Winning The War On Talent

Source: The Economist

When I think about winners in the ill-defined “war on talent”, a few attributes come to mind. First, you’re not apologetic about who you are and what makes your organization tick, so aspirational employee branding efforts are counter-culture and somewhat abhorrent. Second, you use research, data and analytics to study the real actions and resulting outcomes of your candidates and employees. Numbers aren’t scary but instead empower your thinking, decision making or overarching strategic plans. Finally, you are fully transparent about your goals and aspirations. You are running a business and can concisely convey your objectives and how each employee’s cog fits into your wheel of commerce.

A few weeks ago Bill Kutik and several other industry representatives (including yours truly) were invited out to Philadelphia to attend a fairly standard analyst briefing with Kenexa‘s leadership team. My expectations for these events are fairly straight forward – you meet with the executive staff, hear their predictions for the coming year and gather information on product releases, feature specifications, client successes, revenues, etc. It’s a fairly prescribed event and some leave more cynical, others more enlightened, and yet others indifferent to what they saw or heard.

And here’s my top takeaway from the day. Kenexa, if it executes successfully and stays focused, is about to crack the code in this area. This is not something I say lightly and is not guaranteed, so I’ll explain my reasoning below. Know that although my travel and expenses were paid (as they were for all attendees), I received no incentive (financial or otherwise) to write this post.

Back to Philly…

Mid-morning arrived and we were asked to split off into separate tracks depending on our areas of interest. I went with the much smaller recruitment process outsourcing group due to my personal and professional curiousity about this rapidly growing (yet highly confusing) market segment. If you’re interested in what happened in the other track, be sure to read Kutik’s column, Kenexa Puts Its Pieces Together by clicking here. He offered a terrific summation and I wholeheartedly agree with his conclusions.

About eight of us huddled in an extremely warm wood-paneled room in the Union League Club, a Civil War-era time capsule in downtown Philadelphia. Yes, they have a dress code and women’s restrooms appear to be a fairly recent addition. This is not your venue of choice for a diversity conference, believe me. I digress…

I won’t bore you with a lot of what we discussed. Yes, Kenexa is a player in RPO and talent management. Yes, they have a full service solution, global footprint, and so on. That you can find out by reading their literature or visiting their website and it’s all really table stakes for competing in today’s environment. The “Wow!” factor comes when you learn more about their research and how they are deconstructing data-driven market insights.

Kenexa’s Research Institute (KRI) is a bellwether of workforce analytics and an extremely small (but incredibly valuable) portion of Kenexa’s overall infrastructure. If you haven’t heard of them or studied their findings, you’re missing out on some terrific insights, including:

Remember, I’m married to a researcher and understand the value these studies can bring to an organization. But for many, putting that content into the context of their specific organizational needs is a barrier to action and change. And this is where the secret sauce of Kenexa’s new strategy really comes into play.

For several strategic clients, Kenexa has applied its KRI team for the specific purpose of attacking the “quality of hire” question. The insights gathered in this initial consultative research fundamentally change the sourcing strategies and resulting screening and assessment process. The outcome is a “tunnel” versus “funnel” candidate experience with the explicit goal of supporting only quality hires. It is this piece specifically – including competitive market research, top performer research and company culture assessment – that could change the face of recruiting as you know it.

You’re thinking, “But Mark, this stuff isn’t new! I mean c’mon, seriously. They’ll ‘win the market’??” I think it is new, and let me give you an example.

Regeneron is a biopharmaceutical company focused on medicines for the treatment of serious medical conditions. They worked with Kenexa to develop what was at the time a very controversial campaign to attack their market needs. Here’s an extract on the partnership from a recently published piece in the Journal of Organizational Excellence:

A strategic partnership required that this successful biotech company add, in just one year, nearly 50 percent more employees, including top-notch scientific talent, and then do it again just two years later. A key challenge was to preserve, in the midst of high organizational growth, the unique cultural DNA that has been part of the company’s code for success. The authors describe a major employment branding initiative, which included a cultural assessment based on Jungian archetypes, that enabled the company to position its culture as the key differentiator in its recruitment strategy. They discuss the surfacing and articulation of five key cultural attributes that exemplify the culture and how they are used to attract and select new employees for a strong cultural fit; engage existing employees around the defining values and behaviors needed for success; and define the company’s external brand. They also describe how HR practices have been implemented or modified to sustain these characteristics as part of the organizational fabric.

