HR University

It wasn’t my idea.  Let’s be clear about that.

Here’s how it happened:  Margo Rose, known as @HRMargo on Twitter, began a shout out called Hire Friday, encouraging people to highlight out-of-work friends and contacts, to help get people back to work.

I liked the idea so much that I used it to publicize a few people on Facebook and Twitter.  Then I received a message from Teresa Morris (@contollergirl), who said she had read my Facebook post and was suggesting “highlight the unemployed”  as a Carnival of HR theme.  Teresa claims to not have sufficient computer skills to host her own Carnival, so I picked up this rolling ball and decided I could put it into play.  I contacted Shauna Moerke, the HRMinion, who is the coordinator of the Carnival.  She said, in her best Captain Picard imitation, make it so.

SO . . .

If you are out of work, unemployed, in transition in the HR (or related) field, let me – and ultimately the Carnival readers – know in one of the following ways:

1.  Send me a link to a blog profile.  Several people have already been featured in a blog, or have their own profile on their own blog.  I will have a section just for those links.

2.  If you don’t have a blog link readily available, I will also accept short (200 words or less) profiles to be pasted directly into the Carnival.  Hopefully, those profiles will contain links to other online resources, such as LinkedIn.

You can send links to other blog posts via the comment section or email.  Please send your short profile by email to ginsberg dot joan at gmail dot com.

Carnival of HR – Special Employment Edition is set to go live on MARCH 24, 2010.  I need your links or profiles by 6:00 pm EST, MARCH 22, 2010.

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world

(From “Revolution” by John Lennon/Paul McCartney 1968)

I WAS THERE IN 1968, AND I WILL BE THERE FOR

The HRevolution2010 unconference is coming to Chicago on May 7th-8th!  HR social media thought leaders and practitioners from around the country will be converging for 24+ hours of mind-bending, trend-setting discussions, yet space is VERY limited, so… SIGN UP NOW!

3 reasons why this event will rock:

1. People. First and foremost, it’s the people – and the crew coming together for this year’s unconference is fantastic. The planning committee for 2010 has arranged for about twice the capacity of last year’s event, meaning HRevolution 2010 will blend old faces with new in an intimate setting where networking relationships can unfold naturally and meaningfully.
2. Logistics. We’ve locked up a phenomenal and highly professional space for the event that could not be more perfect for an unconference.  HRevolution will take place at Catalyst Ranch, which is one of Chicago’s premier event locations and—bonus!—is centrally located with easy access to hotels, restaurants, and nightlife. Catalyst Ranch is known for bringing a level of fun and sophistication to events that is unparalleled—we don’t recall meeting any other space providers who could so naturally blend “white boards,” “afternoon snack service,” “stereo systems,” and the “Play-Doh for 110 people” into a single conversation. Rest assured, we want you to leave the unconference loving Chicago hospitality.
3. Topics. The beauty of the unconference format is that it is designed to leave you with practical, useful knowledge. When you get back to work on Monday, and when someone asks you, “What did you get for the money?”,  the answer that flows oh-so-naturally from your lips will blow them – and you – away.   Especially given the awesome $100 ticket price!

So if you’re in HR, or are a manager who truly believes in the power of your people, or if you’re dabbling with this social media stuff and thinking “should I or shouldn’t I”,  or “how do I…” or even “why would I”, then get here on May 7th-8th. You will meet the people and learn the stuff and be in the places that make it all come together.

At the end of January 2009, I decided to recognize a member of the online HR community for doing what I asked in this Carnival of HR Vlog.  I recognized Laurie Ruettimann.  Now, I have decided to make do this at the end of every month this year.  This month the recognition goes to Franny Oxford of the blog Do the Work.  Check out my video to see why!

This is me, a generation or two back, when I was a uniformed patrol officer in a suburban Detroit police department.  When I stopped someone I suspected of drunk driving, it was standard practice to give them a field sobriety test, which consisted of a series of simple mental and physical acuity exercises.  Simple for someone sober, not so simple for the inebriated.  One of these exercises was asking the suspect to recite the English alphabet.

