WorkPuzzle

Competitive Advantage: Creating an Environment Where Your Agents Will Find Engagement—Part 2

Earlier this week, I made the case that the real estate industry faces major challenges in articulating it’s recruiting message to potential candidates.  I wrapped up the discussion by suggesting that your company or office find an answer to the following question:

Why would someone with good resources, education, and competencies want work in your company or office, knowing that they have limited (not necessarily poor) income potential?

If you’re willing to abandon the old paradigms of real estate recruiting (most of which either no longer work or will continue to produce a diminishing return), you may free yourself to recruit and compete in some new and more effective ways.

How do you make this happen?  That’s a tough question, and there may be many great answers.   I certainly don’t have a corner on all the great ideas, but here is one answer that I believe has some significant potential:

Create a unique and compelling work environment where individuals working on the team find engagement in their day-to-day tasks.

Let this statement sink in.  Read it a couple of times.  Now ask yourself:  Why would this issue be something that could have an significant impact on recruiting in the real estate industry?  I think there are two reasons: 

1. This is the major weakness of traditional employers.
   In a previous discussion, I documented that about 78% of the global workforce is either dissatisfied or proactively disengaged in their jobs.  While much of this dissatisfaction is self-imposed, most employees don’t see it that way.  It’s much easier to just blame your employer than to take responsibility for yourself!  People want to know... "Would I be happier if I worked somewhere else?"  It only makes sense to position your company or office as the compelling answer to this question.
2. Most traditional employers have no way of fixing this problem.
   In a well-publicized story at Wal-Mart’s corporate headquarters, company executives decided to test the concept of designating a room where employees could rest and take a short respite between meetings or project work.  This practice has been shown to increase productivity and the engagement employees feel in their jobs.  The room was even equipped with soft couches, dim lighting, and other features intended to make it peaceful. 

As you might have guessed, no one would set foot in the room.  Why?  Because the setting was contradictory to the high-intensity Wal-Mart culture they were accustomed to.  Within a few months, the room was converted into an office for a young executive.  Try as they may, most traditional employers cannot deliver on the promise to make the workplace a more engaging place for employees.  And most employees have given up on the possibility of this happening in a traditional work environment.

So, back to the original question:  Can the real estate industry (or more specifically, your office or company) deliver something that traditional employers are missing or intentionally avoiding in their employment value proposition?  I believe it can.  Let me say that a little stronger….I believe it must. 

Real estate companies must exploit the weaknesses of tradional employers if they desire to hire the next generation of talented and effective agents.  If you don't acquire your share of talented individuals in the near future, you'll be stuck with the misfits and B-players.  And there's a good chance that abnormal market conditions will not compensate for such missteps in the future.

To create this compelling work environment, there are two issues that need to be addressed:

1. The pay and security of employing individuals in the real estate industry
2. Understanding what causes people to feel engagement, both individually, and as a team.

We’ll cover both of these these issues in our next discussion.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Competitive Advantage: Creating an Environment Where Your Agents Will Find Engagement

Quick disclaimer on this discussion—I’m going to address some issues that are unique to the real estate industry today.  (This is the arena where the majority of our clients reside.)  Those of you who read and subscribe to WorkPuzzle who are outside the real estate industry may have to cut through a little jargon and real estate framework to grab the concepts today.  But, I encourage you to hang in there, the core ideas do apply to all industries.

Convincing someone to become a real estate agent is a tough sale in today’s environment.  The value proposition for years has been that almost anyone can earn a substantial amount of money by selling real estate.  Granted, realty rarely met the hope of that value proposition (even during good times, 80% of new real estate agents left the career field within one year of starting), but there was always a small group of new agents who were successful.

And some of them were wildly successful.  These are the people whom real estate companies commonly tout during recruitment marketing and presentations.  As a result, a consistent influx of new agents would consistently engage real estate companies with the hope of making it big.

Not sure if you’ve noticed, but this way of recruiting is dead.  I regularly talk with real estate owners in all parts of the country, and I hear the same thing:  Very few people are attracted to the real estate industry in today’s economic environment.  Why?  The traditional real estate value proposition for new agents is no longer resonating with people.  Big new agent successes are increasingly rare and the media is relentless at painting a dreary real estate industry landscape.

