Lean Recruiting

Deploy Automation to Enhance the Efficiency of Your TAP

Automation helps us make smarter choices and be productive. Take, for example, innovations in the automotive industry. Cars can now warn us of oncoming traffic when we’re changing lanes. There are cameras and sensors to help us when we’re backing up. If we’re poor parallel parkers, some vehicles can park themselves. Certain models will automatically slam on the brakes to keep us from crashing.

The risk with this technology is that we become overreliant on it. When we rely too much on automation, our skills become rusty and our senses dull. Such was the case when a semitrailer pulled in front of a car with autopilot. The autopilot failed to avert an accident. The driver didn’t react in time, losing his life in the collision.

Automation isn’t perfect. It’s created by fallible people and used in imperfect ways.

That’s why hiring technology also has its pros and cons. It, too, isn’t perfect, nor is it perfectly used. On the one hand, it makes some aspects of hiring more efficient (digital candidate information is paperless and searchable). On the other hand, it creates effort and undesirable outcomes; for example, job boards can flood you with the resumes of hundreds of unusable candidates.

High Velocity Hiring is, by its very nature, lean and efficient. As you build and maintain your Talent Accelerator Process, you’ll have ongoing opportunities to improve what you’ve created. Automation can play an important role in these improvements as long as they keep your hiring methods lean.

The principles of Lean Recruiting will guide you in making smart technological choices. In this chapter, you’ll learn about Lean Recruiting. We’ll cover how to use it to keep your Talent Accelerator Process running efficiently. You’ll also see examples of how organizations have used the three principles of Lean Recruiting to select software, job boards, and other types of automation.

Available technologies change and grow by the day, as do the needs of those who use them. Because of this, I won’t be recommending one vendor over another. High Velocity Hiring is agnostic as long as the technology contributes to Lean Recruiting. Instead, I’m going to equip you with methods to avoid common pitfalls and make the right choices when selecting automation.

Technology Myths

Before diving into the practice of Lean Recruiting, we need to address some common myths. Buying into these falsehoods can contribute to poor technology choices.

Myth #1: Technology is More Effective Than Traditional Methods

Nick loves technology. He’s got the newest Smartphone, a voice-activated music system, automated grocery ordering, and a state-of-the-art GPS in his car. The GPS comes in especially handy as he travels. His job as a purchasing manager has him constantly on the road, visiting vendors and the 16 locations of the distribution company where he works.

Because he loves technology, Nick’s always been ready to try something new. When corporate decided to experiment with video interviewing, he was first in line.

The idea seemed simple. His organization had contracted with an outside vendor for their video interviewing services. Instead of candidates having to come into an office for an interview, it could be done virtually. Candidates would answer interview questions via webcam. The video interviewing service recorded the interviews. Hiring managers would then watch these at their leisure. No one had to travel.

For a road warrior like Nick, this technological setup seemed ideal. He was an effective interviewer, but scheduling was a constant struggle. He never knew more than a day or two ahead where he’d be next. This made scheduling a problem, especially coordinating calendars with other interviewers. Delays in getting interviews scheduled resulted in losing good talent. Nick was tired of losing candidates to competitors, and was hopeful that video interviewing would eliminate this problem.

With great anticipation, he sat down to review his first batch of video interviews. It got off to a rough start. The first two candidates seemed to struggle with the technology. Others seemed to have good skills, but were robotic in how they communicated on their videos. A few candidates seemed promising, prompting Nick to think of questions he’d like to ask. But, he couldn’t do that on the spot. By the end of his review, Nick was frustrated but not deterred. As an early adopter of technology, he knew there’d be issues. He was still convinced that video interviews were going to make hiring better.

Over the next few weeks, Nick got used to this different way of assessing talent. He’d had more first “interviews” than ever. In a few days, he’d reviewed a dozen candidates.

Nick sat down with his colleagues, who’d also reviewed the video interviews of these candidates, to compare notes. They’d always been able to make swift decisions after a round of interviews. His hope was they’d decide which candidates to pursue further by the end of their conversation.

That didn’t happen. Opinions were all over the place. When one interviewer thought a candidate was a great fit, another interviewer didn’t agree. If someone believed a candidate communicated well, someone else differed. Nick was stunned. Never had this group viewed candidates so differently.

Nick quickly spotted the problem as he dug into the details of his colleagues’ experiences. Video interviewing may have sped up the first round of interviews, but it interfered with the quality of their selection process. The video format didn’t allow them to connect and converse with a candidate. The interviewers struggled to make an honest assessment of which ones could be a fit.

