Selling is hard

Applying psychological pressure (by appealing to someone’s fears, greed, or vanity) to persuade the prospect to make a quick purchase decision.  This approach is justified on the ground that  most people are lazy and will postpone making a  decision even if it were in their best interest to make the commitment.  This practice is, however, reviled when its sole purpose is the salesperson’s gain at the customer’s detriment.  Also called high  pressure selling.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/hard-selling.html#ixzz2UZWywTQx

 

Advertisements

Employment Branding – Har ansvaret och frågan fallit mellan stolarna hos HR och Marknad?

Apropå tidigare blogginlägg kring Performance Management & KPIér. Innan man kommer dit så gäller det att hitta rätt förståelse för rekrytering & Employment Branding.

En felrekrytering kostar mycket pengar – men vad kostar ett felrekryterat rekryteringsbolag?
2011 investerade enligt bemanningsbarometern Svenska företag 819 miljoner kronor, på att lägga ut rekrytering till bolag som säger sig vara proffs inom området. Enligt AEA genomförs totalt ca 1,2 miljoner nyanställningar varje år. Flertalet bolag är just proffs på att rekrytera – men frågan är om de är proffs att vara företagets förlängda arm inom employment branding? Har det rekryterande företaget missat en viktig kanal inom marknadsföringsstrategin för uppföljning av varumärke och image? Har ansvaret och frågan fallit mellan stolarna hos HR och Marknad?

Employment Branding är ett begrepp som myntades på 90 talet som benämning på de strategier som syftar till att identifiera, utveckla och vårda väsentliga kompetenser.
Ett välkänt begrepp inom rekryteringsvärlden är att “det kostar mycket pengar att rekrytera fel person”. Jag vill påstå att det kostar lika mycket pengar (om inte mer!) att jobba med fel rekryteringsbolag som inte förstår sig på det externa värdet av employment branding – d.v.s. marknadsföring och imageskapande.

IMG_8269

Värdet handlar inte enbart om som Stepstone marknadsför sina Employment Branding produkter “du når ut brett och riktat till rätt kandidater, samtidigt som du förstärkt bilden av dig som en attraktiv arbetsgivare”. Detta är enbart kopplat till marknadsföring och image. Men genomförs det en uppföljning på det externa rekryteringsbolag av nöjda kunder, dvs. kandidaterna som deltagit i processen?

IMG_8260

Efter genomförd research bland personer som söker kvalificerade chefs & specialist jobb kring hur personen hanterats av rekryteringsbolag (välkända rekryteringsbolag) är svaret bland annat; usla återkopplingar eller ibland till och med inga återkopplingar alls. Det rekryterande bolaget är inte anträffbar på telefon, svara inte på mail. Till och med när personer kommit till intervju 1, 2 och till och med slutintervju, tappas personen bort på vägen och blir aldrig återkopplad! Vilken annan bransch skulle kunna ta tusentals kronor och enbart ser till den interna processen?

Efter en genomförd uppföljning även hos strategisk talent & performance managers, bekräftas sanningen – det saknas uppföljning från samtliga kandidater i rekryteringsprocessen. Den uppföljning som ibland finns inom några rekryteringssystem är då uppföljning av de (1-5) personer som varit med i slutrekrytering.
Flertalet av de personer (kandidater) jag träffat, har (55 %) en negativ syn på det bolag som de sökt till på grund av hur rekryteringsbolaget hanterat rekryteringen. Och, ännu mindre positiva (70 %) och till och med kommer aldrig som chef & specialist att kontakta det rekryterande företaget vid nästkommande egna rekryteringar de själva kommer att genomföra,

Ett räkneexempel på värdeskapande Employment Branding:
1. Omsättning. Svenska företag investerar 819 miljoner (enl. Bemanningsbarometern) kronor på extern rekrytering.
2. Kostnad. Kostnad per rekrytering ca 60 000 kronor (Snitt för en rekrytering är ca 3 månadslöner)
3. Antal rekryteringar per år. ca 13. 500 rekryteringar/år (omsättning/kostnad)
4. Antal snitt ansökningar per rekrytering: Ca 150 snitt ansökningar per rekrytering.
5. Extern rekrytering/Kandidat Employment Branding värdet: Antal rekryteringar per år * antal snitt ansökningar per rekrytering= 2 000 000 kandidater i Sverige söker jobb varje år (det är ca hälften av Sveriges arbetsföra befolkning!!)

