Recruiting Outside the Box

I was preparing to attend a career fair to recruit engineers and put together a kit of hardware to show off our company’s products. This idea was met with some resistance by those who insisted that the appearance of our booth’s branding would be compromised by the presence of these parts on the table. However, I wouldn’t take “no” for an answer and went ahead and displayed the products at the fair. After a very successful day of recruiting (where an unprecedentedly high number of students stopped by to excitedly pick up the components and engage us with questions about what they did and how they worked), my colleagues were forced to admit that having the products on the table was actually a great idea. Word spread quickly; the company has displayed products at career fairs at every technical recruiting event since that day over 20 years ago.
Having attended career fairs as an engineering student, I knew that it wasn’t the branding that attracted the talent, but the personal engagement. I also knew that engineers and technicians love looking at and touching hardware. This deep insight into our target audience made the notion of showing off components obvious to me, although to my non-technical colleagues it was an unorthodox, outside-the-box idea.
The most effective way to convince someone of the value of a new idea is to demonstrate it. I was confident the benefits of my idea would be significant. I also realized that any risk to the company of having some clutter on the table at one event was negligible, and any risk to my own career was similarly miniscule (after all, they were extremely unlikely to fire me just for displaying some company products).
If your out-of-the box idea is encountering resistance, try to find a low-risk way to demonstrate it to the nay-sayers. People are skeptical and they don’t like change, but they will get on board if something is working.
Did you know CAEDENCE can help you deploy unique and effective recruiting best practices for your own organization? Contact us at info@CaedenceConsulting.com.
Over the years we’ve been exposed to Six Sigma, Juran, Deming PDCA, 8D, Dale Carnegie, A3, Shainin, and more. Each technique works pretty well, and has been demonstrated many times in a wide variety of industries and circumstances. At the core they are all essentially the same!
Each approach relies on an underlying logical flow that goes like this: [a] make sure the problem is clearly defined; [b] be open to all sources of information; [c] vet the information for relevance and accuracy; [d] use the process of elimination to narrow down all possible causes to the most likely few; [e] prove which of the suspects is really the cause of the issue; [f] generate a number of potential solutions; [g] evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility and risk of the potential solutions; [h] implement the winning solution(s); and [i] take steps to make sure your solution(s) don’t unravel in the future.
The differences between the paradigms resides in supplementary steps and toolkits. For example, 8D contains the important “In
Your primary role as a manager is to ensure your team’s success. Internalize this. Make sure your team members know this. Build an environment of trust and collaboration. A direct report of mine would frequently leave me out of the loop as problems escalated, preferring instead to “work harder”. It was clear that he felt uncomfortable delivering bad news to me (his boss) when things were not going according to plan. Let me tell you the rest of the story.
