Human Resources Trends Blog

Wonderlic Fumbles Ability to Pick NFL Stars

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:00:00 GMT

If there ever was a brand name like Kleenex, Dry Ice, Band-Aid, and Scotch Tape in pre-employment testing circles, the Wonderlic (test) might get the honor.

Thanks to the National Football League using this pre-hire assessment to seek out the next Joe Montana, Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady, Wonderlic often graces not only the pages of human resource journals but sports pages as well. Unfortunately the story reported on the sports pages is more notoriety than praise. In fact, a recent article described the Wonderlic as the “least important, most overhyped and phonetically misleading word in sports.”

That’s quite an indictment for a pre-employment test used by one of the biggest businesses in America. What’s the buzz about? Maybe it has to do with 10 players the highlighted in the article that were recruited and played professional football but collectively have a combined score of 50.

For those unfamiliar with the Wonderlic, the exam is supposedly a measuring stick of a person’s general intelligence. A 50 is the maximum score an individual can have. In the case it took 10 players to score a 50!

While I’m just guessing at this, the talent gurus at the NFL must feel that general intelligence is a key to success and therefore a particular score above X on the Wonderlic would predict success on the field (or failure for those who fall below the threshold.) I wonder what that score might be?

Well, it could be 16 if Vince Young is a reliable example of a potential superstar who has done nothing but disappoint. But then how do you explain the success of NY Giant’s star receiver Hakeem Nicks who scored a measly 11 or the so far mediocre success of Buffalo Bills Quarterback and Harvard graduate who scored a 48? Or Washington Redskins quarterbacks John Beck and Rex Grossman, who scored 30 and 29 respectively?

A 2009 study of 762 players from three draft classes might have found the answer. The study found no correlation between intelligence, as measured by the Wonderlic test, and NFL performance except for tight ends and defensive backs — whose achievements increased with lower scores. Even at the quarterback position, where brains are generally believed to be critical, there was no significant relationship between high scores and high performance.

This poses three key questions which are coincidentally the same three questions every organization should be asking when evaluating the best tools to use when screening applicants:

Is a minimum level of general intelligence a predictable indicator of success?
If so, what is the minimum level?
What is the best assessment to measure it?

The first two questions have to do with job relevance. The last question has to do with validity. These same questions should be asked AND answered whether you are measuring IQ or personality.

The jury is apparently out on all three questions as it relates to football although I do suspect that with the complexity of the playbook on many teams, some form of mental ability testing might be predictive. But the verdict is in when it comes to screening applicants and employee during the hiring, succession, and promotion processes.

With the advancement of technology, the necessity to deal with more complex problems on a regular basis, and the constant state of change all employers face, testing applicants and employees for general mental abilities, or cognitive skills, will become more important. But selecting a validated assessment is only one step in helping select employees who have the potential to do the job. Understanding how much ability an employee requires is imperative, because if the bar is set too high, qualified applicants might be ignored. Likewise, determining the minimum level is only part of the equation too.

It’s important to make sure the pre-employment test you use accurately assesses the abilities that are most critical to success on the job. Unfortunately not all intelligence tests (as well as other types of pre-employment tests) measure the same abilities and many are not validated to current standards.

71% of HR Professionals Agree Personality Tests for Hiring Are Useful

Ira Wolfe — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:00:00 GMT

According to a recent poll of nearly 500 SHRM members about the use of personality tests for the hiring and promotion of employees, the majority of HR professionals (71%) indicate that personality tests can be useful in predicting job-related behavior or organizational fit. Only 14 percent disagree.

But when it came to implementation, 82 percent said their organizations do not use a personality test in the hiring or employee promotion process. That’s quite a disparity between recognition of a best practice (or at least a helpful tool) and implementation.

But then again, if you believe in the 80-20 rule, where 20 percent of the businesses earn 80 percent of all the success, maybe it isn’t so surprising.

A 2011 study by The Aberdeen Group, Assessments 2011: Selecting and Developing for the Future, lends credence to my presumption.

A significant but common theme differentiating Best-in-Class organizations from the laggards in their industry is that these Best-in-Class trust the data coming from pre-employment and personality tests in the talent decision making process. (Best-in-Class companies represent the top 20 percent of aggregate performance scorers and demonstrate their dominance in their industry.) That finding is huge because as any proponent of pre-employment testing can tell you, management and HR’s denial of any validity or reliability coming from personality testing is a significant roadblock in improving the managing of talent in many organizations.

The report revealed that across the board,

“Best-in-Class companies place greater value on assessment data as part of the decision process. The one decision point with the greatest gap between Best-in-Class and laggards was in helping understand future potential. The top performing companies know that it’s not enough to just understand the employee’s current capabilities, but what they may be able to do in the future.”

The report also says,

“finding ways to quantify, evaluate, and help make better decisions for the future based on potential is a priority for top performing companies.”

Best-in-Class organizations are also 62 percent more likely to have automated assessments as part of the recruitment process, integrating with their Applicant Tracking System (ATS or APS) or career portal (47 percent to 29 percent for the laggards.) The study found “this automation is yielding impressive performance management improvements in key hiring metrics, including improved hiring manager satisfaction and greater reduction in both time and cost to hire.”

Of the organizations that use personality tests in the hiring and promotion process, the most common job groups targeted include mid-level managers (56%), executives (45%), and entry-level exempt jobs (43%).

Yes, Introverts Can Sell and Lead

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:00:00 GMT

One of the biggest mistakes hiring managers make is thinking that extroversion and introversion is a predictor of job fit. They incorrectly believe these traits can be used to qualify and disqualify candidates during employee selection. Popular tools like DISC and MBTI do an exceptional job at identifying extroversion and introversion. But using these traits as a predictor of job fit is nothing but hogwash.

A recent post on the HRB Blog Network led me to an article about the 5 Myths about Introversion. The 5 myths are worth repeating:

1. Introversion Myth #1: Being Introverted is the same as Being Shy

While there may be a number of introverts who are shy, there are also a number of extroverts who are shy. There is no direct correlation.

2. Introversion Myth #2: Introverts are Socially Inept or Anxious in Social Situations

Again, while this may be true for some introverts, this can also be true for extroverts and is not directly related to one’s introversion.

3. Introversion Myth #3: If I am Fearful of Public Speaking I Must be an Introvert

Studies show the fear of public speaking is the top fear people face, and that 75% of individuals experience speaking anxiety. Yet less than half of all people are introverts. Again, there is no direct correlation and this affects extroverts in the same way it affects introverts.

4. Introversion Myth #4: Introverts Have Communication Challenges and Difficulty Knowing What to Say

This is social anxiety, not introversion. If you research social anxiety you do not find references to introversion as a cause.

5. Introversion Myth #5: If You Act Like an Extrovert You Can “Overcome” Introversion

Introversion is not a disease that needs to be treated. It is merely a preference for communicating and processing. Regardless if you are introverted or extroverted, situations require everyone to adapt. Extroversion is not the preferred state; it’s just another state which is preferred sometime but not all times.

The article also offered a concise description and explanation of introverts and extroverts too:

Introverts get their energy from their “inner world” of thoughts, ideas, reflections and even memories. Introverts get excited with coming up with new ideas and mulling over how they can bring them to life. Idea to reality naturally energizes the introvert. (Note – that doesn’t mean that introverts are creative, innovative, or skilled at implementation. It just means they get energized by the possibility.) Introverts generally love brainstorming, although they may do more listening than talking. That doesn’t mean introverts aren’t participating or contributing; they are just thinking about the ideas and considering outcomes. They may in fact engage in a few side conversations with just one or two other people so that they can thoughtfully turn thoughts into words. Generally speaking, introverts think in their heads rather than out loud.

Extroverts, on the other hand, get their energy from being in the “outer world” of people and places and things. They think out loud, even talk to themselves. They gain energy from being around large groups of people, even a group of complete strangers. Social networking events can be the air that extroverts breathe! For introverts, being in a large group is draining, which is they we have to take time to recharge after being at social events or in large work groups.

Now that we’ve exposed the myths and described the differences between introverts and extroverts, you should be asking how many introverted sales candidates you might have erroneously disqualified or how many introverted accountants and billing clerks did you hire that failed?

No doubt introversion and extroversion does play a role in how an employee might approach his or her duties but it in no way predicts if he is qualified or skilled to do the job. Motivated employees are more than willing to adapt to different situations and learn the skills necessary to perform. Just as the introvert might need to become more comfortable in larger group settings, the extrovert must learn to work independently and often times, think before he speaks or acts. But in neither case does introversion and extroversion potential or ability. Knowing the trait ahead of time only gives the employer the starting point from where the employee might need to flex their behavior.

