January 23, 2025 • 41 mins
Peter Laughter, speaker and experienced recruiting/staffing entrepreneur, joins us this episode to discuss why he believes recruitment is broken and how he views the future of HR as a result.
[0:00] Introduction
•Welcome, Peter!
•Today’s Topic: Recruitment is Broken—How Can We Fix It?
[1:59] Peter journey in recruiting and staffing
•Lessons learned from working for a small staffing firm
•The commoditization of recruitment and staffing services
[19:28] Is recruitment broken?
•The connection between engaged employee and customer satisfaction
•How transformative technologies will fundamentally change organizations
[31:55] How Peter’s experience has framed his view of the future of HR
•Will HR be viewed as a resource as opposed to a cost center?
•The critical impact adaptive leadership can have on an organization’s HR team
[40:11] Closing
•Thanks for listening!
Quick Quote
“How can our organizations be effective if HR is viewed as a cost center as opposed to a resource?”
Resources
Peter's Website
TEDx talk
Moth Story (Podcast)
Moth Story (Video)
Contact:
Peter's LinkedIn
David's LinkedIn
Podcast Manager: Karissa Harris
Email us!
Production by Affogato Media
To schedule a meeting with us: https://salary.com/hrdlconsulting
For more HR Data Labs®, enjoy the HR Data Labs Brown Bag Lunch Hours every Friday at 2:00PM-2:30PM EST. Check it out here: https://hrdatalabs.com/brown-bag-lunch/
Produced by Affogato Media
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Announcer (00:00):
Announcer, the world of business is more complex than
(00:03):
ever. The world of humanresources and compensation is
also getting more complex.
Welcome to the HR Data Labspodcast, your direct source for
the latest trends from expertsinside and outside the world of
human resources. Listen as weexplore the impact that
compensation strategy data andpeople analytics can have on
your organization. This podcastis sponsored by salary.com Your
(00:26):
source for data technology andconsulting for compensation and
beyond. Now here are your hosts,David Turetsky and Dwight Brown.
David Turetsky (00:38):
Hello and welcome to the HR Data Labs
podcast. I'm your host, DavidTuretsky, and like always, we
try and find the most brilliantminds inside and outside the
world of HR to give you actuallywhat's happening today and what
will be happening soon. I mean,you can't even think about that
being truer today with our guestPeter Laughter. And I've had so
(01:00):
many times I wanted him to comeon the program, but this is the
perfect time! Peter, welcome tothe HR Data Labs podcast.
Peter Laughter (01:08):
Thank you, David, and you are giving me an
introduction that is quiteflattering. I'm very grateful.
David Turetsky (01:14):
Well, for those of us who have followed Peter
over the years, and it's beenquite a transition that he's
taken. Think of him as thecaterpillar that keeps becoming
the butterfly
Peter Laughter (01:25):
Over, and over and over again!
David Turetsky (01:27):
Exactly! And that's a good thing! A lot of us
reinvent ourselves, but Peter,you're doing this real time
right now.
Peter Laughter (01:34):
I certainly am.
Yeah, it was, we sold our homein Brooklyn in in May of this
year, and have been travelingaround, looking for a new home
while I'm simultaneouslybuilding a new new career in the
speaking and consultingindustry.
David Turetsky (01:59):
So let's talk a little bit about your past,
because if there's anybody whodoesn't know who Peter Laughter
is, why don't you tell us howyou got to where you are today?
Peter Laughter (02:06):
So I started off, quite by accident, as an
entrepreneur in the recruitingand staffing industry. I was I
had intended of getting my PhDin Sociology and Anthropology. I
graduated from college in '93and I was fascinated by this,
(02:27):
the growing culture of theinternet, and I knew that
something was going to happenthere. And so I went back home
to New York and got a job as asocial worker, just to get some
experience. And during that, mymom's family, my mom's business,
Wall Street services was anadmin staffing firm that did
they had a really great highmargin staffing business doing
(02:49):
primarily administrative workfor at law firms and financial
institutions. And she had a 24hour component of her business
that where she had a live personanswering the phones for law
firms and their word processingcenters and presentation
centers, and that in therecession of the 80s, that
business just had died down. Soshe switched to an answering
(03:10):
service, and in '94 neededsomeone to take the phones at
night. And yeah, I was, I don'tknow if you have heard but
social work, yeah, particularlyon an undergraduate level, not a
lucrative career.
David Turetsky (03:22):
No, not going to get rich.
Peter Laughter (03:25):
Yeah. And I think, I think my mom paid me
$140 plus commission a week tostay at home and answer the
phones, which was like that wasenough for me to make rent and
be able to go out once or twicein the alternate weeks. But
there wasn't a lot of business,so I started selling. And I
hadn't been involved in sportsas a kid, so I had no idea that
I'm insanely competitive. And sosales was like, Oh my god. This
(03:48):
is, you know, this is, there'sall these touchdowns that I can
win!
David Turetsky (03:51):
yeah.
Peter Laughter (03:52):
And I loved it! And I, the the night business
started growing really quickly.
And my mom was like, you youshould do this full time, and I
was like, no social worker, PhD,that's my path. And two things,
yeah, happened simultaneouslythis woman, Christine Smith,
(04:13):
we're still friends. She's oneof the women I placed, and
placed her regularly, and shesaid, Peter, I just want to
thank you, because I am able topursue my dream of becoming an
actor, and you allow me to paythe rent, and I couldn't do
without you. And it was like, ohmy goodness, I am making more of
a difference in my night jobthan I am in my day job, and I'm
(04:38):
having so much more fun. Andthen my mom, in a final act of
desperation to get me come over,said, I will give you equity
based on growth according tothis formula.
David Turetsky (04:52):
Wow.
Peter Laughter (04:53):
And those things happened right up, right on the
back of each other. And I said,All right, let's do it. And. And
from, I think, we went from oursales for about a half a million
in '94 to over 12 million in2000.
David Turetsky (05:09):
Wow, that's dramatic!
Peter Laughter (05:10):
It was insane! Yeah, it was insane. And neither
of us had any idea what we weredoing. We had a few strategies
that we put in place. Iactually, during that period of
time, we built the very firstVMS system, a tool called staff
way we had, yeah, had beenworking with JPMorgan Chase, and
we were their biggest vendor,and they wanted to outsource,
David Turetsky (05:29):
Yeah, right.
and we were competing with someof the largest staffing firms in
Peter Laughter (05:31):
And we we looked at it just at the time,
the world, and we knew they gaveus an RFP, but I think it was
just a pity, you know, like, welike you guys, but you don't
have a snowball's chance inhell. But hey, give it a shot.
outsourcing was single vendor,and it's just a horrible deal
(05:53):
for the clients. And we werewondering, like, Well, why do
they want this? And we realized,well, they, you know, we
remember getting reports fromthem about this is how much you
we, you've staffing, you'veprovided us. I was like, that's
about 40% short. Like you don'teven know how much you're buying
from us. And so I realized, oh,they, they need a single source.
And we thought, well, we'llbuild that, you know. And we put
(06:17):
as an addendum to our RFP, we'llbuild this mythical system, if
you give us the Yeah, give usthe contract. And they did, you
know, and it was one of thosemoments where it's just like, oh
crap, what are we gonna do?
David Turetsky (06:27):
Oh crap, I have to do what they ask. Right.
Peter Laughter (06:31):
And, you know, we, and I made a very, very
expensive mistake as a youngentrepreneur. I didn't take
venture money and or angelmoney. I didn't take angel money
thinking I'd just jump right toventure. And then hearing, years
later, Brad Feld, the head ofthe time Softbank Venture
(06:51):
Partners, but he started,founded TechStars and big name
in DC, and he said, Oh, we onlytalk to people if they're
introduced by angels, and it wasjust like, Oh, I just shot
myself in the foot. And thenstaffing started to gradually
change. It started after 9/11where we were, we were in this
(07:13):
place of being highly respectedby our clients and trusted to a
place of complete distrust. Andit was more. There was nothing
because of what we did. It wasjust that they started to
commoditize labor. And Iremember, you know, talk about
HR data, the metrics that werebeing used to evaluate us were
(07:34):
all commodity based, and weweren't commodity, you know, we
were, yeah, we I remember thisguy, Alex Micheli, who was a
partner at Goldman, or called usand said, I have this idea if we
put together a group of MBAs.
This was back before Goldman waspublic. Their folks didn't want
to do anything that wasn't goingto put them on a partner track.
So a lot of the kind ofanalytical grunt work that
(07:57):
analysis, the high levelpresentation support the
building of models. No, no onewanted to do that. And so Alex
thought, hey, we'll, we'll justhire a group of of temporary
employees to do it. And theycame to us because we were known
as the quality folks. And we puttogether a strategy where we
were recruiting out of secondtier business schools, and we
(08:22):
had a profile of people who hadbeen in banking for about five
years before they got their MBA.
And we were recruiting fromplaces that Goldman wouldn't
touch. I mean, great places likeBabson, for example. And so the
candidates were being were justecstatic, like it was just a
great we launched so manyamazing careers in that project,
(08:42):
and were able to put togetherthis amazing team. And it was
much more profitable. It waseasier. Everyone was happy.
Yeah, the client was ecstatic.
