Recruitment & HR

Whether a candidate gets a job or not, they deserve feedback or a response, not to be ghosted. A rejection is better than silence. ❌ > 🫥 When I was a recruiter at my last company, my manager set an expectation that all candidates would receive a response no matter if they got an offer or not. In addition to that, the interview process would provide them updates every step along the way. By ghosting and not providing a response or feedback, it shows the culture of the company. Companies who provide transparency, empathy, and communication to job seekers are more likely to see a positive outcome of : 👏 Strengthens Candidate Experience: Providing clear communication, even in rejection, contributes to a positive candidate experience, which can impact how candidates talk about your company to others. 🤝 Reflects Company Culture: How you treat candidates reflects your organization’s values and culture. Consistent, respectful communication shows you prioritize transparency and integrity. 🫶 Enhances Employer Brand: Candidates who feel respected, regardless of outcome, are more likely to view your company positively, boosting your employer brand and making it more attractive to future talent. Candidates deserve transparency on where they are at and that’s why I love ActiveCampaign. It is an essential tool for keeping candidates informed during the interview and offer process, ensuring they receive timely updates and don’t feel ghosted—even if the decision is a rejection. With automated follow-ups and personalized messaging, it shows respect for candidates' time and efforts, creating a positive experience that builds trust and professionalism. A clear response is always better than silence, and ActiveCampaign makes it easy to deliver that respect throughout your hiring process. The candidates that didn’t end up getting an offer or moved forward through the process,  expressed that they appreciated that there was some form of response even though it was a rejection. The job search is hard enough, let’s not make it harder by ghosting 💙 #activecampaignpartner

Imagine you're the CFO of a global company and someone pitches you a recruitment automation solution that will do the work of 400 recruiters and save you $30M per year. What would you do? When I was at LinkedIn's Talent Connect in October, I attended a workshop with John Vlastelica in which he shared that a global company had decided to implement a recruiting automation solution that would allow them to save $30M in costs by eliminating 400 recruiter positions. They also reduced the time to hire from 11 days down to 3. He shared that another company had used recruitment automation software to hire 300,000 workers with minimal human involvement - people only came into the process after background checks had been performed. They also maintained candidate quality and candidate experience while increasing the speed of hire. These kinds of case studies should not surprise anyone, although it is sobering to anyone in talent acquisition - the rapid advancement of AI and automation in recruiting is both exciting and concerning. On the one hand, the potential for efficiency gains, cost savings, and improved candidate experience is huge and undeniable, as these examples demonstrate. On the other hand, we must also be mindful of the human impact - thousands of recruiters are seeing their roles transformed or eliminated. As talent acquisition professionals, it's important to be thinking about how to adapt and provide value in this changing landscape. Some key questions to consider: -How can we upskill and position ourselves to work alongside AI rather than be replaced by it? -What are the uniquely human elements of recruiting that AI can't replicate, and how do we double down on those? -How might our roles evolve to focus more on passive talent sourcing, talent intelligence/advisory, strategic workforce planning, employer branding, candidate engagement, and employee experience? For companies considering or implementing recruitment automation, I believe it should be a thoughtful, strategic decision - not just a blind cost-cutting measure. Here are some key considerations: -What is the optimal mix of human and automated touchpoints to balance efficiency and candidate experience? -How will the balance of AI and human involvement vary based on the labor market dynamics for each role? Roles with talent scarcity may require more human touch to attract and engage candidates, while high-volume roles with ample supply lend themselves to greater automation. -How will we redeploy or reskill displaced recruiters? -How do we maintain our employer brand and human touch with increased automation? The future of recruiting is undoubtedly both human and machine - but the mix is up to each company and may vary by role/department. I'm curious to hear your thoughts - have you been impacted by AI/automation? How are you and/or your company preparing for the intersection of AI/automation and recruiting? #AI #Recruiting #FutureOfWork

