Political Correctness denies rationality

OK, so I subscribe to a web-based forum group from ERE (Electronic Recruiting Exchange), that is a national group of recruiters sharing experiences. Some decent contributors are often on there. Here's the link: http://www.ere.net/erenetwork/splash.ASP?D=NTWRK&ACTION=GROUP&GROUPID=3B6E1895276F4DB48CBCD882D2C88523

Anyway, today there were some people talking about the recent surge of video resumes being offered by agencies for their clients to look at. I happen to love these and think they are a great idea. In seconds flat, you can tell whether the person is presentable and professional, do they speak well, and what are their general chances of fitting in with the culture. Videos are a wonderful tool. But at some point in the on-line discussion some HR person on the list chimed in with apparent concern over "liability" at candidates perhaps people being weeded out based on appearances. NO DUH!!!!

That's the entire point! Save our time not bringing in people who we'll simply never hire. Is this person implying that personal presence should not play into hiring decisions? What would be fair? Only interview people if we wear a blindfold? This is the kind of idiocy that gives HR a well-deserved bad reputation.

Business is done in the real world folks, and that means that we need to hire the whole package, not just a resume. It's not discriminatory to have discriminating tastes. 21-day dry-aged Prime beef tastes better than USDA Choice. CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta gets offered the US Surgeon General job over some back-room CDC policy expert because he's pleasant and articulate, and will make better impact on Americans than the other guy who we don't know from TV. It's not only fair, it's the right way it should be...

New Economic Indicator Metric

I had 28 messages waiting for me this morning, but only 4 of them actually mattered to me at all. 24 were from recruiters. That's a 7:1 ratio of recruiter sales calls to business calls I care about. We'll call that a 7.0 on the desperation scale. The higher the desperation quotient, the worse the economy is. Everyone's trying to sell me things I don't want. Try this for yourself tomorrow. ... Let me know your own results.

Don't be Scared

As I've explained earlier, I've worked with world-class entrepreneurs for over 20 years and have learned that they share many common traits. Among these traits is a sense of fearlessness. These people are decisive, don't dilly-dally around a decision, and know that as long as they are doing the right thing, they have nothing to fear. A lot more of this kind of thinking should be introduced to corporate HR leaders, in my opinion. In my experience, HR departments spend too much of their time living in fear; of doing the wrong thing and getting sued, of taking a stance on an issue, of weeding out underperforming employees in a timely manner--the list goes on and on. The most successful people in business do not live in fear; they take action.

Earlier this year, I paid a visit to our Orange County, California office, and made a point to have a brief conversation with the couple dozen employees, just to see how things were going. In very short order a pattern of comments emerged that the place was in an uproar over a new supervisor who was overly autocratic, and bombastic (likely from being new and insecure). Now, this office was very important and we had spent a lot of time and money putting together this group, and simply couldn't have 90% of the employees pissed off over one junior manager. I consulted with the group VP and even the CEO, and shared my concern that the whole office was at risk because of this one person. The VP was terrified of being sued because the California culture was so litigious, but they backed me up, and we terminated the employee the next morning. We didn't go into specifics in that meeting; simply said we had to part ways, and offered her 3 weeks severance if she signed our catch-all release. If she chose not to sign, she'd get her accrued PTO and nothing more. She signed and that was that. My point is that situation could have dragged on for months without resolution. That can be acceptable in a big, slow eneterprise, but not in any organization that needs to move fast, and wants a culture of merit-based recognition.

Next time you know something should be done about a particular situation, take it to your boss, explain that you know there may be some risk to the decision, but that it's in the best interests of the company. Your boss will likely back you and, more importantly, will respect you more for your leadership stance. If he doesn't, and instead is the type of executive who lives in fear of being sued, or rocking the boat, you're probably at the wrong company.

Anectodes of why Union's suck.

So my wife's SUV lease is up in a few weeks and she's been looking at cars. She's driven a bunch, and researched a bunch, and narrowed it down Lexus RX350, Acura MDX, and Nissan Murano, after having dismissed Ford Edge, Lincoln's MKX, and Volvo V70 . She said that the feel of quality was very distinct between one group and the other, even though prices of all were close. What's a major difference of the two groupings? Lexus, Acura, and Nissan do NOT employ Union workers either in the U.S or in their home countries. Ford/Lincoln obviously do--and the Swedes? Forget about it. They have a 32 hour work week and take the entire month of August off.

So we bought a new 2009 Acura MDX today. The technology is unmatched, as is the build quality. We're doing our part to keep the economy moving, but pouring money into companies that produce inferior product; or more accurately, lesser product for the same price (because they exist mainly to provide benefits to union workers), is irrational. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been destroyed by their Union obligations, and the lesson in this is that bad business can not be sustained forever. Unions were created in the dawn of the Industrial Revolution as a means to regulate employer behavior when neither the government, nor the marketplace provided such regulation. Unions have been an antiquated system for the past 40 years, and it's finally caught up with them in a most painful way. RIP.

Why do I Look at HR differently?

Simple. For over 20 years, I've worked directly with and/or for world-class entrepreneurs. Over the years, it becomes clear that while they all may have different leadership styles and strengths, certain traits and behaviors are nearly universal among them. I didn't come to my current job via any sort of HR "indoctrination", and admit to bringing much negative HR bias with me. My background is as a business guy in software start-ups, working in private equity and also executive search. In the world of high-tech start-ups we moved fast, were pragmatic, and hated anything remotely resembling rules or bureaucracy. Then later, in the search business, I was typically retained by an investor, the Board, or the CEO; and HR was more often than not kept out of the loop, and was often seen as a hindrance to the important recruiting and assessment work that had to be done. The placement of a successful new executive was of strategic importance to any business, and we could not afford to be bogged down in trivial details that often seemed to preoccupy HR leaders.

In the 5 years since being thrust into the HR leadership role, I've adapted this kind of entrepreneurial thinking wherever I could, and it's paid off. I'd put us up against nearly anyone you can think of, in nearly any measurement you care to name. In the coming weeks and months we'll talk about what's worked and what's not worked. Your feedback and questions are very welcome!

Let's get this rolling

Seasons Greetings! Part of my 2008 New Year's resolutions was to get the blog started, and I've beaten the goal with 4 days to spare in the year! My intent as we move forward in this experiment is to share experiences from my world as a VP of Human Resources for a successful, forward-thinking, super-fast-growing company. I can't share who we are, or who I am, as my goal is to share real experiences, and thus must protect the innocent. LOL. Welcome aboard!