Many companies have resigned themselves to this reality and have changed their primary focus to recruiting experienced agents away from their competitors.  While this is not a new idea, the intensity of this practice has increased.  And, with many more companies focusing on this strategy, a new realty is quickly becoming established.  In essence, real estate companies (particularly in large metropolitan areas) are now competing for their share of a very limited pool of candidates (productive agents).  In many companies, this type of recruiting has become their exclusive focus, and they’ve given up completely on new agent recruiting.

As you can imagine, this strategy has some limitations... The first limitation is that the pool is constantly getting smaller.  There has been a significant amount of attrition over the last three to four years because the easy money dried up.  (Many of these individuals probably should have never been real estate agents in the first place.)  The second limitation is that the remaining productive agents in the industry now have the upper hand with regard to negotiations.  These agents know they can negotiate better deals if they’re willing to change companies.  Of course, this drives margins down for the companies who are doing the hiring.

So to summarize, new agents are difficult to recruit because the traditional real estate value proposition no longer makes sense.  Experienced agents (who are working for a competitor) are also becoming increasingly difficult to recruit because the pool of potentials is limited.  And even if a company is able to have success in that arena, the profitability of that success is diminished.

Do you feel like jumping off a bridge about now?  Well don’t…at least not quite yet.  The challenges are significant, but they’re not insurmountable.  And, by working to find a viable solution, the real estate industry will start to fix one of its most limiting deficiencies—a workforce that is generally unproductive (as measured on a transaction/agent basis). 

How do we get there?  I believe the following things need to be considered:

1.  Cutting off new agent recruiting is a mistake.

The real estate companies who figure out how to recruit young, talented individuals into their companies will soon out-perform those who only focus only on experienced agent recruiting.  No matter how you look at the scenario, it is difficult to get the demographics to predict a different outcome.  Focusing on experienced agent recruiting only results in more and more work with a diminishing return.

2.   The traditional “get rich selling real estate” message is dead.

The housing bubble produced all sorts of odd behavior in our society.  Not the least of which was the notion that someone with limited resources, education, and competencies could generate large sums of money by standing around taking housing orders.  Yes, that happened in some places and to some individuals, but it’s probably not going to happen again.  Betting on things "returning to normal" in this regard is really a bet that things will return to abnormal.

3.  The real estate industry needs a new recruiting message.

Seriously ask yourself this question:  Why would someone with good resources, education, and competencies want work in your company or office, knowing that they have limited (not necessarily poor) income potential?  Your recruiting message needs to answer this question.  But, before you answer this question in your recruiting message, your company or office needs to live up to this reality.

So, here's the WorkPuzzle manifesto:  Create a unique and compelling work environment where individuals working on the team find engagement in their day-to-day tasks. 

In our next two discussions, we'll cover how to create an environment like this, and then how to tell your story to the candidates who will become the future of your company. 

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Becoming Engaged in Your Work: Don’t Try to Sell Something You’re Not Doing Yourself

Every hiring manager is, at some level, a salesperson.  You’re selling the idea that a candidate will experience a better quality of work life in your organization compared to staying with their current employer.  But, it’s difficult to sell something effectively if you’re not experiencing the “better quality” yourself.

Last week, I mentioned that I’d focus my next few WorkPuzzle discussions around the topic of engagement—how to experience engagement yourself, how to make sure that those on your team are experiencing it, and how to make this topic a key component of your recruiting message.  Today, we’ll work on how you can feel more engaged in your role as an owner, team leader, or hiring manager.

Researchers have well-documented the notion that in order to find engagement in a job, your personal strengths have to be aligned with the tasks that you’re doing on a day-to-day basis.  For employees who work in structured jobs (typically below the middle manager level), this reality tends to have a significant impact on the engagement they feel.  This is often referred to as job-fit.  If a person does not happen to fit the structured tasks required to perform the job, it is difficult to be excited and engaged in the work.

But, for most positions middle-manager and above, a person can adapt the job to match his or her own strengths.  So, job-fit tends to have a diminished impact.  Instead, the way the job is performed by the individual (and how that work integrates into the rest of life) is more predictive of the type of engagement a person will experience.  In essence, if you can figure out how to work well, you’ll find engagement in your work.

Researchers have invested heavily in this subject over the last ten years, and best-selling authors, Tony Schwartz and Jim Loehr, have done a great job of summarizing much of the research on this topic in a best-selling book called "The Power of Full Engagement" (2003).  As I previously mentioned, Schwartz recently completed a follow-up solo project with updated information called "The Way We’re Working Isn’t Working."