Considering the challenge many employers face in finding skilled and qualified candidates, it is imperative that those diamonds in the rough not be overlooked. Dispelling the myths and stereotypes about introverts is a good first step in identifying and hiring the most qualified candidate.

8 Questions You Must Ask Before Hiring Your Next Salesperson

Ira Wolfe — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:12:00 GMT

When it comes to assessing a candidate’s fit for sales, one size definitely does not fit all.

Traits like assertiveness, criticism tolerance (ability to take a no), and resilience may be good enough to have when “getting past the gatekeeper” and “closing a sale” are the two most critical skills required. But selling complex products or differentiating a company’s services from its competitors require consultative and relationship selling skills that many salespeople do not have.

For example, transactional sales, especially those based on primarily on price, depend upon the ability to get people to accept your call, negotiate the best deal, and close quickly. More complex selling opportunities require extensive product knowledge, broad competitive intelligence, excellent relationship management skills, and resilience. Years of experience and a decade’s worth of President Club awards are not necessarily transferrable from one industry to another, one company to another, or even one territory or product from another.

Before hiring or promoting your salesperson, here are eight questions you must ask before interviewing and assessing candidates.

What product or services are you selling? Success in selling requires a lot more than a few years of experience and the completion of a sales skills training. Adding value and differentiating your company from the rest of a crowded market requires finesse and advanced skills.
To whom are you selling? Selling promotional products to a retail shop owner compared to selling an enterprise wide human resource information system require very different sales skill sets.
How competitive is the market place? If you are the only game in town, or at least considered the industry leader, salespeople can lean on the company’s reputation for credibility. But what if your company or product is unfamiliar to your prospects? The most important skill a salesperson might need is the ability to build endorsement.
Is this a new territory or a mature one? Similar to the competitiveness of the market place, developing a new territory or working a mature market require different selling styles and skills. You are likely familiar with “hunters” and “farmers.” It’s much easier to introduce yourself as the new account manager when a customer down the street has been doing business with your company for several years than trying to get the prospect to take a chance on an unknown.
How long is a typical sales cycle? The longer the cycle, the more skills are required. The longer the selling cycle, the more the salesperson will have to have a process and system in place to track and follow leads and referrals. The salesperson must be patient and resilient and equipped to stick it out for the long haul. Products or services will long selling cycles often have bigger rewards but many salespeople are more motivated and skilled at shorter cycle, faster rewards. That leads us to the compensation question.
How do salespeople get paid? This is a complex and complicated question. But the more commission based the compensation, the more money management skills the salesperson must have to deal with the ups and downs of income, especially for longer selling cycles. Few hiring managers take this into consideration before hiring the high potential candidate. Unfortunately many sales failures have nothing to do with sales skills but the short term income to pay the mortgage and put food on the table while waiting for the big commission check.
Who is responsible for lead generation? If developing new business is a requirement for the job, then assessing the sales candidate’s track record or potential for identifying new customers, cold calling, qualifying them, and developing new relationships must be part of the hiring equation. For the company that has a steady stream of warm leads, finding qualified candidates just got a lot easier. Do not assume however that the ability to contact warm leads and qualify them is a predictive indicator of the ability to identify new customers and cold call them.
Who is responsible for writing and presenting proposals? The ability to write and present are critical communication skills in today’s marketplace. Unfortunately few salespeople have mastered these skills at a level necessary to compete effectively.

Asking these questions is one thing. Getting this information quickly and accurately is another. Pre-employment tests are an excellent way to complement and enhance the interview and reference check process. The right combination of assessments can confirm if a candidate has the potential to learn or meet your job requirements as well as the resilience and motivation to persist through good times and bad.

What Are The Biggest Recruiting Challenges Today?

Ira Wolfe — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:46:00 GMT

According to the State of Recruiting 2012 study released by Talent Technology, finding good candidates tops the list of challenges facing many organizations. It’s followed by filling positions fast, dedicated hiring managers, managing applicants, and sub-par job descriptions. All five of these challenges are manageable with best practice systems and technology. This too can and must be better managed if companies are to compete effectively for talent.

A little further down the list at the number 9 spot is “time spent reading resumes.” How much time is spent reading a resume? According to the Talent Technology study, each HR and recruiting professional takes about 4.5 minutes to review a single resume. With over 100 applications being submitted for every one job opening, recruiters spend over 7.5 hours sifting through resumes to find half a dozen candidates worth interviewing. That could be one reason why it takes an average 45 days to fill a job vacancy.

In today’s workplace where human resources are lean and time is money, employers can’t afford to pay recruiters to screen out unqualified applicants when the process can be automated and candidate screening reduced to just a few minutes. The outcome of relying on manual and outdated technologies is that critical positions remaining unfilled for 45 days or more while recruiters and hiring managers shuffle papers and meet with unqualified candidates,

Prevue Pro APS helps small business manage these challenges and turn potential liabilities and competitive vulnerabilities into a competitive advantage.

Accurate Job Descriptions: An Employee's Blueprint

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 10:41:00 GMT

A job description is an employee’s blueprint: Providing directions to the employee for his or her journey on how to get from starting a job to promotion, increased compensation and job satisfaction. And that's just for the employee.

Job descriptions are also important for the employer. There are six key reasons why job descriptions should not be ignored or slighted:

They clarify who is responsible for what within the company.
They help the job holder understand the responsibilities of the position.
They provide information about the knowledge, training, education, and skills needed for each job.
They help management analyze and improve the company’s structure.
They provide a basis for job evaluation, wage and salary surveys, and an equitable wage and salary structure.
They provide a basis from which to determine whether a disabled applicant is otherwise qualified for the job, and if so, to assist in determining what accommodation might be required.

While there is no federal or state statutes that requires them, a good job description is an important tool in the effective and legal management of any organization. Suffice it to say that job descriptions are essential in running a successful business.

Best Practices

(Source: National Law Review)

One of the most common reasons a job description isn’t used is because it isn’t useful. Therefore preparing accurate job descriptions is the first step. A job description is only useful if it’s valid. To be valid, it must accurately reflect job essentials, including responsibilities, expectations, and skills. What would be considered an essential function?

Essential functions are those duties which must be performed in the job. If the job description fails to include all the essential duties, candidates without the proper qualifications might be referred to managers for interviewing or recommended for hiring. Jobs might also be ranked improperly compared to others in terms of their worth to the organization. Employees may end up struggling to achieve unrealistic standards of performance.

On the other hand, if duties are inaccurately listed as essential duties, qualified candidates may be excluded or deterred from applying. Even more problematic is the need for employers to provide reasonable accommodation to disabled or protected candidates that might be unnecessary if duties are misclassified as essential.

Job duties also change over time and an out-dated job description may be of little benefit or could even be a detriment. To ensure that your job descriptions remain current and accurate, consider taking the following steps:

Include the effective date on every job description and ensure that the date is revised when changes are made.
Confirm that the job description is current before posting any open position.
Confirm that the job description is up-to-date as part of the performance review process.
Review all job descriptions on a set schedule. If this approach is not practicable, consider spot audits.

Using job descriptions will help an organization better understand the experience and skill base needed to enhance the success of the company. They help in the hiring, evaluation and potentially terminating of employees. And in the case of a misunderstanding between what a position entails and how an employee or manager sees top performance, a well-prepared job description can help both sides share a common understanding.

Applicant Processing Systems Help Small Business Hire Smarter & Faster

Ira Wolfe — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:29:00 GMT

Today’s job market is tough, not just for prospective employees, but for employers as well. Employers are inundated with applications, resumes, and cover letters. To make matters worse, recent studies show that it takes nearly 100 candidates to find one qualified candidate. Taking the time to sift through all of the paperwork and emails to find qualified candidates is a luxury (and skill) few small businesses have.

"In response to clients frustrated with this overload of resumes from unqualified candidates," says Ira S Wolfe, President of Success Performance Solutions, "we are very excited to introduce Prevue APS PRO."

Prevue APS Pro is a modern, affordable and easy-to-use applicant processing system. It allows small businesses to hire smarter and faster. This recruiting software not only helps reduce the cost of hiring, but also includes a company career site for applicants to upload resumes, complete applications, submit biographical information, and more. Businesses have the ability to screen candidates using their own customized job and skill specific questions, then track, sort, and contact applicants.

Prevue APS Pro allows even the smallest business, who often don't even have a full time human resources person on staff, to cast the widest recruitment net possible. "Without an APS," Wolfe asserts,"small companies tend to avoid using multiple social networking sites like Craigs List, Facebook,and LinkedIn and more traditional job boards to curtail the influx of resumes. Prevue APS Pro allows companies to post jobs on as many sites as necessary but view all the applicants on one centralized dashboard." Prevue APS Pro also includes free job postings to a dozen job boards.