The employees were ecstatic.
And, and that was the late 90s,and then I started to transition
to more professional levelstaffing, which I continued to
but then we start, yeah. We hadthat great trust where it was
(09:03):
just like, put this teamtogether for us to, like, oh,
send us resumes, yeah. And oh,the resumes are so important. So
our vendors aren't going toscreen anymore, and that's what
we were known for. Andgradually, just, you know, it
was only how many res jobs didyou respond to? How many resumes
(09:24):
did you send? How manyinterviews did we conduct? How
many candidates would be highfor interviews, which I'm not
saying those aren't important.
But you know the fact that ourpeople continuously got hired
and their projects got extended?
Yeah, that like none of thosequality metrics were part of it.
Yeah, it was, yeah,
David Turetsky (09:45):
They should have been, though,
Peter Laughter (09:47):
Obviously, and but we just couldn't get ahead,
and the business stopped beingfun. Yeah, it just I and we were
working with people who didn'tunderstand the positions that
they were recruiting for, yeah,I you know. And so if you didn't
have the exact words that wereon the description, which is
foreshadowing to the mess thatpeople in recruiting are in now,
(10:10):
you know you didn't get movingforward, even if it was
abundantly clear that the thecandidate had the skills. I
remember I had a candidaterejected. He was amazing for
corporate actions position andon his most recent corporate
actions, splits, mergers, allthe things that were dividends.
(10:32):
And he the guy who had a careerin corporate actions. His most
recent career was manager ofdividends processing unit. Yeah,
and
David Turetsky (10:42):
right. But it didn't say corporate action
Peter Laughter (10:43):
It didn't say corporate action! So we got
rejected, yeah, and yeah. It wasjust like, This is too much
work, yeah, for like and like,not the kind of work that I'm
good at. And unfortunately, Ione of my greatest strengths and
greatest weaknesses. I'mridiculously persistent. So I
just kept at it, and I kept atit for longer, you know, in the
(11:06):
gift of hindsight, I should havesold in 2006 Yeah, but I kept
going at it for much, muchlonger after that, but I was
done, and I ended up sellingthat company to a friend, really
brilliant entrepreneur, who hada company called Compunnel, you
know, has a company calledCompunnel, you know, Andy Gower,
(11:26):
and started a firm focusingexclusively on management
consulting firms and but by thattime, it was I thought, Oh, this
is a more bespoke client. Theyappreciate it. But it was so
clear that that we had falleninto the space where we apply
this incredibly simple processof buying stuff to the immensely
(11:46):
complex process of engaging withother human beings, and in doing
so, you know, we, everyone'smiserable. And I remember two
instances I had one where wewere working with a management
consulting firm. I won't mentionthe name, a small one, but they
had an abusive partner. I mean,you know, and I had several
(12:08):
people call me and be like, IThat's it. I'm done. I've quit.
And we would work with thesecandidates who were very high
level to say, All right, this ishow you can manage this
individual, so you can go out onyour terms. And that was very
effective. But we had one personwho just couldn't take it, a
woman who, I think you know, hadhad received really bad
(12:29):
treatment before, and she wrotea scathing Glass Door review,
and for that, we were blamedlike that was our problem, yeah,
because we provided someone whowouldn't put up with abuse like,
you know. And the secondinstance we had working with
another management consultingfirm, and they had, it was the
first time we worked with them.
They had a project. They neededsomeone with a specific,
(12:51):
particular expertise. We providethem with three candidates, one
who is head and shoulders abovethe others, and that's the only
one that they wanted to see. AndI understood that, but I was
like, Look, she has options.
She's interviewing at otherplaces. You need to speak to the
other candidates. She is not ashoe in. Not only did they not
listen, but they presented herto the client as the candidate
(13:13):
before she agreed to take thejob!
David Turetsky (13:16):
So dumb
Peter Laughter (13:17):
And we were that we were yelled at by the
partner, because we providedsomeone who wasn't completely
sold on the job. Yeah? And itwas insane, exactly like, how is
it that that would be possiblefor us to do? We are not you. We
are your broker. Yeah, you donot go to a real estate broker
(13:37):
and say, Pick me a house. I'llbuy it. Right? Yeah, right. With
these qualities, yeah, there's,there's too many other things to
have that happen, and viceversa. So that was the real
clear, like, Oh, this is, thisis a broken structure. And, and
simultaneously I had, I was veryinterested in the distributed
leadership movement, and I hadsome experiences in my company.
(13:59):
We, we had a horrible problemwith Yelp. When Yelp first came
out, we had a five star Googlereview, but Yelp disregards
people who only write onereview, and so our people, who
are high level professionals andwe were very closely vetted,
didn't write a lot of reviews.
They would write reviews for usbecause they liked us, but
(14:21):
they're also not reviewing theirlaundry mat or whatever
David Turetsky (14:26):
right or the restaurant they just ate at
Peter Laughter (14:27):
and and we had fallen It was just horrible
practice, and it was animportant lesson for me. I
realized because my people, myproduct, was people, I had
started to view people asproduct, and it was a fatal
mistake, that you almost killedme. But I but our Yelp reviews,
we were ghosting the candidateswho didn't pass our assessments.
(14:47):
Now I had a very, very, verywell reasoned and totally wrong
justification for this. Wedidn't always do that. We would
say, hey, unfortunately youdidn't do well in our
assessments, and they would havetantrums in our office, and it
was horribly disruptive. So we'dsend them emails, and then they
would call and have tantrumsover the phone, which was
horribly disruptive. So we juststopped.
David Turetsky (15:08):
Someone said, you don't do anything.
Peter Laughter (15:09):
Yeah, exactly it was. It was a horrible thing to
do. In hindsight, I'm reallyembarrassed about it, but I was
convinced that if we tell peoplethey will, they will throw a
tantrum. And the the folks thatwe were ghosting understandably
started, started writinghorrendous reviews. So our five
star review on Google dropped toone star, and it was really
(15:30):
inhibiting our ability to findcandidates.
David Turetsky (15:32):
right, right
Peter Laughter (15:33):
And I had come up with a stupid, expensive,
difficult to implement,difficult to maintain solution
to this problem. And one of myemployees, Becky, who I still am
so grateful for to this day, waslike, No, that's no, we. That's
dumb. You know, we just need totell them! And I would say,
(15:55):
well, they're, they're, they'llthrow tantrums. And she was
like, that's because we're notproperly managing their
expectations.
David Turetsky (16:00):
right
Peter Laughter (16:01):
And she was totally right, but I didn't see
it, and I kept insisting that myfococta solution was the right
one. And she got in my face andshe said, Peter, what you're
suggesting is a violation of ourcore values. And I was like, Oh,
crap, I can't argue with that.
And so I said, oh, we'll do ityour way. But in the background,
I was like, oh, we'll watch itfail, I'll watch it fail, and
then we'll do it my way. But ofcourse, it didn't fail. Yeah, it
(16:23):
was just, it was easy. It wassimple. It made everybody happy.
You know, I didn't know theextent my recruiters were
suffering, having to, like,deflect these calls from, like,
everyone was miserable becauseof this stupid policy. And I
realized, Oh, I got leadershipwrong. It's not about me being
the smartest person in the room,me having the vision. No, it's
(16:45):
about me creating theenvironment where others can be
great.
David Turetsky (16:51):
And I think that's one of the problems that
we have as leaders when we thinkwe understand the business
problem better than everybodyelse, and we've been successful
at it usually is when we hirebrilliant people around us.
Sometimes we stop listening andnow comes back to bite us in the
butt sometimes, but thankgoodness we hired those
(17:12):
brilliant people around us tohelp show us the way.
Peter Laughter (17:15):
Yes,
David Turetsky (17:16):
so, so Peter.
What's one fun thing that no oneknows about Peter Laughter?
Peter Laughter (17:21):
You know, it's funny. As a storyteller, I am
readily telling on myself onthose things.
David Turetsky (17:26):
Yeah,
Peter Laughter (17:26):
So when I was thinking about that question,
this, this, what something thatcame to me a memory I hadn't
thought about in years, and Ihave to figure out how to bring
it in a story. But my my auntRobin, who I had a single mom
growing up, and so my auntRobin, who has no blood
relation, was my mom's bestfriend at the time. She would,
when my mom would go on dates,would send me to sleep over at
(17:48):
Aunt Robin's house, and she,I've probably about five or,
yeah, of kindergarten age. Yeah,she took me to FAO Schwartz, and
there was this sports car, andit was slightly diminutive
sports car, yeah, with a realengine. And I saw this group of
kids around this car, and it wasthe coolest thing I had ever
(18:10):
seen. And I Beeline right forthe car. Unbeknownst to me,
those kids were part of somekind of film shoot for a
television program, yeah, and itwas a news program, and it was
the 70s, so I don't think, like,releases were a big part of it,
yeah. And one of the kids waslike, you're not allowed to be
here, and I yelled at him fornot sharing his toys.
David Turetsky (18:31):
Wow.
Peter Laughter (18:32):
And I either shamed him, I don't know what
happened, but they let me play,and my aunt is watching this,
like, Who is this kid who justwalks onto a film set? But I was
oblivious to all that, becauseall I saw was this cool car!