Schwartz describes the lack of engagement problem this way:

“We live in a world of infinite distractions and endless demands.  Many of us juggle several tasks at a time and struggle to focus on any one of them very long.  Lack of absorbed focus takes a toll on the depth and quality of whatever we do, and it’s also an inefficient way to work, extending the time it takes to finish any task…. 

Most of us work long hours and feel a restless sense of urgency.  We juggle multiple demands without feeling we’re devoting sufficient time to the most important tasks.  We arrive home in the evenings with little energy left for our families.  We spend too little time thinking strategically and long term, too little time taking care of ourselves, and too little time simply enjoying our lives….  Is the life you’re leading worth the price you’re paying to live it?”

If you’re in any type of leadership role in your company, I’m sure this resonates with you because it is exactly the type of disengagement that leaders struggle to keep under control.  If you want to attract the best talent to your organization, you must address the issues that cause this type of disengagement.  People are inspired to work for a leader who has his/her own life in order.

How do you fix these problems in your own life?  Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts or quick answers. Schwartz describes the process as “transforming the operating system” of your life.  This means creating an inventory of the habits that drive your poor behaviors and then systematically replacing those habits with new rituals that produce the desired behaviors and actions.

This is easier said than done!  In the last few weeks, I’ve tried to change just a couple of the harmful habits in my personal workflow, and I’m amazed at the internal resistance I’m facing.  I’m not going to give up, but I also don’t want to come across as unsympathetic as I suggest you address these issues.  I do believe that it's worth the effort—both for our personal well-being, and our ability to recruit.

Here are two new things I learned as I worked through Schwartz’s book:

1.  The body and mind work best in rhythms.

All systems in our body pulse rhythmically when we’re healthy—heartbeat, brain waves, body temperature, blood pressure, and hormone levels.  Our fundamental need is to spend and renew energy.  The mind works on the same rule.

This principle has all kinds of implications.  Every area of your life—eating, movement, sleep, relationships, and work- functions optimally if it has a rhythm to it.  For example, your workflow will be most productive if you are able to work intensely (without distractions) for a period of about 90 minutes.  This 90 minute period is then best followed by a period of low mental intensity (emails, most meetings, errands, etc.).  By repeating this cycle several times during the day, your overall productivity and engagement will increase.

2. Physical routine has significant impact on your performance and sense of engagement.

There are three important components to a physical routine:  (1) sleep, (2) exercise, and (3) diet:

Sleep is the foundation of all physical energy.  No single behavior more fundamentally influences our effectiveness in waking life.  Sleep deprivation takes a powerful toll on our health, our emotional well-being, and our cognitive functioning.  The only viable solution to insufficient sleep is to go to bed earlier.

Secondly, regular exercise, especially intense energy expenditure followed by deep recovery, dramatically increases our capacity, not just physically, but also mentally and emotionally.  Ideally, we should be doing some sort of moderately intense physical activity six days per week for twenty to forty-five minutes a day.  That time can be split between two or three sessions over the course of a day, so long as each is at least ten minutes long.

Finally, how we eat (not just what we eat) has a significant impact on overall performance.  The key to nutrition is maintaining a stable level of blood sugar.  Food is our primary source of glucose, and it fuels not just our bodies, but also our brains.  Small, frequent meals serve us better than two or three large ones.  To maintain a steady source of energy, it’s best to eat something at least every three hours—that is five or six “small meals” a day.  Avoid the foods that provide a quick hit of energy but dissipate quickly.  And if you feel like you really need at least one big meal a day—eat a big breakfast.

As you can tell, I’ve just scratched the surface on this topic. There is much more to learn and implement.  Hopefully, this information will jump start your efforts toward finding engagement in your work.  Next, we’ll discuss how to lead a team that is just as engaged as you are...

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

The Importance of Engagement…Both For You, and Those Whom You Recruit

If you have been exposed to the consulting that our company provides, then you’ve heard us talk a lot about the importance of being engaged in your work.  We often reference studies performed by the Gallup Organization, which document that a large majority of those in the workforce are languishing in their jobs.

With the increased knowledge we have about work and the proliferation of new technologies that support smarter work habits, you’d think the percentage of people who are languishing in their jobs would start to decrease.  But, this is not happening...

