Tag Archives: hiring

An Innovation Rant: Just Because You Can Doesn’t Mean You Should

1 Reply

An Innovation Rant: Just Because You Can Doesn’t Mean You Should

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

Why are people so concerned about, afraid of, or resistant to new things?

Innovation, by its very nature, is good.  It is something new that creates value.

Naturally, the answer has nothing to do with innovation.

It has everything to do with how we experience it. 

And innovation without humanity is a very bad experience.

Over the last several weeks, I’ve heard so many stories of inhuman innovation that I have said, “I hate innovation” more than once.

Of course, I don’t mean that (I would be at an extraordinary career crossroads if I did).  What I mean is that I hate the choices we make about how to use innovation. 

Just because AI can filter resumes doesn’t mean you should remove humans from the process.

Years ago, I oversaw recruiting for a small consulting firm of about 50 people.  I was a full-time project manager, but given our size, everyone was expected to pitch in and take on extra responsibilities.  Because of our founder, we received more resumes than most firms our size, so I usually spent 2 to 3 hours a week reviewing them and responding to applicants.  It was usually boring, sometimes hilarious, and always essential because of our people-based business.

Would I have loved to have an AI system sort through the resumes for me?  Absolutely!

Would we have missed out on incredible talent because they weren’t out “type?”  Absolutely!

AI judges a resume based on keywords and other factors you program in.  This probably means that it filters out people who worked in multiple industries, aren’t following a traditional career path, or don’t have the right degree.

This also means that you are not accessing people who bring a new perspective to your business, who can make the non-obvious connections that drive innovation and growth, and who bring unique skills and experiences to your team and its ideas.

If you permit AI to find all your talent, pretty soon, the only talent you’ll have is AI.

Just because you can ghost people doesn’t mean you should.

Rejection sucks.  When you reject someone, and they take it well, you still feel a bit icky and sad.  When they don’t take it well, as one of my colleagues said when viewing a response from a candidate who did not take the decision well, “I feel like I was just assaulted by a bag of feathers.  I’m not hurt.  I’m just shocked.”

So, I understand ghosting feels like the better option.  It’s not.  At best, it’s lazy, and at worst, it’s selfish.  Especially if you’re a big company using AI to screen resumes. 

It’s not hard to add a function that triggers a standard rejection email when the AI filters someone out.  It’s not that hard to have a pre-programmed email that can quickly be clicked and sent when a human makes a decision.

The Golden Rule – do unto others as you would have done unto you – doesn’t apply to AI.  It does apply to you.

Just because you can stack bots on bots doesn’t mean you should.

At this point, we all know that our first interaction with customer service will be with a bot.  Whether it’s an online chatbot or an automated phone tree, the journey to a human is often long and frustrating. Fine.  We don’t like it, but we don’t have a choice.

But when a bot transfers us to a bot masquerading as a person?  Do you hate your customers that much?

Some companies do, as my husband and I discovered.  I was on the phone with one company trying to resolve a problem, and he was in a completely different part of the house on the phone with another company trying to fix a separate issue.  When I wandered to the room where my husband was to get information that the “person” I was talking to needed, I noticed he was on hold.  Then he started staring at me funny (not as unusual as you might think).  Then he asked me to put my call on speaker (that was unusual).  After listening for a few minutes, he said, “I’m talking to the same woman.”

He was right.  As we listened to each other’s calls, we heard the same “woman” with the same tenor of voice, unusual cadence of speech, and indecipherable accent.  We were talking to a bot.  It was not helpful.  It took each of us several days and several more calls to finally reach humans.  When that happened, our issues were resolved in minutes.

Just because innovation can doesn’t mean you should allow it to.

You are a human.  You know more than the machine knows (for now).

You are interacting with other humans who, like you, have a right to be treated with respect.

If you forget these things – how important you and your choices are and how you want to be treated – you won’t have to worry about AI taking your job.  You already gave it away.

Image Credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Sprint Toward the Innovation Action

2 Replies

Sprint Toward the Innovation Action

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Companies have control over one thing: how to allocate their resources. Companies allocate resources by deciding which projects to start, accelerate, and stop; whom to allocate to the projects; how to go about the projects; and whom to hire, invest in, and fire. That’s it.

