Career Insight

Never in my 15 years in recruitment have I ever seen more qualified people looking for work. By qualified, I refer to people who would ordinarily not find themselves unemployed in a traditional marketplace. The other variable is the length of time they find themselves in the market. Good people find jobs, and find them quickly. This has been the expectation for years, but not the case anymore. The market isn’t just candidate heavy, but it’s ‘top-tier’ candidate heavy, and this worries me. The caliber of talent that I am witnessing enter the market is mind-boggling and lends itself to deeper reasoning and investigation. The market has changed drastically over the past 5 years. We’ve lived through a global health pandemic that changed the landscape of how we perform our jobs. We learned quickly that we were capable of being just as productive working outside of the office – the ingenuity of the human race was in full display. This opened up an entirely new marketplace for organizations. They could now explore talent outside their geographic limitations, not to takeaway from the heightened level of safety we all felt as a result of working from the comfort of our homes. Working from home was not only more convenient, but it quickly became the norm, and some have never looked back. With everything in business, there’s always a trade-off. Companies were granted access to a wider and more diverse talent pool, but at what cost, and how has that impacted the future of work, employment, unemployment, and the next generation of workers? Did decision makers over-extend on hiring out of excitement or fear? Did they over-forecast or underestimate the work from home phenomena? Were execs so ‘hire-happy’ that they failed to properly plan for the future? Let’s explore 2 reasons for the rise of unemployment amongst senior leaders. Cost Cutting Due To Redundancy The surge in hiring during covid resulted in widespread redundancy within the workplace. We are currently going through a workplace refresh, with leaders facing tremendous pressure to bring people back into the office. This is hinged on the belief that too much influence has been given to workers. After all, employees now demand/expect to work remote or on a schedule that fits their needs. Many roles were also created during covid to provide the necessary leadership and technical coverage during a moment of great unpredictability – roles that under normal circumstances would not have been necessary. A “swing for the fences because we don’t know if we’ll live to see tomorrow” mentality was now prevalent in the workplace, and this caused a period of irrational behaviour amongst leaders. Consequently, we have an over-populated workplace with no chemistry. This disconnect, coupled with the hires of those with similar skill sets & competencies, has forced decision makers to trim their workforce, starting naturally with the highest paid. Only the 1% have weathered the storm. AI/Technology Has Made Key People Expendable This is a sensitive subject because AI has become integral to how we work and do business. The influx of senior talent entering the market in search of a new career is deeply concerning, but what role has AI/technology played in this shift? Companies are opting to retain their technical gurus with the latest software under their belt over the detached C-Suite professional, primarily because employees are smarter, self-sufficient, and self-managed. Technology after all needs to be managed by someone, and it definitely won’t be by the Director or VP who has little to no contact at the ground-level. The approach is now to automate where & what you can, and trim what is (who is) left. If you’re a Senior Leader in today’s workforce, it’s imperative to remain closely tied to the technical aspects that govern the organization. The days of leading a technical team without understanding what they do or being able to do it yourself are over. We expected hybrid as a type of work, but what we didn’t expect was a movement towards a new hybrid style of leadership – leaders who can teach and also do – this is the 1%. Your leadership style is great (who doesn’t love servant leaders), but tell me the last time you wrote (or understood) a clean piece of code? What are you doing to remain relevant technically? I’m concerned, but optimistic. Good people always land on their feet, and wherever they land it’s for certain that they will replicate past success & cultivate high performers and future leaders. Let’s Sum This Up For anyone who is thinking about changing careers or switching to a new company during a period of great instability such as a recession or another pandemic, make the transition with caution and qualify the legitimacy and future of the position in question. Ask probing questions to better understand the vision the organization has for the role. That new Chief Of Something may sound great on the surface, but is it a role designed to address an immediate leak or a position they believe will be intricately woven into the fabric of the company for years to come. Try these: These questions are circumstantial, but listen for the answers. The more you hear, the more secure you should feel one way or another. Every role should have at minimum a 5-year outlook, a vision of relevancy that extends beyond the short-term. This is especially true for a position that is being created or has not existed beyond the 5-year mark. For more content like this, please follow me here on LinkedIn.

