Gloomy Report on Hiring Predictions

Recently, the US Chamber of Commerce published their latest quarterly small business outlook survey. Besides showing what we already know, the report offers a clear picture of the current national uncertainty about the future. 

Confidence is leaving Americans’ heart, in view of irresponsible actions from an Administration unfriendly to small businesses. A commanding 64% of respondents said they have no plans to hire in the next year, underscoring the stalled unemployment numbers and bleak economic forecast. 84% think our country is on the wrong track.


The report prepared for the US Chamber of Commerce by Harris Interactive on 1409 small business owners clearly indicates that a vast majority of them do not intend to hire more employees.

Economic uncertainty is the most important challenge facing small businesses, with 49% ranking it within the top three choices. Small business owners also feel challenged by the national debt (47%), the new health care law (39%), and the impact of regulations (36%).

Dealing with uncertainty

In times of uncertainty, the last thing you want as a business owner is to be surrounded by people who do NOT share your passion for profits, purposes and results. 

If the current economic challenges are making it hard for you to expand or even survive, do not make it more complicated by having to spend so much of your time to motivate, supervise, control, order or enforce compliance. Good people need guidance, not orders. Bad people do nothing with guidance and fake complying from fear of punishment. Good people need relationship, more than leadership. Bad people don't care about your leadership nor about your attention.

As Jim Collins, author of "Good to Great" states,
"The Good -to-Great leaders began the transformation by first getting the right people on the bus (and the wrong people off the bus) and then figured out where to drive it."  *   

* "Good to Great," New York, NY. HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

If you need to replace some employee or plan to hire more, ensure you attract the right caliber. Do not fall in the personality trap: put your attention on measuring/evaluating some "invisible" but vital soft skills such as loyalty, honesty, persistence and a true taste for performance. Surround yourself with fighters who  will engage battles with your competitors - not with you!



Check on this link to see the program of our upcoming No-Fail Hiring workshop, on September 8 2011.

Also, you should do the Hiring Success Potential Analysis before you start your next hiring mission. It is FREE and it might avoid you a lot of trouble. This powerful assessment will provide valuable information on what you need to do to attract the right people, the top players who do not fear challenges but love them!

Patrick Valtin, author of "No Fail Hiring"
President/CEO of M2-TEC USA, Inc.

Hard Skills Vs Soft Skills - Don't Fall in the Trap!

We all know that most employees get hired for their hard skills and get fired for the lack of soft ones. Personality is what I call in my book the "the Ace of Spades in the Hiring Game" for a good reason: soft skills most often make the difference between good applicants and the others, but you can't detect some critical soft skill by just asking an applicant to exhibit it. I have never met a candidate who was openly confessing a serious lack of soft skill but I have met thousands of them who pretended to possess many.

Why new employees fail

Contrary to popular belief, technical skills are not the first reason why new hires fail. Instead, interpersonal skills dominate the list, per a survey conducted on 5,247 hiring managers*:

• 26% of new hires fail because they can't accept feedback.
• 23% of new hires fail because they are unable to understand and
  manage emotions.
• 17% of new hires fail because they lack the necessary motivation
  to excel.
• 15% of new hires fail because they have the wrong temperament
  on the job.
• Only 11% fail because they lack the necessary technical skills.

During that study, 812 managers experienced significant more hiring success than their peers. What differentiated their interview approach was their emphasis on interpersonal and motivational issues. So make sure you focus your interviewing energy on applicants' coachability, emotional intelligence, motivation and temperament.

* Mark Murphy, "Why New Hires Fail," LeadershipIQ.com, n.d. Web August 15, 2010.

The most important soft skills

No matter what the job is, you should always check for the following
crucial soft skills:

- Honesty, 
- Willingness (eagerness to work hard and to do new things),
- creativity (ability to create or contribute to new ideas and to
  innovate, find solutions to problems),
- Manageability (ability to accept and implement orders or feedback
  from seniors and colleagues),
- Temperament (general attitude towards others, including team
  work and positive attitude),
- Being challenge-driven,
- Drive/self-motivation,
- Communication skills,
- Tolerance to pressure,
- Analytical capacities.

The No-Fail Hiring System precisely focuses on these invisible, hard-to-detect soft skills. Our confidential interview technique allows you to evaluate each of these personality-related skills with optimal objectivity - sometimes within the first 15 minutes.

Hiring soon? 

Make sure you can detect those "invisible" soft skills early in your selection. Buy the book "No-Fail Hiring" on Amazon on on my website. Also, if you plan to hire at least 3 new employees in the coming months, contact me to receive a FREE phone assessment of your current hiring process. I can help you minimize subjectivity in your evaluation of these vital soft skills as stated above. you can also call 877-831 2299.