Taking a broad view of project selection to include starting, accelerating, and stopping projects, as a leader, what is your role in project selection, or, at a grander scale, initiative selection? When was the last time you initiated a disruptive yet heretical new project from scratch? When was the last time you advocated for incremental funding to accelerate a floundering yet revolutionary project? When was the last time you stopped a tired project that should have been put to rest last year? And because the projects are the only thing that generates revenue for your company, how do you feel about all that?

Without your active advocacy and direct involvement, it’s likely the disruptive project won’t see the light of day. Without you to listen to the complaints of heresy and actively disregard them, the organization will block the much-needed disruption. Without your brazen zeal, it’s likely the insufficiently-funded project won’t revolutionize anything. Without you to put your reputation on the line and decree that it’s time for a revolution, the organization will starve the project and the revolution will wither. Without your critical eye and thought-provoking questions, it’s likely the tired project will limp along for another year and suck up the much-needed resources to fund the disruptions, revolutions, and heresy.

Now, I ask you again. How do you feel about your (in)active (un)involvement with starting projects that should be started, accelerating projects that should be accelerated, and stopping projects that should be stopped?

And with regard to project staffing, when was the last time you stepped in and replaced a project manager who was over their head? Or, when was the last time you set up a recurring meeting with a project manager whose project was in trouble? Or, more significantly, when was the last time you cleared your schedule and ran toward the smoke of an important project on fire? Without your involvement, the over-their-head project manager will drown. Without your investment in a weekly meeting, the troubled project will spiral into the ground. Without your active involvement in the smoldering project, it will flame out.

As a leader, do you have your fingers on the pulse of the most important projects? Do you have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to know which projects need help? And do you have the chops to step in and do what must be done? And how do you feel about all that?

As a leader, do you know enough about the work to provide guidance on a major course change? Do you know enough to advise the project team on a novel approach? Do you have the gumption to push back on the project team when they don’t want to listen to you? As a leader, how do you feel about that?

As a leader, you probably have direct involvement in important hiring and firing decisions. And that’s good. But, as a leader, how much of your time do you spend developing young talent? How many hours per week do you talk to them about the details of their projects and deliverables? How many hours per week do you devote to refactoring troubled projects with the young project managers? And how do you feel about that?

If you want to grow revenue, shape the projects so they generate more revenue. If you want to grow new businesses, advocate for projects that create new businesses. If you need a revolution, start revolutionary projects and protect them. And if you want to accelerate the flywheel, help your best project managers elevate their game.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.






5 Things to Consider When Hiring Corporate Innovators

Leave a reply

5 Things to Consider When Hiring Corporate Innovators

GUEST POST from Stefan Lindegaard

As businesses continue to face unprecedented change and uncertainty, innovation is no longer optional – it’s a must-have for companies looking to survive and thrive. However, finding and developing the right people to drive corporate innovation can be challenging.

In this newsletter, we’ll explore five key ideas for hiring and developing individuals capable of leading corporate transformation and innovation forward, in a world where staying ahead of the curve is essential.

Future Potential vs. Past Competencies:

In the past, companies often hired innovators based on past competencies and results. However, the future of hiring will shift towards potential as a key criterion. Past success in other organizations is no guarantee of success in your own, and companies must adapt their hiring practices to focus on individuals who have shown a proven potential for constant learning, growth, and adaptability. Look for people who are capable of dealing well with ambiguity, adapting quickly to changing circumstances, and who possess the potential to succeed in your organization.

Knowing the Direction of Adaptation:

Organizations and talent alike must know the direction in which they need to adapt. However, it can be challenging to maintain an overview of the internal and external factors and trends impacting innovation efforts and capabilities. To tackle this issue, companies must experiment and develop ways to gauge and maintain an overview and/or direction.

For companies with a strong tradition of relying solely on the knowledge of internal R&D experts, it may require broader tracking of emerging trends, as well as reaching beyond R&D to other parts of the company for ideas on other ways to innovate. Consider all the areas where innovation can occur, including in business models, channels, and customer engagement, to name a few.

The Importance of Community Building:

Innovation is increasingly happening in ecosystems and communities, both internally and externally. Future innovation leaders must be able to create shared purpose, values, and rules of engagement to foster innovation within these communities. To build a successful community, strong networking and communication skills, as well as the ability to inspire people, are essential.

Companies should foster a culture of collaboration, encourage participation from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, and recognize and reward innovation efforts.