Prevue APS Pro eliminates wasted time spent on chasing and interviewing unqualified candidates, reducing the cost to hire and improving the quality of hire significantly. It is easily accessible from any computer available to job applicants and employers 24/7. There is no software to purchase or install.

Prevue APS Pro has been used to recruit all types of positions including Sales Professionals, C-level executives, Administrative Assistants, Accountants, Customer Services Representatives, Managers, and more. Prevue APS Pro also includes the option to screen candidates with Prevue pre-employment assessments.

Reseller programs are also available for recruiters and staffing agencies.

For more information or to schedule a demo, click here

It's Time to Kill This Myth about Pre-Employment Tests

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:07:00 GMT

Neither Congress nor the Courts has said that pre-employment tests are illegal. They just say that any tests, inventories, or procedures used for selection must test for job-specific and job-related skills or traits. It's also important to note that selection activities include internal promotions and succession as well as bringing new employees from the outside.

As you can see from the list below of what the Department of Labor and its agencies consider to be employee assessments (source: An Employer's Guide to Good Practice, U.S. Department of Labor), personality tests are no more illegal to use in selecting the best employees for a job than the interview.

1. interviews
2. observations
3. resume evaluations
4. application blanks/questionnaires
5. biodata inventories
6. work samples/performance tests
7. achievement tests
8. general ability tests
9. specific ability tests
10. physical ability tests
11. personality inventories
12. honesty/integrity inventories
13. interest inventories
14. work values inventories
15. assessment centers
16. drug tests
17. medical tests

The issue of legal or illegal is based on job relatedness, not the tool itself. The Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures states that a thorough job analysis is needed for supporting a selection procedure. As a result the job analysis can be the proof an organization needs to defend its use of tools and techniques that screen out mis-matched, unskilled, or disruptive employees and select in the very best people for the job.

Job Descriptions: Hate 'em or Love 'em You Need 'em

Ira Wolfe — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:51:00 GMT

Job descriptions. Employees want them, managers hate them.

Job descriptions traditionally have suffered a poor reputation among managers and human resources. In fact, job descriptions often end up being ignored. The general sentiment is that job descriptions are time-consuming, labor intensive, and the root cause of many a disagreement (or worse!) in the human resources arena.

Yet, as maligned as they are, job descriptions are critical to efficient operations, workplace harmony and business success. A job description is like a map: Providing directions to the traveler on how to get from starting a job to promotion, increased compensation and job satisfaction. And that's just for the employee.

Job descriptions are also important to employers. Employers who underestimate their importance do so at their peril especially when it comes to compliance in the following areas:

Wage and Salary Administration
To Ensure Legal Compliance with: American with Disabilities Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, Equal Pay Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Occupational Safety and Health, Age Discrimination in Employment Act
Collective Bargaining
General Human Resources Administration
Organizational Development/Strategic Planning

The EEOC in particular has said that one of the things the agency will look at when determining essential functions are job descriptions written before an employer advertises to fill an opening. Many companies rely on generic descriptions. A generic job description is not the best way to recruit top talent or defend a company against discrimination claims.

The Courts in fact ruled in several landmark cases that "the cornerstone in the construction of a content valid examination is the job analysis" (Kirkland v. New York State Department of Correctional Services) and "job relatedness cannot be proven through vague and unsubstantiated hearsay" (Albermarle Paper Company v. Moody).

No job description should be viewed as a perfect reflection of the job. The object of a good job description is to differentiate the job from other jobs and set its outer limits.

Many a job description is rendered impotent by failing to adequately address one or more of the following:

How the job relates to successful implementation of the company’s strategy
The purpose of the position (what should happen when the employee successfully performs the duties of the job)
Essential responsibilities of the employee filling the position
Critical core competencies required how to the job
Actual job specifics such as pay grade, physical restrictions, job requirements, etc.

The information for much of job description is often obtained through what is called a job analysis. Its purpose is to identify the job, define it within established paramaters, and describe its scope and content.

Suffice it to say that job descriptions are essential in managing employee performance. Regardless if you love them or hate them, every employer needs them.

Just Released Pre Employment Tests Cut Employee Theft at Casinos

Ira Wolfe — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:34:00 GMT

Recent studies and survey reveal that human-capital considerations top the list of current managerial concerns in the gaming industry. They have good reason.

Many sources document that nearly 50% of all losses incurred by casinos are attributed to employee theft. According to the Nevada Gaming Commission, approximately 34 percent of those arrested for theft or cheating in casinos were the casinos’ own staff members.

The major types of employee theft / misdeeds include:

Cash-handling positions on the gaming floor;
Watering down drinks;
Fraudulent recording of amount of time spent gambling by patrons;
Drinking on the job, drug use, loitering;
Theft of alcohol, food and meat;
Theft of guest possessions;
Patron theft (of winnings, purses, chips, etc.)

Casinos must divert more resources to recruiting and selecting potential employees who are dependable, honest, and customer focused. It is suggested that casino management should adopt a comprehensive employee screening tool kit to screen out high risk candidates. HR managers of casinos should adopt selection tools to choose employees with better personality fit, general reasoning abilities, and positive work attitude.

For example, online personality tests are helpful to assess some important traits in casino and gaming workers such as agreeableness, the degree to which someone is trusting, amiable, cooperative, and open-minded; emotional stability, the degree to which someone is confident, reserved, and poised especially in stressful situations; and conscientiousness, the degree to which an employee will follow the rules, show up for work, and follow-through.

4 Tips to Hire The Right People in 2012

Ira Wolfe — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 11:00:00 GMT

While our economy and job market has a long way to go, most economic indicators point toward a positive job outlook. This means that an already tight talent pool of skilled and motivated employees will get tighter in 2012 and 2013.

The window for ramping up productivity is closing. Employers are running so lean that when new orders or business come in, they don’t have time to waste in hiring employees to sell, produce or deliver the services. Here’s a few basic steps every employer can take to ensure it has the right people in the right place at the right time.

Update job descriptions. But don’t go crazy. Be succinct. Too many businesses turn writing job descriptions into a year-long ordeal (which means they never get done or they get sourced to a consultant who creates a boiler plate document for legal purposes.) Make sure that you define the essential responsibilities, functions and requirements of the position being offered. Use an abbreviated form of the job description in your career ads. Let candidates read what you expect before they apply. This will likely limit the number of unqualified candidates who submit applications to your firm.

Tip: Use the 15 minute job description. Imagine sitting with this employee 12 months from now for his or her performance review. Ask yourself, “What are my expectations for an employee filling this position?” Identify 3 to 5 specific goals you expect them to meet or exceed. Then add or review the essential responsibilities, functions, and skills required for the employee to earn your highest performance rating. If you can’t write this job description in 15 minutes, you’re probably not ready to hire an employee without disappointing you in some way.

Centralize your recruitment and employee screening functions. Choose one employee to review and post all job postings from your business. Using the same person for this task will provide greater consistency and minimize the possibility that hiring managers don’t start personalizing the ads for their preferences and put the company at risk. For example, the desperate manager might remove or edit some job responsibilities or skills to fill jobs faster. While filling the job faster keeps his production high, higher turnover and lower quality might end up costing the company a lot of money. And many managers are inclined to seek candidates who are currently working. This practice is under scrutiny by the EEOC for discrimination because it excludes a disproportionate number of minorities, disabled, and older workers. If “employed only” is a job requirement, that decision should be made by management who assumes the risks if challenged by a disgruntled candidate, not individual managers or HR.

Be more selective with recruiting tools. Traditionally, employers have tried to broaden their searches by advertising on sites that reach a wide audience. But job boards, social networking sites like LinkedIn, and classified ad sites like Craigslist have made it so easy for candidates to apply for jobs that the volume of resumes and application coming through HR’s inbox overwhelms capacity. The knee-jerk response of many companies, especially the smaller ones, is to cut back on advertising and narrow the search. Unfortunately, this also significantly diminishes the chances of finding the right person, especially if the business is seeking a skilled worker. You may find better candidates by relying on industry-specific sites, recruiting firms or networks of professional associations. Ads on sites like LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google can also be targeted to different age groups, geographic regions, or other demographic criteria. Current employees as well as previous employees should also be encouraged to make referrals or recommendations.

