Staffing is not a Zero-Sum Game |
After the dust settled and I read the rest of the article, I
had calmed down and realized that Mr. Sackett had some valid points. I do agree
organizations need to find a balance between funding with regard to attracting,
succession planning and training of their workforce rather than spending the
most money and effort on candidate attraction.
The problem is that I vehemently disagree that we have to
convince hiring managers and whole organizations that the current market is a Zero-Sum Game. The
idea devalues what a true workforce solutions team does.
Companies like Microsoft and Google sprung to being in an industry that was created out of garages, through innovation and a pioneering spirit. If talent management was Zero-Sum, they wouldn't exist as they both created a previously unknown talent pool need and filled it.
Companies like Microsoft and Google sprung to being in an industry that was created out of garages, through innovation and a pioneering spirit. If talent management was Zero-Sum, they wouldn't exist as they both created a previously unknown talent pool need and filled it.
The majority of the people they initially employed were home
grown talent because frankly there was no company doing what they did. It was
an entirely new ‘thing’ created out of nothing. They may have taken some
college kids out of a classroom to put them to work early, or stolen a drive-thru
clerk passionate about BASIC and FORTRAN away from a fast food joint; it was
hardly a Zero-Sum Game; it was a Human Development Game.
People can be developed, trained, motivated, and
unmotivated. We do need to convince
hiring managers of the value in taking someone that can do 95-percent of what
they need now and developing the other desired 5-percent in-house. We also need
to convince them that they do not have the luxury of the 3-5 year IT wizard or
engineer any longer. They will have to start hiring out of colleges again; investing
time in developing curricula with educators to fill their needs. Some of our
most successful candidates are those ‘95-percenters’ because they have a desire
to learn the other 5-percent and have loyalty to the company that provides it.
It's not zero-sum.
It's not a shell game. It's the
game of life as it pertains to business and it's our job in recruiting to help
companies realize the best talent to develop, and to help candidates find the
next step in their path. So much more
can be gained working together; with hiring managers, HR, talent development, and
candidates for a mutually beneficial outcome. There doesn’t have to be a clear
cut winner and loser when it comes to talent management.
Here’s a simple analogy to demonstrate the point further:
The Biggest Loser, a popular US television reality
series, is a competition whereby, in theory, everyone comes out a winner. The goal is to get
healthier through weight loss, nutritional changes and exercise. At the shows close,
there is ultimately a grand prize winner but, there was no cause to which they
had to take from another to come out on top. Nearly every contestant seems to
walk away from the program better for it, even the non-prize-winning losers. That's kind of how how I view
talent management and recruitment.
If you're engaging a ‘passive’ candidate, chances are they
aren't engaged with their current company for any number of reasons. They are
likely dragging down their current company in some way because of this sense of
disengagement. In hopes of a brighter future, they are willing to talk to you
about a new position with growth potential either economically or
professionally.
The losing company actually wins because they have offloaded someone who was
probably producing at a level below their potential. The hiring company wins
because they're getting an employee who is reinvigorated and engaged. The
candidate wins for obvious reasons. The recruitment firm wins because they
provided value to both customers of their services and were paid for the match.
To me, calling recruitment and talent management a Zero-Sum
Game; that cynicism that removes the exact value from staffing that we bring; is
simply inaccurate. If you are truly invested in the job at hand, then you’re
looking to help the organization and the candidate grow. If you’re good at filling
both customers’ new needs; creating a value proposition along the way; you
simply cannot look at the game mathematically. There is so much to be gained from looking beyond the 'perfect' skill set to find out what real potential lies within a candidate or in an opportunity. Humans aren't dollars, or market
share, and therefore can't be zero-sum.
Just ask Microsoft and Google.
Josh Kaplan writes on various subjects including
management, information technology breakthroughs, healthcare IT recruitment and innovations, big data, IT staffing and recruitment, and technical news and trends.