Creating the Right Conditions and Frameworks:

To make innovation work in big companies, it’s essential to create the right conditions and frameworks. This means allowing talent to experiment and explore new ideas freely, but also providing the resources, time, and support needed to make innovation efforts successful. Companies must be prepared to take risks and try new approaches, and foster a culture that encourages diversity of thought and collaboration. In addition, creating an inclusive culture that values diversity and recognizes the importance of different types of intelligence can also be beneficial for driving innovation forward.

The Importance of Multiple Intelligences:

Innovation requires a diverse range of skills, not just technical or product expertise. Future innovators must have a broad range of skills and experiences, including creativity, customer-centric thinking, and collaboration skills. Companies should consider different types of intelligence when hiring and developing innovation talent, such as emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and cultural intelligence. By valuing multiple intelligences and creating a culture that encourages diverse perspectives, companies can ensure they have the talent they need to drive innovation forward.

As the business landscape continues to evolve at a breakneck pace, innovation will be the key to survival for many companies. However, innovation is only possible with the right people in place. By shifting the focus from past competencies to future potential, tracking emerging trends and adapting accordingly, building strong communities, creating the right frameworks, and considering multiple types of intelligence, companies can hire and develop the right people for the job. Hiring full teams can also help foster innovation and bring about change faster.

By keeping these ideas in mind, companies can ensure that they have the talent they need to thrive in today’s fast-paced business environment.

Image Credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






Rise of the Prompt Engineer

1 Reply

Rise of the Prompt Engineer

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

The world of tech is ever-evolving, and the rise of the prompt engineer is just the latest development. Prompt engineers are software developers who specialize in building natural language processing (NLP) systems, like voice assistants and chatbots, to enable users to interact with computer systems using spoken or written language. This burgeoning field is quickly becoming essential for businesses of all sizes, from startups to large enterprises, to remain competitive.

Five Skills to Look for When Hiring a Prompt Engineer

But with the rapid growth of the prompt engineer field, it can be difficult to hire the right candidate. To ensure you’re getting the best engineer for your project, there are a few key skills you should look for:

1. Technical Knowledge: A competent prompt engineer should have a deep understanding of the underlying technologies used to create NLP systems, such as machine learning, natural language processing, and speech recognition. They should also have experience developing complex algorithms and working with big data.

2. Problem-Solving: Prompt engineering is a highly creative field, so the ideal candidate should have the ability to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions to problems.

3. Communication: A prompt engineer should be able to effectively communicate their ideas to both technical and non-technical audiences in both written and verbal formats.

4. Flexibility: With the ever-changing landscape of the tech world, prompt engineers should be comfortable working in an environment of constant change and innovation.

5. Time Management: Prompt engineers are often involved in multiple projects at once, so they should be able to manage their own time efficiently.

These are just a few of the skills to look for when hiring a prompt engineer. The right candidate will be able to combine these skills to create effective and user-friendly natural language processing systems that will help your business stay ahead of the competition.

But what if you want or need to build your own artificial intelligence queries without the assistance of a professional prompt engineer?

Four Secrets of Writing a Good AI Prompt

As AI technology continues to advance, it is important to understand how to write a good prompt for AI to ensure that it produces accurate and meaningful results. Here are some of the secrets to writing a good prompt for AI.

1. Start with a clear goal: Before you begin writing a prompt for AI, it is important to have a clear goal in mind. What are you trying to accomplish with the AI? What kind of outcome do you hope to achieve? Knowing the answers to these questions will help you write a prompt that is focused and effective.

2. Keep it simple: AI prompts should be as straightforward and simple as possible. Avoid using jargon or complicated language that could confuse the AI. Also, try to keep the prompt as short as possible so that it is easier for the AI to understand.

3. Be specific: To get the most accurate results from your AI, you should provide a specific prompt that clearly outlines what you are asking. You should also provide any relevant information, such as the data or information that the AI needs to work with.

4. Test your prompt: Before you use your AI prompt in a real-world situation, it is important to test it to make sure that it produces the results that you are expecting. This will help you identify any issues with the prompt or the AI itself and make the necessary adjustments.

By following these tips, you can ensure that your AI prompt is effective and produces the results that you are looking for. Writing a good prompt for AI is a skill that takes practice, but by following these secrets you can improve your results.

So, whether you look to write your own AI prompts or feel the need to hire a professional prompt engineer, now you are equipped to be successful either way!

Image credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.






Why are so many people quitting?

2 Replies

Why are so many people quitting?

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

People don’t leave a company because they feel appreciated.

