The Candidate Questionnaire

If you are reading this and you are in the business of retaining search firms on occasion to recruit high-impact individuals, I have a suggestion for you that will pay big dividends during your next search, in ways you least expect.  The suggestion involves the preparation of a job-specific electronic narrative questionnaire.  I have been using this valuable tool for many years.  If you want to verify its value, when you are finished reading this posting, link to my website, http://www.ESIassoc.com , and open the page called, "Client Testimonials."  I'll let my clients speak for me as to its value.

The number of questions typically ranges from 10 to 12.  Several of them are experiential in nature and designed to surface past actions and outcomes.  For example:  "Tell us about a time when you were required to do X,  What was the situation leading up to it?  What did you personally do?  How did it turn out?  What did you learn from the experience?"  This line of questioning is nothing new, but for search firms to have their candidates document the answers to these questions, and provide their clients with completed questionnaires for every candidate submitted, it is not a common practice.

Here are the advantages to using such a tool:  Everyone gets asked the same questions. Nothing is edited in their responses  The recruiter and staff are able to use them to better qualify their candidates. The candidates take the opportunity much more seriously when they know that all of their competitors are doing this. The clients have a tool that helps very busy people better sort through a slate of candidates and prepare for their interviews.  Recruiters and clients alike can see how effectively  the candidates write and how they focus on what is really important in various scenarios.

It is my practice never to alter a word of this document.  In the past that has provided my clients with some very unexpected and telling information about a candidate.  It is not uncommon for a client to steer away from an otherwise sterling candidate on the basis of a less than adequate questionnaire.

The questionnaire demonstrates one's writing ability. Senior executives have to communicate in writing a great deal.  If they are poor writers they must rely on help from their staffs. I often see in a position specification that one of the essential qualifications is, "Excellent writing and speaking skills."  Yet few employers verify this skill.  The use of an on-line candidate questionnaire will demonstrate the writing component of this skill or lack thereof.  This is why it is essential in our firm that we do not edit the document. Clients need to see what they are getting.  I have seen them wince at poor writing skills and hire the person anyway for his/her otherwise sterling capabilities.  But at least they get to see the problem in advance of the hire rather than find out after the fact that their otherwise excellent candidate is a poor writer.

If the recruiters you retain do not use such a tool (few if any do) then insist that they do so.  Develop a dozen good questions that you know your decision makers would like to see answered in advance of an interview and provide them to the recruiter with instructions that every candidate will need to have completed one or they will not be considered.  Insist that the questionnaires remain unaltered. To the recruiter this new questionnaire requirement is extra work.  So be it.  I venture that many of them will see the value of this tool after you insist they use it and will make it an everyday practice thereafter.

If you would like a sample of a candidate questionnaire, email me at mburroughs@esiassoc.com and I will send you one.

I would never do a search without it.  If you use this tool as part of your next executive search you will be glad you did.    http://www.ESIassoc.com    mburroughs@ESIassoc.com

After The Interview With An Executive Recruiter

There are likely several opinions on this subject, but here are my own.  The subject is how to thank a recruiter who just interviewed you. When I have met with prospective candidates for either a job-related or a courtesy interview, it surprises me when I do not hear from them afterward either through an email or a hand-written note.  Either is appropriate, and the practice itself is just common courtesy and common sense.  That said, it makes more of an impact on me when I receive a note card with brief comments thanking me for the meeting and reinforcing whatever point is important to them.   I chuckle at myself when opening and reading them that in this fast-paced information age, a handwritten note still grabs my attention--more than the same note sent via email instead.

 If, however, the candidate needed to send me some additional supporting documentation, such as a reworked resume,  then the email is most appropriate and I don't give it a second thought.  I knew in advance, in most cases, that it would be forthcoming.

My point in this brief posting is simply this:  If you are sending any communication as a way of thanking your interviewer, opt for a handwritten note.  A personal touch such as this is better than an impersonal email. You have a chance of better connecting with the recruiter in a way that is different (really) from your competition.  Most people send an email. While emails are fast and efficient, they lack a personal touch and are less professional in my view than a note with the same message.  If you are interviewing a lot, lately, buy some nice "Thank You" cards and use them. Write and mail the note the same day as your interview. It will get to the recipient in a timely manner and the vast majority of the time the note will be opened by that person and read.

The same advice holds true following an interview with anyone--including a potential employer and all members of that interviewing team.   Yes, it will take more time to do this.  But it's worth the effort.
http://www.esiassoc.com 
http://www.michaelkburroughs.com

Unsolicited Resumes: Should You Invest the Time to Send Them to Executive Recruiters?

