ASPIRE by 3P

Job Success Formula's

November 18, 2019 3P Season 13 Episode 1
Show Notes Transcript
Speaker 1:

Good morning. Today we're going to talk about a subject called job success formulas. And for us, this is the secret for successful ton management. Yeah. Um , thought long and hard about , um , the title for this one. Um, you might have heard of a job successful before. It's quite unique to the analytics tool that we use, but we certainly do see it as being the secret for successful talent management. Again, what do we mean by time management? We've got acquisition. This is bringing people into your organizations , not just recruitment. This is acquisition of talent and that will include recruitment, but includes onboarding and as looking at that talent for the future as well, which is then in the subject of succession planning, succession planning, looking at the talent , the high potentials in your organization, where are they going next? What's their ambition? GSF can help you with that. Also, the improvement of aspire, which is the development pace. Again, if somebody is looking to be , uh, on the succession planning route and you're looking to do that with them, well that won't be a good fit just yet. So there's some gaps in there . Those gaps will be the development or the improvement needs. So we can see from the JSF the behavior element you have to look at. And as you said before, V to all of these things really well, retention and engagement becomes a reward. That's not the starting point. It's a reward for a good talent management or successful talent management program. So just to repeat that, the secrets for successful talent management, job success formulas.

Speaker 2:

Yeah. What people tend to use is what we call it, a today approach, which can be very subjective. So you've got the CV and you've got a job description. So people try to sort of make a fits, almost trying to make a three piece stick. So with only two pieces. So you've got CV, which includes things like, yeah, the eligibility factors or qualifications, experience that, that type of thing. Um, job descriptions, which yeah , sometimes you can get a really good detailed comprehensive job description. Sometimes that can be quite bad and not very well thought out. And the first thing is trying to obviously make sure a decent job description with a good explanation of that specific rule. What the problem is with that two day approach of the CV and the job description and trying to make a match. It's, it is a , as I mentioned, it's very subjective. It's very difficult to keep the personal bias , um, out that , that approach. So you see someone, you like them or you like a CV or they make you sweat on the CV. Even I think they've been the same university or submit in common with yourself, you will tend to like them, which I think we've spoke about in previous videos called the the horns in halo effect. So it's trying to keep that unconscious or that person bias out the process and to make sure you make the right decision or as best as you can. Um, cause we've spoke as well about the customer bought here . I think we've mentioned some of the stats showing . Um, I think it was 300% of the salary that can be 300% of the cost of a bad hire . So taken the personal binds out of the way of taken that the horns or the halo effect out the process and not relying on the two D and element of CV in a job description.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, I think, yeah, in summary , they're just a cost of a bad tire. We've said it many times before, but yeah, potentially have up to 300% and this is what you'd be feeling in an organization where my talent management, all my recruitment's , all my acquisition strategies not quite working. It feels painful, feels expensive maybe cause there's a fair bit of rework in the system to the return on investments doesn't seem that good. So the two day approach is one way and we've all experienced errors and I guess some of you guys are still experiencing that as well. Save A's and we're comparing against a job description. So it's it , it's flat. That's on sort of those two dimensions. So you want a more rounded picture . So we talk about the three three D approach, which becomes much more objective. Yeah. Subjectivity. Try and take it out as best you can. There's ways to do that. As you said, be aware of the horns and halo effect, the unconscious bias, trying not to see the individual. Yeah. Let's look at the CVS as I'm looking at anything we can before we actually see them cause you can form that unconscious bias pretty quickly. So the three day approach is objective. The CVE still in there has to be in that and the job descriptions in there . Good quality job description.

Speaker 2:

Yeah. Would you just mention that the job description as well as three key elements in there. You mentioned the eligibility, which sometimes can be seen on the CV. Um, suitability elements. It's more behavioral aspects , um, of the role and also the key performance indicators . So how do you know that person's actually gonna do a good job?

Speaker 1:

So it's not just a job description, which is here's some things I want you to do. It start up, open up some other elements in now. So you got a better measure but more objectivity. So 3d approach, have the CV, I have the job description. You're comparing eligibility, comparing the fit with the job description on manly eligibility factors. But some suitability as well as some behavioral factors. But again that would still be subjective. Yeah . Where you bring in the objectivity is using the JSF and the job success formula, which was essentially built around the other factors in there. So what CV re looking for, that's the job description, which is good indication of the, the what and the how that you want and how to measure that as well. And the JSF brings an elements of the how that , the details of the behavioral preferences and tendencies for a very specific job role .

