Should we move Talent Acquisition to Marketing?

Hardly a day goes by without someone bitching up a storm about a problem in the talent pipeline. Hiring managers, recruiters and H.R. alike whine about the lack of skilled candidates. This has been going on literally for years.

But the problem isn't a pipeline problem, it's a resistance to change problem. To paraphrase everyone from Einstein to Elton John, you can't solve a problem with the same mind that created it. That leaves two options:

• change the people who created the problem - this will only result in a pass-the-parcel situation of un-evolved leaders from one organisation to another.
• persuade the people who created the problem to adapt or change. And herein lies the problem. None of us like change, especially when it involves taking a deep look inside ourselves.

Shifting Talent Acquisition to Marketing

Although some organisation are tackling these problems successfully, elsewhere we see a need for greater agility within T.A. This number discussions around whether the hiring process should be part of Marketing is ramping up. Robin Choy, Co-Founder HireSweet launched one yesterday on LinkedIn.

The rationale is that candidates need to be treated like customers and the talent pipeline should be approached like any other sales funnel. As someone who has done both H.R. and Sales in organisations, and has been in executive search for 20+ years, what I definitely see is a need for a more commercial mindset to tackle scarcity and engagement. But it's not just T.A that needs to get its head round this, but Hiring Managers too.

Talent crisis

Even a cursory glance (thank you Hung Lee for sourcing this image) would tell you that many regions and sectors are facing a talent crisis. Research from Kornferry "Future of Work Talent Crunch Report" shares the huge impact on global economies to the tune of trillions.

We basically have 8 years to get this sorted

Typical process

A typical hiring process today involves searching for potential candidates and benchmarking them against a prescribed type of experience and specific skill set. This is an exclusionary process. Those that make the cut are screened and interviewed to the point where many candidates lose the will to live. A decision is frequently made on the "gut feeling" of the highest paid person in the chain (conformity bias), who maybe so removed from the role that they will probably never clap eyes on the successful candidate once they start.

Responsibility is defused and eventually the candidate who offends the least number of people will be selected. This is not so much blending in, as "blanding" in. In the many years of being involved in these processes I have never heard, not once, EVER someone say

"I don't like that person. Let's hire them."

Hiring people "not like us" is seen to be a lot of work for the hiring manager who can be surprised, hurt, sometimes even angry, when people don't not want to work for them. But they need to get over that and get better at selling. There is a shift in the employment contract we've talked about before. It can be more challenging running a diverse team especially when hybrid and remote. This means mangers have to re-skill and change their M.O.

Because if we don't make the necessary changes, the talent pipeline will dry up.

Today's market

We are currently in a candidate driven market almost unheard of before. Network contacts report:

• The process is becoming like dating. Candidates are benching, a Tinder term for stringing multiple dating options along, with cute little messages to keep them warm, until the "right" rather than "right now" person appears. This strategy is older than even my hills.
• Some candidates openly share they are in multiple processes simultaneously knowing at least for now, they have the upper hand.
• For others ghosting is high - even failing to turn up on the start date. This means processes have to be re-started at huge cost to the organisation.

• Rejections and counter-offers are at the same levels with frantic last minute negotiations as candidates under offer, renegotiate down to the wire. Adam Gordon, CEO Candidate ID, reported from a Financial Services round table that rejection rates on offers are at 28%, "much higher than normal."

Brand agility

In a highly competitive market organisations need clarity around communicating and delivering their brand which reflects their culture. An employer brand, exactly like a product brand, is impacted by the interactions anyone in a target market has with the product and organisation. Bill Boorman, U.K. recruitment specialist, estimates it can be as many as 15 contact points. This can be both positive and negative. Brands need to be agile, in touch with market conditions and customer needs, both of which change frequently. The days of static branding are over, because organisations have to be able to respond smoothly and quickly to market conditions.

In any business if one marketing strategy dries up, leaders understand that they have to fill the sales funnel elsewhere, otherwise the company is in trouble.

Will that make a difference?

Strong collaboration between H.R. and marketing or any other function for that matter can only produce positive results in a competitive market place.

The hiring process should be similar to a sales funnel processes. This involves raising brand awareness and driving interest to the point of sale (hire), critical in a competitive market place. Marketeers interact with their market in a way that is interesting and fun which is where H.R. can become more than a little unstuck. One of the main UX complaints in the application process is around the unrelenting repetition of routine tasks. Candidates are looking for quick and easy. The hiring process is ranked with watching a Jerry Springer marathon, where by the end applicants feel their souls leaving their bodies.

Crisis in the waiting

In any other part of a successful business, indications of potential scarcity would produce a new strategy. Procurement would source other vendors for supplies and the commercial function would identify and break into new markets to sell their products. Talent Acquisition needs to do the same.

Here are some good places to start:

• Manage the biases in your hiring processes. This is an ongoing process not solved by a "two-hour-can't-you-make-it one" Lunch and Learn. This is the?hole piece of the donut?I wrote about. People are focused on the problems, not themselves.

• Understand and be able to articulate the company and team culture. I regularly see recruiters passing the responsibility to candidates to figure out for themselves what the organisational culture is. No. If organisations don't understand what their culture is and can't articulate it, they have a problem. Huge. It shouldn't be necessary if they have a strong Candidate Value Proposition which applicants encounter at every point of engagement.
• Make job profiles real. Seriously. Show salary ranges when you can. I get that it's not always feasible for some roles.
• Seek out under-represented groups for your organisation to diversify your work forces. This means not looking for the usual suspects in the usual places. Involve Talent Development in the process.
• Offer re-skilling opportunities to encourage people to make career pivots. Add?“returnships”? to allow women and seniors (who in some companies is anyone over the age of 40) to return to the workforce. Ageism and especially gendered ageism is currently the biggest bias. Once again this involves Talent Development.
• Improve workplace cultures. It's not enough to open your door to people. Once they are there you have to intentionally welcome them and then support them to be successful. Diversity without inclusion won't work. Although salary is an important driver, poor organisational culture plays a key driving role behind the "Great Resignation"
• Fix the leaky pipeline. Work on retention rates and "love the ones you're with." The message is very clear. People have reassessed their priorities during the pandemic. Goldman Sachs issued a return to office mandate and only 50% of employees showed up. With energy prices sky rocketing the cost of commuting is also going to be factor - not just dead time sitting in a traffic jam.

Future needs

The employee life cycle starts with employer branding and shifts into the hiring process, followed by every element of the employee experience (talent development, people ops, performance, planning, engagement etc.) which currently sit under H.R. Many resist a move to shift recruitment to marketing, and until recently I was also not a fan of the idea, so I understand why. Currently I'm mulling it over, but I don't care where T.A. falls on the org chart, just that there's a mind set shift.

Kornferry summarise the lesson thus:

"Leaders need a deep understanding of talent marketplace economics to put the right planning and core proposition in place to ensure they have the skills their workplaces need"

Wherever recruitment sits, it means that everyone involved in the hiring process (which includes hiring managers) will need a much stronger wider commercial understanding. Leadership teams which will survive the talent crisis are those already taking action. It's important not to get left behind.

*************

? Want to strengthen and diversify your talent pipeline and build more inclusive inclusive hiring processes? Find out how to manage the biases in your recruitment and promotion processes.?Read more about our Corporate Services here.

? My goal is to increase the number of gender balanced, diverse and inclusive workplaces where everyone feels secure and reaches their potential.?Read more on services for individuals

? Like this newsletter? Please hit subscribe and share with your H.R. contacts.