Freedom of Choice in Workplace Technology

There is a growing technology trend in workplaces both large and small called 'Bring Your Own Device', sometimes abbreviated as BYOD. Bring Your Own Device simply means that organizational IT departments are allowing individual employees to use their personal or preferred 'devices', (smartphones, tablets, laptops), to access the corporate systems and tools they need to accomplish their work.

BYOD, while certainly more complex for centralized IT teams to support and administer, is an admission and realization that often an individual's attachment and bond to their personal productivity tools is so powerful, that forcing them to adapt and adopt to the corporate footprint is counter-productive and even deflating.  Think about it, if you hire a new sales executive, that has years of his or her industry and corporate contacts resident on their iPhone, or saved to a cloud-based service they access via an Android app, does it really make sense to hand them a new BlackBerry and tell them to 'deal with it, because that is what we support.'

Proponents of BYOD will contend that allowing employees to bring their own devices can reduce training costs as well as the amount of IT support calls on an ongoing basis. Despite supporting 'more' devices, the argument is that each employee already knows how t use and manage their preferred device. As in the example of the new sales rep above, not having to transition from a device and set of tools to a new 'official' platform, can make employees more productive, and reduce time to achieve desired performance levels. Finally, they make employees happier. People LOVE their iPhones, Androids, iPads, whatever. Making them break those ties when they come to the office is painful for many.

The arguments against BYOD typically center around data security, lack of resources to deploy and support a myriad of devices and platforms, and cultural drivers that tend to resist the kind of openness and freedom that BYOD programs foster.  But it does seem likely that as we see the major shift in consumer preferences towards iPhones, iPads, and Android devices; and away from the traditional enterprise deployments of BlackBerries and Microsoft-based PCs, that progressive organizations and IT leaders will simply have to embrace these shifts, and figure out a way to support what their employees really want, while balancing their need to maintain IP and data security.

Recently Clorox, an 8,300 person strong maker of consumer cleaning products adopted a kind of modified BYOD program, by offering its workers a choice of corporate-supported smartphone. Previously, BlackBerry had been the corporate standard. Workers could choose from iPhone, Android, or a Windows7 device. The result - "the company has issued 2,000 smartphones, 92% of which are iPhones. About 6% of the smartphones chosen were Android-based while 2% were Windows Phone 7 devices."

This isn't a knock on BlackBerry, I personally am a happy BlackBerry user, but rather an observation that prior to having a choice of device, almost all of the employees at Clorox were not happy with the 'provided' device, and given the opportunity to move to something more aligned with their preferences, they jumped at the chance. Clorox didn't make this decision to be nice or kind to staff, they balanced the value of the increased effectiveness and engagement of staff against the cost to procure and support the suite of devices and have determined that rather than being a perk to employees, it is simply just a good business decision.

I think we will see more BYOD programs taking hold in the coming years as new entrants to the workforce carry in their tools and preferences and expect them to be supported in the workplace.

I wonder if the next trend might be BYOHRT, Bring your own HR Technology? What might that look like?

Limitations, Assumptions, and Brain-Control

Yesterday the MIT Technology Review had a piece about a new breakthrough technology that supports a type of 'brain-control' interface allowing users to dial the numbers on a cell phone simply by thinking of them.Credit - University of California, San Diego

From the MIT Technology Review piece:

'Researchers in California have created a way to place a call on a cell phone using just your thoughts. Their new brain-computer interface is almost 100 percent accurate for most people after only a brief training period.

Like many other such interfaces, Jung's system relies on electroencephalogram (EEG) electrodes on the scalp to analyze electrical activity in the brain. An EEG headband is hooked up to a Bluetooth module that wirelessly sends the signals to a Nokia N73 cell phone, which uses algorithms to process the signals.'

The system has obvious benefits to people with disabilities, that for whom even dialing the numbers on a common cell phone can be an extremely difficult challenge.  Once this type of technology is enhanced and improved, one can envision the 'mind-control' interface evolving beyond the relatively simple act of dialing a phone number, to more complex computer interactions (sending short text messages, clicking buttons, searching for content, etc.).

But beyond the obvious cool factor of computers and smartphones reacting to our thoughts, I think this story is a reminder for any of us that design and deploy systems in our organizations, or are tasked with creating effective and important communications and messaging. The audiences that we are trying to reach all have their own set of challenges, that often causes friction in their acceptance of our new systems, or that curtails their willingness and capacity to absorb our messages.

Mostly we realize these challenges and limitations exist. But we also assume that our position in the organization will make whatever we are doing seem important enought that employees will simply have to get over their problems and deal with it.