People don’t leave a company because they feel part of something bigger than themselves.

People don’t leave a company because they see a huge financial upside if they stay.

People don’t leave a company because they are treated with kindness and respect.

People don’t leave a company because they can make less money elsewhere.

People don’t leave a company because they see good career growth in their future.

People don’t leave a company because they know all the key players and know how to get things done.

People don’t leave the company so they can abandon their primary care physician.

People don’t leave a company because their career path is paved with gold.

People don’t leave a company because they are highly engaged in their work.

People don’t leave a company because they want to uproot their kids and start them in a new school.

People don’t leave a company because their boss treats them too well.

People don’t leave a company because their work is meaningful.

People don’t leave a company because their coworkers treat them with respect.

People don’t leave a company because they want to pay the commission on a real estate transaction.

People don’t leave a company because they’ve spent a decade building a Trust Network.

People don’t leave a company because they want their kids to learn to trust a new dentist.

People don’t leave a company because they have a flexible work arrangement.

People don’t leave a company because they feel safe on the job.

People don’t leave a company because they are trusted to use their judgment.

People don’t leave the company because they want the joy that comes from rolling over their 401k.

People don’t leave a company when they have the tools and resources to get the work done.

People don’t leave a company when their workload is in line with their capacity to get it done.

People don’t leave a company when they feel valued.

People don’t leave a company so they can learn a whole new medical benefits plan.

People don’t leave a job because they get to do the work the way they think it should be done.

So, I ask you, why are people leaving your company?

Image credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






Age Discrimination in the Workplace is Real

Leave a reply

Forty-Three Percent Say 40-Plus Is Old

Age Discrimination in the Workplace is Real

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

Diversity, equity and inclusion, known as DEI, is a popular yet sensitive topic in the workforce today. Leadership and HR that recognize this are finding ways to ensure employees from all races, ethnicities, abilities, sexual orientations, religions, etc., are represented. Sometimes included, but often left out, is age.

Age shows no color, race, religion, sex, etc. It just is. People get older, and as they do, workplace biases may become evident. It’s important to be aware of this issue. A 2022 study by LiveCareer, ‘Older People & the Workplace’, revealed some intriguing findings regarding age-related stereotypes and discrimination. More than 1,000 workers were surveyed to “investigate their opinions about older people in the workplace.”

Eight in ten respondents claimed age stereotypes were still alive in the workplace.

What is considered old? Forty-three percent of those surveyed said 40-plus is old. Twenty-six percent said 50-plus is old. And 21% said 60-plus is old. So, if you are 50, with probably 15 or more years until retirement, 69% of the people you work with think you are old.

Here are some more findings from LiveCareer’s study to get you thinking about how your organization treats aging employees:

  • 74% of the respondents aged 50-plus said they had been fired because of their age.

  • 86% aged 50-plus felt that most job postings were addressed to people younger than them.

  • 72% of respondents claimed that older employees were a target for workplace bullying.

  • 77% of the respondents said: I haven’t been hired for a job because of my age.

  • 69% said: I’m afraid to lose my job because of my age.

If over 50 is old, then leadership is … old. According to Zippia, there are over 38,700 CEOs currently employed in the U.S., and their average age is 52 years old. If you look at the Fortune 500, the average age of a CEO is 57. Several companies on the Fortune list are run by CEOs ranging from 71 to 91!

Consider the age of the most powerful executives in the United States. President Biden was 78 when he became president. Donald Trump was 70. Barak Obama seems like a baby considering he entered the Oval Office when he was just 47. The overall average age of a United States president entering office is 56 (almost 57).

Some companies and brands are taking a proactive position against age discrimination. Dove and Wendy’s in Canada reacted to CTV news firing Canadian news anchor Lisa LaFlamme for letting her hair go gray. Dove Canada responded with a #KeepTheGrey campaign on its social media postings. They wrote, “Age is beautiful. Women should be able to do it on their own terms, without consequences.” Wendy’s tweeted, “Because a star is a star regardless of hair color.”

Companies are evaluating their retirement policies, recognizing the value of older employees. Target recently announced it is eliminating the mandatory retirement age of 65. Its current CEO, Brian Cornell, will be turning 64 on his next birthday, and Target doesn’t seem ready to start planning for his successor. While Target’s reason for changing the policy may seem self-serving, you can’t ignore that they have come to realize the value in keeping their best employees, regardless of age. Other major companies like 3M, Merck and Boeing are also changing their policies on mandatory retirement.

The OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), an international group of economists based in Paris, with more than 38 member countries, predicts that by 2050, more than four in ten individuals (that’s 40%) in the world’s most advanced economies are likely to be older than 50. The workforce is aging even more rapidly as younger people are starting work at an older age, and older people are staying employed.

We’re not getting any younger. We’re older today than yesterday, both in life and at work. We can’t fight that. It’s just a fact, and you can’t ignore it. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the workforce is also getting older. In 2000 the average age of a worker in the U.S. was 39.3. In 2010, that jumped to 41.7. In 2020, it increased to 42.8.

Despite these changes and observations, age bias still exists. It needs to be considered—and eradicated—the same as other DEI issues.

This article originally appeared on Forbes

Image Credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






Attracting the Best

Leave a reply

How Purpose Becomes Your Talent Magnet

Attracting the Best - How Purpose Becomes Your Talent Magnet

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the relentless war for talent, organizations often compete on a transactional level: salary, benefits, and perks. While these are certainly important, they are no longer the decisive factors for top-tier professionals, especially for the younger generations entering the workforce. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I am here to argue that the most powerful, sustainable, and effective talent magnet is not compensation, but **purpose**. In a world where meaning and impact are highly valued, a clear and authentic purpose is what separates a good company from a great one. It’s what moves an organization from a place where people simply work to a place where people are compelled to belong.

The modern workforce, particularly top talent, is looking for more than a paycheck. They seek alignment between their personal values and the mission of their employer. They want to know that their work contributes to something bigger than a profit margin. They are driven by a desire to solve meaningful problems and make a tangible difference in the world. When an organization can clearly articulate its purpose—its “why”—it creates a compelling narrative that resonates with the hearts and minds of potential employees. This isn’t about crafting a slick marketing campaign; it’s about embedding purpose into the very DNA of the company, from its core strategy to its daily operations. The result is a self-selecting talent pool of motivated, innovative, and deeply committed individuals.

The Four Pillars of Purpose-Driven Talent Attraction

Building an organization that attracts talent through purpose requires a commitment to four key pillars:

  • Authenticity and Integrity: Purpose must be genuine, not a performative facade. It must be reflected in the company’s actions, its products, and its leadership decisions. Hypocrisy is a powerful repellent for today’s talent.
  • Clear Communication: The “why” must be simple, inspiring, and consistently communicated to both internal and external audiences. It should be a constant theme in recruitment, onboarding, and internal communications.
  • Mission Alignment: Every role, from the factory floor to the executive suite, must be connected to the company’s purpose. Employees need to see how their specific contributions advance the larger mission, creating a sense of ownership and meaning.
  • Tangible Impact: Purpose must translate into tangible, measurable impact. Whether it’s a social, environmental, or technological impact, showing concrete results of the company’s purpose makes the mission feel real and achievable.

“You can rent a person’s hands with a salary, but you can only earn their heart with a purpose. And in the innovation economy, hearts are the most valuable asset.”

Case Study 1: Microsoft’s Transformation from “Know-It-Alls” to “Learn-It-Alls”

The Challenge:

In the early 2010s, Microsoft was a technology giant struggling with a stagnant culture. Employees were highly competitive, often working in silos, and the company was seen as a “know-it-all” culture. This environment made it difficult to attract top talent who were looking for collaborative, growth-oriented workplaces. CEO Satya Nadella’s vision for a new Microsoft was centered on a new purpose: **to empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more**. 🚀

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

Nadella didn’t just write a new mission statement; he fundamentally shifted the company’s culture. He focused on a **growth mindset**, encouraging employees to become “learn-it-alls.” This new purpose created a compelling narrative for potential hires, who were no longer just joining a software company but a mission-driven organization. Microsoft’s purpose became a powerful filter for talent, attracting individuals who were passionate about making a global impact through technology.

  • Talent Attraction: The new purpose helped Microsoft attract a new generation of engineers, designers, and leaders who were drawn to the company’s commitment to social and technological empowerment. This included talent from outside the traditional tech space, as the company’s mission resonated with a broader group of people.
  • Talent Retention: The growth mindset and a sense of shared purpose significantly increased employee engagement and retention. By linking individual roles to a global mission, employees felt a deeper sense of value and belonging, reducing the high turnover that had plagued the company in the past.
  • Innovation: The cultural shift led to a surge in innovation, as employees were encouraged to collaborate and experiment without fear of failure. Products like Microsoft Teams, which became a cornerstone of remote work, were born from this more open and purpose-driven environment.

