WorkPuzzle

Overcoming the Fear of Social Media—Part 2

In our last discussion, I told you about an exchange I had with a Costco executive about ten years ago, while my business partner and I were pitching the idea of using a social network to retain employees. 

While it may sound crazy now, this executive (at the time) was still unsure of the wisdom of giving employees free and easy access to email while on the job.  I’m sure that most of you could not even imagine imposing such a restriction on email today because it has evolved into a much needed and beneficial tool for business communication.  But, that was the lens executives were looking through at the time. 

So, here’s an important question for you:  Do you feel that social media is on the same trajectory that email was on a decade ago?  Or, more specifically, do you believe that social media will become a much needed and beneficial business tool as well? 

Before you start to beat yourself up for being “old school,” let me assure you that many of your peers are also struggling with this same issue.  Harvard Business Review recently highlighted the work of Anthony J. Bradley (Group Vice President, Gartner Research) and Mark P. McDonald (Group Vice President and Gartner Fellow, Gartner Executive Programs) on this topic.  The Gartner research was designed to capture a snapshot of how business leaders feel about the future of social media.  Here are some of the researchers’ thoughts: 

“In just a few years, social media has come to dominate many of our personal communications.  We collaborate daily, sometimes productively, sometimes not.  Most organizations, however, still view social media as a threat to productivity, intellectual capital, security, privacy, management authority, or regulatory compliance.  In fact, this is the most common attitude among the more than 250 organizations in the study.” 

The research shows that most companies have yet to embrace a positive attitude toward using social media for true business value.  But, the results are not as out-of-balance as you might imagine: 

“Overall, respondents were split 50/50 between a positive and challenged attitude towards social media with many indicating that they recognize the potential for social media to address strategic needs and generate durable change.” 

Among the challenged attitudes (this is consultant speak for negative) about social media, the most common emotion documented, by quite a large margin, is fearfulness.  In essence, many business leaders are worried when they consider this topic because it is difficult to predict how the technology will impact their companies and industries. 

While some caution is always appropriate when new things come along, maintaining a fearful attitude can be stifling to an organization. 

“The trouble with a fearful attitude is that an organization often doesn't take a specific stance: it discourages and even prohibits the use of social media.  While this approach reduces the potential for undesirable behavior — that's the reason for restriction — it also stifles any business value that might be derived from grassroots use of social media.”

Let’s zero in on the real estate industry to finish up this discussion.  I’ve not noticed much discouraging or prohibiting of social media among in the real estate industry.  With independent contractors as agents, most owners find it difficult to prohibit much of anything. 

However, I don’t see much strategic sponsoring of social media strategies by real estate companies either.  Instead, there is an ad hoc “do it your own way and let the leadership team know how it goes” attitude.  In the background, there is a lot of cringing and even some hand-wringing that goes on as managers watch the messiness of social media play out in front of them.  Most of the messiness relates to the inappropriate combining of personal and professional social circles. 

Why is there no strategic plan for social media in most real estate companies?  Because there is fear and uncertainty about the impact this technology will have on the real estate business in the future. 

In our next discussion, we’ll learn how organizations in other industries are dealing with this fear and uncertainty and how you can start to set a strategic direction for your organization.

---

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.

Overcoming the Fear of Social Media

Here’s a crazy confession.  In 1999, I started a social media company.   

I’m not kidding. 

I was working for a high-tech company in Oregon at the time, and I developed a relationship with a brilliant software developer in Vancouver, BC.  Ten years earlier, this developer successfully launched a payroll software company and had some extra time to dedicate toward side projects.  One of those projects was called “Community Circles.”   

Community Circles was the software backbone for a new online social network, but it needed to be applied to a compelling problem.  At the time, that problem was employee retention at large companies.   

As you may remember, this was the height of the “dot-com” bubble.  Traditional companies were having a very difficult time retaining their best employees.  Many were running off to new, exciting startups that were offering lucrative stock options and crazy benefits.   

How could a boring old traditional company compete with such enticing options?  Part of the answer to this problem (in our opinion) was....close personal relationships inside the company.  The rationale was that if an employee had close relationships within their existing company, it would be painful for them to leave.    