Regeneron and Kenexa named this initiative The Five and you’ll see that it’s an extremely candid and transparent representation of who they are, who they are not and what it takes to be successful at their firm. This campaign served as a screen to let candidates know that unless you’re comfortable with these five truths, Regeneron is not the firm for you. Beyond the “five things to know”, this also included a controversial list of reasons why you would not fit into their organization complete with a big DON’T APPLY graphic followed by… “If science isn’t your obsession”; “If you’re content being the smartest person in the room”; “If you’re afraid to fail”; “If you think good enough is good enough”; and “If you need a routine to define you”. I love this approach and you won’t be surprised to learn that scientists responded in droves, some enraged by the idea that they may not be the right fit for Regeneron. It’s brilliant and it worked.

And Kenexa isn’t waiting for HR and recruiting to wake up to their newer strategies. Instead they are forming CEO and board-level relationships to ensure that the criticality of discussions on talent and employee engagement see the light of day.

It’s rare for me to declare a winner and I remain very bullish on Kenexa’s chances of fundamentally changing the talent conversation. However, there are three challenges that they must immediately overcome:

  1. Kenexa’s marketing budget is fractional compared to the competition. CEO Rudy Karsan is aware of this issue and knows that, in his words, Kenexa needs to address “how quickly we can expand the microphone“;
  2. The Research Institute is thriving under top-notch leaders such as Dr. Anne Herman, but it’s an underfunded group and needs to expand significantly if Kenexa is going to fully capitalize on the opportunity; and
  3. Kenexa currently houses a twenty-person employer branding group. I think this is a distraction as this is not (and should not, in my opinion) be a core competency of the firm. I think all stakeholders would benefit from an alliance strategy in the branding space.

I know this was a long one so thank you for hanging in there. Now it’s the time in our program for you to share your thoughts. What do you think of these initiatives? Are they ground breaking or am I ill-informed? What will it take to win the so-called “war on talent”? You’re smarter than I am so share your thoughts below and let’s keep the conversation going.


This entry was posted in Human Resources, Research and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

10 Comments

  1. Matt
    Posted July 15, 2010 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    Hi Mark:

    I personally agree with your assessment that Kenexa’s a best practices organization that “gets it” well ahead of most other industry players. I had the honor of cutting my talent teeth while working as a candidate developer for another of their biotech accounts; there was a huge focus on social media, employment branding, and other integrated talent strategies that only now (3 years later) seem to be entering the mainstream but were a significant competitive advantage at the time for winning talent to our client.

    More importantly, Kenexa’s model makes it a true strategic partner to its clients; their recruiters have an operational framework that is best in class, but inherent in this is its flexibility to be tailored and refined on a client & industry basis: this individualized approach really produced astonishing results and ROI.

    They also practice what they preach: from Rudy Karsan on down, their internal practices around engagement, retention, branding and thought leadership remains among the best of any corporation, large or small, I’ve encountered before or since.

    Glad you got to experience some of that first hand.