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I think that's the key as well. It is, it is role specific and it's benchmarked against the success factors within that rule. What we mean by benchmark trends , it basically in the , this the tool we use Harson assessments for our predictive analytics, which you've mentioned a couple of times in the previous videos, the job success factors , there's essentially , um, the job success formulas . There's six and a half thousand job success formulas in the library. So we've got a real library. We've got access to six and a half thousand jobs. Um, and the , the beauty is that the , a lot of the work is being done on those. Um, those templates are those seeds, if you like, because it's, it's benchmark success factors. So what are the successful elements? What , what does, what does it look like? What does success look like in terms of behaviors and preferences, etc . For that role. So they are just sitting there in the job success formula proven to be. Um, so if somebody is got similar traits to those GSS, they're more likely to be successful in that role.

Speaker 1:

So if, if they're in a couple of examples, every said the chief executive officer. Yeah , yeah. It could be gone to the Harrison assessment tool and look the CEO and look forward JSF that's it. Yeah, absolutely. There's one in there. So that would then say the factors for success or likely success in that particular position for heavily and behavioral tendencies, they would be listed, there'll be measurable against the individual.

Speaker 2:

Absolutely. What you're looking for is you're looking for similar traits. Yeah . Because if those traits based on real good objective data, they've been proven to be successful in that role. So what I'm trying to do is look for somebody who's similar to those. Yeah . Cause we know what success looks like in those elements.

Speaker 1:

So, and these are different levels in organization . We talked to CEO, you can have HR directors, I mean come down operations managements , I think down chief exec, chief operating officer, and we come down the junior levels of management too . And also , um, lower elements of , uh , job success in different industries. So six and a half thousands job success formulas and those success formulas as Trevor sides , they have the benchmark traits which will most likely demonstrate or predict success in a particular role. Certainly . And it's, and it's it three key elements to it as you're looking at the, the essential traits. So those real strong areas that you're looking for people to be similar in those areas, the desirable traits, which are also important, but also the traits to avoid that. You just want to, you're not looking for a tall , so you're trying to get them red flags. And so essential traits, desirable traits, and also the traits to avoid. That's what we're looking to measure. So the three D approach we're recommending is [inaudible] objective. Okay. Um , there's a smart questionnaire, very simple 20 minute questionnaire to bring that objectivity. So you end up with eligibility factors, you see the job description, but you've also now got some behavioral dynamics. You're going to get three dimensional picture. Um, we've all got examples. Okay. All good examples of reviews today approach. So operate on one plan. We can see certain elements of the individual and we just kind of predict how they're gonna operate in the live feed of a business. And it's not until you get them in there that you start to get that feedback. This JSF enables you to predict, okay, I predict predicted or three that I mentioned is now predict how they're most likely to behave in normal circumstances and under stress and pressure as well. So gives us a much broader three D visualization of the images to OD Lindsay as well, that that extra dimension of the JSF . It's also customizable. So we don't recommend, you know , we have a starting point with the template which is in the system, but every see if you looking at it at any HR manager, any HR manager in this rule or this company may be a bit different to another company. So we just will make the tweaks , um, and we'll get that relevant information again from the job description, et cetera . Um , I think there's as possible as well to put in some cultural fit. Absolutely. Yeah. Two things you can do. You can build cultural elements in to the job successful and realize all the , and actually measure them in parallel through some that which we'll cover in another series under the video where we look at behavioral competencies. You can Elaine and Mark against organizational values. So that's another, I guess call topic in itself. That might be the four D video that I mentioned . Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So just, just to , to move on a little bit. That's a talent management. I think it can be seen as a, as expensive , um, and also time consuming. Yeah. And I wouldn't disagree with that . That that to some extent that the time consuming bit is, well I've got to interview five people for particular posts . So that's part of your acquisition process. Oh, I don't have anybody who goes to, as in the succession planning, somebody who's leaving the organization with a lot of skills, group behavior. I've got nobody to to fill the gaps. It's feels like a lot of work and can be time consuming. We can operate a lot of your tick , a lot of your operational bandwidth when the problem arises because that's not the right way to do at an expensive, I think we spend money wastefully at times , um , brain somebody and not the right fit and let's try somebody else. I'll bring someone in who's not the right fit and we just cope with that. You know , we haven't really got the top performer, the high potential candidate. We're really looking for with tagging somebody cause we need to fill the position and maybe the unconscious bias kicks in or the hones and halo effect or we move too fast. We move too fast and we talk about money a time, we'll keep doing it because repeating the message, Oh , hits home at some stage the customer [inaudible] 300% potentially of that person's annual salary through indirect costs, the recruitment costs, training, onboarding, and then maybe some , um , compensation to leave the organization equally. The cost of a good hire bring a great person and , but you're just not meeting their expectations for succession planning and that will cost you money also. So like again, so tell me much can be seen as expensive and time consuming. I think it's because we're not doing it the right way and we look at the secrets of successful talent. Montana has been a JSF if you get that bit right, spend the time. Now it's not costing a lot of money.