What better way to foster these relationships than a private online social network?  Since social networks were not available outside the company (ex. Facebook), an employee would be cut off from the social network if they left the company. 

By the time we launched pilot programs the next year, we were marketing the social networks as “PlateSpinner.”  The focus was on Gen X employees who were having a difficult time balancing their work and personal lives. 

Long story short—not long after we got up and running with our pilots, the "dot-com crash" occurred.  We quickly saw our “compelling problem” evaporate because unemployment was rising and those traditional companies were now having no problem with retention.  Not long after the employment tide changed, PlateSpinner died. 

This is a classic entrepreneurial story of having a great idea…at the wrong time.  In hindsight, the technology was not yet available to support the concept of an online social network.  The main problem was that high-speed internet connections were not common enough yet, and much of what makes a social network interesting requires larger bandwidths.    

By now, you might be wondering why I’m telling you this story.  The purpose is to provide you some background information, leading up to an important interaction that occurred while we were introducing large companies to the Platespinner social network back in the spring of 2000...  

The interaction happened in a meeting with one of the executives at Costco.  As you may know, Costco is headquartered in Seattle and was trying, at the time, to keep talented employees from joining crazy little retailing startups, like Amazon.com and HomeGrocer.com.  Costco had the need for a product like Platespinner. 

As we explained the concept of an online social network to this executive (he was in his mid-sixties), he stopped the presentation about halfway through and asked this question: 

“Would using this product require that employees have access to a computer and the internet?”

“Yes, it does,” I answered.

“If that’s the case,” he responded, “I don’t think we would be interested in giving our employees access to such a technology.  A couple of years ago, we gave them access to email, and it has been nearly impossible to control.  All they do is talk to each other now—no one seems to do any work!” 

At that point in time, what emotion was that executive experiencing?    

Fear. 

He was fearful of unleashing a technology in his company that would spiral out of control and cause his employees to lose focus and waste time.   

Looking back, I’m surprised at his insight.  Back in the year 2000, this executive was able to quickly get his arms around a new technology that would not become mainstream in the business world for another decade.  And, as he thought through the implications of such an innovation, he understood the apprehension that he and other business leaders would experience if online social networking was made available to employees. 

Now...fast forward to 2012.  While online social networks are now near ubiquitous in society and very common in businesses, the number one emotion that business leaders experience when talking about social networks is still fear. 

Over the next couple of discussions, we’ll delve into some research that Harvard Business Review has published on this topic and learn how progressive organizations are overcoming the fear of embracing social networking technologies.  The promised benefits of the social networking revolution are on the other side of this chasm.

---

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 Through Collaboration - Part 2

In the last edition, I included the following findings:  

"...The McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) finds that twice as much potential value lies in using social tools to enhance communications, knowledge, sharing, and collaboration within and across enterprises.  MGI's estimates suggest that by fully implementing social technologies, companies have an opportunity to raise the productivity of interaction workers-- high-skill knowledge workers, including managers and professionals-- by 20 to 25 percent."

I then asked the following questions: 

Question one:  What type of agent do you want to build your organization around?  If you answer that you "don't care," then there is little need to read the remainder of this article.  

Answer:  Most companies want agents who enjoy collaborating and sharing with the rest of the organization.  They typically will put up with lone rangers, but much prefer community-minded individuals, who are willing to give back and share.  The reason is simple:  Lasting communities are built by people who contribute to the whole rather than by those who are parasitic to the whole. 

Question two:  What would attract agents who would want to collaborate and share? 

Answer:  Organizations that visibly collaborate and share will attract those who will collaborate and share.  

Question three:  How do you build a collaborative community through social media that is visible to outside agents and provides collaboration as the first open door toward recruiting? 

Here is my 30,000 foot view of what I am implying:  You potentially have two complimentary goals: (1) Recruiting collaborative agents and (2) Encouraging the practice of collaboration.  Up until the last decade, very few methods existed to support or fuse these two, much less measure either one.  But now the groundwork is being laid for this to happen.  That's right...you guessed it...from the the Social Media platform.  