    Matt

  2. Posted July 16, 2010 at 12:11 am | Permalink

    Great insights, and it’s exciting to see a data-based approach to hiring starting to gain traction… “at long last…”

    For the record, I have my doubts about broad selection/development decision model based on the MBTI (the Jungian archetypes mentioned)… that tool does not hold water statistically and I was a bit surprised to see it included in what otherwise looks like a robust and in-depth approach to data analytics…

  3. Jason Lauritsen
    Posted July 16, 2010 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    Mark,

    I have had some experience with Kenexa and agree that they are doing some great work in this area. However, I would have to disagree with your comments regarding their employer branding practice because I think it’s not only a differentiator for their practice, but it’s also a key component to what makes their process differently. In the Regeneron example above, it is their branding practice that drove the creation of “The Five” which then fueled the selection model. I’d encourage you to take a closer look at their branding approach because I think that it’s one of the best in the industry. I hope that they continue to invest in and expand it because many of the firms out there who are doing employer branding work are really focusing on surface level recruitment advertising that isn’t terribly effective. Kenexa’s process is much more robust and spans beyond just recruitment into culture and leadership.

    My two cents.

  4. Posted July 16, 2010 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    Bravo Mark. Our industry simply needs more case studies. Like Jason, I’m not yet convinced that MBTI is the very best tool. There may be more reliable measures out there. Strategic *Partnerships* are the foundation for bringing innovative talent acquisition strategy and culture branding to the mainstream market. A few years into this movement – it’s still a language that is fuzzy – particularly for the C-Suite. I run into this scenario frequently with my clients. Thank you for sharing this valuable overview.

  5. Posted July 16, 2010 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    So this has been an interesting experience for me. Since the time this post was published I’ve received nearly fifty emails with comments, concerns, suggestions and opinions. What fascinates me is not the tone/tenor of the conversation (which I love and encourage) but instead the reluctance for many to post their thoughts and opinions online. I believe this demonstrates the slippery slope associated with commenting on an HR service provider’s solutions.

    And let’s face it – everything in our market is subjective. I saw something I liked and you may have an entirely different body of experience. That’s what makes public forums and discussion so valuable. So, although you may have good reason for doing so, I’d encourage people to try and post even an anonymous thought or two on what I’ve written. We’d all be better off for it.

    @Matt – Great comment, thank you. One concern I’m hearing is that Kenexa really lacks strong product management and maybe is a bit scatter-shot in their packaging and deployment. Any thoughts you can share on this?

    @Jason S – I’m going to have to verify whether it’s MBTI or something more robust. I would agree with your concerns if it’s solely MBTI-based. Perhaps someone from Kenexa reading this could weigh in with clarifications. Great catch Jason.

    @Jason L – You know Jason, you may be right. Remember I said you guys were smarter than me? :) Perhaps the piece that is a commodity is the actual creative itself. In other words, would Kenexa be better served in designing the campaign and leaving the fulfillment to a third-party? You’re correct in that it’s the innovative design (combined with the underlying research and analytics) that make this such a compelling story. Great thoughts as always, thank you.

    @Meghan – Many have complained to me that the Regeneron story is a few years old. What I didn’t share was the story on Navy Medical Center… or Whirlpool… or Otsuka. You’re right in stating that we need more visible case studies to take that theory of what’s possible into the reality of what’s probable. Thanks so much Meghan.

  6. Posted July 22, 2010 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    Oh, my, that does sound like catnip for overachievers!

  7. Posted July 23, 2010 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    Thanks Mark. This is very interesting and very well written. Much appreciated. And thanks for the links to the KNI white papers and Kutik’s article Kenexa Puts Its Pieces Together (which I had somehow missed!). Good stuff.

    • Posted July 23, 2010 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

      Thanks Mark. The KRI pieces are pretty impressive and I’m certain there’s much more to come. Have a great weekend!

  8. Posted August 11, 2010 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Kenexa’s employment branding group does not utilize Meyers-Briggs to do archetype research. The Organizational and Team Culture IndicatorTM asks about an organization’s values, strengths and operating style.

    The confusion here in the discussion may be because the publisher/test distributor for MBTI previously distributed the OTCI. The two assessments are very different in type of questions and purpose.

2 Trackbacks

  1. [...] Winning the War on Talent – Professor Mark Stelzner of Inflexion Advisors. [...]

  2. [...] Mark Stelzner’s Winning the War on Talent [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe without commenting