As documented in Tony Schwartz’s new book, "The Way We're Working is Not Working," the global workforce is still struggling to find engagement in their work.

“The consulting firm Towers Perrin’s most recent global workforce study bears this out.  Conducted in 2007-2008, before the worldwide recession, it looked at some 90,000 employees in eighteen countries. Only 20 percent of them felt fully engaged, meaning that they go above and beyond what’s required of them because they have a sense of purpose and passion about what they’re doing.  Forty percent were 'enrolled' meaning capable but not fully committed, and 38 percent were disenchanted or disengaged.

All of that translated directly to the bottom line.  The companies with the most engaged employees reported a 19 percent increase in operating income and a 28 percent growth in earnings per share. Those with the lowest levels of engagement had a 32 percent decline in operating income, and their earnings dropped more than 11 percent.  In the companies with the most engaged employees, 90 percent of the employees had no plans to leave.  In those with the least engaged, 50 percent were considering leaving.  More than 100 studies have demonstrated some correlation between employee engagement and business performance.”

So, 78% of the global workforce is either not fully committed or proactively disengaged in their jobs—and this was before the recession had an impact on these attitudes.  It is probably safe to assume that things have gotten even worse as financial pressures have mounted for those in the workforce.  If the researchers performed the study today (particularly in the real estate industry), they would probably have to create a fourth category below "disengaged" to capture all those people who are despairing!

While this research may seem like bad news, it actually presents quite an opportunity for a recruiter.  Think of it this way:  At least 78% of the people who you meet every day are either not fully committed or are completely disengaged in the relationship they have with their current employer.  If your primary focus is recruiting agents from other real estate companies, that percentage is probably even higher.  As you know, a person has to be experiencing some level of dissatisfaction to make a change.  The happy people stay put.

If you’re responsible for recruiting, the important question becomes: How do you tap this deep level of disengagement and help people find engagement in your organization?  I’ll cover this topic in more detail in our upcoming discussions, but here is a quick summary of what needs to happen:

1. You Need to Be Engaged In Your Work.  You’ll never be able to convince someone they will find engagement and satisfaction in your organization if you’re not personally engaged in your work.  While being in a job that matches your talents is important, researchers are now learning that how you complete your daily tasks has a major impact on how much engagement you’ll experience.
2. Surround Yourself With Those Who are Engaged In Their Work.  Have you ever been on a team that is truly engaged in their task?  If so, then you know that engagement is contagious.  But, lack of engagement is also contagious.  In fact, the negative inertia created by whom you associate with is one of the most significant factors that hinder personal growth.  If a candidate's hope is to better their life by joining your team, they better find support when they get there!
3. Become an Engagement Expert.  With the previous two foundational issues in place, learning to communicate on the topic of engagement is one of the most powerful recruitment tools you can possess.  But to be effective, you’ll have to become more knowledgeable on this topic and be able to speak to others on a new level.  Don’t worry, it is not as hard as it sounds!

I look forward to working through these topics over the next couple of weeks.  For now, see if you can put these three items into practice.   

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Why Do People Hate to Pick up the Phone to Recruit? Part 2

Last week, I introduced you to Maureen Sharib, one of the few people on the planet who seem to  enjoy recruiting by picking up the phone and calling people.  I know it sounds strange, but such a person actually exists!  And as promised, I’m going to share some of the things I’ve learned from Maureen's insight over the last couple of years.  I can’t guarantee that the information will transform you into an enthusiastic phone recruiter, but it should help to improve your execution of this important fundamental.

Why do we hate to pick up the phone and recruit?

1. We’re scared.  Most people are reluctant to recruit by phone because of fear.

“What prevents a [recruiter] from being successful on the phone?  The biggest element is fear.  Have you ever experienced a situation where you just knew the people you need to recruit are on the inside of a particular company’s four walls and the only way to reach them is via the telephone?  In that situation, even though there was a large monetary incentive to reach those people, did you not do anything about them because you were afraid?”

The answer to these questions (for all of us) is “yes.”

Maureen’s advice..

“So, the very first thing you have to do is get over it.  So get over it.  Next be willing to admit that you’d like to fix this troubled aspect of your existence.  The final step is to do something about it.”

Sharib details some well-established techniques for overcoming fear in phone recruiting in her feature article, "20 Calls to Change Your Attitude."