In their Forbes article titled "From Social Networks to Collaboration Networks: The Next Evolution of Social Media for Business," Karl Moore and Peter Neely write that the smartest companies have realized the power of asking "customers and followers to participate in brainstorming with them so they can learn how to be a better company, offer better products and services, or support the values and issues of the community...They understand that ideas can come from anyone, anywhere and at any time."

They site several examples of this.  Below are two very interesting examples:

1. Toronto-based Goldcorp, a gold mining firm, sought a new approach to finding gold deposits on their 55,000-acre Red Lake, Ontario property.  With analysts believing that the fifty-year old property had been emptied, high production costs, labor strikes, and lingering debt...the firm was desperate to find new life.  Without options, CEO Rob McEwan created the “Goldcorp Challenge,” whereby he placed every piece of information about the property on the web for all participants to download, study, and submit recommendations.  More than 1,000 participants from over 50 countries signed up to solve Goldcorp’s problem.  Submissions came from a diverse group of participants, many not trained in geology.  This open-source innovation network proved to be invaluable, identifying 110 targets worth more than three billion dollars.  By opening the information to a wider network, the company benefited from collaboration of internal and external knowledge banks.
2. The second example uses the idea of social and collaborative networking within the four walls of the organization.  In mid-2007 IBM created Beehive, an internal social network to connect employees worldwide.  The network gained momentum and currently supports 30,000+ employees.  Each employee can add a bio page, photos and connect with employees from other IBM offices around the world.  What’s interesting about Beehive is how the employees use the internal network.  There are three distinct categories of use:  The first is to connect with employees they meet at conferences or when working on inter-departmental or inter-divisional projects.  The network provides a mechanism to stay connected and get to know other employees and their area of expertise.  The second use is to gain project support and brainstorm with others on how best to complete a project.  The connections provide a collaboration channel to promote the project to others and gather ideas from other people at different levels.  The third use of Beehive is the opportunity to connect with people at higher levels of the organization that are not accessible via traditional channels.  Employees use connections to these executives as a method to share ideas and get career advice with the hope of advancement.  IBM Beehive is a great example of leveraging an internal social network to cultivate communication, interaction, and collaboration within the widely distributed company.

With stories like this, it's no wonder that Oracle bought Involver, Microsoft bought Yammers, and Sales Force bought Buddy Media. 

You are probably asking should we build something on Facebook to begin this process?  Probably not.  Facebook is far too general in scope to use for something like the above and gain any traction within your office or company.  But, what if you had your own community site...sort of a virtual office where outsiders could peak in and see how you think....where your agents could collaborate and problem solve.  What if outside agents could join in the discussion and contribute to ideas and vice-versa? 

Are you seeing where I'm going with this? 

We at Tidemark, are interested enough in the power of this direction, that we began thinking hard and developing strategies in alignment with this movement.  More on this sometime in the near future.... 

---

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. 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 Through Collaboration

As you know, we are devoting the next several editions of WorkPuzzle to the exploration of recruiting experienced agents through the tools of social media.  Let me first be clear:  In many ways, I abhor social media.  I am bored easily with it, and frankly most of it seems like a waste of time.  But, then again, I am a baby boomer, and probably as a result could be labeled as a late adaptor to much of the last 15 years of innovation.  But, I have to admit...through the last month of reading and researching this topic, I have come to clearly believe that the vital need to confront this topic has never been more paramount.  

I am finding that the same "real time" and global scale access to social interactions used for political upheaval and consumer research is currently being harnessed by the best and brightest companies for a wide variety of solutions.  Why?  There is reason to believe that the organizations who can figure out how to harness these interactions will lead the next wave of innovation.  But how do you harness these social interactions in a way that makes sense? 

Lee has already presented a convincing argument that directly selling anything to anyone rarely, if ever, really works..and especially through social media; This includes selling your company to an experienced agent through some cheesy pitch.  The best people just won't bite on a blatant pitch of "come join our company."  But what will they respond to?  

Allow me to develop a possibility.  

Many smart-minded people are taking the time to research and write about the untapped potential of collaboration through social media.  

