If you’ve not heard from us...

Welcome to this week’s Discuss HR, the HR blog written for and by members of Human Resources UK.

Pinch punch, first day of the month and happy St David’s Day! In recognition today we welcome the group’s resident Welsh member, Lee Burman, who does a fantastic job managing our jobs page – a bit of promotion, but did you know every job posted to the group is tweeted too, meaning over 7,000 people in total can view the role?  Today, Lee rather aptly looks at an element of poor communication that blights the recruitment process. (Ed Scrivener)

If you’ve not heard from us...

She was sure she'd get feedback someday

These days you can’t read a HR magazine without stumbling across the phrases ‘social media’ and ‘recruitment’ in the same paragraph.  There are countless articles telling you how Facebook has transformed an employer’s attraction strategy, or how Twitter has been pivotal in enhancing engagement between an employer and jobseekers. 

More recently a new ‘tool’, Pinterest is taking centre stage.  No doubt many an employer and recruiter will be scratching their heads, wondering what the recruitment angle will be.

Now don’t get me wrong.  Every day I log into LinkedIn.  I frequently tweet and will rustle through Facebook of an evening.  So I completely understand why employers and recruiters are investing significant resources in these channels.  I’m doing it too, albeit for different business reasons.

However what never ceases to amaze me is the following strapline which remains prevalent on many a careers site and job board:-

Unfortunately we cannot respond to every application.  If you have not heard from us within 14 days of applying for the position, please assume that you have been unsuccessful on this occasion.

Don’t believe me?  Take a look.  I just had a search on a well-known job board and this statement or something akin featured on 6 of the first 18 job adverts.  6.  A third.

A little more investigation reveals that ALL of these 6 have twitter profiles and have tweeted about job vacancies.  All of these 6 have a recruiting presence on LinkedIn.  5 of these 6 have a company or careers profile on Facebook.  I ran out of patience before I could check out what they were doing on YouTube, Pinterest and Google+.

So whilst these companies are ploughing resources into their presence on these sites, the simple truth is that despite all of this, they cannot be bothered to let you know if your application has been successful or not.

They want you to assume, make your own mind up, give it 2 weeks and if you haven’t heard back, move on, fill out another application form, make further improvements to your CV, ‘keep in touch’…..blurgh!

We hear a lot about the candidate experience.  I’ve read blogs about it, listened to people in a room fiercely debate it and seen many a tweet flying around trying to describe what it should mean and feel like.

To me it needn’t be something complex.  It should start with an acknowledgement of your application, and if you are for any reason unsuccessful, it should end with an acknowledgement.  Nothing fancy, nothing over the top, just a simple courtesy that doesn’t leave the candidate having to make assumptions.

So before you leap onto Pinterest, send out that tweet and post that job on Facebook, take a good look at how you are treating your candidates and remove that awful strapline from the bottom of your adverts.

Commit to acknowledging your applicants, don’t expect anything back in return, it’s just a common courtesy after all.

About the author

Lee Burman is Business Solutions Manager at recruitment outsourcers PPS.  A former agency recruiter with 9-years’ experience in the HR industry, he now spends his days helping businesses to improve their processes, cut their costs and drive up quality. 

Email | LinkedIn |Twitter | Website

*****

Discuss HR is the blog for Human Resources UK, the leading LinkedIn group for those involved with HR in the UK.  Next week’s Discuss HR will be published on Thursday 8^th March and will be written by Leadership Coach Dorothy Nesbit.

Any source

What’s in a Name?

Welcome to this week’s Discuss HR, the HR blog written for and by members of Human Resources UK.

As an HR recruiter one of my toughest tasks is deciphering what someone means when they say they want to be an HR Business Partner.  We know what Ulrich means by it, but that it just one of many definitions which makes the title quite ambiguous.  Today we welcome back regular writer Sheena McLullich who takes this a step further and looks at HR, Personnel, Human Capital, etc and asks what should it be called? (Ed Scrivener)

What’s in a Name?

