Networking is easy — except when you make it hard on yourself.
Last month I ran into a medical device executive I’ve known for a couple of years (let’s call him Peter). He’s considering a job change and a couple months earlier asked me for a few referrals.
“How’d it got with those introductions?” I asked. Read More
Business Insider reported on a presentation by Kennedy School Professor Iris Bohnet at the Financial Times Women at the Top Conference in London. She spoke about decreasing bias in hiring.
Bias is a real problem, and not just for candidates who are disadvantaged by it. Bias is a problem for employers, who can end up passing on superior candidates when unrecognized bias leads to selection of the wrong person. That hurts the bottom line. Read More
Should you accept a counteroffer? In a word, no. Here’s why.
When you accept a counteroffer, you burn a lot of bridges. Let’s count them.
First, you burn a bridge with the person who offered you a new position. Going back on your word is a slight that is not forgotten. You can bet the hiring manager will have nothing good to say about you.
You will also burn a bridge with your employer, though you may not realize it at the time. You’ll get more money, a better title or a new job, and be flattered with kind words about your great value to the organization. Read More
The Wall Street Journal published an interesting piece on the challenge of finding job candidates who have soft skills. The author, Kate Davidson, writes:
“Companies across the U.S. say it is becoming increasingly difficult to find applicants who can communicate clearly, take initiative, problem-solve and get along with co-workers… Read More
Many up and coming leaders aspire to become a CEO. Landing that first CEO job is tough, and I’m often asked for advice on how to do it.
It’s a tricky question. In my own work on CEO searches, it’s unusual to see companies willing take a risk on someone who’s never held the top job. Most boards of directors want a low risk candidate who has already been a CEO. Read More
In the last several years I’ve done a number of searches for presidents of the US subsidiaries of foreign companies. These jobs present several special challenges. In no particular order, here they are:
Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that Theranos, the formerly highflying diagnostic startup, plans to appeal the devastating sanctions that were recently imposed by CMS.
Their odds of success are so low that it’s difficult to understand why they bothered. Those who have followed the drama know the full story, and I won’t bother to recapitulate it here. Suffice it to say that the company has developed a reputation for viewing federal regulatory agencies with contempt. That’s the business equivalent of pouring gasoline over your head and lighting a match.
Back in the 1960s, when my father started as an HR executive at Pfizer, lifetime employment was still common. Hiring managers scrutinized a candidate’s every job change. People with a pattern of many short jobs were considered damaged goods and were automatically eliminated from contention.
50 years later things have changed, but not nearly as much as the Wall Street Journal’s Joanne Lublin claims in her article entitled Job-Hopping Executives No Longer Pay Penalty.
Relocating candidates is expensive and risky. As a general rule, it’s better avoided unless absolutely necessary.
That said, there are lots of circumstances where relocation is required. If the talent you need can’t be sourced in the local market, there is no choice but to look farther afield.
In my experience, the single biggest risk comes from a candidate’s family. Family dynamics are always complicated, and it’s an area where hiring managers and recruiters have limited insight. In fact, sometimes I think the candidates themselves have less insight into their own families than they would like to believe.
Last week the Wall Street Journal reported on a new phenomenon, the automated video interview. Sadly, this terrible idea appears to be catching on.
In an automated video interview, candidates provide video responses to questions presented by a computer. Later, the responses are reviewed by humans, and the best candidates are passed on to hiring managers for further screening.