McKinsey Global Institute writes:

"While 72 percent of companies use social technologies in some way, very few are anywhere near to achieving the full potential benefit.  In fact, the most powerful applications of social technologies in the global economy are largely untapped.  Companies will go on developing ways to reach consumers through social technologies and gathering insights for product development, marketing, and customer service.  Yet the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) finds that twice as much potential value lies in using social tools to enhance communications, knowledge, sharing, and collaboration within and across enterprises.  MGI's estimates suggest that by fully implementing social technologies, companies have an opportunity to raise the productivity of interaction workers-- high-skill knowledge workers, including managers and professionals-- by 20 to 25 percent."

So, you ask:  "What does this have to do with recruiting experienced agents?"  And in return, I ask you to ponder the following three topics over the next few days:  

Question one:  What type of agent do you want to build your organization around?  If you answer that you "don't care," then there is little need to read the remainder of this article.  

Answer:  Most companies want agents who enjoy collaborating and sharing with the rest of the organization.  They typically will put up with lone rangers, but much prefer community-minded individuals, who are willing to give back and share.  The reason is simple:  Lasting communities are built by people who contribute to the whole rather than by those who are parasitic to the whole. 

Question two:  What would attract agents who would want to collaborate and share? 

Answer:  Organizations that visibly collaborate and share will attract those who will collaborate and share.  

Question three:  How do you build a collaborative community through social media that is visible to outside agents and provides collaboration as the first open door toward recruiting? 

Answer:  Stay tuned....This is a little more complex -- I'll offer a possible answer in the next edition... 

---

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. 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.

Overfishing: Why Your Experienced Recruiting Tactics Will Continue to Produce Diminished Returns

In the Northwest, many of us love to fish.  At times, it's too many.  For me, nothing is more frustrating than investing a bunch of time and effort into a fishing expedition, only to find out that everyone else had the exact same idea.   

This happened to two of my sons recently, who went salmon fishing with a neighbor on Lake Wenatchee in central Washington.  At this particular spot, it is common to have to wait more than an hour to launch your boat at 4:30am and then join hundreds of other boats who are all competing to stake a claim in the lake's most productive fishing spots.  

And all these anglers are not just fishing for the same fish, they are there at the same time, using the same fishing gear and deploying the same techniques to attempt to catch the salmon that have migrated into the lake.  To make things even more frustrating, the salmon are at a point in their reproductive cycle where they are no longer eating.   

To get them to "bite," specialized gear (flashy metal plates attached to down-riggers)  is used to annoy the salmon and entice them to react. Think of someone waving something in your face and instead of batting it away with your hands (salmon don't have hands), they bite the annoying object in an attempt to get it to leave.  No bait or lures are used in the process, just a bare hook. 

I know this all sounds a bit crazy if you've never been exposed to this type of fishing.  But, there is a core underlying principle that makes this whole process work.  Any idea what is it?    

Large numbers of fish congregate in one place. 

In Lake Wenatchee this year, there are about 60,000 sockeye salmon that enter the lake on their way upstream to spawn.  About 10,000 will be caught while passing through the lake.  The fish and wildlife scientists estimate that 25,000 salmon need to make it through the lake in order to produce a healthy spawn.  Since about 50,000 will swim through the lake and continue up rivers and creeks to spawn, there will be fish in future years to continue the process.   

What does all this have to do with recruiting?  The same principle that causes salmon fishing to be successful in Lake Wenatchee causes your experienced agent recruiting efforts to be successful in your office:   

You need to find where the candidates are congregating and make sure you're there.  

Many hiring managers in the real estate industry are fishing in places where less and less candidates are congregating. For example, the number of experienced agents who are willing to receive, read, and respond to drip email campaigns is very small.  And yet many hiring managers still expect this methodolgy to produce results.   If everyone is fishing for the small number of these candidates, this "recuiting water" becomes overfished.  Even if your techniques and exectuion are flawless, it will not produce a consisent flow of hires.

So, if the candidates you're after are not sitting in front of their email waiting for your drip email campaign, what are they doing?   They are spending time on social networks.  John Sumser, the founder and editor of HRExaminer Online Magazine, puts it this way in one of his recent blog postings:

"The essence of great recruiting is to fish where the fish are.  As times change, the ‘recruiting waters’ get overfished.  This is what makes the profession so highly flexible.  Over the course of a decade, the success of one technique creates the demand for the next.