David Turetsky (18:43):
Right
Peter Laughter (18:44):
And yeah, ended up playing with the kids, and
they just let me be part of theshot. And having a mom as a
hippie meant I didn't have a TVso when the news program came
out, there's about three or fourkids in my class saw it, and
they all thought I was famous,and I had no idea what they were
talking about.
David Turetsky (19:00):
Well, little do they know now? Well, they
probably know now that you knowyou are famous and that you know
that was just a precursor ofwhat to happen.
Peter Laughter (19:07):
I am a legend in my own mind. What can I say?
Well,
David Turetsky (19:11):
Now you're on the HR Data Labs, so there's a
little notoriety
Peter Laughter (19:14):
yeah exactly
Announcer (19:15):
Like what you hear so far? Make sure you never miss a
show by clicking subscribe. Thispodcast is made possible by
Salary.com. Now back to theshow.
David Turetsky (19:28):
So Peter today, our topic is recruiting is
broken. And I know we spent alittle bit of time up front
talking about this. What was itthat you saw that led you to
believe that recruiting isactually broken?
Peter Laughter (19:41):
Well, I think it was a combination of things. So
I think it was the two examplesthat I mentioned is that we were
commoditizing recruitment. But Ithink it was, it's more
insidious than that. And so Ihad created one of the first VMS
systems for managing largetemporary workforces, and we
deployed it at JP Morgan. Andthen. When the JP Morgan Chase
merger, we were being consideredalong with another product at
(20:04):
the time called White Amber, whowas very well funded, and we
were not very well funded, so itwas an uphill battle for us. And
I was meeting with the it was, Imean, probably like 28 at the
time, but I was meeting with theentire the combined HR team from
both sides. And I had read inBusiness Week that the both CEOs
(20:28):
of heritage Chase and heritageJP Morgan were going into the
merger for cost savings. Thatwas the reason. And so I had
built my entire presentation oncost savings. And I get into
this conference room, and it is,I think it's one of the biggest
conference rooms I've ever beenin before or since. It was huge.
And my sponsor was there, andthen her boss was there, as a
(20:51):
woman who had the largestdiamond ring I have ever seen in
my life. It was like a walnut, asparkly walnut. It was
completely captivating. And I'mgoing through my presentation,
and halfway through it, shesays, now I just want to let you
know that cost savings is notpart of our mandate, so maybe
you want to focus on somethingelse. And I was like, in my late
(21:12):
20s, and I was too much of a kidto pull out the copy of Business
Week that I had in my briefcaseand throw it on the table and
say, hey, it may not be part ofyour mandate now,
David Turetsky (21:21):
but your CEOs say it
Peter Laughter (21:22):
But both of your CEOs saying that this is the
number one reason. So it's gonnabe so I can change topic, or we
can get ahead of this. But I wastoo insecure to pull off
something like that. But Irealized that, oh, she isn't at
the table, you know. And it wasthis sign that, like, how is it
(21:42):
that our organizations can beeffective if HR is viewed as a
cost center as opposed to aresource like and it was just
insane to me, you know? And Ithink, yeah, HR folks get blamed
for that dynamic, but it is not,you know, have anything to do
(22:03):
with them. And I think,you know, as we
enter this new time we are, we
David Turetsky (22:04):
yeah, have entered in the most
disruptive and innovative andperilous period of human history
ever, you know. And I mean, ifwe just take stock at what has
happened in the last four years,it is staggering, you know, it
is absolutely staggering, and itis just the beginning. So the
(22:25):
changes that need to happen inbusiness, it is not technology.
It is not the adoption oftechnology. It is not strategy.
It is implementation. Yeah, itis our ability to work with
other people. It is thestructure of our organization to
identify the myriad ofopportunities and transformative
opportunities and terriblethreats that will be appearing
(22:50):
around organizations at abreakneck speed that most
leaders can't see. And so if wedon't dramatically change how we
view leadership and how westructure our organizations, we
will see a tremendous amount ofcompanies fail in the years to
come. And I'm convinced of that.
(23:11):
give us a giveus a hint, what are some of
these major issues that are kindof under the surface that
they're not addressing rightnow?
Peter Laughter (23:21):
Well, so I think, you know, there's, there
was, so there's a couple cracks,you know, that have been there
for a while. So, I mean, the IBMand McKinsey studies that point
to that the failure rate oflarge scale transformations is
around 70%, 60 to 90% dependingon which organization. Now
(23:44):
let's, that is absurd, andthat's a number that has been
consistent for 20 years. So nextyear, companies are going to
spend a trillion, Americancompanies are gonna spend a
trillion dollars in digitaltransformation alone. So merger,
and I mean, for you know, so AI,implementation, dissertations,
all of these things, a trilliondollars. And the folks writing
(24:07):
those checks know full well that70% of that money is going right
down the drain. So $700 billionthis is greater than the GDP of
Belgium and Switzerlandcombined, right? Yeah, this is a
huge waste. And someorganizations, organizations are
(24:28):
playing with the methodologiesthat are needed for this new
time. And those organizationsare going to be in a position to
capture a tremendous amount ofthat 700 billion, you know? And
they're going to use that, thatsavings to to take a lot of
market share. So I think thatthe just the very ability of
organizations to react is got toshift, and this kind of command
(24:53):
and control orthodoxy that we'veused is not working.
The second thing I look at issomething that I'm sure you know
very well. I mean we all know isthe Gallup engagement survey.
You know, record number ofengaged employees last year, 23%
and with with 19% of those beingactively disengaged, so you've
(25:14):
got almost 20% of your staffwho's working against your
goals. They're putting sugar inthe gas tank on a regular basis.
And you know, with the the other60% just or 62% 63% just going
through the motions, doing theabsolute bare minimum, you know.
And whereas you know, companieswith engaged employees, you
(25:34):
know, are 17% more productive.
So you know, just the Deltathere, but they have 10% better
customer satisfaction. So therewas a study that said that the
thing that you can do, theeasiest way to increase your
profits by 70% is to reducecustomer churn by 5% that's a
simple metric. So if you havecompanies with engaged
(25:58):
employees, have 10% greatercustomer satisfaction. I don't
know what that how thattranslates into reducing churn,
but I would gather it would getyou the pretty close to that 70%
so you have on one side, youknow, massive disengaged
employees. And why is that?
Well, it's because we thinkculture isn't something we need
(26:19):
to pay attention to. HR is notsomething that we need to pay
attention to. Yet on the otherside, these organizations that
are figuring this out, they'recapturing that, and they'll use
the immense gain inprofitability and innovation
that comes from engage employeesto just take huge amount of
market share. But then I alsothink that the need like, why do
(26:42):
people work for companies? It'sbecause that's because being an
entrepreneur is too hard, right?
Yeah, well, we have just beenintroduced in the last year now,
and the fastest adopted piece oftechnology in history,
generative AI. I mean, chatGPThad a million users five days
after chatgpt 3.5 was released.
(27:03):
I mean, it took, it tookFacebook four and a half years
to get that. And Facebook's fun,right? Yeah, yeah, like, or was,
yeah,
David Turetsky (27:12):
Somewhat, yeah,
Peter Laughter (27:13):
or was back then, you know, it took Twitter
five years and Netflix 10! OpenAI did it in five days, you
know? And so we're seeing this,these, the rise of this
transformative technology. And Ithink, you know, the
conversation of like, oh, thethere's going to be a small
group of people who will usethis technology, and they'll
(27:35):
will take over the world. No,this is generative tools. These
are tools that allow anyone tocreate anything, right? And so
the need for people to work forcorporations, I think, will
start to decline precipitously,you know, in the next four or
five years. Not to say that wewon't need organizations, but if
(27:58):
you look at the example of BlueSky social. It was the Twitter
experiment that spun off intoother organizations. So this is
an open source social networkingplatform, and so they have
situations where it's a smallteam, they're not well funded.
Their users are like, hey, weneed functionality here. And
they're like, we'll get to it.
We'll get to it. And I was like,No, we really need it here.
(28:19):
Well, groups of those users arebuilding that functionality that
they need and giving it to BlueSky. Now there's only a small
group of people who are capableof that, but in a year or two,
everyone will be capable ofthat.
David Turetsky (28:35):
Well, let me just say, while I agree that the
generative AI is going to begreat, I think, for
productivity, by being able touse some lessons from the past,
one of the things that I've beentalking about a lot on the
podcast is that Gen AI dependson the past. Gen AI also depends
on data, and a lot of the stuffon the web is horsesht. Pardon
(28:59):
my French.
Peter Laughter (29:00):
I speak French fluently so
David Turetsky (29:02):
And a lot of data is horsesht too, and you
don't have to be you don't haveto be Nostradamus to see that,
unless there's a revolution inhow we store, what we store and
what we promote as facts. Idon't know how Gen AI gets away
with being able to give usquality when the quality just
(29:23):
isn't there yet.
Peter Laughter (29:24):
Well, I agree that there are problems with how
this is all playing out, yeah.
And I don't think that the pathis clear, but I think we have to
remember that Gen AI is one ofseveral transformative
technologies.