Speaker 2:

Well I was just gonna add actually Lindsay , because if you put the work in up front , um , so you get a good base, a good objective baseline of what you're going to measure against. Yeah. So you've got the line in the sand, you do the work upfront , you understand what you're really looking for. And in terms of time in cost and efficiency because it's all automated. You're getting to the point where you can shortlist and get two or three people in front of you because you had course , you still need to look at that CV, you still need the interview process, et cetera. We can go through a lot of that stuff really efficiently in the background because you've done the work upfront . Yeah .

Speaker 1:

And you know, sat with aspire that what we're trying to bring gears , the, the power to make confident people choices and much better be sitting in an interview situation, which we still highly recommend you do that , um, to be sitting there with a lot of confidence thinking , okay, being measured objectively, the person sent in front of me is a really good fit for this organization, is for this job role and now I need to know, can I work with [inaudible] tech in the way? A lot of the guesswork, you got a lot of confidence that you're gonna make a great hire here. Yeah. So you know obviously we're looking for you to get a good return on your investment field management strategy and if you're using a two day approach at this moment in time then you'll struggle with that. The three D approach is going to bring the objectivity and it's going to bring that confidence in as well. As we said before, reuse very clearly the Harrison assessment predictive analytics tool. I want to find out more, plenty of links in our content and it'll be a link in this one also that the JSF saw customizable from the six and a half thousand stock so you can take the stock JSF and move that around to suit your organization and again all sounds really complex but it's not and it's the entry in the environment, 20 minutes smart questionnaire and you do not need any particular levels of qualifications or experience to fill it in any organization at any level. It's a 20 minutes of questions .

Speaker 2:

We check up the links after you just share some example reports of all the lookalikes . You can see success, success factors in different roles, roles . The thing to point out as well is Lindsey mentioned there this six and a half thousand jobs in the library. Um, we can measure some on against all of those jobs if you wanted. Not that you would want to know what the results all come from. One the same 20 minute questionnaire.

Speaker 1:

So just to spin off on that then, so you don't know organization. Yeah. And the using Harrison assessments, predictive analytics, and they've got five job functions which they have sat at critical job functions. Yes . You have a GSF every one of those. Yeah. And then you can measure all your high potentials against those. Jeff's definitely can see, yeah . Where they've got some development needs. Yeah. So people might be ready for my attention and then one of those roles. So you can actually do that internal recruitment stroke acquisition piece, which is called succession planning. And look at is there any behavioral gaps. Okay. Let's now start developing this individual ready for that. That next level is , yeah .

Speaker 2:

Yeah . It's , it's just like building an internal talent pool to feed into your succession planning . Um , and as you rate rightly said, look for gaps develop now, but the development is aligned to something very specific. I'm to the next step where that person could potentially move into ,

Speaker 1:

I think I will put it on personal experience and we've seen it in others as well. You can be promoted yeah. To the next level based on your performance in the current level. Then don't necessarily have the behavioral wherever the [inaudible] to perform in that new role. So this gives you a chance to look at that, look at the gaps and again, make the right choice. That is for succession planning as well. Okay. So the call to action for , um , the audience today is to think about in as dimensional approach now, which is the job success formula and we're not recommending a go away and try and just work this out yourselves. Okay. There is a tool there which can help you do this more . Being very clear in our communications now that Harrison assessments, predictive analytics tool one information around that. We can give you that where we can build and CV, job description, the eligibility elements and the behavioral tendencies and preferences, which we'll cover all elements of talent management, acquisition, succession planning, the improvement and development plans, and the retention and engagement to ensure that you've got a great process. And we're saying here now, there's three dimensional approach at the secret to, you know , an excellent and successful talent management strategy that yeah , and it's just how that whole employee journey fits within, right across your talent management strategy, let be from the acquisition to even do it to when that may be exiting the business. So it's just really having a good structure to deal with that employee journey. Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much. Speak to you next time. Cheers .