Many times a suspect would start speaking, “A, uh . . .B”, and then stop and look at me and ask, “Can I sing it?”  When I answered affirmatively, the suspect started singing their ABCs to the familiar tune of “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star.”  You know what I mean.  It’s in your head as you read this.

Baby boomers (like me) learned their ABCs this way.  Sung in sequence.  We learned our Social Security number in order, too. Nine numbers.  So today, when the person at the bank or on the phone asks for the last four digits of your SS number as an identifier, you recite the whole thing, silently or under your breath, before you loudly speak the last four.  Sequences are meant to be recited . . .  sequentially.  We can count backwards from 10 (another part of a field sobriety test), because we learned that as a countdown sequence.  But we can’t say the alphabet backwards without a huge struggle, because you are asking us to remove those familiar letters from their known sequence.

So what does this have to do with generations?

When someone talks or writes about “Gen Y”,  I really have no clue which demographic group they are referring to until I put the letter back into proper sequence.  I have to stop and think about the fact that Y comes after X, and therefore Generation Y is the one born later than Generation X, which by itself is a highly random designation. This is a lot of mental work  for people who have to sing the ABCs all the way through.

I was born during the “Post World War II Baby Boom”, the generation commonly referred to as Baby Boomers, often shortened to Boomers. No letters.  No sequences.  Just one highly descriptive name.  I don’t know who decided to start naming subsequent generations by letters, but I would like it to stop. Let’s use  “Millennials”, instead of Gen Y, as some already do.  I don’t care what you call Generation X, as long as it’s something else. They were first referred to as Baby Busters, but maybe that has negative connotations.

What do YOU think?

In a few short days, many HR and recruiting pros from the world of Twitter will be heading to an unconference called TruLondon.  I am truly heartbroken that circumstances, mostly financial, prevent me from attending this event.  Based on my experiences with some of the attendees, the sessions will be lively and the exchange of dialog and ideas will be electrifying.

What I will miss most, though, is the opportunity to network face-to-face (IRL is the dreaded acronym) with the people that I have come to know and love in the online community.  People whose opinions I seek and whose values I share.  People who have never hesitated to reach out and extend sympathy, laughter, or a helping hand. People who engage you because they want to – which is what social media is really all about.

Based on this experience I have come to the highly unpopular conclusion that most traditional forms of networking are pointless time-wasters. I am not talking about social or family functions, where you happen to mention to Cousin Bill or Friend Mary that you are looking for work.  I am speaking of those events that are billed as “networking opportunities”, where networking sometimes is the only reason the gathering exists at all.

3 recent examples:

1. Local SHRM chapter seminar.  I spoke with a total of 6 people from a crowd of about 120.  Most people came in groups or with co-workers and were happy to huddle with those people only.  Of the 6 people I spoke with 3 were, like me, in transition and moved on quickly.  One woman approached me because she recognized my avatar from LinkedIn. (So much for in-person!)  Cost was $10.  Time spent? 6 hours. Number of real (people you will continue to engage)connections? Zero.

2.  Michigan Chamber of Commerce seminar. I reached out to 5 people in a small group of about 25. At the beginning of the session, one facilitator asked the participants to discuss how their business was doing financially and whether they were hiring.  I approached one woman from an HR consulting firm who claimed to be hiring.  I gave her a business card and explained what I do.  She reacted to me, and that card, as if I was giving her a communicable disease.  I spoke with both of the facilitators, and sent them a LinkedIn contact request when I got home.  They both ignored that request, and I am certain I will never speak with them again.  Cost was $300. Time spent? 9 hours. Number of real connections made? Zero.

3.  Motor City Connect luncheon. MCC is a community created specifically for networking.  Lunch was at a local restaurant and everyone introduced themselves. Most of the attendees were entrepreneurs trying to drum up business.   Cost was $20. Time spent? 2 hours. Number of real connections made? One. I hired him to help me set up this blog and I keep in touch with him through Twitter and Facebook.

In short, I have found that many people at networking functions are there for their own purposes only.  If you don’t fit into that purpose – you are ignored or politely dismissed. Or people come with security blankets made up of other people – and then are afraid to put those blankets down. ROI (Return On Investment) can be pretty slim, if you measure your investment, as any economist would, in terms of time spent as well as dollars.