David Turetsky (29:41):
Oh, sure,
Peter Laughter (29:41):
yeah. And so I think when we look at, you know,
the combination of generative AIand predictive AI, for example,
I mean, I think anthropic hasdone a great job of giving us an
AI model that's actually two AImodels. But I think the
implication of that is becausewhat we have is, and I think
you've pointed to is, Gen AIdoes not know truth from
(30:04):
fiction.
David Turetsky (30:05):
Yeah,
Peter Laughter (30:05):
right, yeah.
And, but that is,
David Turetsky (30:08):
By the way, Peter, a lot of people struggle
with that as well.
Peter Laughter (30:11):
I uh, not necessarily, for me, it is my, I
believe my hopes are my reality,which is, you know, a road to
disappointment. But, so I have avisceral experience with that.
But, but I think that that's aproblem that's going to get
worked out. I mean, I thinkthere's just too, too many great
minds behind it. And so I do, Ido. I think I probably like I
(30:36):
said, Yeah, I predicted to mydaughter would never have to
learn to drive, because, youknow, driverless cars would be
ubiquitous, and this is when shewas six, and that the university
system would collapse by thetime she was 18. Well, she's 21
now going into her senior yearof very wonderful and highly
expensive private school, andshe still doesn't know how to
(30:57):
drive. So yeah, so my timingpredictions will most likely be
off, but I'm not. I think thatdynamic of of the two, yeah,
when we look at we have theability to create tools that
will provide the structures thatthat a corporation will in the
(31:18):
background. And I think that iswhere we're headed, and that is
going to be a game changer, andit will fundamentally shift how
corporations look and feel.
David Turetsky (31:29):
Hey, are you listening to this and thinking
to yourself, Man, I wish I couldtalk to David about this. Well,
you're in luck. We have aspecial offer for listeners of
the HR Data Labs podcast, a freehalf hour call with me about any
of the topics we cover on thepodcast or whatever is on your
mind. Go tosalary.com/hrdlconsulting to
(31:52):
schedule your free 30 minutecall today.
So Peter, you pivoted away fromHR, so how do you think that
experience gives you a betterlens on what's going to be
happening with the world of HR?
Peter Laughter (32:05):
So I am convinced that the time of HR
being a cost center, as opposedto a resource, is coming to an
end. And so I think you knowwhere I think that the companies
that really get it understand.
My my friend Ed Hanson says, Inthe end, yeah, human it's, it's
the human equation that needs tobe solved for. And that's not to
(32:28):
say that, you know, there is asolution to the human equation.
It's one that we constantly haveto work on. But I think that
that understanding, when we'relooking at, you know, the folks
who get beyond the 70% failurerate of digital transformations.
Or who are able to do muchbetter than, you know, a 23%
disengagement rate or 22%disengagement rate are, are they
(32:50):
figured that out, right? And andso suddenly, you know, HR is,
is, is really being leveragedfor for the things that it is
actually capable of, and theyhave a seat at the table. And so
I think that that's how thingswill shift. And I I am now
consulting, mostly speaking,right now. And so I've developed
(33:13):
a talk the the pyramid iscollapsed, adaptive leadership
for the age of disruption. And Italk about, yeah, I use the
Reverend, Dr Martin Luther Kingas the probably the greatest
example of an adaptive leaderwho being interrupted in the
middle of the most importantspeech of his career by Mahalia
(33:34):
Jackson, just seamlesslypivoted, changed the speech, you
know, one which he had notprepared for, and
extemporaneously delivered the IHave A Dream speech and changed
the world. He's known for beingthe father of nonviolence, but
yet he carried a gun wherever hewent and it wasn't until he met
Bayard Rustin that he put thatgun aside, and in doing so,
(33:55):
transformed the civil rightsmovement. And so I look at King
as that. And then I talk aboutwhat it is that we're doing and
the need to really shift todistributed leadership, where
power and authority and decisionmaking are distributed
throughout the organization, anddecisions are made close to the
front lines.
David Turetsky (34:12):
Right
Peter Laughter (34:13):
And that's the work that I am really interested
in helping organizations do. Andso I think that that labor,
which is a massive change in howwe think about leadership. One,
David Turetsky (34:24):
Absolutely,
Peter Laughter (34:24):
someone's got to own it, you know? And that's got
to be HR, because theleadership, yeah, the C suite.
Well, they're stuck in thismentality of command and
control. It's all they know. Soit's very difficult for them to
make the decisions there, yeah,to have that happen. And but the
problem is, is, because we areso enmeshed in command and
control, we need an intermediarystep. And I am trained in a
(34:49):
practice called strategic doing,which, if you, is a non
hierarchical project managementmethodology that combines
strategy... planning, strategy,and execution into one step. So
you start with an appreciativeinquiry, what if we could, you
know, you know, what would it belike if? And then you gather
(35:09):
people who are interested inthat. And then you say, Alright,
well, what, what resources doyou have? And you know, that
you'd be willing to share andyou know. And then how do we
combine those resources. So Idon't know if you know this
about me, like one of myresources is, I'm a fantastic
dancer, and you're a musician,and we just need a good
videographer. And all of thoseskills independently are great,
(35:31):
but together, awesome TikTokchannel.
So, yeah. Soit's, how do we combine those
David Turetsky (35:34):
There you go! assets? And then we ask, so,
well, what can we do with thesecombined assets? What should we
do, and what we will we do? Andthen you break up into
asynchronous groups, yeah, forthe next 30 days, and you come
back together and you say, whatdo we do? Yeah, what do we
learn? What new people havejoined us? What new skills or
(35:54):
assets have we gained? What canwe do now? Yeah, what should we
do? What will we do? And youkeep this process going, and
because of the different stagesof it, require different
leadership strengths, thatleadership is passed off
throughout this project, so. Andparticularly when you look at
this problem of recruiting, youknow, where we deploy this very
(36:18):
simple process of engaged, ofbuying stuff, to connecting with
human, people that needs to betransformed. Well, that's, that
is a mission critical processthat everyone hates, and
everyone is is is miserablewith.
Peter Laughter (36:34):
you know? And so how do we transform that? Well,
David Turetsky (36:34):
right it's we have to try new things.
So methodologies like strategicdoing are perfect to really move
through past that 70% failurerate into really successful
projects that make a difference,but in doing so, they
fundamentally expose people tounderstanding of how to operate
in a non hierarchicalenvironment. That's not to say
(36:56):
that there's deference forpeople who have more skills or
abilities, but how do we do thatso that organizations can create
their own? So distributedorganizations like birddog and
hair and Nucor or theMorningstar company, who have
been incredibly successfulwithout hierarchy or shifting
(37:16):
hierarchy, have done so, butthey they were founded with
those principles. They've hadyears to experiment. Right now,
players trying to transformeverything all at once, it's
going to fail.
Yeah
Peter Laughter (37:31):
So this is a way that companies can gradually
make that change and move withthe times.
David Turetsky (37:36):
It's so difficult from a culture
perspective, there's got to besome kind of Nexus. There's got
to be some kind of event thatenables that transition. Because
transitioning through that is sohard, isn't it? I mean, it's,
it's like shedding your skin,all of it, to be able to get
down to the the real DNA that'snecessary in order to be able to
(38:00):
have people who are empowered tomake not just decisions, but to
make really organizationchanging decisions, and that has
not been the core strength ofleaders, to give up that stuff!
Peter Laughter (38:14):
But at the same time, and I look at my own
experience, like I was ahorrible person to go into sales
meetings with with my salespeople, because I can't stand a
vacuum like so if there's toomuch silence, I'm gonna fill it,
right?
David Turetsky (38:27):
I'm the same way!
Peter Laughter (38:28):
Yeah and, and that's not the best thing for
training sales people. Sometimesyou just gotta let them
struggle, yeah, and watch themdo it. And, but I think that
that dynamic is pervasivethroughout leadership, right?
And so and when you haveenvironments where leaders can
experience, wait, people arestepping forward in this
project,
David Turetsky (38:47):
yeah,
Peter Laughter (38:47):
I don't need to, you know, I can. I can bring a
brick and a trowel. I don't needto bring the cathedral, right?
They'll see, because the peoplein this room will create a much
better cathedral than I couldpossibly imagine working
together. But it's that's anexperiential, you know thing, it
is not a You can't force that onit or say, Oh, we're doing it
(39:07):
differently. It'll beundermined.
David Turetsky (39:09):
Well, the first sign of failure people are gonna
be like, See, I told you theycouldn't do it! And to me,
there's nothing better thanfailure to enable you to
understand what's the best nextthing to do? So give it time,
allow failures and then enablethem to learn from them and grow
and experiment and actually makegood bad decisions, as long as
(39:33):
they're not a bearings or ING,what was it? The Singapore
trades on the
Peter Laughter (39:39):
Oh yes,
David Turetsky (39:40):
the market that just tanked the entire bank!
Peter Laughter (39:43):
Yeah, so I but I think that's also the other side
is distributed leadershiprequires a lot of structure.
Like Jazz looks like a bunch ofold dudes jamming, but it's the
most highly structured form ofmusic there is, and it's because
everyone at the table, oreveryone in the band knows the
structure that they are able toimprovise!
David Turetsky (40:01):
Right
Peter Laughter (40:01):
And it's the same thing with our
organizations.
