| You Keep on Knocking, But They Won't Let You In... |
 |
Think you're the perfect candidate for that job posting at Big Co? You
very well may be, but good luck with making the recruiter notice you.
HRamp has been conducting blind research on recruiter's ability to find
strong candidates in their database and match to an opening. (Strong
candidates are defined as having a 90% or higher match of skills and
experiences listed on their resume to those listed in the job posting).
The results are dismal. Submitting resumes of current, high performing
employees (names altered of course), recruiters only contact these
candidates 17% of the time.
In other words, the gatekeepers wouldn't recognize a quality candidate
if the candidate jumped up and shouted "Surprise! it's me, Bob Smith,
your star performer from Marketing".
Some recruiters will explain that their database is just too big and too
cumbersome to find good matches. So they broaden their search
parameters and end up pulling several hundred resumes. And if you
aren't in the first 20 results, forget it.
So what can you do? Our advice to job seekers: find someone already
within the company who can submit your resume via the employee referral
process. Or better yet, they can email it directly to the appropriate
recruiter. The likelihood of being contacted increases dramatically to
83% if you are referred by an employee.
Good luck!
|
| |
[clients may request: RSS0504]
|
|
| The
3rd Annual "Best Salary Surveys" Results Published |
| |
HRamp has
published the third edition of "Best Salary Surveys". This is
the only research designed to find out who provides the best data for use by high tech, high growth companies. HRamp's
"Best Salary Surveys" study finished data collection January
5, 2004, with responses from over 100 participating organizations. This survey rated more than 20 survey sources and revealed the preferred surveys from over 30 different surveys. Do Silicon Valley firms have different survey needs than other tech sectors? Which survey is considered best for startup information, readying for IPO, biotechnology, nanotech company?
Surveys are ranked along several qualitative and quantitative scales to
establish their overall ranking.
|
| |
[participants may request: RSS0403]
|
|
| The
6th Annual "VCs Rated " Results Published |
| |
The sixth
annual "VCs Rated" has been published. This is a yearly study
conducted and published by HRamp. Participants in the study are drawn from
US companies with VC backing. The survey includes results about the law
firms providing advice to the participating companies. This is the third
year we collected responses about the quality of legal support provided to
the community of VC backed companies.
|
| |
[participants may request: RSS0440]
|
|
| 20
Years Of Schooling And... |
| |
New graduates,
full of hope, energy, and debt. The long term effects on lifetime wages
between those who entered the job market in 1999 and 2003 illustrate
timing may be everything. And also that you can't choose your luck. HRamp used
data from our proprietary data sources as well as collecting new hire
data specifically from client firms as part of research they requested. The
results that we have permission to publish present a dark picture for this
years new graduates.
New hire long term wage
effect changes between 1999 and 2003 reveal drastic differences. Most analysts
recognize the drop in new hire pay this year. This study details the differences
in income that will be felt through the difference in career
earnings.
The bad news bullet: if
the current crop of tech new hires remains with one company, they will be
as much as $1.7 million dollars behind their 1999 colleagues at
retirement. This means that the easiest path to recovering lifetime
earnings potential is to hop jobs quickly.
|
| |
[clients request:
SR0370]
|
|
| Survival
-- The Remaining Reward |
|
The fourth
budget season of this 'economic winter' finds little to hope for. Remember
the skilled and talented employees you so franticly sought and fought for
just a few years ago? Are they ready to jump your 'ship of fools' as soon
as land is sited? How effective is your best HR initiative after nearly
three years of layoffs, forced vacations, reduced PTO accounts, promotions
without pay , and even reductions in pay?
If you implemented and
sustained an effective mentoring or career ladder system you should feel
confident that your employees aren't awaiting a call from their recruiter.
Results from HRamp's Employee Edge™ provide further evidence that
employees interpret company actions based upon feelings of trust and
respect. Leadership works, it also takes effort.
Can you save your HC
investment by installing a mentoring or career ladder program today? No
more than you could harvest olive oil if you started planting trees
immediately. The most successful mentoring plans used alumni, and a career
ladder program takes at least 3 years before it is trusted. It also cannot
work alone. |
| |
[for
study results, clients or participants may request:
SR0385]
|
|
| Human Capital: Ideas
Gone Fad |
| |
Upon hearing the phrase human
capital, you likely think of a company's employees; usually those employees
considered knowledge workers. Over the past decade it has become fashionable
to call Human Resources Human Capital. And HR managers become 'human
capitalists' in some consulting firms. But did you know that the term
human capital was first defined in the 1960s by Gary Becker, an economist who
won a Nobel in 1992? Mr. Becker studied the impact of education and
training on wages and coined human capital to represent that
relationship.
How far we have drifted from
that original meaning. Currently, a big-name human resource consulting
firm promulgates that developmental training lowers a company's market value.
That we should think twice before investing dollars into training employees.
Because while employees may benefit from it, companies won't. [clients request:
SR0305]
|
| |
|
|
|
"Vague-lish":
A failure to communicate |
| |
What distinguishes a successful
product development team from a failed one? How much, if any, difference is
there in the makeup of the team, the strength of vision, market
understanding, skills of staff, or is success
a matter of luck? These were some of the questions HRamp studied as part of
our "Edison or Einstein" project.
We studied the efforts of
eleven firms and their product development efforts over a period of
twenty-one months. The successes required many factors to fall into place,
and to varying degrees. That's the good news. The bad news -- failure was
most certain in the groups that could not communicate. That couldn't share
expression. They
failed not because of
inadequate speed, but because of failure to find options, and alternate
pathways. Paths that emphasized the groups strengths.
Those project teams most
certain to fail engaged in what we call "vague-lish". ... [clients request:
SR0185]
|
| |
|
|
© 2006
HRamp.com. The information you receive on-line from HRamp.com is protected by the copyright laws of the United States. The copyright laws prohibit any copying,
re-distributing, re-transmitting, or re-purposing of any copyright-protected material. |