The Result:

By shifting its core purpose and culture, Microsoft successfully revitalized its talent pipeline. It became a magnet for top talent, proving that a compelling mission can be a more powerful draw than just a high salary. The company’s market value soared, demonstrating that purpose and profit are not mutually exclusive but can, in fact, be mutually reinforcing.

Case Study 2: Warby Parker’s Vision for a Socially Conscious Business

The Challenge:

When Warby Parker launched in 2010, the eyewear market was dominated by a few large corporations, and a single pair of glasses was often prohibitively expensive. Co-founders Neil Blumenthal and David Gilboa’s purpose was to create a company that was both a successful business and a force for good. Their purpose-driven mission was simple: **to offer designer eyewear at a revolutionary price while leading the way for socially conscious businesses**. 👓

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

Warby Parker’s “Buy a Pair, Give a Pair” program was not just a marketing tactic; it was the core of their business model. For every pair of glasses sold, a pair was distributed to someone in need. This clear and compelling purpose became an instant talent magnet.

  • Talent Attraction: Warby Parker attracted talent who were passionate about making a difference. The company’s mission resonated with professionals who wanted to use their skills in retail, design, and technology to address a global health issue. They received a flood of applications from individuals who saw their work as a means to a greater end.
  • Culture of Purpose: This purpose permeated every aspect of the company’s culture. Employees were regularly involved in “giving trips” where they could see the direct impact of their work. This connection strengthened their commitment to the brand and its mission, creating a powerful sense of community.
  • Brand Loyalty: The purpose-driven model not only attracted top talent but also built an incredibly loyal customer base. This loyalty, in turn, reinforced the company’s mission and its value proposition to employees, creating a virtuous cycle of purpose, talent, and business success.

The Result:

Warby Parker successfully built a highly engaged and motivated workforce that was passionate about the company’s mission. Their purpose became a critical part of their recruitment strategy, attracting a wave of socially conscious professionals who were eager to contribute to a brand that aligned with their values. It proved that a clear purpose can attract, motivate, and retain top talent in a way that traditional incentives cannot.

Conclusion: Purpose is Not an HR Initiative, It’s a Strategic Imperative

In the new talent economy, purpose is no longer a “nice-to-have” or an HR initiative; it is a fundamental strategic imperative. The best talent is looking for more than a job; they are looking for a cause. They want to be part of an organization that is making a positive impact on the world, a brand they can be proud to work for and contribute to.

As leaders, our challenge is to move beyond the superficial and to truly embed purpose into the heart of our organizations. We must be authentic in our mission, transparent in our actions, and committed to showing the tangible impact of our work. By doing so, we will not only attract the most talented and innovative people but also build a more resilient, successful, and human-centered business. Your purpose isn’t just your north star for strategy; it’s your most powerful talent magnet.

Extra Extra: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: 1 of 950+ FREE quote slides available at http://misterinnovation.com

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






Four Key Skills All Futurists Must Have

Leave a reply

What is a Futurist?

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the ever-changing world of modern technology, being able to adapt to new trends is essential for success. Futurists are individuals who study the implications of current technological developments, and predict how these technologies will shape the future. As technology continues to advance, the skills that futurists need to remain ahead of the curve are becoming increasingly important.

1. The primary skill of a futurist is the ability to think critically and analytically.

They must be able to analyze data sets and trends, and draw conclusions on how those trends could affect the future. They need to understand the complex relationships between various technologies and industries, and recognize how certain developments could impact the world. Additionally, they must be able to identify emerging trends and technologies, and anticipate how they could alter the landscape in the near and long term.

2. Futurists must also be well-versed in a wide range of topics.

This includes not just technology, but also economics, sociology, psychology, and politics. Understanding the nuances of these topics is important for predicting the future, as all of these fields are inextricably linked.

3. Futurists need to be able to communicate their ideas effectively.

This includes being able to present complex data and analysis in an accessible way, and engaging in dialogue with stakeholders from a variety of backgrounds. Furthermore, a futurist must be able to think outside the box and come up with creative solutions to difficult problems.

4. A futurist must have excellent problem-solving skills.

They must be able to identify potential issues before they arise, and develop strategies to mitigate them. This includes analyzing the potential consequences of certain technological developments and making decisions that will benefit society in the long term.