More than any other corporate function, recruiting involves adaptation to rapidly changing markets.  Companies that shift their methods with the times, thrive.  Companies that don’t, wither.

In 2012, that means learning how to use social media as a part of your recruiting effort.  In a few short years, the center of the Internet moved from static sites to the more vibrant and interactive universe of online networks.  Job boards give way to social media as users migrate to the new world.

Here are a few stats that put the story in perspective:

• 23% of all hours spent online are spent on a social media site
• 80% of all Internet users are members of at least one social network
• 66% of all Americans use a social network
• 25% of all American internet traffic is on Facebook alone"

If you haven't done so already, it's probably time to seriously consider making social media techniques part of your recruiting strategy.  The candidates are starting to pool in such significant numbers that it only makes sense to put some of your recruiting effort in this area. 

But, how do you become effective in this new recruiting arena?  That's what we'll be discussing over the next month or so in WorkPuzzle.  The good news is that your industry (and many other industries) are early in the process of figuring all this out.  There are some boats starting to show up on the water, but everyone is still struggling to discover the techniques that produce results.  Hopefully, we can get you pointed in the right direction.

The last picture is of Camden, my 15-year old son, who landed this big sockeye salmon.  Living in the Northwest in a wonderful thing! 

---

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.

Figuring Out Social Media

To use social media or not to use social media…this seems to be an ever present question among business professionals.  Rarely can I research business-related topics and not come across some article touting the importance of social networking and/or the misuse of it. 

Most business executives understand that there is an untapped benefit to using social media to promote their business, but they do not know how to effectively harness it.  So, what does effective social networking look like?  In one word, “engagement.” 

Engagement isn’t about “likes” or how many “followers” you have.  That is fleeting at best, a one-time click.  Effective engagement comes from you (the seller/recruiter) connecting with your target audience on their playing field.  Trying to get people to listen to you or look at your pages is futile if you do not first reach out and engage them where they are. 

Author and consultant, Tom Searcy, concisely discusses four strategic principles in using social media in the sales process.  Once again, I can easily draw parallels to the recruiting arena.

“1. Getting more 'followers' is not a goal.

There is an implied causal link between 'followers' or 'likes' and real sales activity.  However, that link has low correlational accuracy.  Most people are talking about themselves and hoping you're listening.  Coupons, special offers, and event postings may get some strong responses from people who are already transactional customers.  But if the goal is to get qualified prospects, then you need different metrics for judging the success of your social selling.

2. Connection is not engagement.

Social selling is about engagement, and that comes from effective interaction.  Posting material in any form and simply waiting for your connections to respond is not engagement.  What are they posting that you are responding to?  Learn from those interactions.  You can't sell if you're just pushing messages and your expertise.

3. Buyers signal by declaring problems.

Listen for the buying signals from the social Web.  If you use a third-party tool, such as HootSuite, to compose your messages and read what your followers are writing, make full use of its search capabilities.  Look for certain key words as a way to listen for people who have a problem you can solve.  If you sell routers or servers, you can flag the word router or server failure, giving you a way to watch across all open platforms for anyone who uses the word.  You can even segment the search to a number of miles from your office location.

4. You are not in control.

Many sales folks believe this is the way the process works:  Get followers, and then provoke them to want what you sell through your posts.  The truth is, it rarely happens that way.  The reason is simple:  If you tweet, blog, or post about a solution, idea, or product that a person does not have, they won't necessarily connect with you.  If you are listening to the social Web and hear someone declare a problem that you can solve or a question that you can answer, giving you an opportunity to send a relevant response, then you are truly engaging.”

Value added content is still important and should be included in your Social Web strategy.  But, focusing on content alone, without the meaningful intention of engagement, will stifle your social media progress.  This is a broad topic and one we will continue to discuss in the coming weeks...

---

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. 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.

Employment Brand: What Do Young Candidates Really Think of Your Organization?

Real estate companies spend a lot of time, effort, and resources managing their consumer brands...and rightfully so.  If someone is going to buy or sell a home, the perception the individual has of your company’s brand will play a major role in their choice of an agent.

