WorkPuzzle

What Value Do You Have to Offer a Candidate?

I am a firm believer that everyone receives information in different ways and at different times. Recently, my son Noah reminded me of this and it touched on an application in the interviewing process. 

Noah is an avid runner.   He loves it--distance or speed, lacrosse or cross-country.  He is currently involved in a speed and agility training course.  His first session was two weeks ago.  He came away feeling positive about what he’ll get out of it, but not really understanding what he was being taught.  He had his “AH HA” moment in his second session.  I don’t know what was said or done, but all of the sudden, he got it.

One of the more frequent questions we receive when presenting to companies centers around the interviewing process, especially as it pertains to new-to-real estate candidates.  

Here's the question: What is it that makes you a good recruiter/hiring manager?

Even though we discuss this topic freqently (sometimes with the same audience) each member seems to take away something different each time the question is asked. 

The answer that seems to resonate most with me is:  It's the value that you impart to the candidate.

At some point in the interview process you learn the candidate’s story, what they have liked/disliked in their work history, what about their bosses they have liked/disliked etc.  As you then discuss what you heard, you can reiterate their points of pain in such a way that will demonstrate that a career in real estate could be a good match simply based on what they shared with you.   

Is there value in this dialog?   Absolutely! 

Your value started the moment they walked in the door, and continued while you genuinely listened to their story…everyone wants to be heard.  Your value continued as you had an honest discussion about their story and how a new career in real estate could align with their own goals and career preferences.

Your value does not stop there…it is now at critical mass.  It is what you extend to them between the interview, through licensure and hiring that will determine your overall success in recruiting YOUR top talent.

Keep your value in front of them.   Isn't it a natural instinct for humans to hold onto what they value? 

If you answered yes, by extension would you agree that your high potential talent would then hold onto you as a valuable resource and partner in reaching their career goals?  

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

---

Editor's Note: Lee Gray is the Senior Account Manager at Tidemark Inc. Lee is a guest contributor to WorkPuzzle. Comments or questions are welcome. .

What Golf Taught Me About Recruiting

It’s been a frustrating summer for me.  The exasperation I’ve felt didn’t come at home…or at work…or at church. I’m sure frustration in any of those areas would have been easier to accept. No, my frustration came on the golf course. 

You might read this and think to yourself, “Oh, David must be a terrible golfer or perhaps he is a beginner—it only makes sense that he’d experience some frustration trying to learn a difficult game like golf.” But, that’s not the case.

I've been golfing since I was 11-years-old, and I became proficient enough as a teenager to play on my high school golf team.  I continued to play golf over the years, and I’m able to compete well against most weekend golfers. I used to find golf relaxing and enjoyable.  So why all the frustration? 

The golfing frustration I’m experiencing is a direct result of change. Change is hard, especially when you've done something the same way for so long, and you’ve done it relatively well.  

My problem dates back to 1971 when I first began to golf. I learned to play under the direction of my grandfather.  He was a decent golfer, but not a great teacher of proper technique. As a result, I developed some bad habits while establishing my swing.

One of my bad habits is cocking my left wrist back at the top of my backswing instead of keeping it straight.  This fault forces me to make corrections later in my swing in order to make solid contact with the ball. 

While this technique is not correct, it does work well 95% of the time (that’s why I’ve sustained this habit).  Granted, sometimes the 5% of “not working” can ruin an afternoon of golf, but I generally accepted the idea of being a good enough golfer.

But over time, being good enough was getting a little old.  So early this year, I decided to get better at golf, and I knew that playing one round every two weeks (and working on changes while playing) was not enough repetitions to see any changes materialize.  I had to commit to practicing on the practice range and work diligently at correcting my swing.

I can't even begin to describe how uncomfortable it is to swing in a new way. Everything feels off and it’s not an enjoyable experience.  Although I committed to working through the form issues, I longed to be back on the course where things felt normal and more comfortable.   

As you suspect, I then did what I was told not to do. I went out and shot a round of golf before I was ready.  While I attempting to focus on applying what I had learned on the range, I got seven holes into my round and lost my resolve. When I started scoring poorly, I quickly reverted back to my old habits so as not to humiliate myself. I began doing what I had always done.