As technology continues to advance, the skills needed to be a successful futurist will only become more important. By developing these skills, one can stay ahead of the curve and shape the future.

Does your organization employ a futurist?

Bottom line: Futurists are not fortune tellers. They use a formal approach to achieve their outcomes, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to be their own futurist.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






A Peek Inside the Broken Corporate Hiring Model

Leave a reply

A Peek Inside the Broken Corporate Hiring ModelI was reading with interest some of Linkedin’s recent #HowIHire series and in doing so it was interesting to see how many people are still operating under the old, broken hiring paradigm when it comes to the labor market.

The best of the bunch that I read was Beth Comstock’s You’re Hired. Now What which has more to do with what she thinks people should do after she gives them a job rather than how she hires, which I thought was a good angle to take.

My day job was recently eliminated in a budget reallocation, so I’m out there in the market looking for my next new challenge. Throughout this process (and my consulting work over the years), I’ve observed a number of different challenges that companies face with hiring, and identified some opportunities for companies to increase their return on human capital:

Challenge #1:

Scanning resumes and online applications for keywords is a very bad way to find talent. It’s very good however at finding people who at least know how to spell the keywords.

Challenge #2:

The way most organizations handle human resources is very much a product of the industrial age. Hiring new employees is still a very bureaucratic affair, a far cry from reflecting an Internet Age approach, and farther still from what’s needed in the era of Social Business and Digital Transformation. Having an outdated, bureaucratic hiring approach prevents many organizations from growing (or changing) as fast as they may need to maximize revenue and profits.

Challenge #3:

Building on Challenge #2, the hiring process is incredibly slow. It can take weeks or months to finalize and post job descriptions. It can take weeks to source candidates. It can take weeks or months for a hiring manager to get around to interviewing anyone because they are too busy. This can result in the loss of the best candidates, can lead to the loss of current employees picking up the slack (leading to more job openings), and impacts the financial performance of the organization.

Challenge #4:

With the exception of professional sports franchises, companies are so risk averse that they would rather hire someone with a lot of experience doing something in a mediocre way than someone with limited experience but a higher upside (higher capacity and capability). Following this analogy, most companies would never have hired a high school kid like Lebron James.

Challenge #5:

Automated and recruiter-led screening systems are better at identifying people that fit the job description than they are at identifying people that will thrive in the company culture and be a productive team member. You can’t train people to be a good cultural fit, but you can train smart people to do just about anything.

Opportunity #1:

Every company whether it likes it or not, is a technology company. So, if you’re running a technology company, and ideally a social business, shouldn’t you want to hire people who know how to use technology (or at least how to build a Linkedin profile)? And if they have a Linkedin profile, why wouldn’t you use that instead of asking them to create another profile on your careers site?

Opportunity #2:

Things are changing at an increasing rate. Hire people who embrace change and like to learn, because you’re always going to be asking people to learn something new as the world continues to change around you.

Opportunity #3:

Looking around the landscape, it seems like we’ve created more ways to help people find the ideal new romantic partner than the ideal new employee. Are there things that the recruiting industry could learn for the romance industry?

Opportunity #4:

There is more to an employee than their intersection with the job description. In fact employees often have knowledge, skills and abilities that intersect with multiple job descriptions. Below you’ll find a visual depiction of this and of the increasingly less well-defined organizational boundaries:

Organization of the Future

Opportunity #5:

As the boundaries of the organization become less well-defined (see above) and as business makes increasing use of open innovation, partnerships, and co-opetition, hiring managers should consider not just matching the job description but also consider their ability to build and leverage external networks, and investigate the scope and quality of their existing networks.

Conclusion

Of course there are many more challenges and opportunities than I have space to list here, but I find these to be an interesting start to a conversation. What challenges or opportunities would you like to add to the conversation?

Image credit: businessnewsdaily.com


Accelerate your change and transformation success

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.






What Should the Role of Personal Branding be in Recruitment?

Leave a reply

What Should the Role of Personal Branding be in Recruitment?I’ve been thinking a lot lately about personal branding, in part because several people have told me that I seem to do it pretty well, in spite of the fact that I would never call myself a personal branding expert or endeavor to make my living as a personal branding consultant.