David Turetsky (40:11):
Peter, I could keep talking to you forever,
unfortunately, well, so what I'mgonna ask you to do is, let's
take an orthogonal thought onthis about how recruiting can be
fixed, if not necessarily justby the people. How do we how do
we get beyond it? But we'regonna have to do that another
time.
Peter Laughter (40:30):
I would love to do that.
David Turetsky (40:32):
Thank you so much.
Peter Laughter (40:33):
Thank you, David. This was awesome.
David Turetsky (40:34):
Appreciate it.
It was wonderful. A wonderfulchat. Thank you all for
listening. Take care and staysafe.
Announcer (40:41):
That was the HR Data Labs podcast. If you liked the
episode, please subscribe. Andif you know anyone that might
like to hear it, please send ittheir way. Thank you for joining
us this week, and stay tuned forour next episode. Stay safe.
Announcer, the world of business is more complex than
(00:03):
ever. The world of humanresources and compensation is
also getting more complex.
Welcome to the HR Data Labspodcast, your direct source for
the latest trends from expertsinside and outside the world of
human resources. Listen as weexplore the impact that
compensation strategy data andpeople analytics can have on
your organization. This podcastis sponsored by salary.com Your
(00:26):
source for data technology andconsulting for compensation and
beyond. Now here are your hosts,David Turetsky and Dwight Brown.
David Turetsky (00:38):
Hello and welcome to the HR Data Labs
podcast. I'm your host, DavidTuretsky, and like always, we
try and find the most brilliantminds inside and outside the
world of HR to give you actuallywhat's happening today and what
will be happening soon. I mean,you can't even think about that
being truer today with our guestPeter Laughter. And I've had so
(01:00):
many times I wanted him to comeon the program, but this is the
perfect time! Peter, welcome tothe HR Data Labs podcast.
Peter Laughter (01:08):
Thank you, David, and you are giving me an
introduction that is quiteflattering. I'm very grateful.
David Turetsky (01:14):
Well, for those of us who have followed Peter
over the years, and it's beenquite a transition that he's
taken. Think of him as thecaterpillar that keeps becoming
the butterfly
Peter Laughter (01:25):
Over, and over and over again!
David Turetsky (01:27):
Exactly! And that's a good thing! A lot of us
reinvent ourselves, but Peter,you're doing this real time
right now.
Peter Laughter (01:34):
I certainly am.
Yeah, it was, we sold our homein Brooklyn in in May of this
year, and have been travelingaround, looking for a new home
while I'm simultaneouslybuilding a new new career in the
speaking and consultingindustry.
David Turetsky (01:59):
So let's talk a little bit about your past,
because if there's anybody whodoesn't know who Peter Laughter
is, why don't you tell us howyou got to where you are today?
Peter Laughter (02:06):
So I started off, quite by accident, as an
entrepreneur in the recruitingand staffing industry. I was I
had intended of getting my PhDin Sociology and Anthropology. I
graduated from college in '93and I was fascinated by this,
(02:27):
the growing culture of theinternet, and I knew that
something was going to happenthere. And so I went back home
to New York and got a job as asocial worker, just to get some
experience. And during that, mymom's family, my mom's business,
Wall Street services was anadmin staffing firm that did
they had a really great highmargin staffing business doing
(02:49):
primarily administrative workfor at law firms and financial
institutions. And she had a 24hour component of her business
that where she had a live personanswering the phones for law
firms and their word processingcenters and presentation
centers, and that in therecession of the 80s, that
business just had died down. Soshe switched to an answering
(03:10):
service, and in '94 neededsomeone to take the phones at
night. And yeah, I was, I don'tknow if you have heard but
social work, yeah, particularlyon an undergraduate level, not a
lucrative career.
David Turetsky (03:22):
No, not going to get rich.
Peter Laughter (03:25):
Yeah. And I think, I think my mom paid me
$140 plus commission a week tostay at home and answer the
phones, which was like that wasenough for me to make rent and
be able to go out once or twicein the alternate weeks. But
there wasn't a lot of business,so I started selling. And I
hadn't been involved in sportsas a kid, so I had no idea that
I'm insanely competitive. And sosales was like, Oh my god. This
(03:48):
is, you know, this is, there'sall these touchdowns that I can
win!
David Turetsky (03:51):
yeah.
Peter Laughter (03:52):
And I loved it! And I, the the night business
started growing really quickly.
And my mom was like, you youshould do this full time, and I
was like, no social worker, PhD,that's my path. And two things,
yeah, happened simultaneouslythis woman, Christine Smith,
(04:13):
we're still friends. She's oneof the women I placed, and
placed her regularly, and shesaid, Peter, I just want to
thank you, because I am able topursue my dream of becoming an
actor, and you allow me to paythe rent, and I couldn't do
without you. And it was like, ohmy goodness, I am making more of
a difference in my night jobthan I am in my day job, and I'm
(04:38):
having so much more fun. Andthen my mom, in a final act of
desperation to get me come over,said, I will give you equity
based on growth according tothis formula.
David Turetsky (04:52):
Wow.
Peter Laughter (04:53):
And those things happened right up, right on the
back of each other. And I said,All right, let's do it. And. And
from, I think, we went from oursales for about a half a million
in '94 to over 12 million in2000.
David Turetsky (05:09):
Wow, that's dramatic!
Peter Laughter (05:10):
It was insane! Yeah, it was insane. And neither
of us had any idea what we weredoing. We had a few strategies
that we put in place. Iactually, during that period of
time, we built the very firstVMS system, a tool called staff
way we had, yeah, had beenworking with JPMorgan Chase, and
we were their biggest vendor,and they wanted to outsource,
David Turetsky (05:29):
Yeah, right.
and we were competing with someof the largest staffing firms in
Peter Laughter (05:31):
And we we looked at it just at the time,
the world, and we knew they gaveus an RFP, but I think it was
just a pity, you know, like, welike you guys, but you don't
have a snowball's chance inhell. But hey, give it a shot.
outsourcing was single vendor,and it's just a horrible deal
(05:53):
for the clients. And we werewondering, like, Well, why do
they want this? And we realized,well, they, you know, we
remember getting reports fromthem about this is how much you
we, you've staffing, you'veprovided us. I was like, that's
about 40% short. Like you don'teven know how much you're buying
from us. And so I realized, oh,they, they need a single source.
And we thought, well, we'llbuild that, you know. And we put
(06:17):
as an addendum to our RFP, we'llbuild this mythical system, if
you give us the Yeah, give usthe contract. And they did, you
know, and it was one of thosemoments where it's just like, oh
crap, what are we gonna do?
David Turetsky (06:27):
Oh crap, I have to do what they ask. Right.
Peter Laughter (06:31):
And, you know, we, and I made a very, very
expensive mistake as a youngentrepreneur. I didn't take
venture money and or angelmoney. I didn't take angel money
thinking I'd just jump right toventure. And then hearing, years
later, Brad Feld, the head ofthe time Softbank Venture
(06:51):
Partners, but he started,founded TechStars and big name
in DC, and he said, Oh, we onlytalk to people if they're
introduced by angels, and it wasjust like, Oh, I just shot
myself in the foot. And thenstaffing started to gradually
change. It started after 9/11where we were, we were in this
(07:13):
place of being highly respectedby our clients and trusted to a
place of complete distrust. Andit was more. There was nothing
because of what we did. It wasjust that they started to
commoditize labor. And Iremember, you know, talk about
HR data, the metrics that werebeing used to evaluate us were
(07:34):
all commodity based, and weweren't commodity, you know, we
were, yeah, we I remember thisguy, Alex Micheli, who was a
partner at Goldman, or called usand said, I have this idea if we
put together a group of MBAs.
This was back before Goldman waspublic. Their folks didn't want
to do anything that wasn't goingto put them on a partner track.
So a lot of the kind ofanalytical grunt work that
(07:57):
analysis, the high levelpresentation support the
building of models. No, no onewanted to do that. And so Alex
thought, hey, we'll, we'll justhire a group of of temporary
employees to do it. And theycame to us because we were known
as the quality folks. And we puttogether a strategy where we
were recruiting out of secondtier business schools, and we
(08:22):
had a profile of people who hadbeen in banking for about five
years before they got their MBA.
And we were recruiting fromplaces that Goldman wouldn't
touch. I mean, great places likeBabson, for example. And so the
candidates were being were justecstatic, like it was just a
great we launched so manyamazing careers in that project,
(08:42):
and were able to put togetherthis amazing team. And it was
much more profitable. It waseasier. Everyone was happy.
Yeah, the client was ecstatic.
The employees were ecstatic.
And, and that was the late 90s,and then I started to transition
to more professional levelstaffing, which I continued to
but then we start, yeah. We hadthat great trust where it was
(09:03):
just like, put this teamtogether for us to, like, oh,
send us resumes, yeah. And oh,the resumes are so important. So
our vendors aren't going toscreen anymore, and that's what
we were known for. Andgradually, just, you know, it
was only how many res jobs didyou respond to? How many resumes
(09:24):
did you send? How manyinterviews did we conduct? How
many candidates would be highfor interviews, which I'm not
saying those aren't important.
But you know the fact that ourpeople continuously got hired
and their projects got extended?
Yeah, that like none of thosequality metrics were part of it.