In hindsight, I realized my mistake.  I’ve now made my way back on the practice range and recommitted myself to the process of changing my swing for the better.  While it is still uncomfortable, I know I’ll be susceptible to reverting back to my old ways if the new habits are not fully formed during practice.

So what does this have to do with recruiting? 

Many recruiting techniques in the real estate industry have been used for many years.  At some point in the past, each of these techniques was successful; otherwise it would not have been developed and used.

But, times change.  While some of these old techniques remain effective, many of them have either lost their usefulness or have needed modifications to remain relevant.  From a third party perspective, the recruiting methodologies in many real estate companies look like golf swings that need some work.  

Does the swing need to be reconstructed completely?  No.  In my case, I’m only trying to learn how to not cock my wrist at the top of my backswing!  The same is true in recruiting—even small tweaks can be difficult and all humans tend to resist change.

So, how do you get started on the path to making improvements to your recruiting techniques and methodologies?  Take Harry Beckwork’s advice from the blog I wrote a couple of weeks ago:

 "Assume your service is bad. It can't hurt and will force you to improve."

I started the process assuming that that my swing was bad, and then made a commitment to make it better.

As you start down this path, here are some questions you may want to consider:

• What recruiting practices have you been using for the longest period of time?
• What recruiting techniques have become less effective in recent years?
• When is the last time you learned / tried something new?
• When is the last time you asked an expert recruiter (someone in your network that you respect) what they do and what they have stopped doing?

Once a picture starts to emerge of the changes you need to make in order to improve, know that you’ll have to make a commitment to practice these changes.  Forcing yourself to try new things and then practicing is always the hardest part of learning.

See you at the practice range….

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Dr. David Mashburn. Dave is a Clinical and Consulting Psychologist, a Partner at Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. 

When Recruiting--Should You Trust Your Gut?

In his best selling book, Daniel Kahneman creates the framework for his insights by defining the two “systems” of human reasoning that are employed to make decisions and judgments:

System 1 is sometimes referred to as intuition.  It is fast and automatic and is usually associated with strong emotional bonds.  It is based on formed habits and is very difficult to change or manipulate.

System 2 is sometimes referred to as reasoning.  It is slower and much more volatile, being subject to conscious judgments and attitudes. 

These framework definitions are a simple way of explaining how a judgments can occur in two different ways.  In psychology, this is called a duel process theory.  Obviously, I’m grossly over-simplifying these concepts.  There is much to read on this topic if you care to learn more.

For our discussion, the following chart may be helpful in understanding the concept of System 1 and System 2:

So, here’s a question:

When it comes to making judgments in the recruiting process, is System 1 or System 2 more reliable? 

Before you put too much thought into this question, I’ll share a quick story that contributed to some of Kahneman’s research.  Early in his career, Kahneman and his research partner, Amos Tversky, discovered they both had identical silly ideas about the future professions of several toddlers they both knew.

“We could identify the argumentative three-year-old lawyer, the nerdy professor, the empathetic and mildly intrusive psychotherapist.  Or course, these predictions were absurd, but we still found them appealing. 

It was also clear that our intuitions were governed by the resemblance of each child to the cultural stereotype of a profession.  The amusing exercise helped us develop a theory that was emerging in our minds at the time, about the role of resemblance in predictions.  We went on to test and elaborate that theory in dozens of experiments.”

In simple terms, these gentlemen were employing System 1 to draw conclusions about a person’s fit for a particular profession.  If a human’s mind is susceptible to quickly draw conclusions under these ridiculous circumstances, could it also draw wrong conclusions during a more traditional recruiting encounter? 

Here is another example to consider.  Let’s assume that Steve is selected at random from a representative sample:

“An individual has been described by a neighbor as follows:  ‘Steve is very shy and withdrawn, invariably helpful but with little interest in people or in the world of reality.  A meek and tidy soul, he has a need for order and structure and a passion for detail.’

Is Steve more likely a librarian or a farmer? 

The resemblance of Steve’s personality to that of a stereotypical librarian strikes everyone immediately, but equally relevant statistical considerations are almost always ignored. 

Did it occur to you that there are more than 20 male farmers for each male librarian in the United States?   Because there are so many more farmers, it almost certain that more ‘meek and tidy’ souls will be found on tractors than at library information desks.”