Use applicant processing software to screen applicants. Allow candidates to submit applications online. The cost for online applicant processing has dropped significantly, to a point where it is affordable for a small business that hires only a few employees each year. Applicant processing software can help you narrow the search by screening out unqualified or high risk candidates before recruiters make the first contact. A few applicant processing systems include pre-employment tests too. Time to hire improves because recruiters, HR and managers are wasting time contacting and interviewing candidates who don’t meet the minimum requirements. Additionally, you'll be able to save resumes for the future and build a talent pool if you don't have an immediate opening for someone who wows you. Also, this technique makes it relatively easy to respond to each applicant. Many of the applicant processing systems have auto-responders which can be customized for a more personal approach.

The outlook for business in 2012 is improving. Don’t let the competition get the drop on you because you can’t find the right people fast enough.

Use DISC: Get People to Listen to You Now

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 11:00:00 GMT

You hear the complaint over and over again – people texting, listening to their iPod, surfing the net, watching TV, playing games…all at the same time. This complaint particularly surfaces when the Mature Generation, Baby Boomers, and Generation X discuss Millennials. Yes, multi-tasking is a problem and for many, these distractions definitely turn communication into a challenging and unfulfilling process.

But ineffective communication isn’t always the result of multi-tasking. Ironically, if want to communicate effectively, multi-tasking is required. How’s that possible?

When people communicate face to face, they deliver messages on three channels. You need to listen to all 3 channels if you want to hear what the other person is saying. Likewise, if you want to gain the attention of others, you must be able to identify and tune into the right channel of your audience.

What are these three channels?

Verbal – words. Most people believe it is the words you use that differentiate good from bad communication. While important, the words used are only one channel. In fact, some research says that less than 10 percent of effective communication is driven by the words you use. A majority of people tune you out and never hear your words when you don’t first broadcast your message on the right channel.
Visual – body language. This is the most popular channel, especially in face-to-face communication. Body language is reported to determine nearly 60 percent of effective communication. Your posture, your facial expressions, your eye contact all determine how quickly another person will turn you off or engage with you. Body language also impacts non-face-to-face communication too. Just because your target can’t see you doesn’t mean he or she can’t “hear” the effect of your posture and facial expressions.
Vocal – how you say it. This is the second most popular channel, especially with so many people communicating long distance and telecommuting these days. Loud and soft, fast and slow speech all impact the impression you make on others and how likely they will want to listen to what you have to say. The vocal channel determines approximately one-third of effective communication.

Which channel is most important? That’s a great question and the answer depends on the channel that the customer uses. How can you determine quickly the preferred channel of your listeners?

If effective communication is broadcast on three channels of Visual, Vocal, and Verbal, then CriteriaOne DISC is the TV Guide. Each behavioral style has its communication preferences. By understanding the DISC model, presenters can quickly assess their audience and tune into the appropriate visual, vocal, and verbal channels so the intended listener tunes in and stays tuned.

For an example of how all this DISC stuff works, watch the video embedded earlier in the article. Dr. Tony Alessandra does a great job of demonstrating how Visual, Vocal, and Verbal channels can change the meaning of even the simple word “oh.”

Can you hear me now?

Why Companies Have It All Wrong About Employee Motivation

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 21:30:00 GMT

Employee engagement of American workers is pathetic. According to recent Gallup Employee Engagement Index survey, seventy-one (71) percent of American workers are "not engaged" or "actively disengaged" in their work, meaning they are emotionally disconnected from their workplaces and are less likely to be productive. That leaves only one-third of American workers who are "engaged," or involved in and enthusiastic about their work.

Part, if not most, of the reason why employee engagement is so bad is that employers go about motivating employees all wrong. The problem begins with a misunderstanding of the very basics of motivational theory. Most managers believe some people are motivated, and others are not. That’s wrong – plain and simple.

All employees are motivated. But people are motivated differently. Not only do they value things differently, but the sources of motivation can have both positive and negative influences. When the sources are positive, employees are productive. When sources are negative, employees exhibit counter-productive behavior. These differences in motivation are based on extensive research resulting in the Quality of Motivation (QM) Theory.

All motivation can be traced back to two basic ingredients: pleasure and pain. Motivation by pleasure shouldn’t require much explanation. But you must be asking why anyone would be motivated by pain?

Have you ever heard the phrase "no pain, no gain" or "nothing comes easy'? These beliefs drive people toward pain and self-defeating experiences respectively, believing a little pain now will reap pleasure down the road. Think about the marathon runner or the professional athlete. Despite the risk of chronic pain due to the constant pounding of their joints and extreme stress to body systems, these athletes are relentless in their drive to reach the finish line at any cost, even long-term crippling and incapacitating injury.

Other people constantly pass up opportunity to advance or improve their lot in life (self-defeatance) because they don’t think they have done enough to deserve the raise, the promotion, or the recognition. There is a fine line between self-defeating behavior and humility, and that difference separates employees from being productive and counter-productive.

Self-punishment is mistakenly rewarded in today's workplace. Strong work ethic, commitment, and good work habits are positive characteristics – unless they are derived from counter-productive behaviors. For example, let’s look at workaholism. It’s rewarded and often encouraged by employers. Workers who show up early, stay late, are on call 24/7, and rarely take vacation are put on a pedestal for all other employees to admire. But while doing more with less is driving American productivity and admired as good old work ethic by managers, it is also driving the rates of employee disengagement and employee turnover sky high.

It is also raining havoc on employee health, and consequently medical and disability costs. According to another Gallup survey, only 2 in 10 actively disengaged American workers report they are in excellent health, about the same as those workers who are unemployed. “A little pain never hurt anyone" is apparently not always true. Workers who "tough it out" may have the short-term benefit of increased productivity but long-term negative consequence of burnout, injury and even premature death.

What can employers do to avoid motivating these counter-productive behaviors and ensuring they create a positively motivated workplace? Managers must first recognize that enthusiasm, drive and high-paced activity alone are ineffective measures of motivation. People employed in your business bring their own unique motivational sources and skills to the workplace. That explains why some people seem to run and run….and run - just like the Energizer Bunny. Think about it. Watching Robin Williams perform can make you tired. So can hyperactive, pencil-tapping, emotionally disengaged employees. Their activity and busy-ness uses lots of energy but their results aren't always productive; their work habits are not necessarily efficient.

Rewarding hard work and a strong work ethic is one thing but when it inadvertently rewards self-punishment, the cost to the bottom line is devastating.

Self-punishment is just one of four maladaptive behaviors that motivate employees and shape a company's culture. Motivation is more complex than just pumping up spirits and getting people to work harder. By understanding that motivation has both positive and counter-productive effects, employers can create work environments and employee incentives that get the business results they want and avoid the long-term debilitating consequences of encouraging the wrong behaviors.

Read about “martyrance” – another counter-productive, but self-motivating behavior.

It is therefore crucial for businesses positioning themselves as thriving businesses to select and develop employees who will become profitable, motivated, and highly skilled at providing value-added services. The business must engage the emotional energy and attention of the employees and provide the resources to help them cope with the emotional, intellectual, and physical demands of the job.

Twas the Week Before Christmas and All Through the Shops - A DISC Tale

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:01:00 GMT

Twas the week before Christmas and all through the stores, everyone is scurrying and rushing toward the doors.

The sales staff is exhausted, the shoppers are spent,

The businesses are hoping, they'll make enough to pay the rent.

But regardless of the holiday, one thing is for sure,

To predict how a person approaches shopping, DISC will endure.

Over the next few days, millions of people will purchase goods and services-on-line, by phone, or in person using one of four DISC behavioral styles. There is no magic or hocus-pocus to identifying these styles. All you need to do is observe and listen. Here are a few examples of DISC shopping styles in action:

The high D behavioral style says "Only 1 day? What's the big deal? There's plenty of time left." D types love the challenge. Ironically, the remarkable emotion of D behavioral style is a short fuse - traffic jams, long lines, crowded stores and D types don't mix. Internet shopping is tailor made for these direct, results-focused individuals. Gift cards and certificates are near perfect because they are much more efficient and they believe you can't go wrong with cash or its equivalent. Then again, the D behavioral style might cajole his administrative assistant to make the shopping list, check it twice, and be Santa's little helper. It shouldn't surprise anyone that high D behavioral types are the ones doing last minute shopping on Christmas Eve. And if anything needs to be assembled, Ds pay someone to do the handiwork. High D behavioral types give gifts that identify with increased productivity.

The high I behavioral type loves the holiday season, and the shopping, parties, and crowds that go with it. Shopping is an event, a day out at the mall with friends and families - the more the merrier. The I behavioral type plans a shopping trip with the attention normally given to planning a wedding. Shopping begins early and centers on meals. After all, how can you possibly shop without a big breakfast, numerous breaks for snack and lunch, lunch, wrapping up the day with a sit-down dinner? By the end of the day, the high I behavioral type has had a great time regardless of the success of paring down the gift list. The High I person is optimistic. There's always time for shopping! The high I behavioral type is highly influenced by those gifts with the most attractive wrappings, even if what's inside is not always practical. You can be sure he/she's an I if you hear, "I just couldn't resist buying it. It had my name all over it. I hope you like it too."