Was video interviewing to blame? No. Nick’s peers in other companies were having success with this method. He came to realize that this approach didn’t fit his needs. Nor did it solve the real problem—scheduling. Nick revamped his schedule so he could go back to doing in-person interviews.

The Reality

Is technology more effective than traditional methods? Not always. Technology can solve problems, but only when it’s the appropriate solution for the problem.

Myth #2: Technology Solves Process Problems

One of my jobs as a consultant is to spot patterns. Patterns are like neon flashing lights that indicate something important. These indicators often point toward persistent problems.

In 2005, I began noticing a pattern. Organizations were rapidly adopting new hiring technologies, and then swiftly abandoning them. It wasn’t just one type of technology being tossed aside. Applicant tracking systems, resume parsing software (automated extraction of data from resumes), job boards, online skills testing—all were being treated as disposable.

This pattern caught my attention for three reasons: The prevalence of the behavior, the timing, and the cost. It wasn’t happening in a few companies. This was occurring at hundreds of them. They were adopting and discarding their newfound automations within a few months. These organizations had also spent lots of money on these technologies. Yet, they were acting as if this didn’t matter.

I set out to understand what was going on. I met with organizations that were engaging in this behavior. Specifically, I looked into their reasons for the quick change of heart. These organizations varied in size, were in a wide range of industries, and were located throughout the world. I wanted to determine if size, industry, or location were factors affecting the pattern.

After five years, I’d met with leaders in 800 organizations. What did I find? Two answers emerged as to why they let go of recently purchased technology so quickly:

• 3 percent of the organizations had been sold a bill of goods.

The vendors had misrepresented their offering. Once the organizations learned this, they stopped using the technology.

• 97 percent of the organizations had adopted technology for the wrong reason.

These organizations had tried to use technology to solve hiring process problems. When the technology didn’t solve the problem, it got the blame.

Here’s a common example: Hiring managers in some of these organizations were rejecting lots of candidates. To solve the problem, these organizations implemented online skills testing. When this didn’t solve the problem, they stopped using it. Was online skills testing to blame? No. The real issue was hiring profiles. They were inaccurate or they weren’t being used at all.

The Reality

Can technology fix process problems? No. Not ever. Technology is a tool. In order for technology to work, it has to be part of a well-planned hiring process.

Myth #3: You Must Have the Latest, Greatest Technologies

A construction company in South America has used the same talent management system (TMS) for eight years. The software helps them handle all aspects of hiring and managing employees. They chose their software package because it looked like it would get the job done. It wasn’t sophisticated. It had all the functions they needed. Nothing more.

The TMS was a huge hit. They had a well-designed hiring process, and the software fit that process. It reduced data entry, eliminated lots of paper, and tracked candidates throughout the hiring process. When candidates were hired, the TMS also helped the company manage functions like payroll, performance reviews, and storing electronic versions of employee documents.

Has the company ever considered replacing the system? Yes, every year. The human resource executive in charge of the system regularly reviews new offerings. She’s called on by a growing number of salespeople each year. “I keep gaining options,” she said. “And I keep saying no.”

Saying “no” doesn’t mean she hasn’t come close to making a change. She has. Her current software vendor offered a new product at a substantial discount. Other competing companies have wined her, dined her, and conducted lots of software demos. She takes these demos seriously. “I’m open to something better,” she said. “But it has to be substantially better for me to put our people through such a big change. Software conversions are expensive and time consuming.”

Once, she got close. A software vendor came to her with a TMS that was getting rave reviews. Some of these were from other construction firms. “I gave that software a close look. It was promising, especially since people in our business seemed to love it.”

Her department set up a test run, managing a limited set of data on the new system while maintaining the current one. The new TMS came with innovative features. Lots of them. These were supposed to make the various tasks involved in hiring and managing employees quicker and easier.

After the test, she decided to stick with her company’s current system. “Yes, the new TMS we tested had lots of bells and whistles,” she said. “And it did increase the efficiency of some aspects of our process. But only slightly so. Our current software may be like an old jalopy, but it gets us where we’re going each day.”

The Reality

Do you need the latest, greatest hiring technologies to be successful? Not necessarily. Old does not mean obsolete. Sometimes, replacing older technology makes sense. Other times it does not.

Automation makes hiring better, but only if automation is chosen for the right reasons. Companies that buy into myths are likely to make choices they’ll later regret. To help you avoid poor choices, let’s now look at how the principles of Lean Recruiting can guide you when choosing technology.