If #diversity, #equity, and #inclusion practitioners want to get ahead of anti-DEI backlash, we have to address an elephant in the room: no two people in the same workplace perceive their workplace the same way. I see this every time I work with client organizations. When asked to describe their own experience with the workplace and its DEI strengths and challenges, I hear things like: 😊 "I've never experienced any discrimination or mistreatment; our leaders' commitment is strong." 🤨 "I had a good time in one department, but after transferring departments I started experiencing explicit ableist comments under my new manager." 🙁 "I've never had anything egregious happen, but I've always felt less respected by my team members because of my race." Who's right? Turns out, all of them. It starts to get messy because everyone inevitably generalizes their own personal experiences into their perception of the workplace as a whole; three people might accordingly describe their workplace as a "meritocracy without discrimination," an "inconsistently inclusive workplace dependent on manager," or "a subtly racist environment." And when people are confronted with other experiences of the workplace that DIFFER from their own, they often take it personally. I've seen leaders bristle at the implication that their own experience was "wrong," or get defensive in expectation they will be accused of lacking awareness. It's exactly this defensiveness that lays the foundation for misunderstanding, polarization, and yes—anti-DEI misinformation—to spread in an organization. How do we mitigate it? In my own work, I've found that these simple steps go a long way. 1. Validate everyone's experience. Saying outright that everyone's personal experience is "correct" for themselves might seem too obvious, but it plays a powerful role in helping everyone feel respected and taken seriously. Reality is not a question of "who is right"—it's the messy summation of everyone's lived experience, good or bad. 2. Use data to create a shared baseline. Gathering data by organizational and social demographics allows us to make statements like, "the average perception of team respect is 70% in Engineering, but only 30% in Sales," or "perception of fair decision making processes is 90% for white men, but only 40% for Black women." This establishes a shared reality, a baseline for any effective DEI work. 3. Make it clear that problem-solving involves—and requires—everyone. The goal of DEI work is to achieve positive outcomes for everyone. Those with already positive experiences? Their insights help us know what we're aiming for. Those with the most negative? Their insights help us learn what's broken. The more we communicate that collective effort benefits the collective, rather than shaming or dismissing those at the margins, the more we can unite people around DEI and beat the backlash.

Questions I ask when checking references When hiring for key positions, our last step is speaking with references. A phase for the final-finalists. When I talk to a supplied reference, I'm curious about nuance, feel, and paradox, not the obvious stuff. Below is a question library I might pull from. • What's something that would surprise us about them? • Specifically, any areas where you were surprised they weren't as good as you expected with A, B, or C? Or much better than expected with D, E, and F? • What's the difference between how they interview and how they deliver on the job? • Is there a difference between how a boss, a peer, or a direct report would describe them? If so, what's the difference? • If you were at another company, would you absolutely hire this person again for a similar role? • Who do they naturally gravitate to inside an organization? Or naturally avoid? • What are they better at than they think, and, on the flip side, worse at than they think? • What sort of things do they do that often go unnoticed or are under-appreciated? • What don't they get enough credit for? • Can you tell me about the kind of people they've hired? • Do they leave disagreements on good terms? • Are they more curious or critical about what they don't understand? • What's the one thing nearly everyone would say about them? • What kind of company feels like a natural fit? And which kind would be a challenge? • Can you describe a time when they changed their mind? From what to what, and what caused the change? • What's the best thing about working with them? And the hardest? • If you could change something about them, what would it be? • Are they better working with what they have, or working with what they want? • When have you seen them get in over their head? And how did that turn out? • Have you seen them get better at something? Worse? • Do they make other people better? How? • Are they better at taking credit or giving credit? • Are they more likely to adjust to something, or try to adjust the thing? • Primary blindspot? And bright spot? • As well as you know this person, what do you think their secret career ambition is? • If they hadn't been at your company, how would your company have been different? • Can you remember a time you wished you had their advice on a decision, but you didn't? • Have they ever changed your mind? • What's the easiest thing for them to communicate? And the hardest? • How have they changed during the time you knew them? • Do you still keep in touch even though you don't work together anymore? • What do they need to be successful? • Why do you think we'd be a better company with them on board? • Who else should I talk to that would have something to say about them? There are many more, but those are among the things I'm most curious about. Feel free to take them, use them, tell me they're great questions, or terrible ones. Either way, I hope you found them useful.