Think of the emotions you’d like a consumer to experience when they think of your company.  Maybe these are some of the things your brand stands for:  well-established, trusted, experienced, competent, dependable, innovative, phenomenal customer service, etc. 

While all these are great attributes and characteristics that most any consumer would desire in a real estate company handling a transaction, they may cloud the water when it comes to representing yourself to potential candidates...especially when it comes to younger candidates. 

Many well-established companies are struggling with this issue.  Not everyone can be Zappos (a progressive online retailer based in Las Vegas), Kixeye (an edgy game developer that makes Entertainment Arts and Zynga look like fuddy-duds), or even Zillow.  In fact, many companies need to be seen as dependable, but still desirable places to work for the younger generations. 

Much has been written on this topic, and there are some companies that have spent fortunes trying to reconcile this dichotomy.  One of the most successful case studies is this effort is Enterprise Rent-a-Car.  Started in 1957, Enterprise now has more than 5,000 offices in North America.  Enterprise is not exactly an exciting new startup company, and yet is consistently named one of the top companies in the United States for launching a career.  Take a look at the Enterprise Career site and see how masterful they’ve become at solving this problem. 

But, what if you don’t have the resources to build a far-reaching branding campaign to make such a distinction between your consumer brand and your employment brand?  There is still much you can do to make this a reality—especially if your cognizant that a distinction needs to be made. 

The most natural place for a hiring manager to start transforming your employment brand is during the interviews you’re conducting with younger candidates.  This approach is low cost and can have a profound impact on your office as you bring in new hires who are the flesh and blood realities of your employment brand.   

To interview younger candidates more successfully, you’ll need a better understanding of what they see as interesting and engaging in a potential employer.  

To help in this effort, I’d like to point you to some insight provided by Gary Hamel, best-selling author and professor at the London Business School.  Last March, Dr. Hamel published What Matters Now, an insightful book on change, competition, and innovation.  And recently, he followed-up with an ERE article, connecting the principles in his book to the topic of hiring the next generation of top performers. 

More specifically, Dr. Hamel addresses the mindset that young candidates consistently display in evaluating whether an established company is “with it” or “past it.”   

The article highlights 12 of these mindsets, but I’ve selected the five that I find most insightful: 

1.  Contribution counts for more than credentials.  When you post a video to YouTube, no one asks you if you went to film school.  When you write a blog, no one cares whether or not you have a journalism degree.  Position, title, and academic degrees — none of the usual status differentiators carry much weight online.  [In progressive companies], what counts is not your resume, but what you can contribute. 

2.  Tasks are chosen, not assigned.  The internet is an opt-in economy.  Whether contributing to a blog, working on an open source project, or sharing advice in a forum, people choose to work on the things that interest them.  Everyone is an independent contractor and everyone scratches his own itch.  Progressive companies encourage work to be done in this way as well. 

3.  Power comes from sharing, not hoarding.  The Web is also a gift economy.  To gain influence and status, you have to give away your expertise and content.  And you must do it quickly; if you don’t, someone else will beat you to the punch and garner the credit that might have been yours.  [In progressive companies], there are lots of incentives to share and few to hoard. 

4.  Mediocrity gets exposed.  Online rating systems have become ubiquitous — for hotels, books, local businesses, and products of every sort.  Though not every review is useful, in the aggregate they provide a good guide to what’s remarkable and what’s rubbish.  In traditional organizations, employees don’t get to rate much of anything.  As a result, one often finds a ‘‘conspiracy of the mediocre’’ — ‘‘I won’t question your decisions or your effectiveness, if you don’t question mine.’’  There are no such cabals [in progressive companies].  If you’re inadequate, you’ll be found out. 

5.  Leaders serve rather than preside.  [Among progressive companies], every leader is a servant leader; no one has the power to command or sanction.  Credible arguments, demonstrated expertise, and selfless behavior are the only levers for getting things done.  Forget this [in your organization], and your followers will soon desert you. 

If you’re interested in the other seven mindsets, read the rest of Dr. Hamel’s article.  If you’re more strategic and want to change how your company operates, you may want to pick up his book. 

