A Recipe For Success

by David Bachrach
Monster Government Solutions

Ever bake a pie? To have a delicious pie at the end of the whole process, you need to (a) have the right ingredients, and (b) let it bake just the right amount of time, then (c) finish it before it gets too old. Now, you might think I am talking about pie because I’m writing this at the end of the day, and you’d be right. But I’ve also been thinking about how to come up with a solid job announcement and recruitment process, and the recipe for success is not all that different. Even though the Civil Service recipe might require the end product to be in a certain shape, or contain this ingredient or that, there is still substantial room for a chef’s flair to make each announcement appealing and unique. Here are some of the basics.

Choosing the Right Ingredients

Let’s take a look at two actual job announcements pulled from two different online recruitment sites; both are for human resources specialists. For now, let’s just consider the first paragraph of each announcement. Which of these opening statements is more compelling for you as a job seeker? Which is the more effective start to a job announcement? Would either of these compel you to “dig in” if you were hungry for a new job?

This is an example of one organization selling the job, and the other describing it. In pie terms, we are talking about the difference between these two statements, which could be put on two different menus to describe the same dessert:

In describing the pie, both statements refer to the same dessert; in describing the job, both statements refer to similar jobs. Why would you, as a chef, choose something like the Pie Two statement to describe your dish, unless you really didn’t want to sell any of it? And why would a human resource manager or selecting official choose Announcement Two, unless he or she really didn’t want any qualified applicants for it?

Not convinced? Look at the closing statements of the same two job announcements:

Organization One articulated that strong business competencies are both expected and valued. Announcement One also concludes with an opportunity to take action right away: An online recruitment web page. Because I happened to have an account with that recruitment site, I just selected the résumé and cover letter I wanted to submit, and within three minutes I had successfully completed my application. The screen showed the word “SUCCESS!” and confirmed that my information was submitted to the correct organization (though my boss might be irked if this endeavor really works out). There really is no substitute for little bits of instant gratification like this for job seekers, who otherwise deal with lots of disappointment and waiting.

Announcement Two, on the other hand, is patronizing and demanding at the same time. This announcement is really compounding two common recruiting mistakes. First, there are literally six screens of information to read through just to find out what the referenced “all required information” is. Second, this announcement actually requires substantial work in addition to just reading through the announcement (no small feat itself): Submitting at least ten sheets of supporting documents. Writing five short essays. Making sure that all paperwork is marked correctly, and submitted to the right person by a certain date. One set for each grade level and method of consideration.

Letting It Bake Just the Right Amount of Time

Baking a pie for 20 minutes gives you a completely different result than baking it for 45 minutes. Depending on the desired result, a pie could easily end up either runny or horribly charred.

Looking again at the recruitment process, letting your applicant pool “sit” for too long will ensure that what you end up with is only the remnants of what you were expecting. Qualified applicants will only wait so long before moving on to something else—or being snapped up by another employer. Unqualified applicants will wait indefinitely, which can make drawn-out recruitment processes a recipe for failure: First, eliminate the best applicants, then choose from among the less-desirable applicants that remain.

Do Federal Organizations Have to Follow the Same Recipe?

It is true that your agency observes certain HR guidelines along with other agencies, depending on its source of HR authority. Does that mean that job announcements have to read exactly the same?

The answer lies in the examples above, from the two job announcements. One was for a job with a Federal employer, while the other was for a job with a global company with $25 billion in annual revenue. Without dwelling on which was which, here are some key points that can be extracted:

• An agency can choose the way it markets its jobs to job seekers. It could choose the language directly from either of the two announcements described, word for word, without violating any Federal HR rules.
• Online recruitment makes good business sense. You land applicants faster, you drastically reduce paperwork and filing requirements on the seeker and HR alike, and you play on a level field with other employers recruiting from the same population. With a global targeted labor pool, the Federal government can’t afford not to reach out fully on the web.
• There is no reason that an agency must collect all supporting documents from job applicants prior to a vacancy closing date. Period. It’s more work for everyone, and not helpful to anyone.
• With OPM’s transition to a tabbed vacancy builder, agencies have a great opportunity to revisit their job announcement practices. Do you need three paragraphs for explaining Equal Employment Opportunity? Why is a job announcement for a GS-4 data transcriber over 20 pages long? And a GS-15 nuclear engineer job six pages long? And why is a comparable nuclear engineer job on Monster.com only one page long?
• What is your agency trying to accomplish with its job announcements? What should it be accomplishing?

By questioning your current business processes, you will find that you have an opportunity to change your recruiting recipe to meet your agency’s needs, all OPM requirements, and your human resources objectives.

David Bachrach is a program manager with Monster Government Solutions. He spent four years as an analyst with the Federal government, before implementing alternative Federal personnel systems as a human resources consultant. David is open to your comments on this opinion piece at david.bachrach@monster.com.