2. We’re great at rationalizing behavior that keeps us off the phone.

For example, some people think it is helpful to research the person (typically on the internet) whom you’re trying to recruit before making a call.  Maureen’s take….

"I personally think this 'cold calling' versus 'warm calling' thing is a red-herring made up by people who find calling a complete and total stranger psychologically difficult.  They somehow believe that if they spend half a day researching each person that they'll be more likely to establish a rapport with them. Perhaps 'warming' themselves up for half a day makes them slightly more effective.  But if they made 10 calls instead they'd get much better results.  At some level it is always a numbers game."

Another example:  Some people think it is unethical to call companies with the intention of stealing their best employees.  Nice try.

“It’s a fact that many people don’t want to call another on the telephone and ask for information much beyond what it takes to order a pizza.  Because this is a basic truth about much of human nature there’s a repugnance that’s developed around the subject of phone [recruiting].  It’s intimated over and over again among individuals that it’s a borderline honest activity.  Bolstering that repugnance are the lofty ministrations that usually emerge over the subject of calling another company’s employees and offering them another opportunity.”

These are just two of many examples.  If you’re not calling, you’re somewhere on the continuum of rationalizing your inactivity.  Maureen’s advice….hold yourself accountable to making the calls.

3. We’re lazy.  Very few people are willing to do the work necessary to be successful at phone recruiting.  The laziness applies to both becoming a student of successful recruiting methodologies and following through on the strategies that work.  

Maureen published a very long article earlier this year that outlines an effective strategy for successfully engaging a passive candidate (i.e. someone who is not looking to change companies) in the first minute of talking to him/her.  She uses a case study of one of her clients who would call passive candidates and leave the following message:

“Hello, my name is ___________.  I located your contact information online and have a very exciting opportunity to discuss with you.  Please reach me at (___) ___ – ____ to learn more about this great opportunity.  I promise not to take more than a couple minutes of your time.  I look forward to speaking with you; have a great day!”

This message was left with more than 200 candidates.  The results?  No callbacks.  No interviews.  No hires.  Phone recruiter who is seriously depressed.

Maureen makes the point that if you’re willing to do some work, the results can be significantly improved.

Rule #1:  Try multiple times to reach the candidate live.  Never leave a message until you’ve called the person at least six times and got their voicemail.

Rule#2:  When you get a candidate on the phone, be ready to answer the following questions/objections quickly:  “How did you get my name?” and “I’m not looking to change companies right now...” while keeping their attention.  One of the ways you could answer the second objection is:

“Nobody said you were looking for a job.  The intent here is to locate and talk to persons who are happy in their positions with the idea that these people are likely to be the most productive.”

Maureen’s advice… become an expert at this stuff.  The ROI on becoming a proficient phone recruiter is worth the time and effort.

Hopefully, I’ve whetted your appetite to learn more about becoming a competent phone recruiter.  Reading Maureen’s writings is a great place to start, but there are many, many more experts who are willing to share their secrets...if you're willing to look.

Keep in mind that many of these experts do not specialize in the real estate industry.  The upside to this reality is that there may be many fresh new ideas that have never been tried in real estate recruiting.  The downside is that you’ll often have to translate their verbiage into something that makes sense for your business, and sometimes modify their methods to match your application.

Let me know what you are learning as you do your own research... 

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Why Do People Hate to Pick up the Phone to Recruit?

 

Hopefully, you’ve had an opportunity to read Dave Mashburn’s recent series on the importance of fundamentals (1,2,3,4).  We’ve received a lot of great feedback from the insight that Dave has shared - It seems he has hit a nerve, identifying some issues with which we all struggle.

This got me thinking... What are some of the specific fundamentals that seem to hinder owners and managers who are responsible for recruiting?  After working with hundreds of different managers and leadership teams over the last few years, there is one fundamental that stands out above all the others:  sourcing candidates by phone.

We seem to universally dread this activity in the real estate industry, and in every industry in the marketplace, for that matter.  Maybe you didn’t know this, but there are professional conferences dedicated to sourcing candidates. They even hold breakout sessions regarding why it is so difficult to pick up the phone and call people!

If everyone hates it so much, why do people keep doing it?  You know the answer to this already—because it works!  And, if you’re specifically trying to hire people away from your competitors, there is nothing that produces a better return on your time and money.  I’ve heard many people try to rationalize this fact away, but it’s true:  there is no substitute for picking up the phone and calling people if you strive to be a successful recruiter.