Here is the bottom line:  These mindsets will resonate with the younger candidates that you’re interviewing.  Also, many of these principles dovetail nicely into the business processes and culture that most hiring managers are trying to create and maintain.  There is a win-win in this connection and something that can differentiate you from those stodgy competitors who are in an increasingly weak position to lure your candidates away.  

---

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.

How to Effectively Deal with Resistance

In the last edition, I described the psychology of why people become resistant after initially feeling and acting excited about a proposition that requires change.  Specifically, I described this very natural human reaction within the realm of recruiting.  

I won't repeat what I've described already in my last two editions (1, 2).  Instead, I will focus today on what to do when you meet resistance or a sudden change in direction.  

Let's say that an excited candidate, who has been positive about the prospect of beginning the licensing process, suddenly says:  "I'm no longer interested." 

What do you do? 

Before I tell you what to do, allow me to describe, instead, how to think about it:

Do you believe that this candidate has no internal conflict in their head about the decision?  In other words, do you really think that they are that adamant about not moving forward?  The answer is NO.  They DO have internal conflict.  The only reason that they sound adamant about their decision to initiate an about-face, is to ward off their own internal conflict.  They are, in essence, pushing the conflict outside of their head. 

You see, the anxiety that comes with change is temporarily diminished when we allow ourselves to believe that something is a "bad decision."  At that point, it really doesn't matter what reasons we come up with to justify our decision to remain stuck and resist change; Our objective is to not have to consider both sides of the argument.  

So, what does the above scenario cause you--the recruiter, salesperson, or manager--to do?  

If we don't know any better, it causes us to take up the other side of the argument, and begin to come up with numerous statements and explanations to counter their reasons.  This is the fatal error.  As you take on the other side of the argument, you leave the candidate free to bolster their side of the argument.  Game Over!  Once you've done this, you've lost all power and credibility.  You are no longer viewed as someone who is simply helping facilitate the best decision, rather, you've become in the eye of the candidate, someone who is in it for your own selfish reasons.  

So, what do you do instead?  

You must force the candidate to take the conflict back within their own head, rather than construct this duel.  How do you do this?  You must simply reiterate what you have observed in their behavior and speech that represents both sides of the argument.  For example:

"Two days ago, you said that you were very excited about going to licensing school, had enjoyed meeting our agents and manager, felt as if it fit you and who you are, and now you are saying it's not for you.... What happened between then and now?" 

Get them talking and owning their flip-flop...not to make a point, but to drive them back to the whole dilemma, which is their anxiety around change.  

If you catch yourself wanting the change more than they do, you will lose.  That NEVER works.  There must be a certain amount of indifference to the outcome...very warm and friendly indifference, but indifference.  The more indifferent you are to the outcome, the more bold you become in your observations and questions.  

So, here is a quick checklist to refer to when dealing with resistance: 

1. You can't want it more than they do. 
2. Force the conflict back into the their head.
3. Patiently make comments that force them to answer the question:  Where did the positive reasons disappear to? 
4. Exercise the power of warm, friendly, persistent, and hopeful indifference.  

---

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. 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.

Understanding Resistance

In the last edition, I described the importance of understanding the psychological principle of self-activation, and how to take advantage of a candidate's first step toward joining your company. 

In closing, I described what is a natural reaction for most people to their initial steps toward any change...that reaction being anxiety and a depressed mood.  That's right, it is absolutely natural for most candidates to demonstrate enthusiasm and excitement when they first consider a new opportunity.  But don't count on this newfound excitement lasting very long.  You see, excitement and fear are opposite sides of the same coin -- A candidate usually oscillates back and forth between these two emotions before, hopefully, settling somewhere in between and reaching a rational decision. 

If you have been discouraged in your recruiting efforts by your candidates' inability to maintain enthusiasm throughout the recruitment process, you need to understand that your candidate is likely experiencing something psychologist refer to as the defense triad.  If you don't understand this triad and deal with it as it arises, you might as well jump into the nearest sumo wrestling ring.  You will lose the fight.  

The Defense goes like this:  Self-Activation, leads to Anxiety, which leads to Defense.  

