more outsourcing of functions that are better delivered by technology or people specifically dedicated to that one function? Yes. As far as the talent goes, we are all reported to be free agents by 2025 and solely responsible for marketing ourselves to companies for work. The idea that there are no more defined roles within an organization filled with professionals with a finite set of skills creates complexities for recruitment teams and every other facet of HR as we know it today. Which begs the question will there be a need for recruitment teams in 2025? I think there will be reverse recruitment in the sense that jobseekers with broader profiles will have the ability to actively recruit or seek out companies that align with their values, passions and that have a need for their skillsets. We already are starting to see this with the concept of employer branding and candidate experience. In 2025, Onboarding may be a thing of the past or repurposed, if people are no longer in traditional roles requiring the usual assimilation into their companies.
When asked about the economical impact of this new reality of the future of work, Faith Popcorn responded “there will be the haves and have-nots.” Which leads me to address the global implications of this new reality of the future of work. With companies outsourcing work to alternative markets abroad to create efficiencies and lower labor costs- will we drive these advances in how we work or will the U.S be a late adopter? Admittedly, Faith’s research and predictions are based on the American market, so she could not speak to the global implications of what she was proposing. However, with an economic reality of haves and have-nots and no real mention of those that “have a little” a.k.a. the middle-class, who are the future workers? Are they humans, robots or a mixed bag? If any of the future scenarios involve robots as actual workers this changes the entire landscape of employment law and labor relations. We will have to start thinking of things like “do robots have rights or does being human need to be a protected class?” Wild!
My opinion is change is often far more gradual than the vision of the future I viewed in Faith Popcorn’s presentation. The change we experience in the world of work will be gradual largely because many companies haven’t even adopted the technology and progressive practices available to us now. The playing field is not level for all people socially and economically which also hasn’t been resolved on a global scale; nor will it be in the foreseeable future. I have reason to believe there is a greater need in the future to preserve humanity and it’s place in the world of work. I also believe that when you predict things in the future you have to also account for the inevitable outlier events and resistance to change that often color and shape the final outcome. Too much of anything is never good and that also holds true for any imagined advances for the future of work. With some technological leaps, hardcore streamlining with a focus on creating new efficiencies and a genuine dedication to meeting the needs of future talent and business; I think the future of work has plenty of promise.
What do you think the future of work will look like in 2025? I want to hear from you!
Over the next couple of months, I will be working with IBM on some cool initiatives. Follow my journey along with my 29 fellow futurists with the hashtag #NewWayToWork.
Here’s a glimpse of the IBM Verse launch I was privileged to attend on November 18th, 2014.
http://youtu.be/f1nsDgl5eB8?list=PLEjl4yzB6ckErwJCQyIcBOY0m2s-li4Af
by Janine Nicole Dennis | Dec 1, 2014 | Featured, HR Technology, HR Technology Trends and Tips, Human Resources, Recruitment, Sponsored Post
As the calendar flips over to the months of November and December, our minds inevitably drift to holiday shopping. Recruiters are preparing their shopping lists now for the hiring that is sure to begin (budgets willing!) come January. Taking advantage of the slower pace of business, recruiters need to capture the attention of candidates who may find themselves with a little more free time over the holidays to do some job shopping.
If you’ve ever shopped online (and come on, who hasn’t?), then you understand the value of the “Quick View” feature. It’s not a laziness factor that stops us from going to another page to get the full details of the product. It’s more of a convenience factor. You can easily click on the Quick View option and still get detailed information like the colors the item comes in and whether your size is available. Quick View makes it even more convenient to find what you want quickly and easily.
Where am I going with this?
As many of you know, I am on a quest to find HR technology vendors who are finding unique ways to solve HR problems. As such, I recently stumbled across a new company called Match-Click. If you haven’t yet heard of this company, you likely will soon. In a nutshell, the company is taking the concept of the “Quick View,” enhancing it by adding video and applying it to the recruiting process.
Launched in June of this year, the start-up is quickly spreading the word about its ability to help companies move beyond those staid job board listings to market their positions using short and sweet videos. Like the Quick View feature, the videos (three for each job posting) give candidates a brief look at the salient details of the job – who they will be working with and what the culture of the company is like. It’s a unique way to browse before buying, if you will.
What I found most interesting is that these aren’t your typical lengthy, high-production corporate videos. Instead, these videos are made by the hiring manager and a couple of co-workers using whatever recording device they happen to have on hand, whether that is a mobile phone or a webcam. It’s real, it’s authentic, and it recognizes what we are all short on – time – by keeping the videos blissfully short.
As those who follow me regularly understand, I am in support of HR technology companies who are delivering products that find practical and distinctive ways to help HR practitioners perform their work more efficiently. No copycats, no replicas. Now, I’m not saying that Match-Click is the be-all and end-all solution for recruiters and companies, but what Match-Click does – help companies grab the attention of job shoppers and “just browsers” alike – it does well.
What Match-Click is doing is giving companies an innovative and cool tool to attract interest – to a job, to a company, to the people who work there. It is always challenging to capture the attention of candidates, but compelling content and useful information go a long way. Whether it is an active candidate, a passive candidate or a candidate somewhere in between, the brief, personal videos offer a no-obligation peek into a job. The site also lists the typical information you’d expect – job requirements, day-to-day responsibilities, benefits, etc. The candidate then gets to decide if they want to invest more of their time to apply for the job.
Want to know more about Match-Click and just how easy they are making it to attract attention to your job postings? Visit them on the web at: http://www.match-click.com/
Do you know about an innovative product or service that is making HR practitioners’ jobs easier? Tell me about it and I just might give it a test drive, too!