So, why do you put so much emphasis on people? I wrote a blog post 2 years ago, entitled: The Great Departure – A Recruiter’s Guide To Retaining Your Best Talent (read it here – https://talentsearchpartnersinc.com/the-great-departure-a-recruiters-guide-to-retaining-your-best-talent/) That post did very well, and the feedback supported that… In it, I discussed the 6 areas where leadership has failed, and it resonated with readers… One of the benefits of serving under a poor leader is you get to eye witness everything they are doing wrong, which allows you to not repeat those mistakes… It pained me to watch good people leave that office… Rather than accept the blame for the revolving door that existed, my then boss blamed those who left, highlighting their weaknesses, rather than taking ownership… I did what I could to save what was a sinking ship, but the damage was irreparable, and he was delusional… So, why do you care so much about people and good leadership? Because, no matter how much you’ve made financially or how large your office is, how you treat people will ultimately determine your success & longevity… He spent money on “things” to keep the office running, but he treated people like replaceable resources, and not assets… The office eventually closed. He said very little, but it was the way he treated us that scarred the most… It would’ve been an easier pill to swallow if he had yelled, heaved chairs across the office, put holes in the walls, or kicked the water cooler. But it was his silence that pierced. It made you feel like you didn’t exist. Almost like you were being done a favour… It felt like he kept a life vest in his office, and everyone else was vulnerable… I vowed to never make another human feel like that; not on my watch… He ended up alone, and that came as no surprise. Sad, but not surprising. The best amongst us know how to pull the best out of people. They leverage technology, resources, business intelligence, etc., but they never lose sight of the human factor… The way you make people feel can either build up or tear down. My role in recruitment has afforded me the privilege of working with some great people. I am directly tied to an organization’s growth by aligning them with talent, and with that comes great responsibility… As such, I will not misrepresent an opportunity to a candidate… The people who were hired to work for my former manager were deceived, quickly realizing that the man they interviewed with, was not the same man they encountered 6 months into the role. The honeymoon phase was short-lived, and the list of casualties kept growing. The tipping point for me was his inability to see his own errors. In that state, he was incapable of changing, and my days in that office were numbered after that conversation… Leadership is a responsibility. It’s not a right, and it’s nothing to boast about… If you are leading a team of 1 or 30, it’s a responsibility, and how you make people feel will monetize every time… You won’t need to convince them to go the extra mile. They will go willingly because they know that you will secure their life-vest before you tend to your own… I know they say that you must first put the oxygen mask on yourself during an aviation emergency, but real leaders put others first… This is your competitive advantage.

As a newly hired business leader within an organization, the first 6 to 18 months should be a learning period. You should be spending the majority of your time getting to learn the company, your team, the culture, & your customers. Avoid making any major decisions during this time until you’ve had a chance to survey the landscape of this organization – this requires patience. As a leader, you’ve become a steward of the organization’s assets, primarily its people. Unless you were hired with a specific mandate with an aggressive timeline to achieve a set of goals, the agenda should be to understand the business and forge alliances within your team. This does not happen on your first day. For any leader who is going through the interview process, one of your primary questions to the CEO or President of a company should be: What is your vision for this position within the first year? If that goal is cost-cutting centric for instance, then I’d question that. There’s a lot that you don’t know about the company and won’t know until the completion of your first year, in some cases longer. You may discover through your own exploration that there are issues that require a different approach that will ultimately lead to the same end goal. One of my most tragic placements came with a company that I had served for several years. I built a great relationship with one of their key executives and became a trusted partner for him in the development of his engineering team. Through that relationship, I was able to break into other areas of the business, culminating in a conversation with the CEO to help him find a new VP of Operations. I sifted the marketplace to find someone who had served in a similar capacity in his previous role. He was young, energetic, communicated well, had great references, and he genuinely hit it off with the team. He was hired! Shortly thereafter however, things took a weird turn… Hidden within his briefcase was a sledgehammer (not a literal one) and he wasn’t timid about using it. He made his primary agenda to find and expose problems, rather than formulating solutions. He alienated members of the leadership team, rather than leaning on their expertise and experience to understand the business and its direction. Granted, there were issues within the company, but as a new leader and someone who had been hired to drive new processes and procedures, his first course of action should’ve been to get to know the people by watching what they do and learning how they do it. Along that growth path, some people will be weeded out, but that should be handled delicately, not with a shotgun as one of the team members shared. He was ultimately fired by the CEO, and his departure came as a sigh relief to those within the organization. Lessons for newly hired leaders…

My walk last night did little to solve my value conundrum. The dog feces left along my path certainly didn’t help the situation… I’m struggling with value… Every recruiter pitches their value the same… “a huge database of resumes” “years recruiting in your industry” “a team of recruiters who will be dedicated to your roles” “flexible fees” …a great list of value cliches, but this is not real value because it doesn’t address the needs of the end user… Recruiters are in over-supply and the demand for talent is at an all time high. There is a recruiter on every street corner and the trail of scarred executives runs deep… I’ve encountered executives within companies who would rather struggle to fill positions through their own efforts than work with “another recruiter.” Hard to blame them… 3-months, 6-months, 9-months, a year goes by, and the position still hasn’t been filled… If recruiters are in over-abundance with demand for talent running at the same pace, then why haven’t these two variables been able to marry each other at this equilibrium point… If there are so many of us and an equal number of roles to be filled, then why are executives reluctant to sign on that dotted line to engage that recruiter? Why would they rather deal with the lost revenue and frustration of having positions go unfilled for quarters… I believe the issue lies in quality, not supply… Recruiters for years have over-promised and under-delivered. They talk a big game but fail to show up when it counts. This has happened so many times over the years that companies have caught on and would rather forgo the trauma of another failed attempt to work with a recruiter… The missing link in this relationship has nothing to do with statistics and experience. It has everything to do with doing what you said you would do… Executives are tired of being taken on a roller coaster ride. For most, the thrill no longer exists, and they are exiting the ride in droves… Most executives in my opinion could live with the result of a failed attempt to fill their position if recruiters demonstrated traits of resilience and integrity… We don’t need another recruitment agency. These days anyone with Wi-Fi and a cell phone plan can be a recruiter… What we need are professionals who understand the importance of what they do and how they can drive an economy forward. The key is to serve, not extract, with the end goal of facilitating lasting partnerships. This remains the greatest stumbling block within the recruitment process… I don’t mind paying for a service (even overpaying) if I believe there will be a true exchange of value & a commitment to quality. The reason why there is so much negotiation is because of a misunderstanding of how both sides benefit in this equation.