Studying for and Passing the SPHR

I’m excited to say that I recently took and passed my SPHR certification exam.  This piece is all about the SPHR – what I think about the certification, why I took it, and how I prepared to pass.

For many individuals and organizations, the jury is still out on the value of HR certification.  I have now taken and passed both the PHR and SPHR certification exam.  Here are some of my takeaways and opinions after reaching this achievement.

Why I Got Certified:  During my 2012 performance appraisal at work, I needed to set some professional development goals and outline a plan.  Sitting for the SPHR seemed like a natural next step, and something I thought I could achieve.  So, I set my goal for taking the exam during the winter testing window at the end of 2013.  

Value of Certification:  I’ll be honest – I was frustrated studying for the SPHR.  Why you ask (other than studying is not my favorite night and weekend activity)?  I struggled to see how all the effort I put into studying was going to actually make me better at my job (or future roles).  Most of the content was repetitive from the courses I took while receiving my master’s degree at Purdue University.  There were areas I needed to brush up on, mostly because I don’t or haven’t used those topics extensively in my career.  When I was ensuring I was well versed in these areas, I became a little negative about the process since I knew this knowledge was not necessarily going to make me perform better in my current role.  HOWEVER (here it comes), I do think there is value in obtaining HR certification. 

 

I know this comes across as contradictory, but bear with me.  I’m taking a long-term and holistic stance on this one.  In the long run, HR certification is an added bonus for any skilled HR professional.  While some organizations are unsure of the value of certification, other organizations recognize the PHR or SPHR as a highly desirable resume point when hiring HR pros.  Additionally, there is a whole slew of research on the topic that suggests obtaining HR certification can be fuel for promotions, a door opener to the executive suite, and that it provides HR professionals with greater career satisfaction.  Check out this report on the topic by PayScale:  Sugarcoating or Career Sweetener?

Preparing for the PHR/SPHR:  I used a similar method to prepare for both exams.  Therefore, this sentence is a disclaimer to let you know I’ve not tested all of the methods I mention in this post.  My preferred method of preparation is self-study.  For both exams, I went to Amazon.com and purchased the highest rated study book for each exam.  Both times, I spent about $35-$40 on the prep book.  Both times, I also purchased one of the timed web-based practice tests available on HRCI’s website ($45).  I made sure that the books I bought through Amazon included practice questions – and they actually included a web-based option as well to access additional practice questions and a practice exam.  Simulating the test-taking experience is helpful for me.  Why did I choose this method?  Two reasons – I have the self-discipline to study on my own, and I didn't want to spend a lot of money!  Between the book and HRCI practice exam, my preparation set me back about $85.  Here is the book I used for my SPHR preparation:  PHR / SPHR: Professional in Human Resources Certification Study Guide.  Most other options are far pricier, which I’ll get into next.

The SHRM Learning System is a favorite among the professional for preparing for certification.  I know many HR pros that have used the SHRM Learning System, and honestly I don’t know of anyone who has failed using this preparation method.  In fact, I just recently purchased it for members on my HR team to use to take the PHR in the spring testing window of 2014.  I can do an update to this post after I see this the product in action.  Overall, I think the SHRM Learning system provides a very comprehensive way to prepare, including online features and several opportunities for web-based practice.  I would have used this study method myself, if it didn't cost $870 ($695 for SHRM members). 

The final method I've seen for preparation that appears to be effective is to take a preparation course taught by an instructor.  This method is particularly effective for individuals who lack self-discipline when it comes to studying (which there’s nothing wrong with).  For example, I have a terrible habit of slacking on my workout routine, but when I take a class, the accountability of actually going to class, and sitting with other individuals tends to get me more active, and works better for me than self-directed workout regimens.  Some people find this to be true for studying, and if that’s you, I recommend looking into a course led by an instructor.  These courses are offered through local colleges and universities, local SHRM chapters, or other various locations.  The downside, the typical cost I see for these courses in my area is about $1300 - $1700.  Wow – that’s expensive!