The high "S" behavioral style favors handcrafted gifts and homemade food. Christmas shopping begins and ends early. This steady, methodical shopper makes lists, clip coupons, and maps out a shopping itinerary before leaving the house. Although Black Friday marks the start of the shopping season for most consumers, December 26th is the right time to get a head start on next year's shopping list. The S behavioral style kicks into high shopping gear right after Labor Day and with few exceptions, gifts are bought, wrapped, and shipped before Thanksgiving. December isn't a time for shopping but for making cookies and preparing Christmas dinner. On Dec. 16, the high S behavioral style thinks, "Only nine days until after-Christmas sales begin."

The high “C” behavioral personalities work to avoid big crowds and don't understand how anyone can leave shopping to the last minute. In many ways, the C and S behavioral styles share shopping preferences. But the gifts they choose differentiate these behavioral styles. S personalities give gifts with a personal touch; Cs seek quality. The more practical C behavioral type purchase gifts that will last, and makes certain their gifts have the best warranties. During September and October, they do research to find the best-made, highest quality and most reasonably priced gift. These logical analytical types prefer to give gifts with a proven track record and can't understand why anyone would waste money on this year's fad.

If any of these types seem familiar, that is because they are. DISC is the universal language and dates back to....well as far back as Christmas itself. Learn more about DISC and its history here.

14 Tips to Improve Employee Performance Appraisals

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:00:00 GMT

Performance appraisals. Other than terminating an employee, is there any managerial or HR task more dreaded than carrying out a performance appraisal?

Also known as annual performance reviews, performance management systems and performance evaluations, they can be stressful for all involved, sometimes creating a quasi-adversarial relationship between the appraisee (employee) and appraiser (manager). However, it doesn't have to be that way.

In this article let’s look at how the entire process can be enhanced in hopes of generating the best result possible: An engaged employee determined to do his best and improve wherever possible.

To engage employees and managers in improving performance, what are the critical components of effective performance appraisals?

The first and most important ingredient is honesty. I addressed the importance in a previous article. Once you've addressed the issue of honesty, discussions involving the following thirteen additional tips become more relevant and help create effective performance appraisals:

Clearly identify your objectives;
Have the employee complete a self-assessment;
Redefine or reconfirm the purpose of the job, the duties and the responsibilities;
Define the priority of and set objectives for each responsibility;
Establish specific performance standards;
Be specific when addressing areas requiring improvement, (i.e., facts, figures, work records, reports, etc.)
Be specific when addressing examples of unacceptable conduct (not general references to 'laziness' or 'bad attitude'), cite specific examples as much as possible;
Present, discuss and agree to a "Performance Improvement Plan" if necessary;
Set ongoing goals;
Provide the opportunity for feedback, not only during the meeting but by allowing your employee to respond to the evaluation in writing, detailing their disagreement or position;
Solicit as much feedback as possible not only about the performance at issue but also about what the employee would like to improve, what professional development, training, new assignments and challenges in general she has in mind for herself;
If performance in some area(s) does not meet standards, then agree to set frequent and regularly scheduled performance discussions;
Before closing the meeting, be sure to ask if there is anything else the employee wants to discuss, thereby maintaining a conversational rather than confrontational tone.

One other thing to remember is that it's always a good idea to remind the employee that the annual performance appraisal is not automatically tied to a compensation review. He may be disappointed with some of the results of his appraisal; it's best not to deepen that disappointment by not addressing compensation if he presumed you would.

Effective performance appraisals - They are not possible but, if given the proper priority, purpose and planning, but essential to maximizing the productivity of your most important resource: People.

Honesty Best Policy When Appraising Employee Performance

Ira Wolfe — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:00:00 GMT

The first and most important ingredient in managing performance is honesty. In order for a performance appraisal to have any benefit at all, managers and employees must be honest with each other and the process. Managers must candidly address not only the perceived shortcomings of the employee, but also the employer's part in contributing to those shortcomings.

Managers must ask: “Does the employee still have the same duties and responsibilities she was assigned at the time of hire or since the previous appraisal?” This question is extremely important since so many companies are running lean and mean. Many support and collateral jobs have been eliminated. Others simply go unfilled. That means an employee may have absorbed responsibilities into their job that managers don’t even recognize.

This creep of responsibility is not always isolated to the employee’s company. A growing problem is that suppliers, vendors, and client organizations have shrunk and your employee may be assuming responsibilities for tasks formerly handled by another business in the supply chain. In addition, if your employee is doing a different job or the same one with different tasks, has he been adequately trained in order for the changes in her job? If not meeting expectations, is she unwilling to change or simply unable to carry out the position successfully?

The requirement to be honest applies as well to examining the purpose of the pending evaluation. If the employee has performed in a substandard manner without prior comment, is the appraisal being used in lieu of progressive disciplinary action? If so, even more care will be required in communicating inadequate performance to avoid the perception (not unreasonable, we would argue) that the evaluation process is simply being used as the first step on the road to termination. As always, we think it appropriate to remind you that any disciplinary or remedial action should be conducted proximate in time to the performance or conduct you seek to correct.

4 Ways People Prepare and Celebrate Thanksgiving

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:52:00 GMT

In a just a little over twenty-four hours, many of us will have our bellies full of turkey, stuffing, cranberries, pumpkin pie and who knows what other goodies.How we will get that way is the topic of today's column.

Whether it is Uncle Bob, Grandma, or cousin Sue, there are basically four different ways people prepare and celebrate for the holiday. They fit what is commonly called the DISC behavioral style model. DISC is an acronym standing for Direct, Influencing (or Interacting), Steady, and Compliant (or Conscientious) - in other words, how people respond to problems, people, pace and procedures. Even if you never have heard of DISC before, you will certainly recognize a few relatives, friends or acquaintances who exhibit these classic behavioral styles, representing D-I-S-C.

D Style

Thanksgiving dinner is an event to High D behavioral types, The guest list is figured out on the fly, most likely on the back of a napkin or on whatever writing surface is handy. Seating often resembles a strategic planning event. In fact, Thanksgiving dinner is the perfect venue to discuss a few business deals that just can't get done during working hours. High D behavioral types shop for groceries without a list. The fact of the matter is they don't have any idea what they'll serve for dinner - they'll know a good deal when they see it. If the long lines at checkout are too long, they may decide to make reservations at a local restaurant or country club or even order take out. Where ever and whenever they eat, they chose the place, meal and time. To high D's recipes are only guides. They add and substitute ingredients at will and use gravy and sauces to cover up the "mistakes". Microwaveable foods are a staple. If D-types actually do any cooking, the kitchen may be a mess but they know exactly where everything is. They will be in control. If your host is D behavioral style, don't be surprised to get a call on your mobile while on your way to stop for ice. When the D is ready to eat, he/she tells his guests where to sit. During dinner, expect a blow-by-blow description of each course. You'll hear how much time, money or effort it took to prepare. Recipes are described as "best", "special", "can't be beat", and "great deals."

I Style

High I behavioral types don't prepare dinner, they plan a party. They insist on only one rule - NO business talk! Grocery shopping is an experience - they go to the store at the busiest time so they can socialize and meet people. I-behavioral types may spend more time in the party store picking up holiday table cloths, napkins, dishes and decoration more than they do in the grocery store. They carry dozens of coupons, torn (not cut) from newspapers and magazines, stuffed in no particular order into an envelope or purse. I-behavioral types know where everything is in the store, whether you ask them to tell you or not. The guest list includes family, friends, neighbors and anyone who might otherwise have to eat dinner alone. The list resembles the yellow pages. I-types can't remember everyone they invited so they set extra places just in case extra people drop by. What time is dinner? Just drop-in. A menu? You've got to be kidding. The menu is potluck and the I-type just asks everyone to bring something along. I's use recipes but never measure ingredients and substitute freely. They may even experiment with a new recipe. Foods are selected for color, texture, and whatever looks good in their favorite bowls and dishes. They describe each course by how much fun it was to make it or a history on who gave them the recipe. Seating? Sit wherever you'd like. When it comes time to clean-up, guests will be scooted out the door - you'll hear, "I love to clean up." As soon as the last guest leaves, the I-behavioral type host plops down on the couch and "wishes" the dirty dishes away. "They will still be there tomorrow", the I-type thinks aloud, and puts off today what can be done tomorrow - still wishing for the "dish fairy" to come along while he/she is sleeping!

