According to the Harvard Business Review:

 “80 percent of turnover is caused by bad hiring decisions. These are costly mistakes. The U.S. Department of Labor calculates that it costs one-third of a new hire’s annual salary to replace him. These figures include money spent on recruitment, selection and training plus costs due to decreased productivity as other employees fill in to take up the slack.

But these numbers don’t reflect the intangible damages an exiting employee can have such as lost customers and low employee morale across the rest of the organization. And, turnover costs climb even higher as you move up the organization: mid- and upper–level managers can cost over twice their annual salary to replace.”

Making a hiring decision is in fact: making a buying decision.  A hiring decision should be an investment decision however in many cases there is a need to be solved by hiring someone right away.

Solving needs.  That’s the key reason why people buy things, whether or not we are consciously aware of our actions.  Of course we look for value when we buy, but at its basic core: we buy because of a need.

Employers:  when you hire someone make sure that you are hiring to solve a need that you have but more importantly make sure that you “buy the solution.”  In plain and simple terms, make sure that you have properly identified the business need that you have and why that need exists, then and only then “hire the solution.”

When you hire the solution, you are buying down the business need or enhancing business profit and ultimately solving the issue at hand.

Hiring the right person though difficult it may be, is the solution and it’s also perhaps the biggest challenge that a company faces.  (Sometimes an effective way to buy down a hiring solution is to terminate the issue at hand.  Maybe the wrong person is in the wrong position.) Of course that is a different topic though completely relevant.

In conclusion, buying the solution is an extremely effective strategy when making a hiring decision.  Making a bad hiring decision happens to the best of businesses and though painful it may be in terms of costs and morale, having a “solve needs” strategy goes along way in successful hiring.

Any questions or comments? I am Bernie Reifkind, CEO and founder of Premier Search, Inc.  I can be reached at 1(800) 801-1400 or email at ceo@psihealth.com

It’s human nature in the work environment to loosen up a bit when the boss is not around.  To be fair, most employees do their job effectively whether or not the boss is around.  Most people strive to do their very best at the task at hand.

So what happens when the task changes?  What happens when the pressure sets in and deadlines are approaching? What happens during the rocky times that all businesses go through from time to time?  Who’s is ultimately responsible?

You.

Here is another cliche that is fitting and proper “if you want something done right, do it yourself.”  This is not to imply that one should not delegate.  Being a successful manager or employer is all about delegating even the most important tasks.

Having said that, an employer needs to keep a constant “finger on the pulse” and never let up even if you are getting complaints from whining employees about being micro-managed.

Micro-managing is a vital part of an employer’s job.  An employee’s work environment is not a popularity contest.  It’s about successfully fulfilling the ongoing tasks at hand in the way in which you as the employer sees fit.

Some people work better if they are micro-managed and are held accountable all day long.  Other’s do not need as much hand holding but nonetheless, micro-managing assures you that a job is getting done the way that you want it done.

You’ll know if you need to back off if you are putting too much pressure on an employee- the employee will tell you- and then back off, but just a bit. 

Too bad if micro-managing is insulting to an employee’s self esteem.  If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

In summary, never feel the need to justify your micro-management style.  If you are the boss or a business owner than you risk the most.  You have to micro-manage to ensure success.

What are the ramifications of not micro-managing and constantly holding people accountable?  Why find out?

Any questions or comments? I am Bernie Reifkind, CEO and founder of Premier Search, Inc.  I can be reached at 1(800) 801-1400 or email at ceo@psihealth.com

To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them.

Obviously this is brilliant writing but within the context of today’s complicated world of recruitment and career search, Shakespeare would have probably been clueless.  

In addition, he would have been completely lost as an employer in today’s modern world sifting through countless resumes and conducting countless interviews attempting to find the very best candidate to fill a critical opening.

“To be or not to be?”

Obviously, he never had to go through the recruitment process or to put together a first rate resume, seach for opportunities, go on multible job interviews, and wait sometimes excruciatingly long for a job offer.

So let’s examine this wonderful passage from Hamlet and apply it’s message to today’s employment and recruitment world.  Let’s start with “to be or not to be: as it relates to employment.” 

Most of us do not have the luxury to ponder this option (“to be or not to be employed”) because of obligations both personally and professionaly.  Except in very rare cases, one must earn a living.

To be, or not to be, that is the question:  With regard to employment-there is no question-most of us need to BE employed.
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer:  To look for great candidates or to look for work is to suffer-plain and simple and there is nothing noble about it.
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,  We should all be slinged and arrowed and have an outrageous fortune.
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles The employment world is a constant sea of troubles.
And by opposing end them.  We would all like to oppose and end our sea of employment troubles, but who’s kidding who? The human dynamic is complicated and there will always be change whether or not one opposes this fact!