As a closing note, I would say that if you’re interested in obtaining HR certification, you should definitely go for it!  While it may not contribute directly to getting you promoted or landing that HR dream job, it definitely won’t kill your chances either.  Besides, putting those initials behind your name is sort of cool.

What are your thoughts on HR certification and preparing for the exams?

Product Review: Halogen Software's eAppraisal

Product Review:  Halogen Software’s eAppraisal

I want to start a new type of post on Catapult HR – product reviews!  There are so many products sold to the HR function.  When selecting an HR product, it can be daunting to know what to choose from background screening services, applicant tracking systems, HRIS systems, talent management software, reference checking services and more.  I've had the fortunate experience to use several HR products in my career, and want to share what I've learned.

To start off the product review posts, I want to start on a positive note, and will be reviewing Halogen Software’s eAppraisal product.  In general, I would recommend this software to both small and large firms looking for robust appraisal software. 

Background on Halogen Software:  I’m unsure when Halogen was founded, but I believe they have been in business for more than a decade.  Halogen is a full talent management suite of products built from the ground up to work seamlessly together.  Halogen is not an HRIS system, and does not include payroll, time keeping or general HR information modules.  However, their offerings include just about everything else.  They are headquartered in Ontario Canada.  The available modules include:

• eAppraisal
• e360 Multi-rater
• eCompensation
• eLearning Manager
• eSuccession
• Job Description Builder
• eRecruitment

My interactions with products other than eAppraisal is fairly limited, but I do belong to the Halogen User Group on LinkedIn, and from the conversations I've seen, the feedback seems to be overwhelmingly positive for all of the modules, with the exception of eRecruitment.  eRecruitment is the newest module, and from my understanding, there is still some work to be done for it to be on par with other leading ATS offerings.

Perks:  One of the perks of eAppraisal is that it can be used for processes other than annual appraisals.  It’s actually a pretty powerful form builder and administrator.  I've actually used eAppraisal for a few other HR processes including onboarding and request forms.  Another perk of using Halogen in general is the efficiencies gained by having your talent management software full integrated.  The ability to seamlessly tie your appraisal process, compensation process, succession process, learning and development process, and hiring processes together gives you full insight into your talent management.  You can’t overlook the benefit of truly being able to calculate HR metrics such as your quality of hire, learning and training effectiveness on performance (ROI), or if your succession plan is fully supported by your training, performance and other talent management initiatives.  Halogen is one of the few pieces of technology that provides such a well-rounded and robust talent management offering.

Implementation:  I implemented Halogen on a fairly tight timeline – about 4 weeks.  Our implementation specialist was very helpful in ensuring the project adhered to our tight deadlines.  Configuration and customization was the most time consuming part of the implementation.  It was the reason we selected Halogen, but ultimately took almost half of the implementation schedule to ensure our appraisal forms and process looked exactly the way we wanted them to be designed.  Part of implementation was having a Halogen trainer come on-sight to train our HR staff on the system.  The training took the majority of one full work day, but was very comprehensive.  The trainer was not an employee of Halogen, but rather a retired HR professional who had used the product for many years, and not trained on it part-time.  Our trainer made himself available after the training for questions.  I utilized our trainer for weeks after the training, and he had a lot of great “insider” tips since he had been a user and customer of Halogen previously.

Customer Service:  Halogen has multiple methods to receive customer service, three of which I utilize.  First, they have a support website.  From the website you can place a ticket for technical support.  They respond to tickets you submit via the website very quickly.  I usually have a response within about 20 minutes, with the longest I've waited being about 2 hours.  They try to fix your issues quickly as well – only once have I had a ticket open more than 24 hours.  They also have a feature on their support website called the “Knowledge Base”.  This allows you to type in a question, and receive an instant, pre-determined answer.  This is a great place to go if you forget how to perform a particular function, or if you have a keyword you can use to search for your question, such as “Third Party Feedback” or “e-signature”.  True technical problems or questions are better handled by placing a ticket.  Lastly, you are assigned an account manager at Halogen.  My account manager rarely answers questions herself, but does a good job of pointing me in the right direction, whether it’s to tech support, or to other clients who I can talk to about best practices.