Last week, an employee came to me after reporting her manager for harassment - trusting HR to keep it confidential. Instead, HR passed the complaint to the manager's boss, who told the manager everything. By week's end, her manager had turned her words into a threat - and her job into a target. Here's what being a former corporate counsel taught me about HR's quietest, biggest lie: When HR says "This conversation is confidential," they mean: "Everything you say will be documented, distributed, and potentially used against you.” I've sat in those meetings. I've seen the reports. I've watched the aftermath. The truth? Your "confidential" conversation gets shared with: 1. Your direct manager 2. Their manager 3. Legal department 4. Executive team 5. Anyone deemed "relevant" to the investigation But it gets worse. Remember those "performance issues" that suddenly appeared after your complaint? That's because HR took your vulnerable moments and reframed them as evidence: "She admitted feeling anxious" becomes "Unable to handle workplace pressure" "He mentioned being distracted" turns into "Lack of focus and productivity" "They expressed concerns about the team" transforms to "Not a cultural fit" I've watched this playbook destroy careers for years. Now I'm helping employees protect themselves. Three rules I want you to remember: 1. Document everything BEFORE going to HR 2. Assume every word will be shared 3. Get things in writing - after any verbal conversation, send a follow-up: "As discussed today…" Protect yourself first. The company already has an entire department doing the same. Follow for more insider insights on protecting your workplace rights. #EmploymentAttorney  #CaliforniaEmploymentLaw  #EmployeeRights

HR: Employees are leaving jobs. CFO: Do we have data on why they’re leaving? HR: Yes. 70% of our turnover is tied to unmet needs like growth, recognition, and flexibility. CEO: But how much does it actually cost us when they leave? HR: Each lost employee costs 1.5x their salary to replace, not to mention the productivity gap. CEO: We need to reduce spending. We can't spend on engagement programs. CFO: What’s the impact of these engagement programs on retention? HR: Programs focused on growth and recognition have reduced turnover by 25%, saving us $3M annually. CEO: Are there other benefits to meeting employee needs? HR: Absolutely. Employees who feel valued are 30% more productive and report higher satisfaction. CFO: What about profitability? CHRO: Engaged teams generate 21% higher profitability. It’s not just about keeping them. It’s about keeping them productive and motivated. CEO: So cutting back on programs that meet employee needs could cost us more? CFO: The data shows there’s a significant financial impact. HR: Meeting employee needs isn’t just an expense. It’s an investment in retention, productivity, and profit. The lesson? Employees quit when their needs go unmet, whether it’s for growth, recognition, or flexibility. Invest in your employees.

Let's be real: If you're in HR, you've probably misinterpreted the law at some point and found yourself looking back a few years later with a facial expression that looked something like: 😰 😅 🤮 Here are just a few examples of incorrect legal assumptions I've heard over the years from HR professionals: - You cannot legally terminate an underperforming employee if they've disclosed a medical issue — regardless of ongoing performance issues, reasonable accommodations, etc - You're not legally required to conduct an employee investigation unless an employee files a formal complaint - Employers are responsible for assigning legally required trainings like Harassment Prevention; whether or not the employee actually takes that training, however, is on them Okay, fine. 1 or 2 of these may have been things I was personally told by an HR manager early on in my career. Whoops. And listen, I get it. This stuff is hard. Worse yet when you're thrown into a new responsibility with little to no formal training. I mean, HR professionals quite literally are not lawyers. We do not have formal law degrees. Who thought it would be a good idea to make us responsible for a bunch of legally nuanced scopes of responsibility without any formal training? Especially when the laws keep changing on us every few years and with distinctions by state. But the fact is, we *are* responsible for a bunch of legally nuanced stuff. And it's our job to make sure we get it right — both for the wellbeing of our employees, and for the long-term success of the company itself. So what can you do if you've been thrown into the deep end and feel like you're struggling to keep up with the constant influx of changing legal requirements? 1. Find trusted resources that will keep you posted on the latest in compliance and employment-related legal requirements. I like HR Brew, and of course, Ethena's newsletters. (Link below.) 2. Pressure test your knowledge with multiple sources. People make mistakes. So don't just take one person's word as truth. Look at multiple sources of data. Sign up for webinars, talk to lawyers, download legal resources, etc. (I'll share a few resources below.) 3. Lean on People communities you can reach out to for help. If you've got a legal question, I can promise you: Many other People leaders have stumbled upon this same question themselves. Having a People community you can reach out to for resources, advice, and more is a must. I've personally found a ton of value in the TroopHR community. Resources you might find helpful: - How to terminate an employee (including scripts): https://lnkd.in/eBVKk8Js - Employee investigation checklist: https://lnkd.in/e2APi_WE - Reasonable accommodation templates: https://lnkd.in/egv_2x7m For our full list of legal resources, check out our resources page here: https://lnkd.in/e9_vj7H2 Be honest: Which areas of HR do you see people get wrong the most often? Which areas are the trickiest?