Yeah, it was, yeah,
David Turetsky (09:45):
They should have been, though,
Peter Laughter (09:47):
Obviously, and but we just couldn't get ahead,
and the business stopped beingfun. Yeah, it just I and we were
working with people who didn'tunderstand the positions that
they were recruiting for, yeah,I you know. And so if you didn't
have the exact words that wereon the description, which is
foreshadowing to the mess thatpeople in recruiting are in now,
(10:10):
you know you didn't get movingforward, even if it was
abundantly clear that the thecandidate had the skills. I
remember I had a candidaterejected. He was amazing for
corporate actions position andon his most recent corporate
actions, splits, mergers, allthe things that were dividends.
(10:32):
And he the guy who had a careerin corporate actions. His most
recent career was manager ofdividends processing unit. Yeah,
and
David Turetsky (10:42):
right. But it didn't say corporate action
Peter Laughter (10:43):
It didn't say corporate action! So we got
rejected, yeah, and yeah. It wasjust like, This is too much
work, yeah, for like and like,not the kind of work that I'm
good at. And unfortunately, Ione of my greatest strengths and
greatest weaknesses. I'mridiculously persistent. So I
just kept at it, and I kept atit for longer, you know, in the
(11:06):
gift of hindsight, I should havesold in 2006 Yeah, but I kept
going at it for much, muchlonger after that, but I was
done, and I ended up sellingthat company to a friend, really
brilliant entrepreneur, who hada company called Compunnel, you
know, has a company calledCompunnel, you know, Andy Gower,
(11:26):
and started a firm focusingexclusively on management
consulting firms and but by thattime, it was I thought, Oh, this
is a more bespoke client. Theyappreciate it. But it was so
clear that that we had falleninto the space where we apply
this incredibly simple processof buying stuff to the immensely
(11:46):
complex process of engaging withother human beings, and in doing
so, you know, we, everyone'smiserable. And I remember two
instances I had one where wewere working with a management
consulting firm. I won't mentionthe name, a small one, but they
had an abusive partner. I mean,you know, and I had several
(12:08):
people call me and be like, IThat's it. I'm done. I've quit.
And we would work with thesecandidates who were very high
level to say, All right, this ishow you can manage this
individual, so you can go out onyour terms. And that was very
effective. But we had one personwho just couldn't take it, a
woman who, I think you know, hadhad received really bad
(12:29):
treatment before, and she wrotea scathing Glass Door review,
and for that, we were blamedlike that was our problem, yeah,
because we provided someone whowouldn't put up with abuse like,
you know. And the secondinstance we had working with
another management consultingfirm, and they had, it was the
first time we worked with them.
They had a project. They neededsomeone with a specific,
(12:51):
particular expertise. We providethem with three candidates, one
who is head and shoulders abovethe others, and that's the only
one that they wanted to see. AndI understood that, but I was
like, Look, she has options.
She's interviewing at otherplaces. You need to speak to the
other candidates. She is not ashoe in. Not only did they not
listen, but they presented herto the client as the candidate
(13:13):
before she agreed to take thejob!
David Turetsky (13:16):
So dumb
Peter Laughter (13:17):
And we were that we were yelled at by the
partner, because we providedsomeone who wasn't completely
sold on the job. Yeah? And itwas insane, exactly like, how is
it that that would be possiblefor us to do? We are not you. We
are your broker. Yeah, you donot go to a real estate broker
(13:37):
and say, Pick me a house. I'llbuy it. Right? Yeah, right. With
these qualities, yeah, there's,there's too many other things to
have that happen, and viceversa. So that was the real
clear, like, Oh, this is, thisis a broken structure. And, and
simultaneously I had, I was veryinterested in the distributed
leadership movement, and I hadsome experiences in my company.
(13:59):
We, we had a horrible problemwith Yelp. When Yelp first came
out, we had a five star Googlereview, but Yelp disregards
people who only write onereview, and so our people, who
are high level professionals andwe were very closely vetted,
didn't write a lot of reviews.
They would write reviews for usbecause they liked us, but
(14:21):
they're also not reviewing theirlaundry mat or whatever
David Turetsky (14:26):
right or the restaurant they just ate at
Peter Laughter (14:27):
and and we had fallen It was just horrible
practice, and it was animportant lesson for me. I
realized because my people, myproduct, was people, I had
started to view people asproduct, and it was a fatal
mistake, that you almost killedme. But I but our Yelp reviews,
we were ghosting the candidateswho didn't pass our assessments.
(14:47):
Now I had a very, very, verywell reasoned and totally wrong
justification for this. Wedidn't always do that. We would
say, hey, unfortunately youdidn't do well in our
assessments, and they would havetantrums in our office, and it
was horribly disruptive. So we'dsend them emails, and then they
would call and have tantrumsover the phone, which was
horribly disruptive. So we juststopped.
David Turetsky (15:08):
Someone said, you don't do anything.
Peter Laughter (15:09):
Yeah, exactly it was. It was a horrible thing to
do. In hindsight, I'm reallyembarrassed about it, but I was
convinced that if we tell peoplethey will, they will throw a
tantrum. And the the folks thatwe were ghosting understandably
started, started writinghorrendous reviews. So our five
star review on Google dropped toone star, and it was really
(15:30):
inhibiting our ability to findcandidates.
David Turetsky (15:32):
right, right
Peter Laughter (15:33):
And I had come up with a stupid, expensive,
difficult to implement,difficult to maintain solution
to this problem. And one of myemployees, Becky, who I still am
so grateful for to this day, waslike, No, that's no, we. That's
dumb. You know, we just need totell them! And I would say,
(15:55):
well, they're, they're, they'llthrow tantrums. And she was
like, that's because we're notproperly managing their
expectations.
David Turetsky (16:00):
right
Peter Laughter (16:01):
And she was totally right, but I didn't see
it, and I kept insisting that myfococta solution was the right
one. And she got in my face andshe said, Peter, what you're
suggesting is a violation of ourcore values. And I was like, Oh,
crap, I can't argue with that.
And so I said, oh, we'll do ityour way. But in the background,
I was like, oh, we'll watch itfail, I'll watch it fail, and
then we'll do it my way. But ofcourse, it didn't fail. Yeah, it
(16:23):
was just, it was easy. It wassimple. It made everybody happy.
You know, I didn't know theextent my recruiters were
suffering, having to, like,deflect these calls from, like,
everyone was miserable becauseof this stupid policy. And I
realized, Oh, I got leadershipwrong. It's not about me being
the smartest person in the room,me having the vision. No, it's
(16:45):
about me creating theenvironment where others can be
great.
David Turetsky (16:51):
And I think that's one of the problems that
we have as leaders when we thinkwe understand the business
problem better than everybodyelse, and we've been successful
at it usually is when we hirebrilliant people around us.
Sometimes we stop listening andnow comes back to bite us in the
butt sometimes, but thankgoodness we hired those
(17:12):
brilliant people around us tohelp show us the way.
Peter Laughter (17:15):
Yes,
David Turetsky (17:16):
so, so Peter.
What's one fun thing that no oneknows about Peter Laughter?
Peter Laughter (17:21):
You know, it's funny. As a storyteller, I am
readily telling on myself onthose things.
David Turetsky (17:26):
Yeah,
Peter Laughter (17:26):
So when I was thinking about that question,
this, this, what something thatcame to me a memory I hadn't
thought about in years, and Ihave to figure out how to bring
it in a story. But my my auntRobin, who I had a single mom
growing up, and so my auntRobin, who has no blood
relation, was my mom's bestfriend at the time. She would,
when my mom would go on dates,would send me to sleep over at
(17:48):
Aunt Robin's house, and she,I've probably about five or,
yeah, of kindergarten age. Yeah,she took me to FAO Schwartz, and
there was this sports car, andit was slightly diminutive
sports car, yeah, with a realengine. And I saw this group of
kids around this car, and it wasthe coolest thing I had ever
(18:10):
seen. And I Beeline right forthe car. Unbeknownst to me,
those kids were part of somekind of film shoot for a
television program, yeah, and itwas a news program, and it was
the 70s, so I don't think, like,releases were a big part of it,
yeah. And one of the kids waslike, you're not allowed to be
here, and I yelled at him fornot sharing his toys.
David Turetsky (18:31):
Wow.
Peter Laughter (18:32):
And I either shamed him, I don't know what
happened, but they let me play,and my aunt is watching this,
like, Who is this kid who justwalks onto a film set? But I was
oblivious to all that, becauseall I saw was this cool car!
David Turetsky (18:43):
Right
Peter Laughter (18:44):
And yeah, ended up playing with the kids, and
they just let me be part of theshot. And having a mom as a
hippie meant I didn't have a TVso when the news program came
out, there's about three or fourkids in my class saw it, and
they all thought I was famous,and I had no idea what they were
talking about.
David Turetsky (19:00):
Well, little do they know now? Well, they
probably know now that you knowyou are famous and that you know
that was just a precursor ofwhat to happen.
Peter Laughter (19:07):
I am a legend in my own mind. What can I say?
Well,
David Turetsky (19:11):
Now you're on the HR Data Labs, so there's a
little notoriety
Peter Laughter (19:14):
yeah exactly
Announcer (19:15):
Like what you hear so far? Make sure you never miss a
show by clicking subscribe. Thispodcast is made possible by
Salary.com. Now back to theshow.