The Principles of Lean Recruiting

Hiring is an investment—an investment of time and money. If you’re like most people, you don’t have time to spare; and you don’t want to waste money.

Lean Recruiting is the practice of using automation to make hiring more efficient. The principles of Lean Recruiting (Figure 9.1) set the standard for what automation should do for you. Each of the principles will guide you in making informed decisions when choosing which automations to adopt or discard, helping you get the most from your investment of time and money.

FIGURE 9.1 The Three Principles of Lean Recruiting

Principle #1: Automation Must Reduce Effort

The primary purpose of automation is to create an automatic means for getting something done. For automation to be effective, it has to reduce our involvement in tasks. When it doesn’t, we end up serving our technology instead of it serving us.

Principle #2: Automation Must Be Easy to Use

Using automation can’t be a struggle. This begins with training. A challenging learning curve is overwhelming, causing you to miss important details. If using the technology is difficult, you’ll forget to take advantage of key features. When these difficulties persist, you’ll find workarounds that negate effort-saving features; or you’ll stop using the technology altogether. Automation must be easy to learn and easy to use.

Principle #3: Automation Must Improve Results

Reducing effort and ease of use aren’t enough. Automation typically requires a significant investment of time and money, so there must be a larger, long-term payoff. The technology must also produce better results, such as increasing the flow of top talent and improved reporting to monitor the effectiveness of each hiring step. Only then is the technology worth incorporating into your process.

What happens when you implement automation that doesn’t meet all three principles? Your hiring process slows or breaks down.

Automating references checks is a good example. The traditional methods of calling a candidate’s references can be frustrating. First, you have to get the reference giver on the phone. That could take days of phone tag and follow up. When you get them on the phone, they may decline to answer your questions. Instead, they quote a company policy about being allowed only to confirm the job candidate’s previous role and dates of employment.

CEOs from two organizations in the same Texas town were comparing notes on this reference checking challenge. One ran a large nonprofit, the other a mid-sized accounting consultancy. Both had made High Velocity Hiring part of their overall strategy.

The CEOs met regularly, sharing ideas and helping each other solve problems. One of their companies had recently found a solution for checking references—an online service. The service promised to save an hour of effort for each candidate. Plus, the service provider offered case studies showing how their approach improved the quality of hires. The CEOs decided to have their companies give it a try and compare their results.

Both companies ended up having similar experiences. Setting up each candidate in the service’s online portal was simple. This took only a few minutes. The system then took it from there. Automated reference checking reduced effort. The results, though, were a different story. Each company had an uptick in failed hires after automating reference checking.

Does this mean automating reference checks doesn’t work? No. It didn’t work for these two companies. Both found that a conversation with a reference giver uncovered additional details and resulted in better hires.

Making Lean Recruiting your standard for choosing automation has a number of benefits. You’ll cut through the myths, adopting only those technologies that enhance your Talent Accelerator Process. You’ll make smarter choices that keep your TAP flowing.

How do you apply the three principles of Lean Recruiting? By reviewing important questions and running a test. You’ll first answer questions about the need for a particular technology. If your answers validate the need, you’ll conduct a test of the technology before making a commitment.

Here are the questions your hiring team should answer as you evaluate technology:

• Why do we need this automation?

• How will we use it?

• How will it reduce effort?

• Does it appear easy to implement? Learn? Use?

• What results must it achieve to be worth the time and money?

In answering the question, watch out for the myths. Are they driving the desire for automation? If so, address those myths immediately. Never let myths become the motive for choosing technology.

When it appears that automation is being considered for the correct motives, run a test. Ask the vendor for the opportunity to test-drive their product. During this experiment, measure the results. Does it reduce effort? How much? Have you found it easy to learn and use? Does it achieve the desired results? How do those results measure up when compared to how you get work done without that automation?

Only adopt automation that clearly meets all three principles of Lean Recruiting. No matter how exciting that automation may be. Walking away from something that seems cool can be hard. You’re not alone when faced with this challenge. It’s another aspect of human nature.

Avoiding the Extremes

Throughout the book, I’ve touched on human nature. Why? Regardless of who we are, where we live, and our line of work, our humanity is a common thread.

One aspect of human nature is seeking out the extremes. We tend to be all-in or completely out. If you’ve watched poker players, you’ve seen this dynamic in action. When players have a bad hand, they fold quickly. When they have a great hand (or are bluffing), they’ll bet everything they have.

People also go to extremes with technology. Some are overly reliant on technology, while others avoid it as much as possible. Both extremes are harmful.