During multiple research studies, Kahneman found that participants ignored the relevant statistical facts and relied exclusively on resemblance.  More specifically, the experiments demonstrated that humans tend to use resemblance to construct mental “rules of thumb.”  Once developed, they rely on these mental rules to make difficult judgments—even to the point where it defies reason and causes predictable biases (systematic errors) in their predictions.

Conclusion:  I think we'd all agree--systematic errors in hiring are a bad thing.  Relying on intuition causes us to hire people we shouldn’t and overlook potential high performers.  According to Kahneman, System 1 reigns supreme when making hiring decisions.  By the way--if you think you’re exempt from this type of reasoning, you’re mistaken.  It affects everyone who evaluates candidates and conducts interviews.*

How do you keep from getting stuck in an endless cycle of systematic errors? 

First, recognize what is happening and make a conscious attempt to resist being controlled by your mind’s System 1.  Second, learn how to employ System 2. 

In our company, we use assessment tools to help us overcome the System 1 dominance.  These tools do help, but it is also important to structure interviews so that you’re collecting data and not just allowing your System 2 to lazily disengage. 

This means asking lots of open-ended questions, formulating thoughtful follow-up questions, listening, taking notes, drawing trial conclusions from your candidate’s answers, asking the candidate to defend their positions, etc. 

We’ll cover more on this topic in future discussions, but for now, work to stay mentally sharp and engaged during your interviews.  It will take more effort, but you’ll make better hires. 

*Note:  After evaluating the financials of many real estate companies over the last seven years, I’ve noticed that most companies have 40% to 60% “D” performers in their ranks at any point in time.  Considering that many “D” performers leave the organization soon after they’re hired, most companies have a very poor track record at selecting high performers.

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

 

---

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. 

Making Decisions and Forming Judgments: An Introduction to Daniel Kahneman

A few weeks ago, I started reading a fascinating book called Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. 

I usually move through business books quickly and zero in on the few ideas that seem applicable.  I suspect most business books are intentionally designed to be consumed in this manner.  They’re “sugary” and easy to digest knowing the attention span of the readers (me included) is relatively short.

So it took some courage for Kahneman to write a 500-page book full of substantive content that is fairly difficult to understand.  I’ve been reading for a couple of weeks and I’m only 20% finished!  I recently picked up a couple other books to read in parallel because this one is going to take while, and I don’t want to rush through it.  If I did race through it, I feel like I’d miss a bunch of great insights.

To provide some background, Kahneman won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002.  Since Kahneman is a psychologist (not an economist), it was unusual for him to win this prize.   In fact, he was the first non-economist (by profession) to win this award.  He won the prize for developing Prospect Theory-- a behavioral economic theory that describes the way people chose between alternatives that involve risk.

Studying Prospect Theory would be beneficial for anyone in the real estate profession (I can’t think of a Nobel-prize-winning topic more applicable to the day-to-day work of a real estate agent), but the topics we’ll be discussing in future WorkPuzzles will focus more on the psychology of making decisions and forming judgments.  Here is quick summary of what we’ll hope to learn:

In his best selling book, Daniel Kahneman will take us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think.  System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical.

The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from recruiting your next agent to diagnosing what causes some of your agents to consistently make the wrong choices—each of these can be better understood by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.

Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives—and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us (and those we manage) into trouble.

Tomorrow, I’ll share some specific insights concerning some of Kahneman's ideas and how they apply to recruiting.  In the future, I'll occasionally revisit this topic with new insights and ideas that apply not only to recruiting, but also coaching and personal performance as well. 

If you want to read the book on your own, the Kindle version in a great bargain (only $4.99 on Amazon) right now.   Also, there are several summaries of this book available if you’re more of the “cliff-notes” type of person. 

Regardless, I believe there is a lot learn from Daniel Kahneman’s manifesto.  Writing from a near 80-year-old’s perspective, he has much wisdom to share.

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

 

---

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. 

The Unintended Consequences of Rewarding Outstanding Performance

Last year, we wrote a series of blogs outlining some of the research concerning the usefulness of  "carrot and stick" motivation techniques.  The findings of the research were very clear:  Providing extrinsic rewards cannot be blindly relied upon to help motivate individuals to perform better.