Halogen User Group (HUG):  Halogen has a group on LinkedIn specifically for Halogen users.  It’s an open forum where you can ask questions of other Halogen users, explain your situation to see if other companies had similar questions or situations, or peruse to find ideas for your own processes.  They also hold HUG meetings in larger cities each year for users of the system to come together and learn from one another.  The HUG meetings are usually a daylong event, where they setup discussions around topics the participants voted on prior to the meeting.  I actually found more learning value from my HUG meeting in 2013 than I did the annual national SHRM conference.  I also gained a network of Halogen users in my region that I can connect with if I have questions or want to learn further best practices from.

Configuration and Customization:  Halogen is a highly configurable software product.  It seems like there are endless options to choose from to make your forms look the way you want and to make your process run the way you want.  For configuration, I give Halogen two thumbs up.  With so many options, I’m sure all of their client’s forms and processes look entirely different.  When it comes to customization in Halogen, it’s slightly more challenging, but it can be done.  They typically charge a fee if you require extensive customization beyond the standard eAppraisal offering.  I've not been through the process, so I cannot attest to the price or time frame that such customization requires.  The good news is that the product comes with so many options already, that I think most organization can make their appraisal process align with the software’s capabilities, and vice versa.  The other good news is that your assigned Account Manager will take requests you have to make updates or changes to the software, and submit them to the technology team.  Not all requests make it onto every release (which happy 1-2 times per year), but it’s exciting when you see your requests as part of a future update.

Compatibility with other Software:  Halogen offers an “HRIS Connect” product which helps streamline the data transfer between your HR system and Halogen.  To manually update Halogen isn't the worst thing in the world, but it’s slightly cumbersome as might be expected.  I recommend obtaining the “HRIS Connect” product.  The annual fee is pretty minimal, and if you have a mid to large sized organization, it definitely makes sense.

Pitfalls:  So, what are the pitfalls?  While my review is generally a glowing one of the eAppraisal product, there are a few pitfalls, as with any software.

1. With so many options for configuration, you have to be incredibly detail oriented when setting up a form or process.  It’s easy to overlook one box to check, which can substantially throw off part of your form or process.  As someone who has experienced this, and because there are so many details to configure, I cannot emphasize the importance of testing, testing and retesting.  And when you’re done testing, test again!
2. Software updates typically happen once per year, maybe twice.  Each update is fairly significant since they occur infrequently, but when you put in a request, it’s a bit of a bummer when you must wait up to a year to see if it will be implemented.
3. I receive LinkedIn and email updates from Halogen.  Sometimes I will ask my Account Manager about something I see in my Halogen updates, and she’s not been briefed on the topic yet.  For example, I saw a press release that Halogen would be adding a module that facilitates the Myers Briggs type indicator personality assessment.  I was interested in it, but my Account Manager did not know the press release had gone out and had zero information on the new product or when information would become available.

Overall, I've been very satisfied with Halogen’s eAppraisal product, but more importantly, the managers I work with and associates I support find the software to be easy to use and an asset in managing performance.

I hope this is helpful to anyone considering appraisal or talent management software.  

Please let me know if you have questions about my experience with Halogen’s eAppraisal and if you have used the product, what your experiences have been.

If you like the product review posts, please let me know and I'll be sure to include them more often!

3 Lessons from the Millennial Generational Debate

Happy New Year!  I've been MIA recently on the Catapult HR blog, but one of my goals for 2014 is to post on a regular basis.   To kick off 2014, I wanted to begin discussions around generational dynamics in the workforce.

I’ll admit, I enjoy reading about generational differences in the workforce.  Some people like reading about cars, others politics or beauty.  This is a nerd alert – I like to read about stuff like different generations in the workforce.

 

I hear about generational differences regularly in discussions with my managers and various organizational leaders.  And guess what?  Millennials (or Gen Y) have a generally terrible reputation.  Anyone who has ever read an article on the topic is not surprised.  Now, I need to preface all of my comments with the fact that I am a millennial - I was born in the 1980’s.

