Upload
ere-media
View
1.841
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Marie Artim's Spring 2008 ERE Expo presentation
Citation preview
Recruiting for Quality: Best Practice Recruitment
with Objective Assessment
ERE ExpoSpring 2008Marie Artim
Introduction
• Enterprise – Who we are• Recruiting in the New Millennium - Change
Your Perspective• Traditional Recruiting Methods Becoming
Less Effective• Look at “Talent Pools” Differently
Who are we?
Who are we?
Founded in 1957 Largest Car Rental Company In North America
65,000+ Employees
7,000 locations Worldwide US, Canada, UK, Ireland & Germany
Operate Fleet of more than 900,000 Vehicles
Fiscal 2007 Revenue of $9.5 Billion The “Taylor Family of Companies” now includes
National Car Rental and Alamo Rent-A-Car
“Take care of your customers and employees first…
And profits are sure to follow.”
- Jack Taylor, Founder
Business culture & philosophy
Decentralized structure
Promote from within philosophy
Employees focus:
Profit-and-loss responsibility
Employee income tied to performance
Responsibility to grow local business
Responsibility to develop people
Our model
Enterprise Recruiting
Goals around hiring pipeline for future leadership Efficient sourcing and processes Measuring and metrics
Education of the audience and “Selling the Dream” Overcoming misperceptions Not a typical opportunity
A blend of National strategy and Local implementation
Genuine, grass roots relationships
Technology for consistency and volume
Enterprise Recruiting
8,500 College Grads this year into the Management Training (MT) Program
Management Interns – 2,000 in Summer 2007 Pipeline to MT Program Mirrors the MT Program
Recruiting Team Structure
Corporate Recruiting
Department
Corporate Recruiting
Department
Field RecruitersField Recruiters
Field OperationsGeneral Manger/RVP
Field OperationsGeneral Manger/RVP
National PartnershipsNational Partnerships
Recruitment AdvertisingRecruitment Advertising
National Media PlanNational Media Plan
Training & DevelopmentTraining & Development
Website DevelopmentWebsite Development
Internet RecruitingInternet Recruiting
College RelationsCollege Relations
ERPERP
Internship ProgramInternship Program
Part Time HiringCar Preps & Drivers
Part Time HiringCar Preps & Drivers
Online Application & Assessment
Online Application & Assessment
Components of Success
• The ERAC Recruitment Process• High Tech, High Touch• Local Approach, “Global”
Perspective• Highly Adaptable, Flexible, and
Customer (candidate) oriented
Components of Success
• Use several tools to identify “talent”:
• Targeted Marketing
• Online Assessments
• Online Application
• Integrated Background Checks
Challenging Assumptions
• “Centralization” Myth• Talent pool, or pool of unusable data?
• “Candidate Experience” Myth• Today’s candidates are the “Internet”
generation
• “High Tech = High Touch” Myth• Technology isn’t about removing personal
connections from the process – it enables it
Challenging Assumptions
• “Resume” Myth• Accuracy: 42 percent of resumes contained at least one
glaring inaccuracy in key factual information.1 • Usefulness: A snapshot of past performance – yet we
hire for potential
• “Best Schools/Sources=Best Candidates” Myth
• Are we excluding some of the best potential?• Is there a link between performance and a degree or
school?
1. Source: Resumedoctor.com
14
Thinking Outside the Box
What we often use to identify talent isn’t always the most valuable
Perfect PredictionPerfect Prediction
+.65 Assessment Centers
+.45 Ability Tests/Job Samples+.40 Group Exercise/Personality Assessments+.35 Structured Interviews/Simulations+.30 Background/Past Performance
+.15 Employment Interviews
+.10 Educational Qualifications
Graphology/Astrology/Phrenology
Random PredictionRandom Prediction
+1
Source: Mike Smith, UMIST0
Objective Hiring, Objective Assessments
• Recruiting is Entering the “Age of Objective Assessment”
• Transparency and objectivity in the eyes of the candidate
• Focus on Competence and Potential
• Hidden gems
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
-$8,000 $14,000 $36,000 $58,000 $80,000 $102,000 $124,000 $146,000 $168,000
Value
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Top Performers
Poor Performers
85th percentile15th
percentile
Cost exceeds value Value exceeds cost
Example: Cost/Value of Talent
$40,000 Salary
The Interview Challenge
How many interviews can you do in one day? Maybe 5 or 6
How long are they? Approximately 45 minutes
When do evaluate the information/do your write ups? End of the day, following morning
How many superstars do you see in one day? Maybe 1 or 2 if I’m lucky
How long before you really know someone in an organization and that they are performing to the required level?
6 months
The Interview Challenge
So,you spend at least two thirds of your time interviewing unsuitable applicants; you don’t know much about their strengths and weaknesses in relation to the requirements of the job and you are going to wait six months to find out if you made the right decision?!
This is similar to: Purchasing a new IT system after a 45 minute
sales call Buying a new car without test driving or
researching pricing and performance
Objective Hiring, Objective Assessments
• Technology – Both Requires and Enables Assessments
• Increased candidate volumes: Good or Bad?
• Good – tap into new talent potential • Bad –Manage the flood of candidates
• Effective automation with assessment is key
Focus on Quality
• Quality is Value• Quality assessment = quality candidates• Poor quality can create both business and
brand risks• What quality do you get from your current
process, screening and assessment?
Research from the assessment industry has shown that:
The difference in value between an average performer (50th percentile) and a top performer (85th percentile) is between 40-70% of salary
The average value of output of the average worker is about twice his or her salary
The average cost of employing someone is between 1.2 and 1.4 times their salary
The Value of Quality
Best of Breed Practices
• Recruiting is Changing, Will Continue to Change – Adapt!
• Don’t Assume You Understand Your Candidates
• Challenge Internal Assumptions
• Focus on What Makes a Difference