During my career I’ve asked, and been asked, some unusual questions during interviews but one I was asked by my current CEO stopped me in my tracks.

“OK” Jon said, having offered me the job and shaken hands on the deal “What are we going to call you?”

I'm HR!! No, you're Human Capital!!

He went on to explain his view that the term ‘HR’ had something of a bad reputation.  We’ve all heard the accusations – the ‘No’ Department, the ‘faculty of compliance’, ‘Human Remains’ – I could go on, but they only get worse! 

As leader of a dynamic, fast-growing market research agency, Jon has a strong view that people are fundamental to his company’s success and he didn’t want HR being seen as any form of barrier to impede the company’s progress.  To be honest, nor did I – anyone who knows me knows that’s not the way I work – but how to overcome that perception?

To make matters even more critical, I was joining the company as its first ever HR professional.  Having grown rapidly over the previous year through a series of acquisitions, the company had reached the stage of needing to harmonise and consolidate many different policies, practices and ways of working.  My job is to pull all of this together in a one-company approach and to ensure that we’re focussing on our people right across the business.

We eventually settled on ‘Director of People’ and that’s now my job title.  I like it.  More importantly, lots of other people seem to like it too.  Most people I’ve met since my appointment have commented favourably – with the exception of one of my sons who commented drily “Director of People - you mean like a traffic cop?”  Actually, he may have a point.  There are often busy days in all organisations when it seems as if we’re fending off juggernauts of questions and problems from all directions and trying to avoid a massive pile-up somewhere in the middle!

Lots of people I’ve spoken to seem to concur with Jon’s view that HR has a somewhat negative connotation.  That also seems to be borne out by the history of the name and its association with economic ‘resources’ or commodities.  When the term ‘Human Resources’ was imported from the US back in the 1980’s, many ‘personnel’ practitioners were concerned that it was too impersonal and too business focussed.   Having said that, the word ‘personnel’ itself has connotations of routine administration, welfare and of being reactive rather than a dynamic, strategic business enabler.

As an HR (personnel, people?) professional, it saddens me that HR seems to have lost the ‘human’ part of its name and that in many organisations, it’s seen as transactional, process driven and far removed from its human element.  Perhaps ‘people’ is a good compromise?  It beats ‘human capital’ or ‘talent’ (don’t get me started…!) and avoids the stereotypes of both HR and Personnel. 

As Director of People, I seem to be in good company with Sky, BT, Google, Microsoft, Wal-Mart and Harper Collins among other leading organisations, using the same title.   It seems to be gaining in popularity as a quick search on Linkedin shows over 2,000 people called Director of People across the world. 

We’ve taken it one stage further and I now head up the ‘People Services’ team across the company.  I think the label describes what we do very neatly.  We’re here to provide a people orientated support service to all the people in this business.  Simple isn’t it? 

However, I have to concede that in many ways it doesn’t matter a jot what we’re called, it’s what we do that really counts and that’s what we’ll be judged on.

What do you think?  Do you think HR has had a bad press and that the name is losing credibility?  Or does it simply not matter and no-one really cares?  What would you like to be known as?

About the author

Sheena began her career in Training & Development before moving to a generalist HR position in 1998.  Since then she has held senior HR roles for several SMEs in a wide range of industries. A Fellow of the CIPD and Member of the US SHRM, she has a keen interest in Employee Development, specifically in coaching and supporting managers to enable them to get the best from their people.  She was appointed as Director of People for SPA Future Thinking in September 2011.

Email | LinkedIn| Website

*****

Discuss HR is the blog for Human Resources UK, the leading LinkedIn group for those involved with HR in the UK.  Next week’s Discuss HR will be published on Thursday 1^st March when we will welcome our latest guest writer Lee Burman.

*****

Click here to view the back catalogue of posts from 2011

Any source