David Turetsky (19:28):
So Peter today, our topic is recruiting is
broken. And I know we spent alittle bit of time up front
talking about this. What was itthat you saw that led you to
believe that recruiting isactually broken?
Peter Laughter (19:41):
Well, I think it was a combination of things. So
I think it was the two examplesthat I mentioned is that we were
commoditizing recruitment. But Ithink it was, it's more
insidious than that. And so Ihad created one of the first VMS
systems for managing largetemporary workforces, and we
deployed it at JP Morgan. Andthen. When the JP Morgan Chase
merger, we were being consideredalong with another product at
(20:04):
the time called White Amber, whowas very well funded, and we
were not very well funded, so itwas an uphill battle for us. And
I was meeting with the it was, Imean, probably like 28 at the
time, but I was meeting with theentire the combined HR team from
both sides. And I had read inBusiness Week that the both CEOs
(20:28):
of heritage Chase and heritageJP Morgan were going into the
merger for cost savings. Thatwas the reason. And so I had
built my entire presentation oncost savings. And I get into
this conference room, and it is,I think it's one of the biggest
conference rooms I've ever beenin before or since. It was huge.
And my sponsor was there, andthen her boss was there, as a
(20:51):
woman who had the largestdiamond ring I have ever seen in
my life. It was like a walnut, asparkly walnut. It was
completely captivating. And I'mgoing through my presentation,
and halfway through it, shesays, now I just want to let you
know that cost savings is notpart of our mandate, so maybe
you want to focus on somethingelse. And I was like, in my late
(21:12):
20s, and I was too much of a kidto pull out the copy of Business
Week that I had in my briefcaseand throw it on the table and
say, hey, it may not be part ofyour mandate now,
David Turetsky (21:21):
but your CEOs say it
Peter Laughter (21:22):
But both of your CEOs saying that this is the
number one reason. So it's gonnabe so I can change topic, or we
can get ahead of this. But I wastoo insecure to pull off
something like that. But Irealized that, oh, she isn't at
the table, you know. And it wasthis sign that, like, how is it
(21:42):
that our organizations can beeffective if HR is viewed as a
cost center as opposed to aresource like and it was just
insane to me, you know? And Ithink, yeah, HR folks get blamed
for that dynamic, but it is not,you know, have anything to do
(22:03):
with them. And I think,you know, as we
enter this new time we are, we
David Turetsky (22:04):
yeah, have entered in the most
disruptive and innovative andperilous period of human history
ever, you know. And I mean, ifwe just take stock at what has
happened in the last four years,it is staggering, you know, it
is absolutely staggering, and itis just the beginning. So the
(22:25):
changes that need to happen inbusiness, it is not technology.
It is not the adoption oftechnology. It is not strategy.
It is implementation. Yeah, itis our ability to work with
other people. It is thestructure of our organization to
identify the myriad ofopportunities and transformative
opportunities and terriblethreats that will be appearing
(22:50):
around organizations at abreakneck speed that most
leaders can't see. And so if wedon't dramatically change how we
view leadership and how westructure our organizations, we
will see a tremendous amount ofcompanies fail in the years to
come. And I'm convinced of that.
(23:11):
give us a giveus a hint, what are some of
these major issues that are kindof under the surface that
they're not addressing rightnow?
Peter Laughter (23:21):
Well, so I think, you know, there's, there
was, so there's a couple cracks,you know, that have been there
for a while. So, I mean, the IBMand McKinsey studies that point
to that the failure rate oflarge scale transformations is
around 70%, 60 to 90% dependingon which organization. Now
(23:44):
let's, that is absurd, andthat's a number that has been
consistent for 20 years. So nextyear, companies are going to
spend a trillion, Americancompanies are gonna spend a
trillion dollars in digitaltransformation alone. So merger,
and I mean, for you know, so AI,implementation, dissertations,
all of these things, a trilliondollars. And the folks writing
(24:07):
those checks know full well that70% of that money is going right
down the drain. So $700 billionthis is greater than the GDP of
Belgium and Switzerlandcombined, right? Yeah, this is a
huge waste. And someorganizations, organizations are
(24:28):
playing with the methodologiesthat are needed for this new
time. And those organizationsare going to be in a position to
capture a tremendous amount ofthat 700 billion, you know? And
they're going to use that, thatsavings to to take a lot of
market share. So I think thatthe just the very ability of
organizations to react is got toshift, and this kind of command
(24:53):
and control orthodoxy that we'veused is not working.
The second thing I look at issomething that I'm sure you know
very well. I mean we all know isthe Gallup engagement survey.
You know, record number ofengaged employees last year, 23%
and with with 19% of those beingactively disengaged, so you've
(25:14):
got almost 20% of your staffwho's working against your
goals. They're putting sugar inthe gas tank on a regular basis.
And you know, with the the other60% just or 62% 63% just going
through the motions, doing theabsolute bare minimum, you know.
And whereas you know, companieswith engaged employees, you
(25:34):
know, are 17% more productive.
So you know, just the Deltathere, but they have 10% better
customer satisfaction. So therewas a study that said that the
thing that you can do, theeasiest way to increase your
profits by 70% is to reducecustomer churn by 5% that's a
simple metric. So if you havecompanies with engaged
(25:58):
employees, have 10% greatercustomer satisfaction. I don't
know what that how thattranslates into reducing churn,
but I would gather it would getyou the pretty close to that 70%
so you have on one side, youknow, massive disengaged
employees. And why is that?
Well, it's because we thinkculture isn't something we need
(26:19):
to pay attention to. HR is notsomething that we need to pay
attention to. Yet on the otherside, these organizations that
are figuring this out, they'recapturing that, and they'll use
the immense gain inprofitability and innovation
that comes from engage employeesto just take huge amount of
market share. But then I alsothink that the need like, why do
(26:42):
people work for companies? It'sbecause that's because being an
entrepreneur is too hard, right?
Yeah, well, we have just beenintroduced in the last year now,
and the fastest adopted piece oftechnology in history,
generative AI. I mean, chatGPThad a million users five days
after chatgpt 3.5 was released.
(27:03):
I mean, it took, it tookFacebook four and a half years
to get that. And Facebook's fun,right? Yeah, yeah, like, or was,
yeah,
David Turetsky (27:12):
Somewhat, yeah,
Peter Laughter (27:13):
or was back then, you know, it took Twitter
five years and Netflix 10! OpenAI did it in five days, you
know? And so we're seeing this,these, the rise of this
transformative technology. And Ithink, you know, the
conversation of like, oh, thethere's going to be a small
group of people who will usethis technology, and they'll
(27:35):
will take over the world. No,this is generative tools. These
are tools that allow anyone tocreate anything, right? And so
the need for people to work forcorporations, I think, will
start to decline precipitously,you know, in the next four or
five years. Not to say that wewon't need organizations, but if
(27:58):
you look at the example of BlueSky social. It was the Twitter
experiment that spun off intoother organizations. So this is
an open source social networkingplatform, and so they have
situations where it's a smallteam, they're not well funded.
Their users are like, hey, weneed functionality here. And
they're like, we'll get to it.
We'll get to it. And I was like,No, we really need it here.
(28:19):
Well, groups of those users arebuilding that functionality that
they need and giving it to BlueSky. Now there's only a small
group of people who are capableof that, but in a year or two,
everyone will be capable ofthat.
David Turetsky (28:35):
Well, let me just say, while I agree that the
generative AI is going to begreat, I think, for
productivity, by being able touse some lessons from the past,
one of the things that I've beentalking about a lot on the
podcast is that Gen AI dependson the past. Gen AI also depends
on data, and a lot of the stuffon the web is horsesht. Pardon
(28:59):
my French.
Peter Laughter (29:00):
I speak French fluently so
David Turetsky (29:02):
And a lot of data is horsesht too, and you
don't have to be you don't haveto be Nostradamus to see that,
unless there's a revolution inhow we store, what we store and
what we promote as facts. Idon't know how Gen AI gets away
with being able to give usquality when the quality just
(29:23):
isn't there yet.
Peter Laughter (29:24):
Well, I agree that there are problems with how
this is all playing out, yeah.
And I don't think that the pathis clear, but I think we have to
remember that Gen AI is one ofseveral transformative
technologies.
David Turetsky (29:41):
Oh, sure,
Peter Laughter (29:41):
yeah. And so I think when we look at, you know,
the combination of generative AIand predictive AI, for example,
I mean, I think anthropic hasdone a great job of giving us an
AI model that's actually two AImodels. But I think the
implication of that is becausewhat we have is, and I think
you've pointed to is, Gen AIdoes not know truth from
(30:04):
fiction.
David Turetsky (30:05):
Yeah,
Peter Laughter (30:05):
right, yeah.
And, but that is,
David Turetsky (30:08):
By the way, Peter, a lot of people struggle
with that as well.
Peter Laughter (30:11):
I uh, not necessarily, for me, it is my, I
believe my hopes are my reality,which is, you know, a road to
disappointment. But, so I have avisceral experience with that.