Organizations with an unhealthy reliance on automation suffer from technological codependency. They can’t live without it. The technology runs the show. How work gets done is planned around its capabilities. When their tech can’t do something, that obstacle becomes the reason it shouldn’t be done. They go as far as using technology in ways it wasn’t intended. Instead of technology serving the organization’s people, the people become slaves to their technology.

One of the worst cases of technological codependency I’ve witnessed was at a biotech firm in Germany. The firm had it all when it came to hiring tech—a talent management system, multiple job boards, automated resume parsing, a candidate sourcing system, skills testing software. These were some of the products the firm was hooked on. But the hiring process was slow and ineffective.

The firm’s various tech products weren’t linked, requiring users to enter the same data several times. When leaders wanted specific hiring reports, they couldn’t get them. The system didn’t track that information. Searching the talent database was cumbersome, as was the skills-testing software. Hiring results suffered. Seats remained empty for months. Turnover was high: Two out of three new hires lasted less than a year.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, when organizations shun automation, they suffer from automation anorexia. Underutilization makes work harder. Tasks that could be handled in seconds by technology require hours of someone’s valuable time. Work that could be done flawlessly through automated means is completed haphazardly. Automation anorexia makes hiring a long, frustrating process.

A law firm in the northwestern United States is a classic example of automation anorexia. The firm is as low-tech as it gets. They’ve avoided hiring technology completely. There’s no ATS, no job boards, zero automation. Nothing.

The law firm runs newspaper ads when jobs become open. Resumes stream over their fax machine, flooding them with paper. Reviewing them takes hours. Frequently, none of these candidates are a fit, so they run another ad—another flood of resumes and hours of extra work. Once they find a good candidate, often it’s too late. Another firm has already snapped them up.

Smartly, they keep the resumes of these good candidates. Their resumes fill four cabinets full of paper files. The firm searches these files every time they have an opening. Sifting through resumes takes hours and is always interrupted by competing demands. Much of the time the firm comes up empty-handed and has to run yet another ad. Filling a job ends up taking months.

How can you avoid the extremes of technological codependency and automation anorexia? Here are three ways:

1. Use just enough: The Talent Accelerator Process is already fast and accurate. Using enough of the right automation as part of your TAP helps keep talent flowing and hires happening quickly. How much is enough? This varies. Most organizations find they need at least an applicant tracking system and a job board that fits their version of TAP. The more hires you make using TAP, the greater your need may be for additional automation. Following the three principles of Lean Recruiting will guide you in using just enough technology for your circumstances.

2. Keep the myths in check: The myths can sneak up on you. New products may profess to be better than traditional hiring methods, when in reality they’re not. It could appear that tech can cure process woes. Don’t be deceived. The latest and greatest innovation may be what all the cool companies are buying. Make sure it’s really what you need. Technology is neither the enemy nor the savior. It is but a tool. Picking appropriate automation that enhances your TAP requires keeping the myths constantly in check.

3. Monitor your tech diet: Staying lean requires a healthy diet. Too much tech creates a bloated process. Too little makes it weak. A healthy diet of just enough of the right tech will help you sustain a fast and accurate TAP.

Leaning Your TAP

Adding technology isn’t the only way to keep your TAP lean. Over time, you’ll find ways to creatively reduce effort, make aspects of your TAP easier to use, and improve your hiring results.

How can you keep leaning out your TAP? Five examples follow.

Example #1: Assigning Hire-Right Profiles

Employees who all do the same job can help write the Hire-Right Profiles for that role. These employees have different strengths. One of them may be really good at prioritizing. Another may be the best at performing detailed tasks. Someone else could be a savvy problem solver. Their different strengths are their areas of subject-matter expertise. When it comes to those aspects of the job, they know better than anyone, including you, what it takes to do quality work.

Have these employees collaborate to create a Hire-Right Profile for their role. In minutes, you can lay out the four-quadrant structure. Explain Dealmakers, Dealbreakers, Boosts, and Blocks by providing examples for each.

Assigning this to your team is an acknowledgment: You’re demonstrating your trust in them. Let them handle the scheduling and logistics. If they want do this over lunch, offer to supply food. If they’d rather do it after hours, pay them for that time. By being flexible, you’re showing your appreciation for this responsibility you’ve asked them to take on.

You can also have your staff handle Hire-Right Profile updates. They see what’s going on with their coworkers. When new hires aren’t working out, they know it before you do. If aspects of the day-to-day work are changing, they experience it first. Who better to update your profiles than the people living the job each day?

Assigning Hire-Right Profiles still takes effort. But that effort is concentrated, focused, and efficient.