Online networking – where the people are generally as anxious as you are to connect and go to great lengths through tweets, status updates, blogs, and comments to achieve that connection – is a vastly superior investment of time and emotion, in my opinion and experience.  Still not convinced?  Let me ask you one question: When was the last time you went to a conference, or seminar, or similar event, and hugged almost everyone there?

I like all kinds of live theatre, but I am particularly fond of musical theatre  – what many people call “Broadway musicals”.  I like musicals so much that I read books about them, listen to cast albums, and attend performances at all levels, including local high schools.  I follow many musical-related sites on Twitter; my favorite is @DailyShowtune.

Unfortunately, I am also hyper-critical, which sometimes makes it very difficult to enjoy watching shows.  If a musical takes place in 1958, like Bye, Bye Birdie, and the actors are wearing 1995 shoes, I go a little berserk.  Don’t even think about using a 1960’s radio as a prop in a show set in the 1940’s.  I don’t like the concept of  jukebox musicals (musicals that are written around a song catalog of one artist, like Jersey Boys) at all.  When I see these things, I see so much red that it is hard for me to concentrate on the rest of the show.

So when I am squirming in my seat, trying to ignore Emile de Becque (you know, the guys who sings Some Enchanted Evening)  wearing a Detroit Red Wings tie in a local community theatre production of South Pacific (yes, this really happened), I take a deep breath and say to myself:  What can I find to really LOVE about this show?

Inevitably, I will find something I really love – like the costumes, or a particular performance, or the sets.  Turning aside my critical feelings and finding the good stuff – it’s always there somewhere – keeps me in my seat for the whole show, even though the accepted theatre-goers response to show dislike is to get up and leave.

So what does this have to do with Al Gore? Or HR?

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) announced that Al Gore was going to be the featured speaker at their big, brassy annual convention in San Diego in June 2010.  There was an immediate amount of backlash and negative discussion prompted by his selection, including negative bloggers and a highly critical discussion on LinkedIn.  Many people said they would not go to his speech, or to the convention itself, because of his selection.

See the connection?  These people are letting this one small piece of hyper-criticism destroy their love of the whole.  And if they don’t love the whole, why do they care if Al Gore speaks or not?  I hope these people re-evaluate their positions and decide that it is not worth walking out on SHRM Annual just because they don’t like or agree with Al Gore and/or his politics.  If they LOOK FOR SOMETHING TO LOVE, even in his speech,  I bet they’ll find it.  Maybe he’ll be wearing great shoes.

Audience walks out – why do they come back?

As 2009 disappeared into 2010, Bill Boorman called for a special Carnival of HR. He asked HR and recruiting pros from all over the world to create a Vlog (video blog if you are unaware or extra-tired) with their predictions for the New Year. As sometimes happens, I chose not to follow directions too carefully.  My video was actually a PLEA, not a prediction:

I wanted – and still want – the HR/Recruiting community to reach out and help others within the community.  Don’t wait to be asked for help – offer it first.

Now that we have come to the end of the first 2010 month, I would like to recognize and shout out to a member of the HR/recruiting community for doing exactly what I asked for in that video: Laurie Ruettimann.

Laurie is a heavy hitter, and highly influential,  in the HR/Rec world, enjoying a demand for her services as a writer, facilitator, panelist, and commentator.  Her PunkRockHR blog is followed and read by a large and diverse population. Consequently, there is a certain amount of prestige in being included in her blogroll. So I was a bit surprised – but very delighted – when she REACHED OUT and asked people to furnish their blog information so she could include them on her updated blogroll.

Many bloggers are very particular about their blogroll – and understandably so.  After all, it is essentially a recommendation by you that may impact your own credibility as a blogger. The fact that Laurie just brushed those concerns aside and invited everyone who blogs to be included makes her the recipient of my first Reach Out and Touch award of 2010.  I think I’ll send her some bacon.

Who will be the recipient in February?  You?