When I began my career in retained executive recruiting we had not yet entered the Information Age. The firm I worked for was a regional boutique with a solid reputation in its market. There were 12 people on staff. About a fourth of the office space was set aside for files, primarily files for resumes, and most of those were unsolicited. They had arrived over the transom and were not aimed at any particular search we were conducting. We had an administrative staff who would quickly review each resume long enough to determine if we had a search that might be a match. If so, the resume was given to an appropriate research associate who would make the final judgment. If there was a potential match he would initiate contact. If not, the resume was returned to our administrative staff to be filed under an appropriate heading. I don't recall a time when the files were purged. They were, however, reviewed each time a search was initiated for which their job category might possibly be a match. The majority of the time the resumes were never seen again.

Move forward 14 years to another time when I was with a different search firm. This time it was a large multi-national outfit. We were well-entrenched in the Information Age. Not only did the national headquarters receive unsolicited resumes, but so, too, did each of the firm's 40+ regional offices. Sometimes, the resume was sent to all of the offices. If received at a regional office it was usually addressed to a search consultant known to be in that office. We each received several hard copy resumes per day. My personal practice was to look them over, briefly, on occasion. I would usually spend a half hour and open them all. We did not file them, but I must admit that I kept a few in a personal file. More often than not, I was interested in seeing how people were representing themselves. If they had a cover letter, I looked it over. I was especially interested in resume formatting--what worked and what did not work. I have seen more styles of resumes than I could possible remember. Some stood out; most were indistinguishable. Of particular note were the resumes that came from outplacement firms. They looked basically the same and were always two pages.

Many job seekers began to send their resumes to our firm (and individuals) via email. This is now the standard practice. At the firm's national headquarters they were filed in a large database for possible later retrieval. They were rarely reviewed by anyone. If they were sent to my email address I would look them over for a minute or so and read the ones that grabbed my attention. On a very rare occasion one would be an oblique fit to a search I was doing. On occasion, I would file a resume in a personal file on my computer--the ones I particularly liked.

I recall one occasion when I was having a tough time on a search for a senior operations leader for a large company. One of my colleagues had a habit of printing electronic resumes and filing them. I looked at a stack of about 250 resumes he had not yet filed and took the entire stack home one evening to sift through. To my pleasant surprise, I found five or six resumes of people I needed to contact. Two of those ultimately ended up on my short list "slate" of five candidates submitted to my client. I also had received some good referrals from them. Neither got the job, but they were excellent candidates. I never needed to take that approach again.

There are still some books on the market that tell individuals in the job hunt to mass mail (or email) resumes to retained executive recruiters. This is extremely time-consuming and even expensive. From my point of view this is not the best use of your time. The best executive recruiters stay in business because they treat each search as a fresh project. They identify target companies and, with the aid, these days, of social networking, and good old fashion phone calling these individuals, build a growing list of potential candidates, many who refer other candidates. It is not unusual to have well over a hundred that must be reduced to three to five. From my experience the odds of an unsolicited resume making it to the short list are extremely rare.

Look for future blog postings from me in which I will suggest somee strategies for working with executive recruiters.

What Would You Like to Know?

In the past weeks I've published several articles on the Internet.  They're available at
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_K_Burroughs .   The topics cover executive recruiting, coaching and career transitioning.  More are currently in the queue.  Given the increasing responses to these articles, and the diversity of reader interest, if you have a topic you would like for me to address, contact me via a blog comment below and let me know what you would like to have me discuss and I'll do this as soon as possible.  Look for a new blog posting on your topic, or a new article or both.  I will alert you either way. I can also be accessed through my website at http://www.esiassoc.com/ .

Disclosing Compensation Information to an Executive Recruiter

If ever there has been a topic of debate in the management of one's career, it has been in the area of disclosing compensation information.  The thinking is that such disclosure can cost you a job opportunity or result in a pay cut in an offer that you would not otherwise have experienced.  I'm writing this from the standpoint of an executive recruiter.  I will leave to you how you deal with this when interviewing directly with an organization.  Of course, eventually (and generally sooner rather than later) the organization will require you to complete an application.  Leaving the compensation space blank is up to you, and how it will be received is up to them.

But know this if you are dealing with an executive recruiter:  Keeping compensation history close to the vest is usually a show stopper.  We are being paid well to narrow a large field of potential candidates into those few who best fit the position specification, and that includes a compensation range. 