S Style

High S behavioral types prepare dinner for the entire family. In fact, they will prepare enough food to feed a neighborhood. You never know a guest may lot like a particular food or course, so the S prepares back-ups. "Family" for an "S" may include neighbors or anyone who doesn't have family to share the holiday with. "How terrible to spend the holiday alone" they think. They begin planning dinner weeks ahead by preparing a list. Next, they begin to clip coupons, even ones they don't need, just in case they meet someone at the store who doesn't have the right one. This list takes weeks to prepare. Finally the cooking begins. S-behavioral types begin making the feel-good foods first, desserts and appetizers, weeks ahead of time. Personalized invitations are prepared for guests, a few S-types preferring the hand-written invitation, taking the time to personalize each note. Every course is prepared from scratch using his/her favorite recipes, including special foods for the kids and anyone on a special diet. Often times the recipes are family traditions, handed down through the generations. They rarely use the microwave except for warming things up. Guests are seated in groups by family and friends. During dinner the S-behavioral type offers to share his/her recipes with everyone and likely have copies already prepared for distribution. There is always extra food for guests to take home in doggy-bags. The doggy bags may even have each guest's name on them including a label with what's inside and the date.

C Style

High C behavioral types prepare dinner for just the immediate family or may even prefer to eat alone. Dinner is more like a tradition or ritual than a celebration. Guests receive a formal invitation and an RSVP is required. C-types shop with coupons which are organized by aisles. They have a budget and click off items on a calculator as they work their way up and down the aisles. C-types have a practice run of each course throughout the preceding week. Recipes are followed exactly as written using measuring cups, utensils and timers. C-behavioral types would never think of substituting an ingredient, not even one brand for another. Guests have assigned seats and name cards are typed at each setting. (The cards are saved after each meal and re-used at future family events.) Rarely do C-types have any food left over - that would mean they made a mistake. If food is left over, they store it by meals in compartmentalized containers, just like the old "TV dinner". If asked about a recipe, C's describe each course in excruciating detail including the cost of the ingredients, the best place to purchase them, the best time to shop. The recipes are available upon request, which are stored in alphabetical order on computer printouts in the filing cabinet. After dinner, C's refuse everyone's offer to clean up - they have an unchangeable routine and a special place for everything. If by chance you get to peek inside their cabinets, don't be surprised to see the canned goods alphabetized and sized. If the C-Behavioral type does allow you to help, expect explicit instructions how to wash, dry, and put things away...and criticism when you don't do it exactly the "right" way. No one can clean up or put away the dishes as good as the high C behavioral type- so they think!.

A most important take-away from understanding behavioral types is that no one style is right or wrong. Likewise there is not one right way or one wrong way to prepare Thanksgiving dinner.

There is, however, a right way to celebrate Thanksgiving - be thankful for the opportunity to share Thanksgiving with friends and relatives, be thankful for the food you enjoy, be thankful for whomever prepares your meal, and be thankful we can laugh at our behavior!

Did you recognize any relatives or friends in these descriptions? Or maybe you experience a grimace or grin when a particular style revealed a little about you too. Whatever the situation, Happy Thanksgiving!

Employee Performance Evaluations (without comments) Are a Waste of Time

Ira Wolfe — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:07:00 GMT

Volumes have been written about the importance of employee performance evaluations. Proponents extol their value; skeptics promote their demise. Some talk about designing the employee evaluation form. Others talk about how to conduct the employee appraisal meeting. Consultants promote greater frequency, especially for workplaces recruiting Gen Y. A few even discuss how to evaluate the evaluation. What has not received much attention, however, is the act of actually writing effective comments about employee performance.

No matter how much emphasis has been placed on it, the fact remains that employee engagement is the key to conducting effective and productive performance evaluations. Engagement beings with the manager providing advice and counsel, not a report card.

A good starting point is for the managers to describe exactly what it is he or she wants to accomplish. Is this an annual review? Is it to review a probationary employee? Perhaps you're reviewing performance on a specific project. Whichever it is, you can be succinct, to the point. You can be objective. Focus will help you go where you intended to go. But regardless about what you write, take a few minutes and plan that journey in advance.

Next, consider what challenges, obstacles, feedback or, heaven forbid, blow back you can reasonably anticipate throughout. Plan, in writing, a response for each item you believe may happen. While you can't predict every possibility, there are situations or circumstances you can reasonably expect.

Now for possibly the most important writing a manager can do. Too often performance review forms rely on cookie-cutter, checklist-style performance evaluations: Grading on a scale of 1 to 5 or 1 to 10. Or perhaps rating each performance aspect from Excellent to Poor or Needs Improvement. The "grade" provides little help or insight into improving or advancing performance. While this system is quite common and expedient, these types of employee evaluation forms are usually inadequate to address the sole reason for their existence: Evaluation of Performance.

An effective employee performance appraisal identifies strengths and weaknesses. More importantly, guidelines for improvement are clearly articulated which should stimulate a productive dialogue with the employee. This conversation should engage both the manager and employee in a discussion that helps improve employee performance, productivity, and career development. To encourage this dialogue, supervisors and managers must provide written comments describing or defending their rating of the employee. Without these comments, the performance review process becomes no more than an elementary school report card.

So, what does a manager write about? To borrow from a popular television crime drama of the late 1960s, "the facts, ma'am, just the facts." Writing performance evaluations is not the time to engage in creative writing or clever prose which you hope will disguise uncomfortable issues or bad news.

The narrative portion of any performance evaluation is the most important. It is here where you, as the appraiser, have the opportunity to communicate in a clear, concise and constructive manner, everything your staff member needs to know in order to fully understand her job and perform it to the best of her ability. So facts are of critical importance. The more information about her performance that you can provide in factual form, the easier it will be to illustrate how he or she performed her job. This will also make it easier to assess empirical rather than anecdotal evidence in the context of (and measured against) established goals and objectives.

The language used when writing performance evaluations should always be without any opinion or editorial comment, unless such comments serve to provide guidance for improvement (e.g., "If I were you, this is how I would...."). Objective, unemotional language will not only assist you in staying on task, but will facilitate a less emotional response from your employee. Someone will always take a personal observation personally so don't make one.

One additional thing to remember when writing performance evaluations is that you should avoid including anything that is not relevant to the review itself. Keep references to outside issues or observations not related to how the job is performed out (e.g., family matters).

Writing effective performance evaluations is art, not science. It requires managers to describe shortfalls and recommend improvement. It’s time for employers to turn the annual performance review into a process that engages employees, not grades them. Providing thoughtful, objective, and helpful comments in addition to a numerical grade adds context to employee ratings and power to the process.

6 Tips To Save Time Doing Annual Performance Reviews

Ira Wolfe — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 04:27:00 GMT

Time is money. It is also true that time can save money. An example? Taking the time necessary to prepare for and conduct annual performance reviews can save your organization both time and money.

Annual performance reviews, also called performance evaluations or appraisals, are an essential and inevitable component of the relationship between employee and employer. That said, supervisors, managers and executives (perhaps especially executives) usually hate the thought of conducting reviews and would just as soon skip the whole process. Combine this perspective with the fact that the manager or supervisor puts off this responsibility as long as possible and the performance evaluation meeting is often awkward, uncomfortable or even contentious. The employee appraisal process is so stressful that it may even trigger termination of the employer-employee relationship.

Although the necessity of conducting a performance review is well documented, a stressful process and negative outcome is not. To help alleviate the pain, here are a few annual performance review tips.

1. The first tip relates to time. Before you actually review the employee's performance and certainly before you discuss the results of your review with her, you should set aside sufficient time to fully prepare yourself so that you are able to conduct an honest, objective and complete performance review devoid of emotion.

2. Re-familiarize yourself with the purpose of the appraisal. Review the employee's personnel file, her past reviews and her job description to be sure that what you're evaluating is what she understands her job to be.

3. Remember, this is an annual review, not disciplinary action. And by that I mean that waiting until the annual evaluation to carry out corrective action is not only unwise, it is inappropriate and counterproductive. Although conducting disciplinary or remedial action is beyond the scope of the present discussion, we would be remiss if we didn't issue a reminder that corrective action should be taken proximate in time to the incident(s) of inadequate performance or unacceptable conduct, not weeks or months after a non-performing incident.

4. No discussion of annual review tips is complete without reference to honesty. In order to conduct a performance appraisal productive for the company and employee alike, it is critical that the written review and the meeting to discuss it involve direct, clear and honest language. Failure to do so will only create problems down the road. If there are specific areas in which the employee needs to improve, he needs to be advised what they are and what he is to do about them if your intention is for him to remedy any shortcomings and improve his performance. (That is the purpose of the performance appraisal, right?).

