Applicants apply at employer always, right? WRONG!

Check out what Andrew Horner, an applicant for Tech in spe did: http://reversejobapplication.com/

Nice idea and yes, much better than LinkedIn or XING. BUT - yes here we go again - as HR headhunting for fitting candidates we all love our profiles which are composed in an equal way. This way we can see what sticks out the most. Imagining reading through a bunch of websites such as these may make us feel closer to the person behind the résumé but it will munch our time away like MyLittlePony Shows my evening. (Yes, this show is stealing my delightful evening plan. Always.)

So, will this reverse application thing become a movement? Especially since more and more companies realize, that they don't pick applicants, but applicants pick employers (when and if they can). Latest when the third applicant rejects an offer for the same position, employers notice that. Walking you talk as company has never been so important as now in the times where CSR and Employer Branding has become a market in themselves.

The thing is, it will NOT become a movement. We, the HR, will not have to look through a googillion of website based vitas. Yes, we admit, one page as CV is almost nothing to see how the person ticks and acts. YET, that is what interviews are for. That's why companies torture their applicants by runnign them through assessment centers. That is what trial period is for. And in the end, it is just less time and as cost efficient as letting HR eyes scan over oh so many resume-ed sites.

It will be interesting on how Applying actually will change in the future. Back then references was everything, now even pre-fixed resumes like the Europass ain't the best. LinkedIn/XING Profiles meh. Jeanne Meister for instance suggests, that there won't be CV's at all one day.

It definitely will be HR-evolutional.

HR Innovations - Whatcha Got?

In regard to Ralf Junge's blog entry: Innovationen in der HR-Arbeit – Was? Wer? Wie? Warum?

Last week, Ralf was requesting, well actually demanding rightfully, more progress in HR. This request certainly met open ears of plenty which made Ralf check for more input regarding the key: Innovations. 

Now a lot of companies have tried all kind of existing techniques in HR, went back and forth and eventually got stuck on the level they are now. Most companies even run the, in my opinion, completely wrong way of outsourcing. After all, sites like hr-innovations.com promote it. The from outsourcing being an HR innovation we consider to be truely innovative and less... how to say, culture destroying, is another thing to be discussed. One day folks, one day. ;) 

Back to the actual matter. Ralf knows it from his studies still, and me from my vocational school and the terror of final exams too. The theory "Diffusion of Innovations" by Everett Rogers. The theorem shows and describes the characters and spreading process of innovations. According to Rogers innovation is an idea which is apprehended as "new" to an individual. Over a certain period, this new idea is spread via several channels meeting the members of a social system/ community. That's the diffusion of innovation, or as we Germans would say: innovation diffusion. Yea, say that three times out loud, fast.  But it is easier understood when seen:

Depending on the types shown and the social community targeted, implemetation of such ideas can be approached accordingly. I am not gonna get into this much now. Let's call it suppression. But you definitely should check out the Adoption Lifecycle to find out what kind of "adaptor" you are (English/German)

But I searched for more detail. Again, suppression makes one nosey to find more, differently. And I came across this blog featuring the study by futurestep with the very informative list: 

• Over three-quarters expect employers to be innovative in the way they retain and engage their staff.
• 72% expect employers to be innovative in the way they develop people, but only 36% think that their current company is innovative in those fields.
• 79% agree that innovative approaches to engagement and development would make them more likely to perform better in their jobs.
• 49% say they would be more likely to take a job advertised or offered in an innovative way, and 51% believe that innovative approaches to recruitment would make them feel more positively about that company overall.

Basically saying: If you (the employer) are not innovative, you loose. 

For more pretty picturized stastics, check this link.

So after Ralf's last weeks request we wanna know: What kind of HR-innovations works best for your company, how was it introduced or applied and why is it working, or not working? 

Who are the Innovators and Early Adopters in HR? Ralf is going to find it out and report for sure. Stay tuned.