All executive recruiters identify the compensation target range early in the process.  In most cases, their fees are built on the compensation target--total annual cash compensation, usually.  The client fully expects the recruiter to sift through candidates until an excellent slate of those who fit within the range can be assembled.  There are situations where the entire slate of candidates will exceed the desired range.  This is the point at which recruiters put on their consulting hats.  In these situations what has usually happened is that the organization has lost touch with what people are making who hold a given position in comparable organizations.  It is incumbent on the recruiter at that point to be able to back up their findings rather than simply submit a slate of candidates who make more money.

You will quickly be asked by a recruiter a question such as, "How are you currently compensated?" or "How were you compensated in your previous position?"   If you are coy about this, it is questionable whether you will be moved forward in the process.  The search firm generally has a lot of potential candidates they are working through and a client who expects quick results.  If you take a stand on this you will usually be passed over.  If there is a story around your compensation, e.g., everybody at your company had to take a 20% pay cut over the past two years, or, there were no bonuses paid ever since I arrived and 30% of my compensation was tied to bonuses, then just say so.  Recruiters understand this, especially in the current economic conditions.   Every potential candidate is striving to do generally one of two things:  1) move up in responsibilty and compensation, or 2) get out of a bad situation (for any number of reasons).  Experienced recruiters have heard just about everything, and if your background suits the position well, they will represent the truth for you with their client.  Their job is not to low ball you.  It is to find the best candidate--a candidate that will succeed and stay as long as possible with the organization.  It has been my experience that for the right candidate, hiring organizations compensate them fairly, whatever their history.

So when asked by an executive recruiter to disclose your compensation history, do so if you want to continue in the process.  Be candid and open with the recruiter.  In most cases you will be able to work through any perceived compensation difficulties.  http://www.esiassoc.com/  http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/

Military Resume Writing

If you are a military officer who is transitioning from active duty to the private sector, know before you read this that I was once in your shoes.   The advice in this posting may go counter to that which you have received from others or from some books on the market.  It comes from over a decade of experience as an executive recruiter and two decades of experience in the corporate world in the field of corporate staffing, organization development and HR.

One of the most common things I see in military resumes is an attempt to transform military titles into civilian terms.  For example, company or battalion commander becomes something like "general manager" or "director of operations."   "comptrollers" become "chief financial officers."  Another common observance is the absence of accomplishments.  Instead, what is often written are job descriptions that simply state what you were responsible for.  If you have not started doing so already, and you still have a few years to go in your military career, take note of your accomplishments and keep a record of them.  You will need to do this from now own, whether a military professional or a civilian.

So my advice here is short and sweet.  If you were a company, battalion, ship or wing commander, say so.  Tell a little bit about the scope of responsibility and then isolate some key accomplishments.   Go back through your career and think hard about what you accomplished in each of your past positions.  Two or three cited accomplishments per job is a sufficient number.  State them clearly and succinctly.  In the case of staff roles, use terms that do relate to the private sector.  For example, if you were a battalion S-3, state that you were the chief of plans, operations and training.  If you were a battalion S-4, say you were the chief of logistics.  If an S-1, you were the chief of personnel and administration.  You get the idea.  While many civilians can relate to what a company commander might do, they would hardly ever relate to what an S-3 or G-3 would do, so you will have to spell that out a bit.  Instructor positions speak for themselves.  You could say you were a faculty member or department chief at XYZ school or service academy, and briefly state the subject matter for which you were responsible.  

In summary, resist the temptation to try and make your resume look like a civilian manager's of comparable level.  It's not.  Stress leadership wherever appropriate. The experience you have gained in the military has a unique value, and it is more and more appreciated and understood in the past decade than it was previously. Once you make the transition to the private sector you will be able to use civilian terms, but when you do, resist the urge to go back in time and do the same for your military experience on your resume.  Stick with the military titles.  http://www.esiassoc.com/     http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/

Junior Officer Recruiting

With repeat deployments and extreme hardship on their families, there is an exodus if junior officers leaving all branches of the service that is unusually high.  A junior officer falls into the ranks of second lieutenant to captain in the Army, Marines and Air Force, and ensign to lieutenant in the Navy and Coast Guard. They generally have less than eight years of service, sometimes a bit more.  Most, though, are leaving at the five-year point.  In many cases these young leaders are leaving with very mixed emotions.  When you have private conversations with them and ask, "Do you miss the service?" you often get both a yes and a no.  What they DO miss are their comrades.  There is a level of intensity in their relationships with other officers--and their NCO's and enlisted members--that is almost impossible to replicate in the private sector. What they DON'T miss are...well, the obvious things.