5. Another important tip that your appraisal should be specific, both in written and spoken word. Quantify whenever possible. "Tardy 14 days in the last quarter" is objective; "always late" is not. If there is a behavior issue, use specific scenarios and facts to describe the behavior, not subjective statements such as "aggressive", "short-tempered", or "always in a bad mood." For example, what you consider aggressive, someone else may find to be initiative.

6. If your review includes some negatives, you must do everything in your power to converse with, rather than confront, the employee during the meeting. Refer to strengths and provide a clear path to improvement. Again, speak honestly, but with an eye on the big picture.

There are, of course, numerous other annual review tips. Regardless of which ones you incorporate, the bottom line is to do it and take the time to do it well. After all, avoidance disguised as expedience will not serve the process, you or your company.

6 Great Interview Questions

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 05:19:00 GMT

Seth Godin posted a excellent post earlier this week. There's not much to add so I'm just posting it as is:

What good interview questions are actually trying to discover:

How long are you willing to keep pushing on a good project until you give up?
How hard is it to get you to change your mind when you're wrong?
How much do you learn from failing?
How long does it take you to learn something new?
How hard is it for you to let someone else take the lead?
How much do you care?

The rest is merely commentary, either that or they're interviewing you for a job that's not as good as you deserve. For those jobs, the only question they're really focusing on is, "will she fit in around here?"

When DISC Meets Social Networking

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 02:45:00 GMT

A recent Hubspot post asked "if your marketing strategy had a personality type, what would it be?" The article discussed how Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) might be used in developing a good inbound marketing strategy, addressing each of these personality types.

That prompted me to dig into my library of posts and articles to find the one I published in my book Geeks, Geezers, and Googlization about DISC Meets Social Networking. A few things have changed since I wrote it, but I thought it was worthwhile revising and reprinting in light of the interest in how understanding personality types can help improve inbound marketing.

For those of you who know your behavioral style, do the following responses feel familiar?

D: Social networking is all about gaining market share and beating the pants off our competition. The change brought about by all this disruptive innovation, ambiguity, and complexity - it's the perfect environment for me to establish myself as the expert. I've got so much to tell people and Twitter is great. What more can I ask for - tell someone what I'm thinking in 140 characters or less!

I: Woohoo! For me, social networking sites keep me on a 24/7 high. They are a dream come true. I know no strangers, just friends I haven't met yet. I can now become friends with people all over the world. I feel like I'm at one continuous party. I love getting invitations to follow other people. That means other people find me interesting. It's such a warm feeling knowing that I never have to feel alone again. I can say whatever is on my mind whenever I want and there is always someone who is ready and willing to talk.

S: I'm overwhelmed. I opened accounts in Linkedin and Facebook but I wasn't sure what to do next. I got to the personal profile and felt uncomfortable sharing my birthday with complete strangers. How do I know that I can trust all these people who send me invitations? I've never even heard of many of them before? How much can I believe about the information people put on their profile? If I'm going to join a site, I'm going to start with just one and feel my way around. But I'm exhausted just thinking about getting started.

C: I'm really squeamish about this whole thing. There's just no research that any of these sites will ever last...and then what happens with all my information. Is it safe? You never can be too careful. Someone needs to prove to me that my privacy will be protected and that I can control who sees my profile. Only a fool would want to share their personal information with a complete stranger. I've got to study this more and evaluate the benefits vs. risk. If I do become a member, you can be assured I will keep my profile protected and only connect with people that I know and trust.

How are your behavioral preferences influencing your approach to social networking? How can marketers use DISC to tune their messages to different styles?

Why Interviews Aren't Fair....but Pre-Employment Tests Are

Ira Wolfe — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 10:03:00 GMT

“Our attorney told us that pre employment tests are illegal to use.” If that is your logic and defense for sticking with the interview and resume as your primary screening tools for employee selection, it is time to get with the program. The job relatedness of most interviews and many resumes carries very little weight when defending a discrimination claim by a candidate.

Since anyone can sue anyone for anything, we'll agree that employee discrimination claims are very real. But that doesn’t mean that all claims are justified. Ignoring tools that can help companies hire the right people and avoid costly employee turnover is a sign of avoidance, or even ignorance, of the risks associated with different employee selection assessments.
Unbeknownst to many human resource professionals and small business owners, the U.S. Department of Labor publication, TESTING AND ASSESSMENT: AN EMPLOYER'S GUIDE TO GOOD PRACTICES includes employee applications and the interview in the same category of employee assessment as the personality "inventory," background check, or drug test. In fact, any tool, inventory or procedure used to "assess" the fit of a candidate for hire or an employee for promotion is considered a test.

By this definition, the simple act of observation is considered an employment assessment and in order to be legally defensible, decisions based on observation must be as valid, reliable and job related as interview questions or personality tests.

So let's look at the manager or human resources director or corporate attorney who views the personality test as fluff, hocus-pocus, or just plain too risky and compare it to candidate observation? How would you defend yourself and your company if questioned about the validity or job-relatedness of any of these questions?

• Are you turned off by a male with a ponytail or a female with a buzz-cut?
• Are you turned on by individuals with athletic builds and turned off by anyone who is obese?
• Do you feel uneasy around other men who walk with a swish and speak with a lisp?
• Do tattoos, body-piercing and purple hair affect how you evaluate job fit?
• Men: do you prefer buxom, petite, and perky blondes to chunky, outspoken middle age women?
• Women: Are you attracted to tall, dark and handsome hunks or short, bald and chubby men?
• Do you notice if other people are wearing a crucifix, Star of David, or a mezuzah around their neck?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you are discriminating and put your company at risk for prejudicial hiring. Not one of the observations above is a valid predictor of abilities, skills, knowledge, or job fit.

Whether we intentionally or unintentionally do it, we all have our biases. We respond to the information we receive by valuing some of it positively and judging the rest of it negatively. Like it or not, we all have our preferences. Those things we value more or less bias our observations and therefore impact how we rate candidates for hiring.

In addition to looking through our own rose-colored glasses, how likely is it that our mood at that moment in time might affect our ability to interview fairly and without bias?

The simple act of observing candidates is filled with personal bias, much of which has nothing to do with job fit. The same goes for the process of interviewing. For most companies, observation and interviews fail to meet the required validity, reliability, and job relatedness standards required by law. If and when challenged, companies lose.

On the other hand, many (although admittedly not all) employee screening assessments have gone through extensive validation studies that confirm reliability, job-relatedness, and fairness. Pre-employment tests offer an objective, cost-effective, third party assessment of a candidate’s job fit.

Isn’t it time employers stop throwing stones at pre-employment personality tests when their current screening process is a house of glass?

5 No-No’s When Designing Performance Review Forms

Ira Wolfe — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 19:04:00 GMT

Human resources and management spend an awful lot of time designing performance review forms. That’s good news because despite the negative attitude of many managers toward completing the annual employee appraisal, it does show the good intentions of management to make the review more valuable for the employee and the company.

Unfortunately, good intentions don’t always end up with good results. Here’s a list of typical mistakes that companies make when designing employee evaluation forms.

Too much criteria to evaluate. To accommodate the personal viewpoints and biases of human resources, managers, and management, the number of items evaluated becomes everyone’s wish list with little to no relevance to performance. After a year’s deliberation, a client of mine recently released their new evaluation form…with 33 criteria. Consider these unintended circumstances: a manager has 6 reports. That means he needs to consider a total of 198 items when evaluating performance. Even if desirable, it’s not logical to think that a manager will give each item sufficient time before he offers a rating and/or include a comment that might be helpful to his direct report. If a company wants to turn a superficial feedback processes into complete irrelevance, then add as many competencies, goals, and attitudes as possible to the evaluation form. That strategy is a sure way to turn a performance feedback system from superficial to irrelevant.
Non-relevant criteria. Whether a human resources designs a form with 10 or 50 competencies isn’t as big a problem as when the criteria don’t directly impact employee performance. Management and HR painstakingly investigate the validity of pre-employment tests but rarely if ever test the relevance and correlation of criteria on their employee appraisal forms with performance, productivity, and profitability. For instance, attendance and appearance are almost universal criteria used by managers to evaluate performance. But little if any data supports the linkage between appearance (tattoos. piercings, facial hair, etc) and productivity or meeting attendance and profitability.
One form fits all. Out of necessity, many organizations use one form to evaluate all employees, from the maintenance person to the executive team. For the sake of sanity, reducing the number of form types to one or two prevents managers from completing the wrong form or version. It also minimizes the number of forms HR needs to update. Unfortunately this strategy makes no sense except for convenience. Ideally each position should have its own set of criteria; possibly four or five company-wide criteria plus up to a half-dozen job specific ones.
Lack of comments. A rating without supporting comments significantly diminishes the value of performance feedback. In effect, a performance review without comments is a report card – a grade on past behavior with no justification, documentation, or value. Without some explanation to the employee why the rating was given or recommendation for improvement, the value of the performance review is near meaningless.
Unintended comment consequences. Many companies require comments only if and when a managers gives an employee of 5 (consistently exceeds expectations) or (consistently misses expectations). Often this strategy is chosen with a single purpose – to avoid giving too many employees high or low ratings, especially if the ratings are tied to compensation. But even if compensation is not linked directly to the ratings, many managers will avoid giving an employee a 1 or 5 rating even if he or she deserves it – just to avoid taking the time to comment and justify the high or low rating. Requiring comments on only high and low ratings skews all employee performance ratings toward average. That strategy is neither motivating nor productive.