While I think the personal branding topic is an interesting one, it is more because I am curious about:

  1. The role of personal branding in helping organizations achieve innovation success
  2. Whether or not organizations should be factoring in personal branding strength as part of their recruitment considerations

Now that we’ve hopefully made the case for the role of personal branding in helping organizations achieve innovation success in my previous post, let’s investigate whether or not organizations should be factoring in the strength of personal brand as part of their recruitment considerations.

Is the personal brand of an individual important to the brand of a collective and the brand equity that the organization is trying to build?

Well, look no further than organizations like Nike and Adidas that harness the personal brand equity of elite athletes like Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, and Derrick Rose.

Look no further than organizations like Target that harness the personal brand equity of Michael Graves, Isaac Mizrahi, Mossimo Giannulli, Jason Wu, and Phillip Lim. Meanwhile Macy’s has the Martha Stewart Home Collection (but JC Penney, Sears and Kmart also have Martha Stewart collections). So, harnessing the personal brand of designers and celebrities is obviously seen as beneficial to the brand of the collective in the minds of these organizations.

But it doesn’t stop there, the University of Phoenix is attempting to harness the personal brands of Clayton M. Christensen, Jeff Dyer, and Hal Gregersen to try and save their accreditation, London Business School harnesses the personal brand equity of Gary Hamel, Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management harnesses the personal brand equity of Philip Kotler, and several consultancies harness the personal brand equity of famous professors to lend credibility to their consulting brands.

So, if at the highest levels, the organization’s brand equity benefits from harnessing the strength of the personal brands of certain individuals, shouldn’t organizations be considering the personal brand strength of applicants in the hiring process?

Not just for the reasons detailed above in relation to the increasingly open and interconnected organization, but also as content marketing becomes an increasingly important way for organizations to tell their brand story, and as innovative organizations seek to do the value translation component of innovation, shouldn’t the strength of personal brand equity be a consideration?

Now I don’t want to make this about me, or to say that my personal brand is nearly as strong as any of the individuals referenced before, and so I’ve made this as generic as possible:

  • Wouldn’t a McKinsey, Booz & Co., Deloitte, PWC, Bain, BCG, Innosight, Strategyn, ?WhatIf!, IDEO, Frog, Idea Couture, Fahrenheit 212, Jump Associates, or other consulting firm be better off (all other things being close to equal) hiring a consultant that could not just do great client work, but also a public evangelist for the firm at conferences and events, and bring visibility to the firm in print in the various media outlets that their personal brand has given them access to?

  • Wouldn’t a university be better off bringing in a candidate into a PhD research effort that would not just create a purely academic piece of research, but benefit more by partnering with a candidate that has a pre-existing publishing track record, pre-existing public visibility to help promote it, and whose personal brand equity could also bring potentially greater visibility to the degree granting institution?

  • Wouldn’t a company (all other things being roughly equal) be better off bringing in someone to lead their innovation efforts who has a strong personal brand in the innovation and/or startup communities, than someone who might have great program management capabilities, but limited personal brand equity and visibility? I mean, if one of the goals of an innovation program is to gather more insight-driven dots than your competitors, shouldn’t you base part of your selection criteria on the insight capacity of the individual and the connections that their personal brand equity brings?

These are just three examples of where organizations (and HR professionals) should be factoring personal branding into their recruitment criteria, but there are many more.

I have to say that too much of the focus on personal branding these days is from a social media perspective and making sure that the individual is not damaging their personal brand with careless social media involvement, or is focused on encouraging people to gather as many ‘friends’ as possible, or on the clothes that someone should wear, as if these things by themselves create a personal brand.

I’ve already given my thoughts about what the organization should do with personal branding.

Now here are my personal branding recommendations for the individual:

  1. Determine what your personal brand is. Start by thinking of the three words that define you. What do you want to be known for?

  2. Once you determine what your personal brand stands for, then make sure that all of your online profiles and other kinds of digital and physical assets (including your appearance) reinforce it.

  3. Create content for your online portfolio on the topics related to the three words that define you.

  4. Join the communities that intersect with your personal brand and your passions.

  5. Get out there and meet people. Look for those intersections of skills, abilities, talents, and passions that you have with others that are also consistent with your personal brand.

  6. Look to pursue activities that will strengthen your personal brand, not weaken it.

  7. Be authentic!

  8. Have fun!

Let’s close with a few questions:

  • What would you add to this list?

  • What is your personal brand, how strong is it, and how are you going to leverage this to power your career success?

  • How is your organization viewing personal brand when it comes to its recruitment efforts?

Keep innovating!


Build a common language of innovation on your team

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.