What this means is that once a person begins to experience anxiety, they will come up with a multitude of reasons why they can no longer consider moving in the direction they were just previously excited about.  And not only that, they will not budge an inch! 

Now, you'd think that it would be difficult to differentiate between a defense that is rational...and defense that isn't.  Take for instance, a candidate who says on Wednesday, "I am thrilled with the possibility of finding out more and seeing if this may be in my future."  And then on Friday says, "NO.. I'm really not interested now," or "I just spoke to my spouse who says this isn't a good plan."  These are most likely defenses.  How do I know?  Because the initial interaction was one of reciprocal discussion, but now they don't want any feedback.  Whenever someone does this kind of about-face, and you are suddenly treated like a threat, the person is truly acting out of a defense against their own first step of self-activation.  

You see, the only time that we are all very comfortable with first steps and change is when we are young.  Fortunately for most of us, we don't mind falling a few times before learning to stand on our own, or falling harder a few times before walking or running on our own.  But, as people get older, we resist change and become more attached to security and familiarity, even if we are bored with the familiar.  Research shows that if we get too bored, we don't grow and can't enjoy what we do.  We must continually challenge ourselves to remain vital. 

Unfortunately, educating the candidate about the above won't help.  Instead, you must understand how to deal with resistance when you see it.  In the next edition, I'll give you some insight on how to best do this in a way that leaves you more relaxed than you can imagine.

---

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. 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 Self-Activation

If you've ever attended any of our presentations, you've heard both Ben and I refer to Self-Activation, a concept that is the foundation on which much of our recruiting platform is built. 

What is Self Activation you ask?

Allow me to begin by explaining what it is not.  If someone were to call you right this minute, and ask if you'd like to purchase one of their new or used cars, what would you say?  My hunch is that you would quickly interrupt their sales pitch and tell them to never call again.  Why is this?  There are several reasons, but the primary issue is that you have done nothing to demonstrate any interest whatsoever.  This is the coldest of cold calls.  They are chasing you, much like a predator chases its prey -- the target (you in this case) has never taken step one towards demonstrating any interest in the product. 

On the other hand, let's say you drive on to a local car lot, and someone approaches you... Are you offended?  I hope not.  Of course you might say something like, "Allow me to look around a bit" and then later ask him/her questions.  But their approaching you is completely reasonable and expected because you're taking the first step.  The first step is another way of understanding self-activation.  The act of you driving to the dealership to look at cars is one form of self-activation toward the ultimate goal, purchasing a car.  If "self-activation" were on one side of a continuum, the other side would be disinterest, and in the middle would be apathy.  

If you've ever tried to teach a child to swim... oh, how important is it to let that first step be theirs!  Right?  Because if you force the issue, they will resist it for months to come.  How to establish the perfect conditions to get them to take that first step, is the primary problem to solve.  

In whatever you do, whether it be sales, recruiting, or management...begin to consider how to watch for, and even actively elicit from others, forms of self-activation.  Without the other party self-activating, you are stuck in the very weak position of wanting something more than they do.  That never works. 

So, the question that we continually ask ourselves in order to assist you in attaining more candidates and to build software systems to track those candidates is, "How do we elicit a self-activation from people who have never thought about working in real estate before?"  Without going into great detail, we attempt to understand the pain that ordinary people feel, and use this knowledge to appeal to that pain in a way that resonates with reality. 

Once the candidate takes the CCI and expresses interest in being contacted, they have activated their "self" to do  something unusual and new, thereby leaving the door open for you to pursue them for an interview.  Voila!  No cold call.  

In your work, how can you spend more of your time talking to people who have already taken steps toward you without wasting time pursuing people who are running the other way?

1. Identify the pain of your target audience
2. Identify the answer for that pain
3. Identify ways that you might already have access to that target audience (people you could truly help)  
4. Identify easy steps that you can take with them with little commitment in each step
5. Have a solution that addresses their pain

You might be saying, "...but many of these warm leads seem to resist the very thing that they have shown interest in."

That is absolutely normal and should be anticipated.  In the next edition, I'll share with you how to deal with the defense that usually follows self-activation.

---

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. 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.