Good luck in your hiring missions,

Patrick Valtin, Author of "No-Fail Hiring"
President CEO M2-TEC USA, Inc.

SEVEN TYPES OF DISCRIMINATION MANAGERS MUST AVOID, BY L D SLEDGE, J.D.

The following article was taken fully from HR Daily Advisor, June 23, 2011

Today's HR Daily Advisor Tip:

The 7 Types of Discrimination Your Managers and Supervisors Must Avoid

Topic: HR Policies and Procedures

In yesterday's Advisor, we found out what fairness means to a jury; today, discrimination, the dark side of fairness, plus an introduction to the famous "50/50": the compendium of 50 employment laws in 50 states.

Nondiscrimination is the legal side of fairness. Illegal discrimination comes in many forms, some obvious and overt, some subtle and hard to spot. Here's what to avoid:

1: Overt discrimination (I don't like Xs)

This is the out-in-the-open type of discrimination that most people think of when they hear the word. For example:

• I don't like to work with [women, men, old people, white people, black people, Asian people, disabled people].
• My customers don't like to deal with [women, men, old people, white people, black people, Asian people, disabled people].
• I don't like to hire [young women because they get pregnant and go on leave].
• I'm not promoting [anyone over 40—they don't have enough energy].

2: Stereotyping (Xs can't X)

Stereotyping usually takes the form of "Xs can't X."

• Women aren't strong enough.
• Men aren't compassionate enough.
• Xs aren't smart enough.

3: Patronizing (Xs shouldn't X)

This is a special form of stereotyping that seems well-intentioned, but is, in general, discriminatory. For example:

• Terry is active in the community; he/she won't want to relocate.
• Parents with young children shouldn't travel.
• Women shouldn't travel alone.
• Pregnant women can't [travel, lift, move, be stressed].

4: 'Avoidance' Discrimination

Some managers try to play a game of avoidance discrimination. They say, "If I can get in trouble talking to X, no problem. I'll never talk to X." Don't use this thinking; it is discriminatory and it won't fly.

5: Playing favorites (I always turn to my friends)

All managers have groups with whom they feel most comfortable. But if you always turn to that group when you need to hire, you are discriminating. And you've got friends at work with whom you're comfortable. If they always get the plum projects, bonuses, and promotions, you are discriminating.

---

Operate in multiple states? That's a real compliance challenge, but with "The 50-50" (50 Employment Laws in 50 States); answers are at your fingertips. Wage/hour? Leave? Child labor? Discrimination? All there in easy-to-read chart form. Get more details.

---

6: De facto (I just never seem to hire Xs)

One of the more subtle forms of discrimination is called "de facto." In these situations, there are never any direct statements against hiring or promoting certain types of people—it just never seems to happen. For example, you're not against hiring women in a certain job, but although many qualified women have applied, of the last 50 hires, all 50 were men.

7: Reverse discrimination

Reverse discrimination means discrimination against someone as a result of your attempts not to discriminate against someone else. You probably don't have significant exposure unless you have a very strong, quota-type program favoring one protected group

WALMART WINS---WHAT NOW? BY L. D. SLEDGE, J.D.

 

  The last blog was written prior to the decision by the US Supreme Court refusing to allow the huge class action involving 1.5 million claimants to proceed.  The lawsuit claimed that Wal-Mart systematically paid women less and did not provide equal opportunity for advancement. It contended that all women employed by Wal-Mart since 1998 should be part of the class.

    The court’s decision was not about the discrimination itself, but around a procedural issue, and whether the technical rules for forming a class were followed. The court decided that the group could not be certified as a class.

   To form a class, you have to have so many members that it is impracticable to have separate trials for all of them. The Wal-Mart women unequivocally met that standard. But the members of the class have to share a well-defined common interest, and it must be clear that resolving the cases of the few actual representatives would effectively resolve all the cases of all the class members.
 

  The Supreme Court just didn’t see that literally millions of separate employment decisions relating to women in many different jobs, could be viewed as meeting the class requirements.
 

   Having been involved in several class actions myself, I am aware of the difficulty in getting a group with similar claims certified as a class. In this case, I am sure there were political and social-economic considerations. The ramifications of a lawsuit of this magnitude being permitted to continue to jury trial are beyond comprehension, for a possible judgment could be in the billions, and like locusts these suits would proliferate through every large corporation in the US, creating more economic disruption than the losses to individuals by not being treated properly.  But it did teach Walmart a lesson and now they have largely corrected these errors, and other big companies have taken that lesson seriously as well. So all is well that ends well--I guess it ended well for Corporate America—what’s good for the duck isn’t necessarily good for the hunter.  Here the duck won. The hunter will have to reload.