"If you want to get hired, send a thank you note" - influencers everywhere. But what if - and here me out - we shifted from putting this expectation on candidates, to asking employers to show some gratitude to the people who put time and energy into interviewing with them? The people doing the interviewing? They're being paid by their employer and doing their job by building their teams. But jobseekers are spending hours on each interview process with no guarantee of payoff. So here are a few ideas employers might consider to show some appreciation to those people who invest in your company through the interview process: 1. candidate.fyi recently rolled out a cool new feature allowing employers to offer exclusive discounts to candidates as a "thank you" during the interview process. Their platform manages and tracks all of this for you as well, and it could give candidates even more insight into your product and brand which can help them be more competitive in the future. 2. Consider compensating candidates when you ask them to put extensive time into a take-home project, or if anything in their work could be utilized by your company in the future. If this is too tricky, a gift card, swag, or even a personalized thank you note following an interview could be a show of appreciation for their efforts. 3. Provide other helpful resources! For example, at Zapier, we've gotten a lot of positive feedback on sharing a list of other remote companies that are hiring as well as some of the organizations we partner with that could be helpful to candidates in their own job search. These are all low-lift steps you can take to help candidates feel a bit more appreciated, build your employer brand, and keep those top candidates excited to come back and explore opportunities next time you have an opening. And if you're an employer thinking that a bad candidate experience doesn't negatively impact your business, think again. Back in 2017, Virgin Media realized they were losing $5M annually as a result of a poor candidate experience. Perhaps investing in candidate experience in 2024 could be the reason you hit bonus in 2025! P.S. I would be remiss if I didn't say that a thank you note isn't going to get you hired. It's always a polite thing to do but it's not going to be a game changer. - someone who has hired tens of thousands of people over the years.

You applied to 100+ jobs but no interviews? Here's what's actually happening. Your experience is valuable. You're just invisible. Let me explain why, and how to fix it. When you apply online, your resume goes into a database called an ATS (Applicant Tracking System). Think of it like a massive filing cabinet. Now here's the key: Some recruiters don't read every resume. They search. Just like you search Google, they search their database: "Python AND data analysis" "SAFe AND agile transformation" "Tableau AND dashboard" If your resume doesn't have their exact search terms, you’re making it harder to get discovered. You're not rejected. You're just not found. But here's the secret: The job description often tells you EXACTLY what keywords they'll search for. It's like having the answer key. Example from a real job posting: If they say "Experience with Snowflake required"... → They'll search "Snowflake" → Make sure you write "Built data warehouse in Snowflake…" Not "cloud database" or "modern data platform." Use their exact words: Snowflake. I've mapped out 80 keywords that get candidates noticed in 2025: Top searches happening right now: • Python, TensorFlow, LangChain (AI roles) • Kubernetes, Terraform, Docker (tech leadership) • Power BI, Tableau, SQL (data leadership) • SAFe, Agile, DevOps (transformation roles) Your action plan: 1. Read the job description carefully 2. Circle every tool, platform, or methodology mentioned 3. Add those EXACT terms to your resume (if you have that experience) 4. Use them naturally in your accomplishments Example: Instead of: "Led team through digital modernization" You say: "Led SAFe agile transformation using ServiceNow and Jira, reducing delivery time by 40%" You have the experience. Now make it searchable. Your next role isn't rejecting you. It just hasn't found you yet. You’ve got this! 💡 Save this cheat sheet of 80 searchable keywords ♻️ Share to help someone in your network Follow me for more insider recruiting insights

Everyone knows the working‑age population is barely growing. The bigger story is who is shrinking. • Non‑college adults are already shrinking as Boomers without degrees retire. • College‑educated adults keep climbing 1‑1.5 % a year, as record‑share Gen Z graduates replace retirees. Now the kicker: that non‑college decline is being driven disproportionately by women, as the chart below shows. Over the past decade, working‑age women without a degree have fallen far faster than men, and forecasts show the gap widening. That spells acute staffing pressure for frontline roles, health‑care support, childcare, personal care, built on non‑college female labor. These hands‑on jobs can’t be offshored or automated at scale, so employers must raise pay, upgrade job quality, and widen recruiting pipelines, or watch service bottlenecks grow. #labormarkets #demographics #gender #highered #recruitment #futureofwork