So, how do you overcome the deep internal resistance you feel toward this activity, and instead grow this fundamental into one of your personal strengths?  There is no quick answer to this question.  But, I’d like to introduce you to someone who can help you find the answer over time.  Her name is Maureen Sharib.

Maureen owns a recruiting company, moderates the MagicMethod business networking site, and writes extensively on various recruiting sites such as the Electronic Recruiting Exchange.  She is a very practical person who writes in a conversational manner.  The only downside to her style is that her articles are very long.  However, I’ve learned to stick with her stories because she ends up sharing some of her best tactics, if you’re willing to hang in there and listen.

In my next discussion, I’ll summarize a few things that I’ve learned from Maureen over the last couple of years.  Until then, you may want to check out an article that weaves some of Mark Twain’s writing on “Pocket Hunting” (a interesting method of prospecting for gold) into the principles needed to be a successful phone recruiter.  Enjoy!     

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Ben Hess. Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email. If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.

Social Networking: Are You Becoming the Right Kind of Expert?

Earlier this week, I ran across an article written by John Sumser.  John is one of my favorite recruiting columnists because he really makes me think.  He’s a little like the Matt Drudge of recruiting—he seems to get things figured out a little ahead of the rest of us.

The article of interest concerns the time and energy it takes to maintain a social network on the internet.  It is the first time I’ve seen some metrics on this topic.  Any idea how long it takes to stay in touch with a social network of 1,000 people (not an uncommon size for many today)?  Take a guess before you read on...

Through an interesting birthday celebration experiment, John shows that just to maintain the network at the “annual birthday greeting card level” takes five concentrated hours per week!  The article is long, but entertaining, regarding how he reaches this conclusion.

Do you have this kind of time to dedicate to such an effort?  It’s an important question to ask yourself because social networking is the type of activity that can eat up a whole lot of time if it is not controlled by some self-imposed boundaries.

If you are purposefully dedicating this much time, are you likely to get a return?  John goes on to answer this question in a follow-up article.  Here is his perspective:

“There is no correlation between having a big social media presence and:

• being good at what you do
• being smart
• having something useful to say
• being worth the attention
• getting your work done
• making sales
• closing deals
• getting new business
• innovating
• being a good place to work
• getting smart people to work for you

Social media is no different than any other form of [media].  The message and the distribution channels tell you nothing about:

• the biases of the author
• organizational affiliationthe truth or falsity of any claims made
• the accuracy of the material
• whether or not the material is good for you
• the utility of the idea

When new [media] technology takes root, the early adopters appear to have (and in some ways actually do have) more influence and authority than might otherwise be accorded them.  Prowess with new technology can seem like subject matter expertise.  Learning to tell the difference between publishing skills and functional utility is one of the new frontiers of literacy.”

The point:  If you happen to be one of those people who spend the time and effort to master this new form of media, it doesn’t necessarily mean you know what you're talking about.  Mastering the media (at perhaps a very high cost with regard to time and effort) may give you a short-term advantage, however, it will be eventually overwhelmed by those who truly have the subject matter expertise.

What is the take away here?  Don’t aspire to become a social networking expert.  Instead, aspire to become a real estate expert who is proficient with social networking.

---

Editor's Note:  This article was written by Ben Hess.  Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle.  Comments or questions are welcome.  If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email.  If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below. 

Building Consistency and Linkage Into Your Recruiting Message

 

Earlier this week, I encouraged you to develop a believable recruiting message and then stick to it—even under the pressure of competitors who are touting discounts and shortcuts.  Recruiting guru, Peter Weddle, weighed in on this topic a couple of months ago.  I think his perspective is worth sharing:

“Consistency involves the creation of a single message that is used in every candidate channel.  It could be your employment brand or a more aggressive 'sales pitch' to ramp up your hiring for a new product launch or facility opening.  Whatever it is, the central idea you convey and even the choice of words you use must be the same in every single channel.

Such consistency is difficult to achieve in any of a number of different situations.  But despite those challenges, it is critical that your organization achieve and maintain this goal.  Differing messages or different expressions of the same message across multiple channels will confuse candidates and diminish your ability to influence their behavior. In the past, we told ourselves that we only got one chance to make a good first impression; today, we have hundreds of chances to make one good impression, and it's just as important that we do.”

