All organizations should be agile, to a greater or lesser extent, to be able to adapt to their own business contexts. It is not a statement, it is a reality in any media or article that one can currently read, from TIMES, FORBES or the Harvard Business Review. It is the evolution of Darwin's species at a business level, the strongest and the largest do not survive; The one with the greatest adaptability survives.
There is a very important word that must be developed in any organization: feedback or feedback; both positive and negative feedback.
Improving is yes or yes living from the comments of other people in most cases. But currently, in some organizations, the selection processes may not have enough feedback. An adequate feedback is not "You do not fit into our culture" or "You do not follow the process", that is a generalization without a reason for the rejection of the candidate.
Something very important, both during COVID19 and in the Post-COVID19 era, is organizational culture. A culture that must be based on learning, transparency, collaboration and co-creation (source from the Harvard Business Review 2022). A very important part is the image, which is accompanied by the worst tolerated behavior. There are 2 Lean tools that I love, both to help internalize and to use, and that I try to be faithful to and put into practice:
The first is Hansei, which is to recognize mistakes as one's own to be the basis for improvement. If your team, area or organization has made a mistake or error, make it yours, internalize it and help improve from there. Let's break with the impulse to blame others: "It was x" or "it is that the area Z has not arrived on time". How can I help so that x is not blamed? o What can you do differently so that area Z arrives on time? In this way we break down the silos and begin to develop feedack and flow thinking, that is, the way to contribute to generating full value to generate a client as Peter Drucker said in his day.
The second is Senekawo Miseru, translated as showing your back or leading by example. If a manager shows his best behaviors, the rest of the employees will own it and encourage those behaviors in themselves. By being consistent, honest, empathetic and visible at all times, we foster leadership by example, and imitable by the people who interact with us.
Both form the heart and pillars of adequate feedback. In all the selection processes that I have led, I have tried not to make the following mistakes:
When a candidate does not advance in a process, in most cases they are interested in knowing the cause. A candidate rejected today may be necessary in the future or have great potential at some time, and the impression left previously may influence the future, if he were to participate in a new process.
Once one or two interviews have been carried out with a candidate, whether from human resources or from the technical part of the interview, that person waits for feedback, which in many cases does not arrive or arrives as a result of an impersonal email. A feedback of "we consider that your profile has less experience than necessary", "you have more experience than necessary, and you would go beyond the maximum salary allowed for this position", "we consider that certification X is essential for the position", is better than an impersonal email for example. A comment "the process has been stopped due to an internal movement or a reorganization of the area", or "the decision is being delayed due to the change of manager or person in charge of the area" is sufficiently empathetic for the candidate and clarifying when, for example, the final decision is being delayed.
The recruitment areas are the mirror of the companies, the brand. In the same way that if a candidate rejects a company, whether due to salary, hours, etc. in most cases, we should want to know the cause and not settle for "I have a counter offer", or "I am not interested", we should be more curious to look for the cause of accepting the counter-offer or his "I'm not interested". Just as when an employee leaves an organization, in many cases an exit interview is carried out to see his motivation for change; In all these cases, they provide us with knowledge of the market, of the candidates, of their aspirations and motivations for change, in addition to being more humane organizations and fostering learning organizations. Faced with this situation I am curious, and I say it in advance, not to change the candidate's mind, but to understand his motivation, and learn to improve for the future.
Recruitment processes are sometimes overwhelmed and hardly allow giving feedback, but every process, even digital, can be improved, it does not require big changes, but rather small actions, short feedback at this point in the process, a complete team with all the profiles necessary to cover a specific vacancy here, both verbal and visual communication between all the parties in a very important position for the company, for example. It is not about communicating, it is about communicating around a complete value stream with the purpose of transparency, continuous improvement and learning. Transferring these behaviors your corporate culture changes to always improve.
The so-called employee experience begins with potential employees, whether they complete the process or not. Something very important and very topical in organizations. Human resources departments, to this day, have that name because they are human and deal with people, no matter how much technology the processes in organizations begin to have. One of the main skills is empathy, which makes us human, which helps us improve as people and help others.
Our adaptation to the new context must be accompanied by continuous improvement, something as simple as the experiment of an email with a link to a form with a couple of questions:
1.- Rate the process you have participated in up to this point.
2.- How do you think the process could be improved?
This feedback has generated in companies like zappos or netflix to give an example, rates of interest in candidates that turn out to be the envy of business branding, as well as the candidate experience. The seduction in the selection process is as important as its onboarding.
I always try to lead you with two questions, at the end of the technical interview. How was the interview for you? And how do you think the interview could be improved?
Something that has not yet happened in all organizations is the publication of the salary ranges of any candidate search position, on the one hand, it would break with the saturation of the recruitment areas and at the same time it would stop generating false expectations in many candidates . Only with these actions, a lot of time can be saved to be able to dedicate it to giving feedback to the candidates, and therefore to always improve our positioning as a brand and organization and the quality of the process. It is a transparent process, regardless of asking what economic conditions the candidate considers, it is showing from the beginning the total aspirations of the process.
The process of change in organizations is not only technological, it is more human than technological; and said humanity comes from the hand of meaningful conversation, empathy and feedback always in an ongoing and effective way. And being the showcase of the company, these processes have to be continually reinvented, and reinventing is not just being efficient. They must be managed as services of excellence, both in terms of quality and culture, since feedback humanizes us and helps us improve said organizational culture, a basic pillar both externally and internally, to be better organizations day by day. In addition, these behaviors that you internalize can lead you to forge important relationships, contacts and alliances.
Today you are the interviewer, tomorrow the interviewee. Today you have a role, tomorrow you have another role and the memories in the people who cross your life, will be the future that you leave in you.