Many organizations have long valued the inherent talent in junior military officers and recruit them with enthusiasm.  Others do not have a clue what they are missing.  The ones that don't, either don't realize what junior officers can bring to their organizations, or have little or no understanding of what it takes to develop a junior officer and the types of responsibilities they have held.  Others simply do not put a premium on young leaders who can think on their feet and operate effectively with a minimum of oversight.  Still others think that there is no relevance what-so-ever between a military officer and a civilian manager.  And there are those who have political leanings that are such that the military in general is viewed as an undesirable institution and that carries over to their hiring decisions.

What makes a junior officer attractive to a potential employer in the private sector?  There are many examples.  At the top of the list is that the majority of departing junior officers are very effective leaders as well as managers.   They put a high premium on the welfare and effectiveness of those they lead, and take personal responsibility for what they do and fail to do.  In the course of being effective leaders they are also ethical decision makers.  They fully understand that in reality, there are few, if any, grey areas.  There is right and wrong and they can be counted on not only to do things right, but to do the right things, which is (to paraphrase Warren Bennis) the difference between management and leadership.  Both are, of course, essential.  But there is little in the way of comparable leadership formation in the ranks of young business managers.  From the outset in the military, leadership is driven home, and one's peers will insist that another officer conforms to the highest standards, even if the system fails to see it for some reason.  

From an officer's earliest days as a cadet or midshipman, the point is drilled home that they are not special people, they just have a high obligation to serve responsibly, and they have many for whom they are responsible...totally responsible.  The maxim in the military is that an officer's first obligation is to the mission, followed very closely by being totally responsible for the health and welfare of those who work under his or her supervision.  Those two values are complimentary not contradictory. There is a level of "selflessness" that is expected of a junior officer that is not the norm in the private sector.  Let me illustrate with just a couple of examples.  As a young cadet, I was acting as a platoon leader on a forced road march training exercise.  It was cold and raining.  We had about 20 miles to cover that day, with pack and weapon.  We would stop every hour for five or ten minutes.  It is natural for people in such a situation to simply flop down and rest as much as possible.  But there was a mission to perform.  Every member of that march had to face and point their weapons outwardly from the edge of the road, in effect building a defensive perimeter.  It was my job to see that they did that affectively while also getting a breather. Furthermore, it was also my responsibility to check on the welfare of my men, and in this case, welfare had a lot to do with the condition of their feet.  I asked every man to tell me how his feet were holding out.  I expected and got truthful answers.  I had a lot of cold, bare, blistering, smelly, wet feet to look at that day. At least once or twice along the march people would put on dry socks.  While that may seem trivial, the point was this:  I looked after the mission and the welfare of my men BEFORE I looked after my own welfare.  In essence, my feet stayed wet most of that day.  Yes, it is important for the leader to remain healthy, but it was more important for me to push on and check on my soldiers before looking after myself.  It was a lesson that stuck.

Another example occured when I entered the private sector in the early 80's.  I had the privilege of using the company's executive dining room for lunch.  I did not do so.  It was anethma to me to see the men and women in my department going the main cafeteria while I would have ducked into the executive dining room.   You see, as a junior officer, it was fully expected that I did not eat a bite until all of my soldiers had been fed.  It was my responsibility to not only see that they were fed first, but that the quality of the food was good (field rations aside).   It was very difficult for me to fathom eating in better conditions, and eating better food, than the people for whom I was responsible.  It still is.

So how does this relate to the private sector, to actively recruiting junior officers who are leaving the service of their country?  Well, extrapolate those simple values to the complexities of accomplishing the mission in your organization.  Would it not make sense to hire young leaders for whom it is ingrained that the right things get done?  That the employees are well looked after along the way?  Would it not be desirable to have your young managers leading from the front and subordinating their own needs until those they lead are well taken care of? (There is a statue of an infantry officer at Fort Benning, Georgia, leading the charge, looking back and motioning with his arm and hand for his soldiers to follow.  Incribed below are the words, "Follow me!")   

Yes, there are many fine young leaders out there.  Leaders who did not come from the junior officer ranks of the military.  But with few exceptions, and irrespective of the branch of service, junior officers are groomed from the start to do the right things while doing things right.  If you have not incorporated junior officer recruiting into your hiring practices I would urge you to do so.  There are several recruiting firms who specialize in placing junior officers.  Talk to them and see for yourself the talent that is increasingly becoming available to you.   http://www.esiassoc.com/    http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/