We create the standard and necessary communication messages to distribute to all employees and in the next breath say 'But we know no one pays attention to these emails'. We litter the screens of our online Employee Self-Service systems with help text and links to dense 27-page User Guides, with the full realization that busy managers and employees don't want to be bothered to read them. Our IT departments support corporate BlackBerry and lately iPhone and iPad, but almost none of the HR-related interaction (messaging, training material, access to HR systems and information), are available on these mobile platforms.

So employees continue to ignore messages, work around the set of systems and processes we have installed, or require what we interpret as irrationally high demands for support to use systems that we think should be simple, intuitive, and frictionless.

But often we fail to see our end of the problem in these situations. It would be, as in the example of the mind-control cell phone, if the cell phone manufacturer blamed disabled people for their inability to make a simple phone call.

So today I am thinking about the tools I have deployed, and the communications that surround them, and considering whether or not I have done the equivalent of handing a cell phone over to someone without the ability to dial.

But until I can deploy systems in the enterprise that operate on 'mind-control', I think, as you may agree, we have a longer and tougher road to go.

'Like' this job on Facebook

At the recent ERE Expo in San Diego, I had a chance to interview Stephane Le Viet, CEO and Founder; and Matt Brown, Director of Business Development of Work4Labs, the company responsible for the popular Facebook recruiting application known as 'Work 4 Us'.

Work 4 Us is a Facebook application that allows organizations to quickly and easily add job listings to their company Facebook page, whether by automated import from the company ATS or career site, or via manual entry. Once imported or entered, the company can then leverage the social sharing capabilities inherent inside Facebook (individual jobs can be shared and 'liked'); and the supported integration with the Facebook advertising platform allows the creation of more precise ad campaigns designed to get the company job listings noticed by the target candidate audience on Facebook. Tracking and analytical tools allow the organization to assess and evaluate the reach and success of their job posting campaigns.

That's assuming the desired candidate pool is on Facebook. And considering that pretty much everyone these days from your 12-year old nephew to your 83-year old Grandma seems to be on Facebook it is a pretty good bet that at least some of your desired candidates are out there.

Work4Labs claims over 6,000 organizations have installed the Work For Us application to date, with large, multi-nationals like L'Oreal and Citi among the applications' most notable adopters.

Yesterday the team at Work4Labs announced a new enhancement to the Work For Us application, namely the ability to present the Facebook user that views a job description in the application with a suggested list of Facebook friends, and optionally LinkedIn contacts that might be a suitable match for the job, and perhaps would be interested in the job details. Once authorized, the app processes Facebook and LinkedIn profile data – education, work history, interests, location, and so on – to suggest the most relevant friends for the job.

Sample job listing posted using Work For Us with suggested friends:

This is the kind of functionality, a matching algorithm based suggestion engine, that social recruiting technology solutions are increasingly adopting in recognition that simply broadcasting links of available jobs to all of one's social connections is not only inefficient but can also be seen as highly annoying. By making the social sharing and referral process simple, easy to use, and more relevant by narrowing and suggesting social contacts to share the job information with, the hope is that the organization will not only just see it's job posting shared widely, but that the likelihood of social discovery of candidates that are good fits for the positions will increase.

More and more organizations are actively pursuing so-called 'social recruiting' strategies, whether it is using blogs, LinkedIn groups, Twitter accounts, and even Facebook to advertise positions, communicate and articulate the company employer brand, and more effectively engage with candidates and prospects. If your organization is starting down this path, or is considering adding a more active Facebook component to the mix, then you should give Work4Labs a look.

The Work For Us application installs to a Facebook page in literally minutes and has a number of pricing plans, ranging from Free (allows posting of one open position at a time), to $799/month that offers unlimited job postings, automatic import from an ATS, and other customization capabilities. All paid plans offer a 30-day free trial period.

So are you actively recruiting on Facebook? Thinking about starting?  Would the Work For Us application work for you?

Hold my calls

Recently a piece in the New York Times titled 'Don't Call Me, I Won't Call You', highlighted our increasing reticence and reluctance to talk on the phone. The article describes the downward trend in adults overall use of voice communications, with increasing time and energy spent on alternated methods of electronic communication - email, text, IM, and social network mediated methods.Can you just send me a text next time?

Past HR Happy Hour Show guest Sherry Turkle devotes an entire chapter of her book 'Alone Together' to this phenomenon. Various people that Turkle interviewed for the book offer explanations ranging from a teenager stating, 'You wouldn't want to call, because then you would have to have a conversation'; to an overworked Gen X professional sharing, '(phone calls) promise more than I am willing to deliver.' Throughout the chapter, we see again and again a general unwillingness to share that most precious commodity in our overscheduled, hyper-connected lives, something known as 'private cell phone time.'