 

I speak to business leaders all the time who are actually PART of Gen Y themselves, and have pretty negative things to say, especially as they regurgitate the characteristics that have come to define the generation such as narcissism, instant gratification, laziness, entitlement, job hoppers and even delusional.  Managers often talk about Gen Y as if they’re Millennial aged staff don’t know what they’re saying.  They also pretend like even though they are part of the generation, these stereotypes are not characteristic of them…they’re different…they’re “special.”  The problem is, that’s exactly part of the negative stereotype.  Everyone thinks they are a “special snowflake”.  My personal feeling on the matter is that there is some truth to the stereotypes, as there is to many stereotypes, but generalizing a group of people born over a 25 year period (or any group of people for that matter) is dangerous and misleading.  But this post is less about my opinion on Gen Y, and more about what I've learned after some thought on the matter.  I don’t disagree that the direction millennials have taken some cultural norms is not a positive one.  So, if or when I have children, there are a few things I plan to teach them based on these heated millennial debates.

1. I plan to set expectations.  I plan to set these expectations based on what I've learned.  These include things like the importance of a college degree and hard work.  The expectation that education is important, but does not equate success, and the importance of giving.
2. Avoid student debt.  I took on student debt to go to graduate school, and while I’m grateful for my degree and the doors it helped to open, the debt associated with my degree took away some of my freedom and life options for the early part of my career. 
3. Get paid to do what you love.  Leading a happy life that you’re satisfied with at the end of it all is so important.  Start doing what you love, and then find a way to monetize it!  Too many people do this backwards – they get a paycheck, then wish it was from doing something they really loved.

Future generations will have their own stereotypes, and challenges to overcome.  However, it’s important for everyone to reflect and pull upon the wisdom of current and previous generations.  

What lessons have you learned from the millennial generation debates?

The Only 4 Jobs in the Entire World

I recently read a LinkedIn post by Lou Adler, who is a seasoned recruiting and talent expert.  His post struck a chord with me, because I appreciate when someone has the ability to break something incredibly complex into something very simple.  It seems to make everything so clear.  His post was focused on job descriptions, and he goes on to describe that if you really think about work, no matter the industry or function, it can be broken simply into 4 jobs.  While people can incorporate pieces or dabble in two, three or all four of the categories of work, a vast majority of people generally have a natural affinity toward one or maybe two jobs.  That is to say, that in one of the jobs, you will not only be successful, but likely thrive.  Likewise, recruiters and hiring managers need to ensure the right mix between which skills the position requires, and the candidate that fills the role.  It’s really interesting way to think about work and talent.  I hope you enjoy this article and find it as fascinating as I did.

Here is Lou Adler’s article (all remaining content is non-original):

Everything starts with an idea. This is the first of the four jobs – the Thinkers. Builders convert these ideas into reality. This is the second job. Improvers make this reality better. This is the third job. Producers do the work over and over again, delivering quality goods and services to the company’s customers in a repeatable manner. This is the fourth job. And then the process begins again with new ideas and new ways of doing business being developed as the old ones become stale.

As a company grows and reaches maturity, more of the work gets done by the Producers and Improvers. However, without a culture of consistent improvement, the Producers soon take over and implementing change becomes slower and slower until it stops. Long before this the Thinkers and Builders have left for some new venture. Improvers soon follow to join their former co-workers and hire new Producers to add some order to the newly created chaos. The old Producers who aren’t continually evolving, learning new skills and processes, are left behind to fend for themselves. Maintaining balance across all four work types is a constant, but a necessary struggle for a company to continue to grow, adapt, and survive.

Every job has a mix of all four work types dependent on the actual work involved, the scope and scale of the role, and the company’s growth rate. To ensure balance and flexibility, all of these four work types should be taken into account when preparing any new performance-based job description. 

Here’s how:

Producers: these people execute or maintain a repeatable process. This can range from simple things like working on an inbound help desk and handling some transactional process like basic sales, to more complex, like auditing the performance of a big system, writing code, or producing the monthly financial reports. Producers typically require training or advanced skills to be in a position to execute the process. To determine the appropriate Producer performance objectives, ask the hiring manager to define how any required skill is used on the job and how its success would be measured, e.g., “contact 15 new customers per week and have five agree to an onsite demonstration.“ This is a lot better than saying “the person must have 3-5 years of sales experience selling to sophisticated buyers of electro-mechanical control valves.”