It's not that rewards should never be used.  In some cases (and for some people), incentives do have a positive impact on both individual and team performance.  But, don't be lulled into thinking this motivation technique is some kind of magic bullet.  It's not.  Offering an incentive can sometimes produce negative results.

In the case of our previous series, researchers demonstrated that trying to incentivize tasks that involve creativity was particularly ineffective. New research has now demonstrated offering incentives to top performers in your organization may also prove counterproductive in the long run.

The new research was recently summarized by Max Nisen at Business Insider, 

"Prizes and rewards are designed to produce more effort, to give people something to strive towards. But what happens once they actually get it? According to a new study by Harvard's George Borjas and Notre Dame's Kirk Doran of recipients of the Fields Medal, the most prestigious prize in mathematics, winning big actually kills productivity.

Mathematicians who win it publish far less in the years afterwards than similarly brilliant "contenders"

It goes to show that major awards and recognition can have unintended consequences. 

The drop off is pretty massive, as this chart shows:

This is explained, in part, by the classic economic "wealth effect." The impact of the Fields medal is significant. It's more prestigious than any other prize, and though the financial reward is a meager $15,000, the career and research opportunities available to a winner expand massively. 

Because they've achieved so much "wealth" in terms of prestige, job security, and opportunity, winners are more likely to choose leisure activities over work, just as someone who suddenly comes into significant monetary rewards might.

Not only do they produce fewer papers, but the ones they do write are relatively less important. And winners take fewer mentees, as well.

The authors did find one surprising positive effect. Though they publish less, winners also take more risks in the future. They've already reached the pinnacle of their field, so they feel free to pursue moonshots, new areas of mathematics that they think are fascinating or vital.

The risk is quite large. The winners know they're capable of doing extraordinary work in a particular area. Moving outside of it makes future results far less certain. Their particular gifts or talent might not translate well, and they're going to have to learn new skills and an entirely new body of research in the new area, which is all very time consuming.

The researchers term movement outside the core field, "cognitive mobility," and its increase explains about half of the drop off in productivity for medal winners.

The prize frees them up in an extremely significant way. In the years leading up to the medal year, the likelihood of a mathematician straying from their comfort zone is very rare, at just 5%. For prize-winners, the rate quintuples to 25%."

This research obviously covers a very specific and unique population, but it has implications for high performers in any area. Whether it's promising a promotion, a raise, or an award, leaders have to think about the aftermath as well as the competition itself.

It's important to reward achievement, but it may also have the unintended side effect of creating complacency. At the same time, there's something to be said for giving top performers the opportunity and safety net required to do really innovative work, even if it's less certain and takes longer.

When this research is paired with Daniel Pink's observations highlighted in our previous series, it should be worth at least a prolonged head scratch. As I said previously,  

"These days, carrots and sticks will often do more harm than good. The time has come to tap into the deeply human need to direct our own lives and create new things and to do better by ourselves and our world."

Exactly.  

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Dr. David Mashburn. Dave is a Clinical and Consulting Psychologist, a Partner at Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. 

Selling the Invisible For Recruiting

I’ve recently been listening to the audio book edition of the classic Selling the Invisible by Harry Beckwith.

You might think that I picked this title as a means of improving our sales within Tidemark, but you’d be mistaken.   I did read this book a few years ago for that purpose, but this time I wanted to think through how proven marketing ideas could help you improve the recruiting process. 

It’s been my observation that most well-run real estate companies understand that they are not only in the real estate transaction business, but also in the agent recruiting business. Gaining market share means performing both functions well.

I’ve also noticed that top recruiting companies share a common defining characteristic—their management teams tend to seek out any and all information that might lead them to increased results. There is a solid correlation between openness to assessment/feedback and steady improvement.

Those who are not willing to track, examine, metric, compare, and seek improvement (including challenging long-held beliefs) will invariably underperform their competitors and peers.  

As I was listening to Selling the Invisible from this perspective, I wrote down several principles that differentiate the best recruiting companies behavior from those who struggle.  Here are some of the standout differentiators and my comments beside each one:

Assume your service is bad. It can't hurt, and it will force you to improve. It is so uncanny how the best leaders I have ever met in my entire life have always made this assumption. Conversely the worst have an arrogant stance of "we've figured it out." I have learned a great deal through the humility of these fine leaders. 