Om nu företag investerar miljontals kronor på att lägga ut sin rekrytering till rekryteringsbolag – Vilket imagevärde skapades, utöver en attraktiv annons kopplat till en attraktiv arbetsplats och kan det till och med ha skapat motsatt negativ effekt? Har rekryterande företaget glömt bort en viktig kanal kopplat till marknadsföringsstrategin? För vilket emotionellt strategiskt värde kan skapas till de personer som faktiskt själva väljer att söka sig till företagets varumärke? Och hur kan företag vårda det på ett mer strategiskt imageskapande sätt än vad som görs idag?


Om syftet med employment branding är att både tillfredsställa det interna och externa värdet av varumärkesbyggande är min slutsats: företag bör ta ett mer aktivt ansvar och börja jobba med rekrytering som kanal och ställa mätbara KPI mål och inte enbart följa upp topp 5 kandidater, utan samtliga kandidater. Tänk vilket mervärde som ett B2C företag kan utveckla och tänk vilket mervärde det kan skapa! Det är att ta ansvar för företagets långsiktiga employment branding och utveckla värdeskapande image och varumärke!

Performance Management and KPI

articles_528

Performance Management and KPIs

Managers talk a lot about employee performance. There’s constant pressure to achieve performance targets, to reach higher performance levels, and to ensure that people’s work supports and furthers the organization’s goals. Performance management is the process used to manage this performance. The key question asked is, “How well is an employee applying his or her current skills, and to what extent is he or she achieving the outcomes desired?”

Key Points:

KPIs are metrics that link organizational vision with individual action. If you think of strategic practice as a pyramid, as shown in Figure 1 below, with vision at the top and actions at the bottom, in the middle you find the KPIs that have been derived from the strategy, objectives, and critical success factors of the organization.

Below the KPIs are the activities and projects that are pursued by the organization in an attempt to achieve the KPIs.  To ensure that these activities are in fact aligned with the organization’s strategy, you need to concentrate on what the employees are actually doing. You do this through performance management. By applying the principle of KPIs to employee goals and performance, you create a direct link between all of the key success factors that have been derived from the overall strategy. The result is that members of your team actually do what they should be doing, and that your measurements for determining how well they are doing are clearly tied to organizational success.

.
Donald L Kirkpatrick’s “Four steps to measuring training effectiveness”
This model uses four separate stages for the evaluation of the effectiveness of a training program.

The four stages are:

  • Reaction
  • Learning
  • Behaviour
  • Results

Level 1

The first stage is about the reaction of the trainee to the training. This sort of measurement is concerned with how the trainees “feel” about the course. The usual course feedback sheets are an example of the Kirkpatrick level 1 evaluation. Most organisations do not do any more than this type of measurement and analysis. The drawback is that we do not really know if the trainee has actually learnt anything. What really seems to be being asked of the trainee was how “happy” were you with the course; hence the somewhat derogatory description that is often applied to the “happy sheets”! We will now look at the next level of evaluation concerned with Learning.


Level 2

Things can be improved by using a pre-test and post-test and comparing the results. The questions need to be objective and closely related to the course objectives (more about that later). In this way we can determine if the training actually delivered knowledge and this was understood by the trainees at the time. An organisation that does this can be confident that the trainee has actually learnt something at that time. Why do I make the point that we have to make the measurement and consider the learning at a certain time? Well because we do not know if the learning has had time to be internalised and become “concrete”. All too often trainees (and delegates at conferences for example) will have difficulty remembering what was in the course or seminar they attended a few days later let alone months later. There are various techniques that we can employ to improve the level of recall but basically “if we don’t use it we will lose it”!


