Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Changing State of Talent
Acquisition, where your hosts,graham Thornton and Martin Credd
, share their unfiltered takeson what's happening in the world
of talent acquisition today.
Each week brings new guests whoshare their stories on the
tools, trends and technologiescurrently impacting the changing
state of talent acquisition.
Have feedback or want to jointhe show?
(00:21):
Head on over to changestateio.
And now on to this week'sepisode.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
All right, we're back with another episode, another
season of the Changing State ofTown Acquisition Podcast.
Super excited to be back withyou, Marty.
What's new?
Speaker 3 (00:37):
Yeah, man, happy New Year.
Busy, busy, busy, busy.
We got a lot going on, a lotplanned for the year.
I'm excited about our littletrend survey.
I don't know if people haveheard about that, but we think
we can really raise the bar ontrend surveys.
We all see them.
Some of them are better thanothers.
Of course, obviously, you guysall know, if you've listened to
the show, my background is inmarket research, so we see a
(00:58):
real opportunity to level up andhopefully do something that's
super impactful and not just.
Here are the top trends, whichseem to be the same year over
year.
So, on that note, if anyonewants to take our survey, you
can go to changestateio slashsurvey Would really appreciate
the help, as many responses weget will help us be able to
(01:18):
slice and dice and give everyonereally valuable insights
everyone really valuableinsights.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
Yeah, I don't want to name names, but you know, I do
find it amusing that some of thelarger I don't know, we'll call
them consulting firms we see a2025 trend survey and it's hey,
the top five trends are, youknow, hr tech, you know,
workforce planning, you know.
And then you look at 2024 andit's hey, the top five trends
are workforce planning, hr tech,skills-based hiring.
(01:45):
It's the same five.
And you know, quite literally,that was when you and I circled
up and said, okay, yeah, enoughis enough.
Maybe we get something, youknow, maybe we put something
together that people wouldactually want to participate in
and learn something from.
So, you know, super excitedabout our study and, yeah, I
would love, you know, would lovelove the support for anyone
(02:08):
that hasn't hasn't taken thesurvey.
Now, that said, I will say, likeyou know, it certainly trends
season, right, and uh, so wealways like starting the year by
diving into, you know, thesurveys that we do, like you
know, perspectives that we do,like you know, on the future of
TA, future of tenant acquisition, future of HR.
And you know, we've got acouple guests, you know, coming
(02:30):
up early on in the year that I'mpretty excited about and, you
know, with that said, I thoughtit would be, you know, pretty
interesting for us to start theyear by talking about, you know,
three articles, three studies,call it what you will three
predictions to set the stage for2025.
So those are going to be CornFairy's 2025 Town Acquisition
(02:51):
Trend Study.
Love that one, steve Hunt, who Ibelieve Steve used to work over
at SAP Success Factors.
Now he's ventured out on hisown.
He's written a couple books hisinsights on HR predictions, and
then our good friend JamesEllis and his always provocative
take on employer branding.
(03:13):
So, super excited to unpackwhat's changing, what's staying
the same, where we might all beheaded as an industry.
So we've got a lot of stuff inthe hopper.
A lot of stuff in the hopper.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
Awesome.
Well, let's dig in.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Let's kick things off with.
How about that Korn Ferryreport?
Ai focus.
For sure, you know, I'd say youknow, one of the things that
Korn Ferry kind of emphasizes isyou know, we'll call it.
You know, progress overperfection, right In talent
acquisition and, you know,really pushing companies to
calculated risks to adopting AI.
(03:47):
I think there's five key trendsthat they really highlighted.
We'll lean right into AI.
This is not going to be a shock, but growing pains in AI.
Maybe it's the year or the yearthat reality really kicks in,
as they might say.
So 67% of respondents thinkthat AI usage is going to be the
(04:09):
top trend in 2025.
And so you can do the math twoout of three, two out of three
people think that AI is going todominate TA trends in 2025.
But 40% of them are worriedthat we're just going to lose
the personal touch, make thatprocess, the recruitment process
, impersonal.
So I guess, hey, with that inmind, all right, what do you
(04:32):
think, marty?
What are we worried about withAI?
Speaker 3 (04:36):
Well, I don't know how snarky we want to be to
start the year.
Funny thing that just came tomind 40% of people are worried
that it will make the processimpersonal.
In an industry where it's thenorm for people to apply for
jobs and just never hear back,or hear back like 90 days later,
I mean I don't know ifimpersonality is the real big
problem.
I think most people would bethrilled to get a response from
(04:58):
an AI quickly, rather than noresponse.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
I think that's a good point.
Yeah, you know what'sinteresting is in the fall.
You know we'll talk about thepersonal piece.
