d before. Those in the sphere have used precisely those methods to their own benefit and literally said, "We'll do whatever [the heck] we want to do." They take what is good for their own profit and disparage and defame the originator while claiming ownership and creation of the thing of interest. And except for one instance where I watched the wheels of destruction go into motion, all is done behind closed doors -- no transparency and all the rest.
The difference between the two is simply not there. As you say, SHRM got disgusted with the whole thing and just stepped aside. Perhaps that's what needs to happen here. With no support, the ones who cavalierly go about doing whatever they want will have to rethink their methodology and hopefully come up with something that is more acceptable.
a very powerful thing, as is represented daily in news reports of continued global unrest due to world views dominated by religion, consumption, greed, hope and charity. The approach to any particular problem is dictated mostly by our assumptions which are based on our point of view (even after we've consulted other points of view).
In the case of gen Y'ers, their point of view is from a comfortable chair in front of any number of devices that will deliver their requests without delay. Their egos are formed by their family and peers who continually tell them how great they are.
I for one cannot wait to see what comes out of this turmoil in the employment arena for gen Y'ers. As one who repeatedly bends the universe to my will so to speak, I have no doubt the these gen Y'ers will bend the universe to fit their world view of a sense of entitlement that has never been seen before. With millions of twenty-somethings silently and audibly chanting "it's not fair", big change is close at hand.
I wish them all the best and cannot wait to see what they come up with!…
than recruiters, they don't always get candidates looking for a specific job, and precisely because they work with college students, the need to make it slick is less important than the need to be doing something.
This was not a large project. Several of my social media friends are ribbing me because I didn't make it look like a professional marketing site. But that works in Rehabcare's favor. This works because it's authentic, cheap, and doesn't require outside maintenance. If they had to drop 2 grand a month on me to make it work, they probably would have abandoned it. Instead, we went simple, and now it's in their blood.
I'll be on the lookout for your article - I think what the whole industry needs is concrete examples of what works, and a lot less hype. The simple fact that you're trying, consider six months to not be that long, and are building social media into your system suggests you'll be successful.
What I've noticed is that companies that are successful have been very quiet about it. Which makes sense, but is funny considering they're being quiet about something so open.…
Added by Jim Durbin at 4:13pm on February 11, 2009
t matter if you have it.
The feds already have a great deal of information that they can and do use for various purposes some against the constitution and some to uphold it. As far as I’m concerned, the info the IRS has is more then enough to create 1984 “Ministry of Justice”.
Google may index only 1%, but that’s precisely because it’s indexed. The whole idea behind an index is to allow faster retrieval time; if Google actually stored all the data contained in the sites it indexed it would go out of business. Thus with a 1% index, Google leverages a vast amount of data. As the web becomes more interactive, Google will have access to more even information…
Eventually, “something” will have access to all information. Any network not tied to this entity will be a huge disadvantage to everyone else and will therefore be forced into the network or cease to be relevant( to exist). Even internal networks are accessible if properly hacked. It’s no science fiction, just wait…
Please check out my recruiting blog and join the discussion!
any. There is always an internal struggle between engineering, production, operations, and sales & marketing for limited capital to pursue their desired projects. How does management decide which projects to fund? They examine the potential returns in either increased sales or reduced costs. You either deliver one or the other.
Marketing managers have tracked the effectiveness of their campaigns for decades. Not a single commercial, but a tv campaign. Not a single billboard impression, but the results of thousands of impressions. They include special phone numbers, email addresses, promotion codes and a variety of other elements solely to track the effectiveness of their campaigns.
Why would social media efforts be any different? Should you devote your time to Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter or blogging? Which reaches your target audience most precisely? What happens when they read or receive your message? How do you convert your new and strengthened relationships into increased sales or reduced costs? What's your ROI?
Insisting that SM will produce results without any evidence won't convince a single CFO or CEO to fund your project. Showing them case studies of successful SM campaigns and demonstrating how you intend to pursue similar strategies to reach prospects, clients and industry influencers and track the effectiveness of your efforts will give you the ammo necessary to justify your proposal. Ignore the necessity for ROI at your peril.…
ly I dispel those prejudices the end result is that Corporate Recruiters get shuffled around and I have to start all over again. In principle that's not in itself a big problem because I naturally behave ethically, openly, and respectfully with all clients - it's not a facade I have to keep up, but while that new Corporate Recruiter contact "gets comfortable with me" they get paid either way every two weeks.
In that same time I'm trying to earn a living at what feels like the whim of a Corporate Recruiter. Human Resources Professionals, Hiring Managers, and Corporate Recruiters all hold power positions in their respective relationships with TPRs but all wield that power differently.
In your excellent post you enumerate the perceived failings of the Agency Recruiters you encounter but, perhaps unwittingly, justify their behavior in the broader market almost point-by-point. Rather than decrying TPRs' behaviors you are declaring them unnecessary because you're not like other Corporate Recruiters.
With that in mind you're the client that I dream about but almost never encounter. And it's precisely because I never get to work with people like you, but believe I could be a person like you, that I often daydream about a transition out of Agency.