In conclusion, translating a Shakespeare quote in the context of  today’s world of sophisticated and complex recruitment and career advancement is tricky business at best.

However if “all the world is a stage” then employers must direct a Tony winning performance in recruiting and managing a world class staff.  If you are a candidate than you need to give an Oscar winning performance during an interview.

Oh, and one more great Shakespeare quote for all of us: “Be not afraid of greatness.“

Any questions or comments? I am Bernie Reifkind, CEO and founder of Premier Search, Inc.  I can be reached at 1(800) 801-1400 or email at ceo@psihealth.com

After an interview, most applicants need feedback almost immediately.  Employers who intend to further explore a professional relationship with a candidate should provide that feedback within 48 hours of an interview.

Why?

If a candidate does not hear back after an interview, the following assumptions are usually made:

• “They’re not interested in me”
• “I had a bad interview”
• “Do I really want to work for a company that takes too long to make decisions?”

The first impression of a new employer is just as important as the impression made by a candidate. 

Candidates often judge employers by their decision making abilities.  If too much time goes by (without reasonable communication) and then an offer is made, an impression might be inferred that the employer is unable to make timely decisions.

Candidates tend to wonder “what other decisions do they drag their feet on?’ and often times are hesitant about accepting an offer.  ”If I take this job, how long will I have to wait if I need more resources, or more staffing? How long will I have to wait for my employment review”?

In the recruitment world it is a given that “time kills all deals.”

On the other hand, employers should never make rash hiring decisions.  That is not the message being conveyed in this essay!  There should be no less than 2 interviews and of course references should be checked but this does not have to take weeks and weeks as it often does. 

If there is a legitimate reason why the interviewing process needs to take a long time, then it is incumbent upon the employer to communicate, communicate and communicate!  We are living in the digital age so an easy email is all that is really necessary to communicate  intent but why not pick up the phone and give it a personal touch? 

The personal touch goes a long way.  Communication is key.

In conclussion, employers should do their best to communicate the process with a prospective new hire during the interview process and never let time kill a deal!

Any questions or comments? I am Bernie Reifkind, CEO and founder of Premier Search, Inc.  I can be reached at 1(800) 801-1400 or email at ceo@psihealth.com

It is essential that a health care organization in need of critical staff to use a health care recruiter to get it “right, the first time”?  If you are not using a health care recruiter to solve your most critical staffing needs, than one can presume that you are also not using a CPA, not using an attorney to represent your best interests and of course you never go to a dentist.

If saving money is a reason that you are not using a professional health care recruiter, you might just be missing the boat.  If you are relying on your human resources department or if you are posting ads on the various job boards, you are not in fact saving money and you could be drowning.

In opportunity costs alone you might be paying a fortune.  For every day that a critical job remains open, it is costing you in not only the obvious ways but in non-tangibles such as the cost of low morale amongst your staff and quite possibly compromising in providing the best in quality care to residents and patients.

Using a health care recruiter is “getting it right the first time.”  Here are 5 reasons:

1.  Recruiters are experts in the field of your industry and take a proactive approach in seeking out the very best candidates and not relying solely on placing ads on Monster, Career Builder, Yahoo Job,etc.

2.  It is proven that by using a health care recruiter, an organization often achieves a much higher recruitment ROI by using a professional recruiter who understands the costs associated with what it truly takes to recruit the very best candidates. 

3.  Health care recruiters understand urgency- your urgency- in filling positions because as you know: for every day that a position remains open it is costing you big time. (Not only in real dollars but in downtime and company morale.)

4.  Professional recruiters proactively call on your competitors and seek out the best talent.  In most cases it is in poor taste for organizations to recruit competitor’s employees.  Some searches can only be conducted in this manner.   

5.  Using software (such as using the job boards) to get resumes will never replace the skills of  an action oriented and results driven recruiter.  This is similar to hanging a sign on a retail store.  Recruiters put buyers in your store!

In conclusion, getting it right the first time should be key to one’s business plan when it comes to staffing issues.   It is obviously not a good idea to defend or represent yourself in legal matters, to perform your own dental work or to repair your own car.  So what is stopping you from calling a health care recruiter?

Any questions or comments? I am Bernie Reifkind, CEO and founder of Premier Search, Inc.  I can be reached at 1(800) 801-1400 or email at ceo@psihealth.com