The rules are simple:

1. Select a charity that is soliciting donations for aid in Haiti.
2. Apply your HR and social media skills by doing a “back­ground check” on that orga­ni­za­tion.
3. Write up your find­ings, pos­i­tive or neg­a­tive, and post them on your blog no later than Jan­u­ary 26^th.

So asked Mike VanDervort, friend and fellow HR blogger, in his blog The Human Racehorses.

Sometimes, though, it is okay to color outside of the lines.  So I changed the rules.  I changed them because I didn’t want to pick a charity and research it.  I wanted needed to find a charity that I could be comfortable sending more than a $10 text message to – and I wanted the best.  The new rules?

1. Pretend you are creating a new job position called Haitian charity.
2. Undertake a needs assessment; determine the knowledge, skills, and abilities the charity must have to be successful and worthy of “hiring”.
3. Research charities until you determine the perfect candidate.
4. Hire the candidate charity by writing your findings in a blog and sending them the most sizable donation you can muster.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Experience is the usually the best teacher, so I looked back at the Indian Ocean tsunamis of 2004.  I studied white papers, blogs, and news articles to see what I could learn about the effectiveness of charitable organizations in dealing with that disaster, and what types of problems all charitable organizations faced (examples here and here ).

After that research, it became clear to me that those non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that already had operations running in the affected area were the most efficient and effective performers. These NGOs already have committed people on the ground, have overcome language and culture barriers,  have established contacts and connections with local vendors, and will remain engaged with the country on a long term basis. This became my main requirement for my charity: Long term commitment to Haiti that preceded the January 12 earthquake, evidenced by established operations.

The next skill is pretty basic: how much money goes to actual operational support, as opposed to administrative and fund-raising expenses? Research showed me that an organization that spends 80% of the donations it receives on charitable programs is considered efficient, while 90% is considered highly efficient.  I always want the best I can get, so my additional requirement became: Program spending of 90% or greater.

FINDING THE CANDIDATE

One of the most important tools I used to research and find the ideal charity candidate was Charity Navigator.  Itself an independent, non-profit that helps evaluate and promote charitable giving, they were so helpful that I found myself donating to them after finishing my research.  There were many four-star rated charities with long-term Haitian ground operations, including Save the Children and Medecins Sans Frontieres (the international parent of  Doctors without Borders).  In the end, I decided  on Partners In Health/Stand With Haiti.

Partners In Health(PIH) has been working on the ground in Haiti since 1985.  Their Zanmi Lasante (“partners in health”) project in Cange, Haiti is a community based health project that has grown to include 8 facilities in central Haiti.  They are devoted to providing medical services to Haitian poor.  PIH believes that health care is a right that should be available to everyone. Their vision is “whatever it takes”:

Almost 95% of their funds go to program expenses.  If you go to Charity Navigator and look at the salaries of their top executives, you will understand why they are able to devote so much funding to their programs.

I wanted the best, and I think I found it.

This post really begins at a different blog:  Laurie Ruettiman’s  Punk Rock HR.  On January 15, 2010, on her weekly F@%k It Friday series. she posted a blog called Pat Robertson, Haiti, and The Devil. Her blog contained this video.

This blog and video generated a lively response of comments, including one from me:

Pat Robertson is entitled to his opinion in America, and he is even entitled to express his opinion without unnecessary government intervention, a la the First Amendment. Put a video out on You Tube? Go for it, Pat.

What he is NOT entitled to under our governmental system is to have anyone give a crap about what he says. The fact that he has a video being played over and over again on the news programs (at least I presume it is – I don’t watch television and I first saw this video on this blog) is the fault of news media decision makers who have decided that what Pat Robertson says is important.

I have several videos on YouTube and no one cares. (Well, maybe @BillBoorman does. A little.) I could stand on my street corner all day long and yell the same ridiculous things about Haiti as Pat Robertson, but I doubt that even my local news media would show up.

So I don’t hate Pat Robertson. I hate the CEO of any ersatz news program that has replayed that drivel and called it news, because the decisions of their company is their responsibility, and those decisions are why I even know who Pat Robertson is.