One very effective solution to improving the employee performance review process is to go digital. Online performance review systems don’t necessarily solve the problem of too much or not relevant criteria, but it does allow companies to customize multiple forms specific to different jobs. The problem of filling out the wrong form is minimized if not eliminated because the form the reviewer receives is programmed into the system, removing the chance of human error or oversight. By simplifying the distribution of multiple employee appraisal forms, HR can more easily engage managers from different departments and functions in selecting the criteria they feel are most important to improving the performance of their teams. By engaging managers, they have more ownership and participation will improve. Greater involvement and participation means faster and higher completion rates and more valuable feedback for employees.

Online performance reviews systems also can require a manager to comment on all reviewable items or as an alternative just the most critical ones. Unlike paper forms, the reviewing manager cannot submit the form until he or she includes a comment in addition to a rating.

Providing employee performance feedback has never been as critical to a company’s productivity and profitability as it is today. The ability to create employee evaluation forms specific to the responsibilities of individual employees is a significant benefit of putting the performance review process online.

Management and Leadership Competencies That Will Make or Break Your Business

Ira Wolfe — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 04:12:00 GMT

Management. Leadership. Two simple words, two complex concepts. In today's hyper-competitive business environment in which profits are scarce and companies are forced to do more with less, financial success (if not mere survival) depends on hiring the right people to manage and the right people to lead. The question is, of course, how to do this. In order to find effective managers and leaders, you must first identify the management and leadership competencies that make them successful.

Since successful recruiting and hiring is contingent upon finding leaders most likely to perform, if not excel, in the job, it critical that these efforts focus on managerial competencies. But let’s stop there for a minute.

What are competencies? They are, in short, a set of personal traits, skills, knowledge, and abilities that determine whether someone can perform a specific activity, task or job. These attributes address personal capability, a person's focus on results, the interpersonal skills and, for those considered for leadership positions, ability to lead organizational change and vision the future.

Many large American employers, including the federal government, have developed or are developing a list of core competencies which drive their personnel decisions (as an example, see Making the Right Connections-Targeting the Best Competencies for Training, A Report to the President and the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, February 2011).

This sounds easy enough, but it really isn't. The difficulty doesn't lie in choosing the competencies that are important; the difficulty also lies in whether the management competencies of those doing the choosing are sufficient to adequately assess the importance and criteria of each competency. In other words, are your managers capable of distinguishing critical factors so that they can apply them appropriately when making personnel decisions?

Because traits, motives and characteristics are qualitative rather than quantitative, recognizing those deemed most relevant is a subjective exercise. And evaluating these characteristics is itself a subjective exercise. You could say that employing the right competencies by which to evaluate a candidate is actually something that requires its own competency.

Unfortunately no hiring decision requires accurate recognition of relevant competencies more than when a company is looking to bring aboard or promote a leader. Effective leadership requires that a person with vision is able to transmit that vision and convey a sense of mission (where are we going, how do we get there?) in such a way that she gets commitment from others to realize the vision and energizes them to feel empowered so that they, in turn, utilize their own capabilities, characteristics, their competencies, to maximum effect. (While that’s a mouthful, it accurately represents the complexity of effective leadership!)

So where does that leave executives and business owners? It leaves us is with the task of determining what competencies are crucial to the position for which we are hiring and then picking out the person in possession of those competencies, preferably in abundance. We can no longer hire people simply on the basis of education and prior experience, because what got a business to where it is today very likely aren’t the same skills required to keep it moving forward.

A typical list of managerial competencies might look like this:

Visioning
Decisive Judgment
Championing Change
Driving for Results
Planning and Organizing
Managing Others
Influencing and Persuading
Coaching and Developing Others
Motivating Others
Relationship Management
Integrity
Business Acumen

(Source: Assess Leading Others Competency Model)

How do these compare to your managerial skill list? How are you evaluating these competencies on candidates, current managers, as well as future leaders?

Why DISC Doesn't Work For Employee Screening

Ira Wolfe — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 20:28:00 GMT

There are several reasons why DISC doesn’t work for screening employees.

Before I dive into those reasons, let me first address a few of the reasons why so many employers do select DISC as their pre-employment test of choice for employee screening.

First of all, DISC has been around a long, long time. While the acronym DISC was adopted sometime in the mid-twentieth century, the four-style behavioral model was first described by Hippocrates somewhere around 400 B.C. If longevity has anything to do with credibility, the DISC assessment certainly has time on its side and centuries of endorsement.

Another reason is that DISC is also one of the most user-friendly assessments available. Most DISC assessments require only 10 to 15 minutes to complete, the questions are very easy to understand, and face validity (which means the participant agrees with the results of the assessment) is extremely high. And while fees vary widely, the cost is generally below $100, often times significantly less.

By now, it should be fairly obvious why DISC is so popular – user-friendly, high credibility, low-cost. All those reasons sound pretty good, don’t they? Then why am I saying that DISC doesn’t work for screening employees?

There are many reasons. Let me start with three.

Validation. This reason is a big one- one that concerns HR and employment law attorneys. While the DISC assessment itself is valid (it accurately measures what it says it measures), DISC is not a valid tool for job success. If that was the case, every assertive, outgoing individual would be a successful salesperson and every steady, compliant person would turn out to be a very successful accountant. But we know for sure that’s not the case. DISC merely assesses HOW energetically an individual will respond toward problems, people, pace, and procedures. It was not constructed to predict how proficient that same person might be at solving problems, interacting with people, working at a fast pace, or complying with rules and procedures.
Observation. DISC is an “observable language.” Each style (D-I-S-C) is easily observed by others when the other person(s) know what to look for. Ds and Is tend to be very animated; Ss and Cs more reserved. Is and Ss are more people-oriented; Ds and Cs are task focused. Is and Ss should be "good with people." But we know that isn't always so. People make assumptions about performance based on behavioral style. But as the research about hiring success shows, the behavior you see might not be a predictor of the results you get. Five-factor personality tests and cognitive ability tests are much better predictors of future job fit and skill potential than behavior style assessments like DISC and temperament assessments like MBTI. And that’s not only my opinion but the caveat offered by many of the DISC and MBTI publishers.
Norming. DISC assessments are considered ipsative tests. The preferred type of test for hiring is a normed test. Like hundreds of other assessments based on the four style behavioral model, DISC reports the relative strengths of the person being tested. If a DISC assessment reports the individual is 75% “high D”, this merely means this individual is energized by asserting him/herself in dealing with problems. What it does not predict is how two people with similar DISC patterns will perform a job or interact with others. In plain English, two people who both "score" 70% in the D Style might appear to approach the same problem in a similar way but get two entirely different outcomes. Using normative tests, an individual’s “score” measures a specific characteristic against confirmed patterns of normality, usually represented as a bell curve. In business, normative testing allows individuals to be compared to other employees who have met with success or failure in a job.

Normative tests (like PeopleClues, Prevue, and Assess) are therefore best suited as a recruitment and selection instrument. They can be also useful in developmental, coaching and training. By using normative tests when screening employees, managers can select candidates who will have the best chances of success if hired or promoted and avoid placing the wrong employee in the wrong position.

Note: I do recommend on occasion using DISC for employee screening and selection. While I mentioned DISC is not a good predictor job skills, it is a powerful assessment for predicting HOW a candidate will interact with other people and approach a project. By using DISC in conjunction wth five factor personality tests, managers can predict both job fit and team (people) fit with accuracy. When selecting the right pre-employment test for your organization, the best choice is not a case of either-or. If DISC is used for hiring employees, use it in conjunction with other hiring tools...or not at all.

Click here for more information about ipsative and normative tests.