Any idea what he is referring to in that last sentence?  It is an acknowledgement that because people are exposed to so many different media channels, there is a chance that a person may see your messages from many different angles.  When there are inconsistencies, your candidates become confused about who you really are.

What makes the State Farm billboard I referenced yesterday so damaging is that I viewed a commercial in my hotel room just ten minutes earlier featuring a man with a deep voice reassuring me that “like a good neighbor” State Farm would be there for me if I got into trouble.  I walk outside, and the State Farm rep is shouting “Discount!” When the messages collide like this, something doesn’t feel right.  I don’t believe either message.

Likewise, your candidates won’t believe you if you’re not consistent in your messaging.  How do you keep this sort of mixed messaging from occuring in your organization?  You create what media experts call linkage.

"The propensity of candidates to move among [media] channels presents us with a choice.  We can accept that such movement exists and simply react to it, or we can endeavor to exert some control over that movement so that it better serves our purpose.  Linkage is the way you accomplish the latter goal.  You create 'stepping stones' among the various channels to make it easy for candidates to follow a path you have laid out.

In effect, no matter where a candidate goes, they are led back to the one place online where you have the best opportunity to sell them on your organization.  That's the purpose of linkage-to amplify the impact of your message by eliminating or at least lowering the randomness of how candidates will see it. We can't, of course, stop them from moving around, but we can try and move them to where we can make our best impression on them, and it's important that we do that, as well.

A consistent and well linked pattern of messages enables you to create a clear and more impactful portrait of your organization.  Its repetition across multiple channels ensures that everyone sees the organization in the same way and sees it everywhere they look."

Do the recruiting messages you’re presenting to the public have this kind of linkage?  If not, you need to rethink your approach -- you're not getting the maximum benefit for your advertising, and the end result is a less powerful impact on potential candidates...

Also, remember that the recruiting process doesn’t end with marketing - once a candidate agrees to an interview, the hiring manager should be supporting and reiterating the marketing message to which the candidate responded.  The most successful recruiting companies create a link from beginning to end. 

---

Editor's Note:  This article was written by Ben Hess.  Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle.  Comments or questions are welcome.  If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email.  If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below. 

Recruiting Messaging and Branding: Are Your Competitors Causing You to Act Stupidly?

 

A couple of weeks ago, I spent some time with a client in Richmond, VA.  My meetings did not begin until late morning, so I had the opportunity to go for a run before my day started.  The hotel where I stayed was on a frontage road, just off one of the major interstates in Richmond.

This frontage road contains a number of billboards that are visible from the main road.  One of these billboards caught my eye and I couldn’t help but snap a picture.  (If you’re not able to read the text on this picture, click on the image to enlarge it.  If you’re an email subscriber, you may need to click through to the WorkPuzzle site to see the image.)   
 
As I read this billboard, I couldn’t help but think that this poor guy has been driven to distraction by his low cost competitors.  I think the “15 minutes could save you 15% or more in car insurance…” must be what he hears when goes to sleep at night!  To combat this messaging, he does the marketing equivalent of standing in a crowded room and yelling “Discount!  Discount!  Discount…!”  And while he is yelling, the rest of us are wondering what creative thing the little gecko is going to do next.

Before we get too critical, we have to give Geico and some of the other low-cost insurance companies credit for running effective marketing campaigns - They are good competitors.  But, to try to compete in such a reactionary way does not seem very effective.  Most people perceive State Farm as a full service insurance company that is able to offer their customers a higher level of service.  This is not a bad position to have in the marketplace—pay a little more and receive an outstanding level of service.  From a branding perspective, it would be more effective to reinforce their core strengths than to blatantly publish a “me too” message in response to their low-cost competitors.

We’re all great armchair quarterbacks when it comes to evaluating someone else’s problems, but does this type of thing happen in the real estate industry?  When it comes to recruiting, it happens every day.  Many of the most prominent real estate companies in the country are competing for agents against companies who have low cost or alternate business models.  When the competitors start to have even limited success, it is amazing how quickly even successful companies will succumb to the temptation of watering down their recruiting message (and sometimes even their business model) to compete.