Now Laurie is always generous and thoughtful, responding to all comments on her blog.  This is what she said about my comment:

@JoanGinsberg – yup, you’re exactly right, the media have a huge part to play in people like PR consistently having a soapbox from which to shout stupid, stupid things. However, you’ve also got to put some of the accountability on audiences – PR gets on the news because when he’s on the news, ratings (and revenue) go up. For whatever reason, people listen PR – either because they think he’s a tool and want to hear what kind of tool-like thing he’s going to say next or because they *shudder* agree with him. Either way, he’s on TV because people demand that he be on tv (i.e., implicitly, by watching whenever he’s on), not just because network execs want to force him on us.

After all, TV networks and producers (of news or entertainment, etc.) are not in the business of providing audiences with content, they’re in the business of selling audiences to advertisers. TV shows aren’t their product, you are.

I hope I still have your attention after all of this back story, because what I really want to do right now is discuss Laurie’s reply.

While I don’t dispute the idea that television viewers/consumers are accountable for the content that is created, I maintain that consumers are far less responsible for NEWS content than entertainment content. I will lay ALL of the blame at the feet of consumers when it comes to entertainment, but I’m a lot less sure of audience responsibility when it comes to news content.

Let’s face it, every person in the United States could have called MSNBC on January 2 and said, “Hey, we want you to cover a natural disaster that causes massive destruction and death.  Maybe an earthquake in Haiti.  Within 10 days, please.”  That quake in Haiti, and the resultant news coverage, didn’t happen because audiences asked for it.  No matter how great the consumer demand, and the resultant high viewer percentages to sell to advertisers, the news content has to come first.  Without that content, the news media can’t produce any product.

Al-Qaeda and other extremist terrorist organizations know this all too well.  Their opinions don’t get any airplay from new organizations until they bomb buildings or blow up airplanes.  So they create the content for the TV executives and producers to put on their newscasts. Without that content, the viewers neither know or care about Al-Qaeda’s message.  That content is chosen by the TV and other media executives, and then the audience responds.

Yes, the public, or some degree of it, cares about what Pat Robertson thinks about Haiti, even if it is just to hiss and boo his message.  But the public only cares because – as the children say when they have been caught misbehaving – the other guy ( news organizations) started it.

There was a great movie made while back that satirized this very problem.   “Wag the Dog” is about White House spin doctors hiring a Hollywood director to create a war.  In the movie, news content was CREATED  to control the public demand for certain news.   The movie may have been fiction, but I think it was based, as great satires are, on fact.  That, in my book, is the essence of corporate irresponsibility.

What do you think?  Who should bear the responsibility for inane or irrelevant news content?

In all of my lengthy professional life, I had never been to a conference. I had been to plenty of trade shows and training seminars, but a conference – where people actually talked to each other and exchanged ideas – was outside of my experience.  Now that I am unemployed, why am I preparing to sign up for two very expensive HR conferences, spending a fortune in travel, lodging, and meals on top of the registration costs, and considering several more?

Twitter.

Jim Mitchem, whose Twitter name is @smashadv, said it best: The best part of Twitter is the humility that comes with realizing that you’re *never* the smartest person in the room.

When I got really involved in Twitter late last summer, I learned that there was a whole group of highly intelligent HR and recruiting pros online that were willing to share their knowledge and insights.   When some of those pros hosted an “unconference” called HRevolution, with the idea that the exchange and engagement from Twitter would come alive, I knew I had to go.

HRevolution was electrifying for me. It was a non-stop exchange of ideas about a profession amongst highly intelligent practitioners, and I was instantly addicted. Now I crave more, because

There are BRILLIANT people that speak at these events—and even MORE brilliant people that are present and networking. MANY of these people have not joined the dialog in our beloved Social Media—but that means NOTHING about the level of knowledge and expertise they have to offer.

That quote, from Monster.com’s Eric Weingardner (@ewmonster on Twitter), says it all for me.  I’m going to start out with the Employment Law &  Legislative Update given by SHRM, then attend HRevolution in May.  I’m taking advantage of early registration for SHRM 2010, their June annual conference.  I’m sure there will be more along the way, and I am happy to take suggestions.

How about you?  Want to plug your HR Conference or talk about your conference plans?