Ignore your industry's benchmarks, and copy Disney's.  The point here is to surprise the candidate. Remember the blog we did on the offices that display a welcome sign with each candidate’s name before every interview? 

Big mistakes are big opportunities. If you aren't' performing well, see it as a time to examine, learn and improve.  If you make a mistake with a candidate, follow it with an apology, a gift card, and a promise to improve.  This will typically work wonders to reversing the course of the hiring process for most people. 

Don't just think better. Think different. Be open to out of the box ways of understanding a dilemma. Don't get so locked into old belief systems that you aren't willing to entertain other ways of seeing realty. You just might discover something revolutionary. 

Don't just create what the market needs or wants. Create what it would love. For recruiting, the market is the candidates you’re interviewing. The thing that all candidates love is to be understood thoroughly before making any bold statements about how you can solve their pain.

Every act is a marketing act. Make every employee a marketing employee. From the first contact with a candidate until he hands you his license, every touch with him is a marketing message.

What does each step in your recruiting process suggest to a candidate?  The candidates who will turn into top producing agents will be intuitively sensitive to how they are being treated (this is part of what will make them great agents).

If anyone on your team is not treating them with the upmost amount of respect, they WILL go elsewhere. If you’re waiting for agents to prove themselves before treating them with this respect, you ARE losing the best candidates. 

In most professional services, you are not really selling expertise - because your expertise is assumed, and because your prospect cannot intelligently evaluate your expertise anyway. Instead you are selling a relationship. Hopefully this speaks for itself. 

Which of the above principles can you improve upon? Which are strengths? Which are weaknesses?  Know that it is easier to see the weaknesses in others rather than yourself, so you might want to re-read the list a couple of times and make it a point of discussion with some of your peers.

Make sure you don’t miss the first point as you process this information-- we all must entertain a need for improvement if we want to grow. 

 

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

---

Editor's Note: This article was written by Dr. David Mashburn. Dave is a Clinical and Consulting Psychologist, a Partner at Tidemark, Inc. and a regular contributor to WorkPuzzle. 

Top 5 Recruiting Drip Email Questions Answered

If you’ve ever scrolled down to the bottom of a WorkPuzzle email, you’ll notice that we use a company called MadMimi to distribute our blog content.  We chose this company because they have fun way of looking at business, and they do a great job of delivering our emails to our subscribers.

MadMimi is also a thought leader in the arena of email marketing.  Over the last couple of years, I’ve learned a lot about marketing from Dean Levitt (I think he’s the guy who runs the company) and his crew.

Dean recently wrote a blog that is one of the best I’ve ever read on the best practices and metrics of sending marketing emails.  It’s a very long blog with lots of rabbit trails you can follow to learn more.  If you have the time, read the whole post.  Since many of are pressed for time, I’ve selected the top five questions/answers that most apply to recruiting.

Before revealing the top five questions, I want to offer a disclaimer.  I have not been a huge fan of using drip emails in the recruiting process.  The best way to use email in recruiting is to keep your active pipeline numbers low (25 to 50 candidates) and send personal emails to each candidate on a regular basis addressing his/her unique needs and circumstances.   This takes work, but pays the highest dividends in the long term.

So why am I addressing this issue if I believe it’s a bad idea? 

It’s because I get questions concerning this topic so often from our clients and prospects.  Many of you are trying to manage and engage larger talent communities (100+ candidates) in addition to your high-priority active pipeline.  For this purpose, drip email campaigns may be helpful.

Here’s the risk of using drip email:  There are many ways to screw it up!  So, if you’re going to use this tool, listen to Dean and become a student of effective email marketing.  Here are the top 5 questions:

How Long Should Your Drip Emails Be?

Consider this: the average reader spends less than 20 seconds reading your newsletter. Consequently, the links that are clicked most are those links that are up top, or at the very least, visible without scrolling.

With that in mind, I’d say your newsletter can be as long as you’d like but make sure your most important info goes up top. If your newsletter needs 5 minutes of uninterrupted attention by your readers, then you need to be comfortable knowing that most readers won’t make it to the bottom. Also, if your newsletter is taking you hours to compose, it’s probably too long. 