Improvers: these people upgrade, change or make a repeatable process better. Managers are generally required to continually monitor and improve a process under their responsibility. Building, training and developing the team to implement a process is part of an Improver’s role. Improvers can be individual contributors or managers of teams and projects, the key is the focus on improving an existing system, business or process. A performance objective for an Improver could be “conduct a comprehensive process review of the wafer fab process to determine what it would take to improve end-to-end yield by 10%.”

Builders: these people take an idea from scratch and convert it into something tangible. This could be creating a new business, designing a complex new product, closing a big deal, or developing a new process. Entrepreneurs, inventors, turn-around executives, deal-makers, and project managers are typical jobs that emphasize the Builder component. Ask the hiring manager what big changes, new developments, big problems or major projects the person in the new job would need to address to determine the Builder component. An example might be, “lead the implementation of the new SAP supply change system over every business unit including international.” This is a lot better than saying “must have five years international logistics background and strong expertise with SAP."

Thinkers: these people are the visionaries, strategists, intellects, and creators of the world, and every big idea starts with them. Their work covers new products, new business ideas, and different ways of doing everyday things. Ask hiring managers where the job requires thinking out-of-the-box or major problems to solve to develop the Thinker performance objectives. “Develop a totally new approach for reducing water usage by 50%,” is a lot better than saying “Must have 5-10 years of environmental engineering background including 3-5 years of wastewater management with a knack for creative solutions."

Now for a little secret. Recognize that every person is comprised of a mix of each work type, with one or two dominant. Likewise for every job. Most require strengths in one or two of the work types. As you select people for new roles, it's important to get this blending right. This starts by understanding the full requirements of the position, the strengths and weaknesses of others on the team, and the primary objective of the department, group or company. In the rush to hire, it’s easy to lose sight of this bigger picture, emphasizing skills and experience over performance and fit. This is how Builders get hired instead of Improvers and Thinkers get hired when Producers are required. While there are only four work types, hiring the wrong one is often how the wrong work gets done.

2 Employee Types: Quitter or Marathon Runner

I recently read the book Quitter, by Jon Acuff.  As a book, I give it a B+.  While it lacks the “call to action” his brand is known for, it’s a quick read with some good metaphors that will help the points stick.  In the book, Jon describes his own journey to attaining his “dream job”.  Prior to landing his ultimate gig, Jon was a serial quitter (in terms of his career), quitting 8 jobs in 8 years.  He discusses the paradigm that makes this both a positive and a negative.  It’s negative, because job hopping is frowned upon in our society.  He viewed it as positive because he gained a variety of experiences in a relatively short time that gave him “practice” for his dream job (not always in the most direct sense). 

While I only mildly relate to Jon’s personal journey, there is some real insight that comes from his book.  Jon Acuff may be one of the first of his generation to so eloquently put into words why he was a job hopper.  For the record, I do not think that job hopping is as terrible as the stigma it has in society.  I think there are some benefits to hiring a job hopper, and the benefits can outweigh to pitfalls (see 5 Reasons to Hire Job Hoppers).  However, I’m a logical person and understand you cannot build your entire workforce out of job hoppers.  Your turnover would be highly costly and the benefits would no longer be worth it.  Plus, in every career, there is occasionally some benefit in sticking around.  The hard part, is actually doing it.

"I'll give it two weeks. If I don't bring in my first deal by then, I'll go do something else.”  This individual was trying to cram a three month ramp-up into an impossible 14-day window.

"I plan on retiring soon.  I want to earn as much money as I can in the next five years, and then retire." It seems like this person is setting themselves up for disappointment by sabotaging their career with a plan to scramble up the corporate ladder in an unrealistic way.

"If the sales don’t come in and the job doesn't deliver in the first month, I'll know it's time to start interviewing."  It is scary to think this is actually someone’s career “vision”.