But, but I think that that's aproblem that's going to get
worked out. I mean, I thinkthere's just too, too many great
minds behind it. And so I do, Ido. I think I probably like I
(30:36):
said, Yeah, I predicted to mydaughter would never have to
learn to drive, because, youknow, driverless cars would be
ubiquitous, and this is when shewas six, and that the university
system would collapse by thetime she was 18. Well, she's 21
now going into her senior yearof very wonderful and highly
expensive private school, andshe still doesn't know how to
(30:57):
drive. So yeah, so my timingpredictions will most likely be
off, but I'm not. I think thatdynamic of of the two, yeah,
when we look at we have theability to create tools that
will provide the structures thatthat a corporation will in the
(31:18):
background. And I think that iswhere we're headed, and that is
going to be a game changer, andit will fundamentally shift how
corporations look and feel.
David Turetsky (31:29):
Hey, are you listening to this and thinking
to yourself, Man, I wish I couldtalk to David about this. Well,
you're in luck. We have aspecial offer for listeners of
the HR Data Labs podcast, a freehalf hour call with me about any
of the topics we cover on thepodcast or whatever is on your
mind. Go tosalary.com/hrdlconsulting to
(31:52):
schedule your free 30 minutecall today.
So Peter, you pivoted away fromHR, so how do you think that
experience gives you a betterlens on what's going to be
happening with the world of HR?
Peter Laughter (32:05):
So I am convinced that the time of HR
being a cost center, as opposedto a resource, is coming to an
end. And so I think you knowwhere I think that the companies
that really get it understand.
My my friend Ed Hanson says, Inthe end, yeah, human it's, it's
the human equation that needs tobe solved for. And that's not to
(32:28):
say that, you know, there is asolution to the human equation.
It's one that we constantly haveto work on. But I think that
that understanding, when we'relooking at, you know, the folks
who get beyond the 70% failurerate of digital transformations.
Or who are able to do muchbetter than, you know, a 23%
disengagement rate or 22%disengagement rate are, are they
(32:50):
figured that out, right? And andso suddenly, you know, HR is,
is, is really being leveragedfor for the things that it is
actually capable of, and theyhave a seat at the table. And so
I think that that's how thingswill shift. And I I am now
consulting, mostly speaking,right now. And so I've developed
(33:13):
a talk the the pyramid iscollapsed, adaptive leadership
for the age of disruption. And Italk about, yeah, I use the
Reverend, Dr Martin Luther Kingas the probably the greatest
example of an adaptive leaderwho being interrupted in the
middle of the most importantspeech of his career by Mahalia
(33:34):
Jackson, just seamlesslypivoted, changed the speech, you
know, one which he had notprepared for, and
extemporaneously delivered the IHave A Dream speech and changed
the world. He's known for beingthe father of nonviolence, but
yet he carried a gun wherever hewent and it wasn't until he met
Bayard Rustin that he put thatgun aside, and in doing so,
(33:55):
transformed the civil rightsmovement. And so I look at King
as that. And then I talk aboutwhat it is that we're doing and
the need to really shift todistributed leadership, where
power and authority and decisionmaking are distributed
throughout the organization, anddecisions are made close to the
front lines.
David Turetsky (34:12):
Right
Peter Laughter (34:13):
And that's the work that I am really interested
in helping organizations do. Andso I think that that labor,
which is a massive change in howwe think about leadership. One,
David Turetsky (34:24):
Absolutely,
Peter Laughter (34:24):
someone's got to own it, you know? And that's got
to be HR, because theleadership, yeah, the C suite.
Well, they're stuck in thismentality of command and
control. It's all they know. Soit's very difficult for them to
make the decisions there, yeah,to have that happen. And but the
problem is, is, because we areso enmeshed in command and
control, we need an intermediarystep. And I am trained in a
(34:49):
practice called strategic doing,which, if you, is a non
hierarchical project managementmethodology that combines
strategy... planning, strategy,and execution into one step. So
you start with an appreciativeinquiry, what if we could, you
know, you know, what would it belike if? And then you gather
(35:09):
people who are interested inthat. And then you say, Alright,
well, what, what resources doyou have? And you know, that
you'd be willing to share andyou know. And then how do we
combine those resources. So Idon't know if you know this
about me, like one of myresources is, I'm a fantastic
dancer, and you're a musician,and we just need a good
videographer. And all of thoseskills independently are great,
(35:31):
but together, awesome TikTokchannel.
So, yeah. Soit's, how do we combine those
David Turetsky (35:34):
There you go! assets? And then we ask, so,
well, what can we do with thesecombined assets? What should we
do, and what we will we do? Andthen you break up into
asynchronous groups, yeah, forthe next 30 days, and you come
back together and you say, whatdo we do? Yeah, what do we
learn? What new people havejoined us? What new skills or
(35:54):
assets have we gained? What canwe do now? Yeah, what should we
do? What will we do? And youkeep this process going, and
because of the different stagesof it, require different
leadership strengths, thatleadership is passed off
throughout this project, so. Andparticularly when you look at
this problem of recruiting, youknow, where we deploy this very
(36:18):
simple process of engaged, ofbuying stuff, to connecting with
human, people that needs to betransformed. Well, that's, that
is a mission critical processthat everyone hates, and
everyone is is is miserablewith.
Peter Laughter (36:34):
you know? And so how do we transform that? Well,
David Turetsky (36:34):
right it's we have to try new things.
So methodologies like strategicdoing are perfect to really move
through past that 70% failurerate into really successful
projects that make a difference,but in doing so, they
fundamentally expose people tounderstanding of how to operate
in a non hierarchicalenvironment. That's not to say
(36:56):
that there's deference forpeople who have more skills or
abilities, but how do we do thatso that organizations can create
their own? So distributedorganizations like birddog and
hair and Nucor or theMorningstar company, who have
been incredibly successfulwithout hierarchy or shifting
(37:16):
hierarchy, have done so, butthey they were founded with
those principles. They've hadyears to experiment. Right now,
players trying to transformeverything all at once, it's
going to fail.
Yeah
Peter Laughter (37:31):
So this is a way that companies can gradually
make that change and move withthe times.
David Turetsky (37:36):
It's so difficult from a culture
perspective, there's got to besome kind of Nexus. There's got
to be some kind of event thatenables that transition. Because
transitioning through that is sohard, isn't it? I mean, it's,
it's like shedding your skin,all of it, to be able to get
down to the the real DNA that'snecessary in order to be able to
(38:00):
have people who are empowered tomake not just decisions, but to
make really organizationchanging decisions, and that has
not been the core strength ofleaders, to give up that stuff!
Peter Laughter (38:14):
But at the same time, and I look at my own
experience, like I was ahorrible person to go into sales
meetings with with my salespeople, because I can't stand a
vacuum like so if there's toomuch silence, I'm gonna fill it,
right?
David Turetsky (38:27):
I'm the same way!
Peter Laughter (38:28):
Yeah and, and that's not the best thing for
training sales people. Sometimesyou just gotta let them
struggle, yeah, and watch themdo it. And, but I think that
that dynamic is pervasivethroughout leadership, right?
And so and when you haveenvironments where leaders can
experience, wait, people arestepping forward in this
project,
David Turetsky (38:47):
yeah,
Peter Laughter (38:47):
I don't need to, you know, I can. I can bring a
brick and a trowel. I don't needto bring the cathedral, right?
They'll see, because the peoplein this room will create a much
better cathedral than I couldpossibly imagine working
together. But it's that's anexperiential, you know thing, it
is not a You can't force that onit or say, Oh, we're doing it
(39:07):
differently. It'll beundermined.
David Turetsky (39:09):
Well, the first sign of failure people are gonna
be like, See, I told you theycouldn't do it! And to me,
there's nothing better thanfailure to enable you to
understand what's the best nextthing to do? So give it time,
allow failures and then enablethem to learn from them and grow
and experiment and actually makegood bad decisions, as long as
(39:33):
they're not a bearings or ING,what was it? The Singapore
trades on the
Peter Laughter (39:39):
Oh yes,
David Turetsky (39:40):
the market that just tanked the entire bank!
Peter Laughter (39:43):
Yeah, so I but I think that's also the other side
is distributed leadershiprequires a lot of structure.
Like Jazz looks like a bunch ofold dudes jamming, but it's the
most highly structured form ofmusic there is, and it's because
everyone at the table, oreveryone in the band knows the
structure that they are able toimprovise!
David Turetsky (40:01):
Right
Peter Laughter (40:01):
And it's the same thing with our
organizations.
David Turetsky (40:11):
Peter, I could keep talking to you forever,
unfortunately, well, so what I'mgonna ask you to do is, let's
take an orthogonal thought onthis about how recruiting can be
fixed, if not necessarily justby the people. How do we how do
we get beyond it? But we'regonna have to do that another
time.
Peter Laughter (40:30):
I would love to do that.
David Turetsky (40:32):
Thank you so much.
Peter Laughter (40:33):
Thank you, David. This was awesome.
David Turetsky (40:34):
Appreciate it.
It was wonderful. A wonderfulchat. Thank you all for
listening. Take care and staysafe.
Announcer (40:41):
That was the HR Data Labs podcast. If you liked the
episode, please subscribe. Andif you know anyone that might
like to hear it, please send ittheir way. Thank you for joining
us this week, and stay tuned forour next episode. Stay safe.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!