What if you have a lot to say?  Consider hosting the main content outside the inbox.  If you keep your content on your site or blog, you give yourself the luxury to send out much shorter newsletters that then drive traffic back to your site or blog. I’ve found this to be very effective. It can open up new opportunities to engage your subscribers on your site as well as presenting a lot of information in the newsletter as bite sized chunks. This way, your readers can see more within a shorter time span and if something piques their interest, they can click through to your site.

How Often Should You Send Your Drip Emails?

The ideal frequency depends on your content and what your subscribers prefer but if you’re unsure, some experimentation is needed.

Most businesses should send a monthly newsletter and then possibly increase frequency from there. If you find your content is making your newsletter longer and longer then consider increasing the frequency and splitting up the content. 

With increased frequency you’ll notice an increase in unsubscribers and lowered view rates but don’t panic. Add up your open rates over the entire month and if you’re reaching more people by increasing your frequency then that may be the right tactic for you.

When Is The Best Time To Send Your Drip Emails?

This depends on you and requires some experimentation. The studies focusing on best times to send a newsletter tend to look at averages which, when it comes to you, your list and your content, may be meaningless.

That means that while your competitors are sending on Mondays at 8am, and seeing good responses, you might too. However, you also may see better results if you send on the weekend or afternoons and stand out more.

Testing will be needed to find the right time for you, but make sure you’re not basing your email marketing strategy on one test. Test a few newsletters on weekday mornings, midweek afternoons, weekends and evenings. Watch for trends and then decide for yourself if there’s any significant gains at a specific time slot.

Experian Marketing Services found that people responded more to email marketing emails sent on the weekend. They also found that, in general, response rates were higher in the early mornings and in the evenings. That makes sense considering that people tend to check emails with less distractions before and after work.

I’ve seen data hinting that Tuesday through Thursday has higher view rates but an Experian email benchmark report found that Monday emails generated the highest revenue per email.

What Is A Good Or Average Response Rate For Drip Emails?

This is one of those questions that has no straight answer. It’s like asking what the perfect weight is. Everyone is different! 

Overall, average view rates are somewhere between 10% and 25%. If you’re consistently getting below 10%, I’d recommend making some changes. You could adjust your sender frequency, work on improving your list health by removing non-responsive email addresses, work on improving your subject lines and maybe make some changes to your content. 

It’s extremely rare to see emails with view rates above 40% but it is possible with opt-in practices that result in highly engaged subscribers. Targeted, niche market newsletters with strict double opt-in, combined with regular, consistent sends and valuable content tend to have above average results. They also tend to have smaller list sizes. 

Your view rate should be something you’re happy with as well as being realistic. Take small steps to improve constantly. 

How Do I Avoid The Junk Folder?

Avoiding the junk folder is actually quite easy, provided you stick to some best practices that are more common sense guidelines than strict rules. 

The logical starting place is the list itself. If your subscribers signed up, directly with you, and expect to receive your newsletters, you’ll be just fine. If you’d like to stay out of the junk folder, don’t purchase an email list. Nor should you add anyone to your list without their permission.

Staying out of the bulk folder also requires maintaining a view rate that shows ISP’s that people want your newsletter. Aim for a minimum of a 10% view rate. By delivering the type of content your subscribers expected and signed up for, you’ll maintain an engaged audience and keep your view rates up.

Similarly, by removing old, defunct email addresses, you’ll avoid “bounces” and that’s good. A bounce is when we try to send to an email address that’s non-existent, inactive or otherwise undeliverable. ISP’s look at bounces as an indication of a poorly managed email list.

Specific content makes a big difference too. Here are some tips:

• In general, it’s a good idea to avoid hard-sell catchphrases like: Free, Instant, Double your money, Sex, XXX, Win, Cash, Bonus, Membership, Free Offer, Call Now, Rates, $$$’s, Success, etc.
• Excessive use of CAPS LOCK can cause issues, as well.
• Avoid excessive punctuation especially in subject lines. Multiple !!!’s and ???’s can be troublesome. Keep your promotion conversational rather than hard-sell EXTRA!!!! BUY NOW!!! style.
• Keep a reasonable text to image ratio. Email marketing promotions that are all images can trigger spam filters because it looks like you’re hiding something.