Welcome to 2013 where today’s generation can be summed up with one word:  impatient.  To Jon Acuff’s point from his book “Quitter”, today’s younger workforce is smart, ambitious, and eager to quit whatever it is they're doing right now to get promoted or make more money somewhere else.  Hate your job after one week?  Quit and find something better.  The logic is that if you move at this speed, it’s still possible to fail, but it will come quickly so you can move on to the next thing which might be the opportunity that puts you on the exponential career trajectory.

Why are we this way?  Well, it’s difficult not to compare ourselves to our friends, who post to Facebook and Twitter all about their fabulous new jobs, promotions and exotic vacations.  The unrelenting persistence with which we get these messages makes us re-examine ourselves and how we define success.  Additionally, a career change is right at our fingertips (or is it?).  With the Internet and wide availability of free information, you can quit your job in the morning, learn to code throughout the afternoon and read Mark Zuckerburg’s Cinderella story all before you hit the sack. 

Dan Gulati wrote that quitting early and avoiding getting stuck in a rut can be smart. But continually shortening your time horizons for career achievement and shirking hard work in the search for immediate silver bullets is a dangerous practice, and may actually limit your long-term outcomes. 

Dan says, “If you're someone who constantly obsesses about becoming an overnight success, you're aiming at entirely the wrong target.”  A study in the music industry has shown that music artists whose careers build more gradually are more commercially successful and have longer career longevity than artists whose careers catapult to the top overnight.  Consider this in terms of more typical careers.  I like to think of this as the “building” phase.  All careers benefit from enduring a “building” or growth phase.  This is similar to the growth phase of a business.  It’s important for the long term strategy.

Think about this logically.  If you are constantly working on a 2 year horizon until you jump to your next opportunity, the competition is high.  However, if you lengthen your horizon to 5, 7, 10, or 15 years, you will be competing against a fraction of people.  It’s the old marathon runner vs. sprinter analogy.  There’s certainly something to be said for working hard and creating value that is enduring.  The milestones will be bigger, and the end result will likely be more meaningful.  I encourage you to carefully consider your career decisions and to be honest with yourself.  Employ the right mix of job hopping and slow career success that will help you reach your goals.

5 Reasons Why Career Burnout is a Crock

I, like most Americans, work very hard.  What this means is that I put in long hours and spread myself too thin sometimes.  I do this because it is part of my DNA to put in 110% into everything I begin.  My dad always set this example – when he wasn't inundated with work from his day job, he was managing his rental business or tackling a start-up project with a fellow techie who he respected.  I saw him as always busy, but happy and successful.

In my life pursuit of happiness and success, I also work hard.  I can outwork a majority of people on their most caffeinated day.  When I let the occasional person in on my secret about how much I actually do, they usually say, “Be careful, you are going to burn out.”  Now let me clarify – occasionally I enjoy some relaxation.  However, I’ll be honest – I often sit down to watch a movie and relax, and feel the need to break out my laptop within the first 10 minutes because it kills me that I may waste two perfect hours that could lead to productivity.  I’m an expert at multi-tasking, and this scenario is still more relaxing than working in an office.  I realize this is a choice that I make, and I’m okay with that.

But career burnout?  I don’t buy it.  I do not believe that one day after working hard for several years, I am just going to be so exhausted and disinterested that I can no longer trudge on.  I think career burnout is something different and something deeper.  I think burnout happens when people:

1. get fed up
2. begin to harbor resentment
3. feel they've experienced injustice in the workplace
4. are owed something
5. disagree with the business in some fashion

The point at which many people make a change in their life is when they get fed up.  When they say, “ I've had it!” they are able to move on to the next thing.  Resentment has the same effect on people.  It’s a feeling most people work hard to disassociate themselves with.  When this creeps into a person’s career, it can manifest many emotions, but often results in one feeling deflated which in turn is misinterpreted as “burnout”. 