   My question is now what can employees do when seeking redress as a group against a large company. For the time being, the companies are safe if they watch their step. For more, read the following link

http://hrdailyadvisor.blr.com/articles/HR_Policies_Procedures_WalMart_Decision_Supreme_Court.aspx?Source=HAC&Effort=15

What really motivates us?

PURPOSE: The key to high morale and performance - by Patrick V. Valtin, author of "No-Fail Hiring."


I hear too much the following complaint from business owners interviewing young job applicants: " New employees are mainly motivated by money." My first reaction is always: well, if the employer is money-motivated, he/she should expect to attract mostly people who are motivated by money... but most business owners/employers neglect a vital principle of motivation: it is NOT just about money!


Money is an important factor of motivation, for sure. But it will be found that successful companies use other factors of motivation - way superior to money! The most powerful of them is completely ignored by a vast majority of small businesses: purpose and values! Purpose (WHY or the reason why people do what they do) naturally drives people to work harder, to be more dedicated to their tasks - and to their employers. 


Many examples are testimony to this simple fact: people will be more eager to put their best at work when they KNOW they are doing something that contributes not just to the company's profits, but mostly to their customers, to their environment and to everyone around them.


Successful companies like Apple, Ikea, Southwest Airlines, Whole Food market, Stonyfield Farm, etc. all prove on a daily basis that driving employees with valuable, socially responsible core purposes, proves to be the single most powerful leadership tool and natural motivator.


Check this highly inspiring animation by RSAnimate: it will show you that people are naturally purpose-driven and will perform at their best when invited to contribute to worthy purposes. this kills the myth of money motivation for good!


"DRIVE - The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" shows with entertaining evidence that purpose brings power, energy and natural drive to everyone. This fantastic animation is worth the 10 minutes you will spend watching!


I hope it serves as a source of inspiration, next time a potential employee pretends he or she is worth more than what you are willing to pay him/her. But make sure you adjust your company's core purpose: is it inspiring to you? How about your customers - would they feel inspired? And ask your current employees - would they feel motivated to come to work for THAT purpose?


Food for thought...
Patrick Valtin

THE WALMART JUGGERNAUT, BY L D SLEDGE, J.D.

THE WALMART JUGGERNAUT

Betty Dukes, a Walmart greeter, far right in the above picture, filed a sex discrimination suit against Walmart in 2,000 saying she had been denied training she needed to receive promotion. It is now before the US Supreme court for a decision if it should be allowed to proceed as a class action involving millions of female employees. Her lawsuit says Walmart systematically discriminated against female employees who were underrepresentated in management positions and were paid less than male colleagues.

Earlier court’s decisions let the case proceed after a judge aid that there was “significant proof of a corporate policy of discrimination.” The case can cost Walmart billions if allowed to proceed. Corporate America is watching nervously from the sidelines. Twenty major firms, including GE and Microsoft, filed in support of Walmart. If Duke wins, lawyers expect a whole new set of discrimination class actions will be brought, not just on behalf of women, but also for minorities and those with disabilities. A win for Walmart would be a major blow for nationwide job-bias lawsuits, making it harder for employees who work in different stores and hold different jobs have enough in common to be a class.

Duke’s lawyer argues that women comprise 37.6% of assistant managers, 21.9% of co-managers, and 15.5% of store managers. The standards are the same whether it is a huge company like Walmart or a small business. So this decision could be far reaching and touch the pocketbooks of thousands of small businesses.

FOR THE WANT OF AN OUTHOUSE---BY L D SLEDGE, JD

I promised last blog, on the definition of disability under the ADA, that I would give a case on point, to demonstrate what may be considered disabled. Here is a recent matter that didn’t go to court, but reached the outhouse door before settling.

EEOC guidance has made it clear that employers have to follow the ADA even when it contracts with temporary workers.  (The exemplary rule of this case would apply to permanent as well as temporary)

Recently, the EEOC settled a case in Illinois against R.R. Donnelly & Sons for failing to accommodate a temporary worker who experienced incontinence problems. The employer permitted the worker to go home to address the problem, but it also called the temp agency and informed it that the worker would not be permitted to return.  Because the employer decided to terminate the worker without considering possible accommodations, the EEOC alleged the employer violated the ADA.  The case settled with the worker getting $150,000.