 

I know this was a long WorkPuzzle (I definitely broke the first rule on the list), but hopefully you were able to quickly scroll through the issues and find the one most interesting and relevant.  If you’re able to apply even one or two of these best practices, the effectiveness of your recruiting drip emails will improve.

Question:  Do you have things you’ve noticed as you sent recruiting drip emails?  Email me with your lessons learned and I will publish them in a future WorkPuzzle.

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

 

---

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. 

Helping People Transition from a Traditional Part-Time Job to a Full-Time Real Estate Agent—Part 3

I want to wrap up the current series of blogs we’ve been working on for the last couple of weeks. The premise of the discussion thus far is that many individuals in the workforce find themselves in part-time jobs that are not fully utilizing their skills, abilities, and talents.

Some of these people may also find the possibility of transitioning into a full-time real estate agent position as an attractive alternative to their current circumstances.

If you haven’t read the previous two blogs in this series, it may be helpful to catch-up (Part 1, Part 2) before reading today’s conclusion.

Assuming you’ve bought into the premise of our discussion, the next question you may be asking is: 

If there are talented individuals languishing in part-time jobs, how do I find them?

The quick answer is figure out where they’re working now. This may not be as hard as it sounds—searching through some of the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) data will help us uncover some answers.

Here are two tables of data that I found particularly helpful, and I’ve also provided some commentary on each data set.

1.  People working in jobs that require less than a high-school education, who are college graduates.

If a person finds themselves in one of these professions after going through the hard work and financial sacrifice of getting a college degree, I would suspect that many of them are very frustrated.  They are even more frustrated if they can only get part-time hours.

Not all of these job categories would be a natural fit for the real estate industry, but the following professions contain a higher percentage of those who could make the transition to real estate:

 -Retail Sales Persons

-Waiters and Waitresses

-Bartenders

-Home Health Aides

-Telemarketers

Of the 2.9 million people represented in this chart, 1.6 million are employed in these five professions.

2.  People working in jobs that require a high-school education who are college graduates.

Moving up the employment food chain, the next table documents those who are closer to what they would consider a desirable job, but still not quite there.

Almost all of the categories in this group could be viable candidate pools for real estate agents with perhaps the exception of agriculture workers.

Between the two data sets, there are over six million college educated individuals (of all ages) who are working in jobs where they are overqualified. If you also consider that many of these individuals are being forced to work part-time, it’s easy to see why many of them are languishing.

How do these candidate numbers compare to the number of existing real estate agents in the United States? 

The most recent estimates I’ve found report the total number of real estate agents and brokers to be about 2.5 million (900,000 of these agents are Realtors).

If the real estate industry needs to replace 250,000 agents each year (I believe this is a conservative estimate), then a candidate pool of six million is enough to fill this need adequately. 

It is not a stretch to believe that 4% of the candidate pool is a potential fit for a real estate agent position.

Conclusion.  There are many companies in the real estate industry who focus on the conventional candidate pools of experienced agents (agents working for competitors) and new agents who have independently made the decision to pursue a real estate career (these candidates typically show up on a real estate commission’s newly licensed list).

While these candidate pools are important recruiting sources (and should continue to be pursued), many real estate companies do not pursue the “third-pool” of candidates.  The third pool of candidates are the six million individuals identified above.

Those companies who learn to recruit successfully from the third pool will face less competition in the recruiting process, will bring innovation into their companies at a higher rate, and will continue to improve their workforces. 

---

Join the WorkPuzzle Discussion at the Tidemark Online Community (TMOC)

Engage in the WorkPuzzle discussion by joining the TMOC private social network.  Commenting on a public blog like WorkPuzzle can be a little intimidating, so why not join the discussion inside the privacy of the TMOC discussion group?  

By joining TMOC, you'll get to see who else is in the group and your comments will only be seen by those whom you trust.   Joining TMOC is quick, easy, and free (no kidding…this takes less than 2 minutes).   To get started, click here.

Already of a member of TMOC?  If so, join the WorkPuzzle Dialog Group by clicking on the WorkPuzzle Group icon on the left side of your TMOC homepage.  Questions?   Email the WorkPuzzle editor (workpuzzle@hiringcenter.net) and we'll walk through the process.

 

---

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.