'Looks, Game or Money' in Talent Acquisition

There is a colloquialism in dating (or so I've heard) that you need 'looks, game or money/status', and if you want to punch above your weight class, so to speak, you have to have at least two out of three. I was thinking about how well this unwritten rule of dating applies to the current job market, in which the job candidates are often holding all of the cards, and in which the employers are the ones courting talent. So, in that spirit, here is the metaphor spelled out in detail.

Looks

'Looks', from an employer-to-job-seeker standpoint, are things that are obviously attractive about either a company or the open role. This could be your company's reputation. Say you are one of the top companies in your field, that helps. I think another thing that is outwardly attractive is having a certain level of role open, like a Director or VP-level role. Or, 'looks' could be having a sexy location for your opening...somewhere where a lot of people desire to live (I hear "Denver", "Austin", "The Carolinas", "Florida" a lot). Or 'looks' could be being a shiny tech start-up company - again, it is the things that make a role obviously attractive to someone who is on the prowl for a new role.

Game

'Game' is your ability (as a hiring manager) to talk up either the job or the company. Maybe there is a clear advancement path within your company, or maybe your company has better benefits than most other companies. Game is the thing you or your company have that is unique amongst your competition (i.e. the other companies in your space). If you're in the chemical processing space, you've seen a ton of people leaving ExxonMobil lately (just saw two pictures in front of 'the cube' today). They used to have looks and game (and money), but somewhere along the way, they lost their game. They still have the reputation (looks), but their competition has caught up in terms of 'game', and also on the money side. People have started to realize that looks and money are great, but not all there is. A lackluster Oil & Gas market and regulatory headwinds don't help either, but nevertheless, what was once considered the pinnacle of that industry has lost some of its luster.

Game, in this market, could even be something as simple as executing an efficient hiring process. As it relates to speed and efficiency, its the sort of thing demonstrates level of interest and makes people feel desired. This is no different than that smooth-talker who knows just the right things to say to get their romantic interest to swoon. People like to feel desired, whether in life or in business. What kind of 'game' is your hiring process talking?

Money/Status

Another obvious one - you are simply able to pay more than everyone else (or most others) for the role you have open. I had an example of this recently. There was a newer company that I was working with - they weren't in a particularly desirable location, but they had a salary that was in the top 5% for the type of role (their benefits were also very competitive). To their credit, they had some 'game' too - and as a result of having some game and money, they were able to land an A-player for their position, despite not having a great location. Of the three (looks, game, money) money alone will only get you so far. In terms of job-seekers, a change for money alone will only describe some job seekers, many of them are looking for money AND something else.

*Something important to consider if you are a smaller, lesser known company in your space: your competition, in this current market, are sometimes (often times?) the top companies in your space. They already have 'looks' (for some job seekers) and often also have money. You may be stuck to some degree because of internal equity issues, but that doesn't mean you can't compete. Getting creative with sign-on bonuses or with bigger relocation incentives can help tip the scales in your favor, especially if the candidate for your role is more interested in the influence they can have within a smaller company. As a hiring manager in a smaller company, learn to talk about the differentiators of working on a smaller team. Have examples of how your junior or mid-level engineers have been able to make a real difference for your company. Those types of things can go a long way to selling your opportunity.

Practical Application

Example A: If you aren't one of the top companies in your space, and you have a plant or facility that is in an area of the country where people aren't looking to move to (save, to be closer to family), then you HAVE to have either 'game' or 'money'. If you don't have either of those things, and ideally both, then the odds of your job being filled in this current candidate market, are closer to the 'zero' end of the scale.

Example B: As a TA or HR leader, don't underestimate how much your own employees can affect the hiring process. For example, I knew of a company in the Midwest that was trying to hire a site manager but they had a disgruntled employee at that plant who was telling prospective candidates that he wouldn't recommend they work there. The HR and TA folks didn't know that until one day, during a debrief with a candidate who had gone through an on-site interview, told us about it. To that point, they had gotten 3-4 turndowns, despite the desirable location of the facility (near a city, reasonable cost of living, etc.) and competitive compensation package. After hearing this, the company confronted the employee and were able to fix this, resulting in the acceptance of an offer on their position a few weeks later.

General Comment 1: If you don't have any of these three, your job is likely unfillable in the current market. If your company doesn't have much of a reputation within the industry, the location of the role is undesirable, and the money is not competitive, the only chance that the role is filled is if the perfect situation comes along. You might get 'lucky' and that person comes along during the first few weeks of the search but more often than not, you are going to continually lose good candidates because they have other, more attractive, options available. If you don't have looks, game or money, and your role is critical to fill as soon as possible, then you have to get creative and find a way to bring one of those three to the table. Money is going to be the most direct route, but it is possible to develop game as well. That could look like rolling the red carpet out for potential candidates, or cutting all of the fat out of the hiring process, making it as quick as possible, and creating that feeling of desirability with the candidates you do interview . You could also get creative from a skillset standpoint, relaxing some of the requirements for the role, and thus increasing the size of the pool of potential candidates. You will have to get creative in some way, because on the job seeker side of things, the options are almost unlimited in this market and very few are 'settling'.

General Comment 2: If you have two of these things, or all three, you are in a position to land top-talent in this market. I hear from people every week who are looking simply because they have heard how good the market is. They are picky, undoubtably, but they are willing to listen. When the job market is this active, even people who may not have otherwise considered making a change are more likely to at least entertain a good option.