How do you keep from making this mistake in your company?  Here are some guidelines that will help:

1. Make Sure Your Branding/Message is Believable.  What is the value proposition that you offer the candidates who interface with your organization?  You should be able to articulate this in several sentences.  Now ask yourself:  Would you be engaged by this proposition if you were a candidate?  Would you encourage one of your kids to accept this proposition for their career?  If not, you need to adjust your message until it passes this test.  If you do change your message, do so based on what candidates think, not what competitors are pushing you towards.
2. Stick to Your Core Message.  Why does everyone know the Geico marketing proposition?  Because it has been repeated so many times that it is ingrained in all of our minds.  You don’t have to run an enormous, multi-year marketing campaign to take advantage of this principle.  For example, we have one client who has boiled down their recruiting message to the following:  “We’ll take you by the hand and show you how to do it.”  They repeat this message many times during the recruiting process, especially when they face objections.
3. Be Willing to Say No to Some Candidates.  When you know who you are and what you stand for, you are going to find some people at odds with your message.  When this happens, don’t be afraid to say, “You may not be a good fit for our organization,” and then suggest they go see one of your competitors.  By doing this, you’ll not only avoid making some bad hires, but you’ll also cause the most talented candidates to respect your position.  Some of those candidates will be intrigued by your clarity and reengage.  Others will remember who they can trust to tell them the truth when their low-cost alternative lets them down.

Maintaining a consistent message and staying true to your recruitment brand takes courage--especially in today's economic climate.  But, it's an investment that will produce a return and help you maintain your dignity.  Without this focus, you could be the next person figuratively shouting "Discount!" in a crowded room. 

---

Editor's Note:  This article was written by Ben Hess.  Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle.  Comments or questions are welcome.  If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email.  If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below. 

3 Labor Statistics That Could Help Save the Real Estate Industry

One complaint we commonly hear from hiring managers and company owners is that it’s now very difficult to attract new talent to the real estate industry.  And since the real estate industry has received so much negative press over the last few years, there are certainly some elements of truth to these claims.

But difficult does not mean impossible, and the difficult often needs to be done to stay competitive.  The remaining productive agents who make up the ranks of the companies who have survived the downturn continue to age.  Failure to bring in “new blood” will significantly diminish a company’s prospects for long-term success.  There are no shortcuts around this reality.

Before you sink into depression, I’d like to share a few interesting labor statistics that may help brighten your perspective.  These labor statistics were compiled by Peter Weddle in his most recent recruiting newsletter.

1. There is a common perception in business today that the individuals who have jobs are not willing to give up those jobs to try something new (such as starting a real estate business).  Not true.

“According to the U.S. Labor Department, between February and April of this year, more people resigned from their jobs (2 million) than were laid off (1.7 million).  They had the courage to take their career into their own hands and chart a course that made more sense for them.”

If someone is laid off, they often do not have the resources to take on the expense of starting a real estate business.  But, those who voluntarily leave often do so from a position of strength and confidence in their new prospects.  Are you able to compete in the employment marketplace at large for this talent?

2. There is a common perception that those who have jobs are “hunkering down” and not investing in the future.  Not true.

“According to the U.S. Department of Education, 92 million American adults are now enrolled in an education program.  That's over half of the workforce.  These working men and women are brave enough to take personal responsibility for their own development.”

Why are all these people pursuing education at this point?  Because many do not like their current jobs and they want to be prepared for opportunities in the future.  Of course, these numbers are skewed towards younger demographics, but aren't those the candidates you need to start focusing on?  Do you have a way of getting your message in front of these 92 million people?

3. There is a common perception that those who have employable skills are not willing to take risks to make use of those skills.  Not true.

“According to Time magazine, 40 million Americans move each year and 20 percent of them do so in order to take a new job.  They are courageous enough to head off into the frontier of a new locale in order to stake their claim to a better future for themselves and their family.”

Moving yourself and your family to a new area is one the biggest risks a person can take.  Eight million people are doing so each year for job related reasons.  If people are willing to take this risk, are they willing to take the risk of working for your company?

Add all these numbers up and you have quite a few people who are willing to sacrifice to build their careers, take risks to potentially realize something better, and dedicate resources (both time and money) to better their chances of success in the future.  The challenge for any real estate company who wants to successfully engage these people is to develop employment value propositions that are compelling.  Are you up for this challenge?

---

Editor's Note:  This article was written by Ben Hess.  Ben is the Founding Partner and Managing Director of Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle.  Comments or questions are welcome.  If you're an email subscriber, reply to this WorkPuzzle email.  If you read the blog directly from the web, you can click the "comments" link below.