And so whether it is hard date from sources like Nielsen; phone call activity logs kept by recruiters or salespeople; or even personal or anecdotal evidence - once we have accepted this lack of interest or desire of many friends, colleagues, or customers to take our calls what matter know is what we choose to do with this information.

It is common in many sales and recruiting roles for organizations to place quotas on the number and repetitive frequency of calls made to customers, prospects, or potential candidates. These requirements often stem from historical trends - 'X' number of calls will yield 'Y' number of prospects, which will result in 'Z' sales. It is simple, or simple enough math. If you aren't having much luck moving the 'Z' number, then simply fire up the coffee pot and keep dialing, eventually history says the numbers will move in your favor.

But taking that kind of an approach can only work for so long - if indeed there is (and most indications seem to be bearing this out), a more widespread trend favoring other methods of communication, or perhaps more accurately avoiding the phone, then the design of strategies, rewards, performance metrics, and job descriptions that attempt to proscribe particular methods of communication and contact might need to be reconsidered.

A better approach that attempts to account for the ever-changing preferences and profiles of the target market might be something more like, 'We need you to make 'Z' sales. In the past, it would take about 'X' calls to make that happen, but since no one answers the phone any more, we really don't know how many calls you will need to make. In face, making more calls might not be the answer at all. Maybe you have to figure out a new strategy, that factors in blogs, LinkedIn, Twitter, and SMS. Fact is, we don't know. You figure it out.'

The broader issue is, I think, when we try to prescribe to colleagues and employees 'exactly' how to accomplish something, then that becomes the way they will attempt to meet their goals. Once the presciption starts breaking down, we might not have given them the freedom, or equipped them with the capacity to adapt quickly enough to address the changing conditions. 

When the only thing we know how to do is dial the phone, a world where no one answers any more is quite scary indeed.

The Tech Job Market - Heating Up

Yesterday the folks at Dice.com released their 'The Rising Demand for Tech Talent - Spring 2011' report, which highlights trends in the tech job market, as indicated by job postings on the Dice.com site over the last year.

These kinds of reports from large job boards like Dice.com are instructive; while we can postulate or rely on anecdotal evidence about the condition and situation of certain labor markets, the Dice data provides more quantitative data about the tech labor market that can be used to help explain the actions we see from candidates and employees, and help inform strategies for recruiting, retention, and compensation.

Dice tagged the Spring 2011 report 'Rising Demand', and a closer look at the data justifies that label.

Figure 1 - Tech Job Postings by Position Type

Overall Growth - March 1, 2011/March 1, 2010Nice, overall growth in posted positions of 30%, with stronger growth in Full-Time gigs (35%). More overall opportunities for tech professionals will tend to make filling your specific tech positions more difficult, and also provide even more impetus to your current staff that may have been reluctant (or unable) to seek other opportunities to consider making a move. 

Taking a closer look at the overall numbers, we see increases in tech job postings across most major tech markets.

Figure 2 - Job posting growth by area

DC is still pretty hot. But so is Atlanta

If you are a technical recruiter or corporate tech manager in say Washington or even Chicago and have been wondering why it seems so much harder to fill that ABAP developer spot, maybe you shouldn't be wondering anymore. Markets like Chicago, Seattle, and Atlanta are all seeing significant increased in tech positions (again, as posted on Dice.com). 

So maybe this data is just re-stating the obvious - the tech labor market is improving, it is getting more difficult to find people with the right tech skills in many markets, and those curious recent voluntary departures from your IT staff may all of a sudden make more sense.

But aggregated job board data is not just useful in looking at macro trends in posted positions, these tech jobs are all looking for sets of specific skills, and examining the trends in the kinds of technical skills that companies are advertising for can give us some clues about the trends in enterprise IT priorities and needs in the coming months.

Figure 3 - Trends in Desired Skills

Need for Cloud skills on the riseThe Dice.com data show huge increases year-over-year in the desire of employers for skills in Cloud computing, Virtualization, and JavaScript. Key skill sets and technologies that underly much of the major changes in how enterprise technologies are developed, deployed, and consumed. For those IT pros still clinging to older and more traditional technologies, all is not lost, jobs posted on Dice looking for PeopleSoft skills also increased 66% year-over-year.

Again, maybe not earth-shattering news, everyone knows the Cloud is hot. Heck, when Microsoft is running mass-market TV commercials about 'The Cloud' you know it has arrived. But having some real data helps the recruiter better understand the market, and the HR leader assess what these changing (and clearly improving) markets may mean for workforce planning and strategy. Talent markets are constantly shifting and evolving, if you buy into the whole 'War for Talent' metaphor, then arming yourself with some data is a necessary condition of engagement.

Thanks to the folks at Dice.com for sharing this data, hopefully you don't mind that I re-used much of it here (probably should have checked first).

I encourage you to check out the full report here.