It's time to reinvent management. You can help.

Humanocracy

indy-neogy's picture

Forced migration of recruiting herd

By Indy Neogy on June 9, 2013

Recruitment officers/depts are herd animals. They all graze in the same places, looking for "that person who did the same job at our competitor" or "that person who did the same degree at the same place as the current dept. manager." 

We need to put limits on this kind of thinking. Allow some "herd" hires (some work out well) but once you hit the cap, you have to go recruit someone with a different background. Only this will produce the diversity of thought that brings flexibility to HR and the wider corporation.

HR process being hacked:Talent Acquisition

You need to register in order to submit a comment.

indy-neogy's picture

Here's a piece from Rory Sutherland, vice-chairman of Ogilvy Group UK. It's a very hard, rational take on the situation:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/life/the-wiki-man/8953111/why-im-hiring-gradu...

julian-birkinshaw's picture

Hi Indy,

yes, I completely agree. It is all too easy to "follow the pack" in hiring, or indeed in any other area, and that leads to conformity, lack of differentiation, me-too strategy and so on. Obviously imposing quotas (or limits) is one way of getting recruitment officers to hire different types of people, but I wonder if there are other ways of generating the same ultimate outcome of diversity? perhaps getting recruiters to define, in advance, the ideal mix they want so that the diversity of the team becomes their responsibility rather than an externally-imposed guideline? Or perhaps we should find creative ways of identifying talent in the first place? I remember a senior executive at the Guardian telling me how they had hired a guy with no journalist training because they were monitoring some sort of blogging site and they found he was gathering a lot of interest for his views. They looked in an unusual place, and they found a highly skilled but non-traditional hire.

indy-neogy's picture

Hi Julian,

Great ideas! I think I was in a frustrated mood when I wrote that comment.
One thing you said that I'd definitely pick up on is that of creative ways of identifying talent.
In theory the move to "competencies" enables this, but the opportunity hasn't really been grasped.
Too often competencies are written in the language of the existing organisation - which means unless people come from a similar organisation they are unlikely to "fit" the ways the competency is described.
So perhaps an extra point is: better/more general ways of describing the skills, which don't close the door on non-traditional candidates?