Level 3

This is concerned with “behaviour”. By that we mean the measurable change in an individual as a result of their attendance on the training course. This is, in my opinion, the least we should be expecting from any training program. After all what is the point of spending money and using resources if the training does noteffect some measurable change in the behaviour of the trainee?


Level 4

Kirkpatrick is now concerned with the training to determine if it has actually been translated into tangible benefits to the organisation. Quite simply has productivity and or quality been improved? Have the number of accidents or incidents been reduced? Has plant availability and or plant utilisation been improved? Has the morale of the workforce changed for the better? These are metrics which really have an impact on the “bottom line” and for that reason feature in the companies balance sheets and KPIs. We have to ask ourselves is this not the real reason for training? Training has to make a real difference in performance and effectiveness; this is tied closely to competence. Training has be proven to deliver results and be cost effective. It might sound simple but it is not for most organisations. The reason is that most do not have in place any system for measuring the improvement in competence of the individual; let alone a systematic approach to identifying the most effective means of assisting the individual to becoming competent.


Cost effective training
If we all now accept that the majority of organisations carry out training to change the behaviour of the workforce and improve their performance in the workplace we also must accept that this cannot be achieved without a clear plan and strategy.

Evidence or proof?
A goal can be considered to be something that the organisation strives to achieve through the meeting of specific objectives. Achieving the individual objectives in a methodical and logical way effectively maps out the process towards the eventual achievement of the goal. There are many tangible benefits and other benefits which are very important but more difficult to quantify.

Benefits can include:

  • Better productivity
  • Lower insurance premiums
  • Improved morale
  • Enhanced reputation
  • Reduced stress
  • No legal costs
  • No compensation cases
  • Lower staff turnover
  • Employer of choice


Input, Process and Output
Some leading companies recognised the change model (see below) and one (IBM) introduced the IPO paradigm. The concern being is training delivering the desired results within the organisation? The IPO model was designed to confront and solve problem. In this model a distinction is made between output (short term benefits) and outcomes (benefits which are longer term but actually determine the availability of future training resources). The following quote is particularly relevant here “The ultimate payoff or added value of an employee’s learning experience is how well he or she performs on the job.” David S Bushnell writing about the “Input, Process, Output: A model for Evaluating Training” 1990 Training and Development Journal.


Flow chart of input-output approach to training evaluation

inputandoutput


Conclusion
The training intervention has to be designed to meet the needs of the organisation by satisfying the competence development requirements of the individual. By achieving this goal we have a rational and justifiable case for training and we are able to prove that training really does deliver tangible benefits, not least to the “bottom line”.

Sources:
http://www.sentricocompetencymanagement.com
http://www.mindtools.com

The Experiential Learning Cycle

kolbcycle

We learn in different ways, and for getting full effect in performance learning – action learning is effective.

Kolb’s theory explains the relevance of a learner’s internal cognitive process.  Kolb’s experiential learning theory works on two levels: a four-stage cycle of learning and four separate learning styles.

Kolb’s experiential learning style theory is typically represented by a four stage learning cycle in which the learner ‘touches all the bases:

  • Concrete Experience (feelings)
  • Reflective Observation (watching)
  • Abstract Conceptualization (thinking)
  • Active Experimentation (doing)

Effective learning is seen when a person progresses through a cycle of four stages: 1. Having a concrete experience followed by 2. Observation of and reflection on that experience which leads to 3. The formation of abstract concepts and generalizations, which are then 4. Used to test hypothesis in future situations, resulting in new experiences.

It is possible to enter the cycle at any stage and follow it through its logical sequence. However, effective learning only occurs when a learner is able to execute all four stages of the model. Therefore, no one stage of the cycle is an effective as a learning procedure on its own.