Resentment usually happens due to reasons three through five.  Perceived injustices occur when someone is passed over for a promotion, not given due recognition, don’t feel they’re opinions or advice is heeded or for any other vast array of situations.  When we feel we are entitled to something we are not receiving, we also begin to feel resentment.  After 10 years on the job, one might feel they are entitled to be bumped to the next pay grade.  When that doesn't happen, what’s the result?  You guessed it, resentment.  Resentment also occurs when we disagree with our employer.  Whether this is how a project or even a department is structured, or the businesses an organization chooses to participate in, or even leadership practices.  All these things (and more) can be shaped by personal and fundamental beliefs.  When we are in disagreement with something we consider to be part of belief system, it can harbor resentment, especially when someone feels they are contributing to something with which they disagree.  When this happens in the workplace, particularly if a major organizational change occurred in recent memory, you may soon be hearing the words “burnout” from some of your staff.

Working hard?  Working hard about something you have so much passion about that you choose to spend your couch and movie watching time contributing to it?  Burnout is a result of lack of passion and motivation, not too much of it.

Hire Character, Teach Skill.

In today’s job market, with so many available workers for hire, job seekers have probably noticed a phenomena occur that didn't exist 5-10 years ago.  Job descriptions for openings are very SPECIFIC.  When companies have an opening, they want the perfect incumbent.  Heck, the economy still stinks, so money is tight and unemployment is still around 9%.  Why shouldn't expectations be high?

I’m guilty of this myself.  I used to look for niche tech talent at an Internet company in the Midwest.  I was pretty good at finding needles in haystacks.  Getting them to relocate to Indiana proved to the greatest challenge.  Common requirements would be:

• Bachelor’s degree in computer science or related field
• 4-7 years experience in a high traffic consumer facing web environment
• 4+ years experience in iOS development
• 2+ years building an eCommerce product for a high traffic website
• Experience in an agile web development environment

At first glance, not so bad.  Each bullet by itself seems reasonable.  You may have even seen some of these requirements if you've ever come across a job description for a web developer.  However, experience in a high traffic consumer facing web environment knocks out 99% of the population immediately, unless you are recruiting in the San Francisco Bay area.  Further, 4+ years of experience developing iphone apps is nearly impossible since the iphone only went to market in 2007.  Apps then took a year or two to catch fire.  eCommerce used to consist of making retail or brick and mortar business translate to the Internet.  Now, businesses are built for eCommerce  and while it’s not a new function, it takes a level of ingenuity and entrepreneurship that is not rampant among the job seeking population.  Agile methods of working are catching on.  Many candidates may not have experience with it, but are usually familiar with it.

Technical positions are not unique to this phenomenon.  You’ll see it in all areas of business if you browse some career websites.  Don’t mistake me, pedigree is important, but a perfect background does not equal a perfect hire.  Culture fit is key.  By the time I found someone who met every qualification of the position, we had to pray they were also a cultural fit, because they were our only option.  Even if they weren't a cultural fit, we probably were going to hire them anyway, because it’s improbable that anyone else exists who will meet the impossible and unreasonable qualifications we've tied our hands with.  More organizations are realizing this and incorporating a culture fit portion into their hiring process.  I argue this is the most important part of picking a new employee. 

I recently interviewed a candidate whose background and experience were ideal for a position.  He answered every question in a way I would hope to hear.  He had the skill set the organization needed.  However, I felt concerned about the way he might interact with the hiring manager, and other leaders of the organization.  I felt OK about him, but not fantastic, and while gut is certainly not everything, it’s enough to take a second look.  A second interview revealed that he was the type of person who got things done, but potentially at a cost.  He would bulldoze any people or obstacles in his way in order to achieve goals.  That is not how our organization functions.  We needed a “doer”, but this candidate went too far in the direction we thought we wanted, and I saw years of problems down the road.  We let the “perfect candidate” go and started over.

However, we ultimately found someone who worked well with our group and had a great background.  Our hire was lighter on process improvement than would be ideal, but he had the firm but fair managerial character we were seeking.  Process improvement can be taught.  We sacrificed filling the position quickly in order to make sure we brought the right mix of skill and personality into the organization, and we’re more than satisfied with that sacrifice.  On the surface (and by this, I mean by looking at resumes), it looks like I made a mistake.  It looks like I traded my Cadillac candidate for a Toyota.  But I’ll tell you what – our staff sure find the Toyota approachable and really respect the new addition to our organization.