Example #2: Crowdsourced Referrals

You’ve probably heard the expression that two’s company and three’s a crowd. When hiring, though, a crowd is powerful. Especially when you get their help with candidate referrals.

You have access to many different crowds: Employees that report to you, colleagues in other departments, peers in other companies, alums from college, family, and friends. These crowds are easily accessible through social media, email, and text.

The people in your crowds can help you with referrals. This doesn’t mean you’ll stop asking for them yourself. I’m suggesting that your crowds can help lighten the load. Asking for their help is one of the easiest forms of automation. People like being helpful.

Requesting help from your crowds can be quick and simple. You could send a text message to a group of people from time to time. Social media is perfect for a quick post about a specific type of candidate you’re looking for.

Your appeals for help can also be creative. Gamifying your request (turning a task into a game) will quickly capture the interest of some of the crowd. For example, you could create a competitive game in a social media post. Your offer? The first three people to send a quality candidate referral could get to join you for drinks after work.

Crowds are a powerful force when you engage them as part of your hiring process. That force grows as you keep them engaged.

Example #3: Candidate-Driven Interviews

Interviewing isn’t something that only happens during hiring. Lots of jobs—like being a journalist, an admissions counselor, or a researcher—require interviewing skills as an essential part of the daily work. When that’s the case, one of the tools in your hiring toolkit should be the candidate-driven interview. This form of interview helps you evaluate the candidate as you watch them do the work they’d be hired to do.

How does the candidate-driven interview work? You bring two candidates into the room simultaneously, and they interview one another. You take notes as you watch them in action. There’s a lot to observe. You’ll experience how they interact, ask questions, manage the conversation, and relate to one another.

Candidate-driven interviews are a perfect example of streamlining your TAP. It’s easy to set up and minimizes what you need to do. The results speak for themselves: You get to have a real experience of candidates doing important sample work.

Example #4: Responsive Reference Checks

To confirm that someone is a good hire, it’s important to use reference checks. Chasing down reference givers, however, can be frustrating. Leaning your reference checking process can help.

It starts when a candidate passes your phone interview. Ask them to contact their reference givers the moment your conversation ends. Suggest that they ask each reference giver for options about when it’s best to schedule reference calls.

Now you may be wondering: “Why would I want to take this step now? I mean, I don’t know if I’m going to be offering this candidate a job yet.” The reason: You do this because later on it’ll eliminate phone tag and will speed up the process when you’re ready to make a hire. Plus, you’ll experience how your candidate takes direction and follows through. Their actions will also demonstrate their level of interest in your job.

Example #5: Delegated Check-Ins

To keep your Talent Inventory fresh, you’ll want to periodically touch base with the people on your list. Touching base—using a lean approach—goes something like what is explained next.

I tell the prospective hire I want to remain in regular contact. Doing so allows me to keep them updated on when we might start working together. Also, it allows me to be a resource. I hear things all the time. Sometimes, that information can help others, like sharing details on a book I’ve recently read or an announcement I heard about a new seminar. Staying in touch lets me pass along helpful insights.

I go on to suggest that it’s best if they call me, especially if they’re currently working. I wouldn’t want to catch them at a bad time. Maybe, I’d end up calling when the boss is standing in their office. They know when they can talk freely. I ask the candidate to check in monthly and to call me sooner if anything important changes in their work life.

Delegating check-ins ticks all the boxes for the principles of Lean Recruiting. It lessens effort and improves results. Staying in touch becomes meaningful to both you and your prospective employee. Also, it’s another opportunity to experience their ability to follow through.

These five examples of leaning your TAP are just the beginning. You’ll discover others ways to fine-tune your process. Keep watching and asking yourself how you can keep things easy, effective, and effortless.

Striking a Balance

In the season two opener of the TV series, Mr. Robot, a psychological thriller about a young computer hacker, a woman experiences technology gone wild. She lives in a fully automated apartment where technology controls everything. After arriving home one day, things go haywire. Lights brighten and dim as if they have free will. Her thermostat behaves erratically, turning her place into an icebox. The television turns itself on and blasts her with audio. Her burglar alarm sounds, and she’s unable to turn it off. After a while, she’s had enough and dashes out the door.¹

Challenges with your hiring technologies probably won’t make you want to run from your office. Nor will technology solve every problem. The right technology that fits your process will be an asset—a valuable, yet imperfect asset, made by smart and fallible people.

Striking a balance, when it comes to automation, is the best strategy. You can use too little or too much automation. Use just enough technology that fits your Talent Accelerator Process, and you’ll constantly be able to hire in an instant.