You know we had our what one ofour latest virtual networking
sessions in our office and youknow there was a round table
going on on AI and recruitmentand you know, I do think it was
interesting because we had acouple leaders on there and you
know they are all talking aboutusing AI, for you know candidate
(05:24):
sourcing there and you knowthey are all talking about using
AI for you know candidatesourcing and you know really
concerned that like hey, like AIisn't really good at closing
out or finding or screening outthe right people.
You know, I almost wonder ifthere's a correlation there to
you know the personal nature oryou know how recruiters need to
be involved in you know thecandidate selection side, just
(05:45):
in general.
Where's the connection betweenis impersonal really the word
that we're worried about, or thepersonal recruiter lens may be
something that we need to bemore focused on.
I can phrase that questionbetter, Marty, but what do you
think?
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Yeah.
Well, I don't know if we'vealready retired the funnel
metaphor for recruiting, butlet's use it.
I mean, ai seems very importantat the top of the funnel, sure,
I think.
Despite my scenario earlier, Ido think that the question of
whether it's impersonal or notis something we should think
about is real.
You and I we had a blog postabout this idea that you can
spit out some amazing contentfrom chat GPT.
(06:25):
But there's some spidey senseamong intelligent people that
maybe a person didn't write thisand I don't even know what that
means exactly.
It feels a little odd.
Is it bad?
I'm not sure.
Is it good?
Maybe Is it something we needto get used to?
Maybe we're still figuring thatall out.
I think the same things reallyapply to recruiting and again,
given what I just said, how poorwe are in general at reaching
(06:49):
people at the top of the funneland saying, hey, thanks for your
application, or hey, we'vedecided not to move on with you
because of this reason.
Yeah, and.
AI won't be perfect organizationthat.
I just think that we shouldleverage AI as much as we can to
actually provide that kind ofcustom experience to people that
people expect in terms ofconsumer products and goods all
(07:11):
the time.
Just let them know you receivedthat.
Sure, have an AI say we'vedecided not to move on with your
application for these threereasons in a nice way.
Is it going to get some of themwrong?
Are there some great catchesthat AA might screen out that a
recruiter never saw?
Probably.
But if it delivers a pool of,say, the 10% that are really
great and well-suited that therecruiter can then talk to, I
(07:34):
mean I don't see a downsidethere.
I think that's a win-win forboth sides of the transaction.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Yeah, no, I completely agree, and I almost
think you know that probablydovetails nicely into one of the
other highlights from KornFerry and that's you know, hey,
like, where are we going tofocus in 2025?
You know, it's really on morecritical skills.
I think that's where theconnection point is to you know,
kind of what you just described, marty, right, it's like, hey,
(08:00):
if we're, you know the criticalskills are like, you know, sure,
leadership is one, but likeproblem solving, communication
skills, you know it's that typeof stuff that is going to be
more important as AI becomesmore, you know, a larger stake
in the process, right, and soyou know whether it's critical
thinking skills or problem youknow solving skills around, boy,
(08:20):
like something just feels offfor how we're screening out
certain candidates, you know, orhow we're communicating, like I
think that is where you knowsome of the tie-in, you know,
probably comes into play, marty,you know it is.
Ai is great.
I still, we use this analogy toooften.
You know it's a free, unpaidintern, you know, so it's more
(08:41):
important that you have, youknow, people that can critically
think, people that know how tocommunicate, people that can
solve problems, sort of owningor overseeing how AI is being
used in your process, and Ithink that's probably where
those two kind of marry uptogether.
People are concerned aboutlosing the personal touch.
(09:02):
People really want to use AI alot more.
There's a large focus on hiringfor critical skills, and I
think those skills are going tobe pretty key in helping
companies adopt and implement AIin their processes.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
Absolutely.
It reminds me of this idea ofprompt engineer, which I don't
know if that term is still beingused, but the idea is that
anyone could log into a chat GPTand ask a question, but, as we
have firsthand experienceourselves, you get better at
asking better questions to getbetter outputs out of an AI over
time.
Chat GPT, of course, is standsto reason that you would have
(09:42):
people that would become subjectmatter experts in getting AI to
find the right kinds ofcandidates or asking the right
questions that maybe humanswouldn't necessarily think of to
find the person that's going tobe the best fit for the
organization.
I think one caution on that notefor the industry is just that
we're again, I'll be gentle, butwe're, as an industry, this is
(10:03):
the status quo can be.
Hey, we just spent a milliondollars on a new ATS.
We kind of expect that we'rejust going to flip a switch and
it's going to transform ourrecruitment function.
Anyone who's implemented an ATSknows that really what you need
is a paid consultant that's onstaff full time for several
months, if not a year, tocustomize and configure the ATS
(10:24):
so that it actually does whatyou want it to do.
And, using your unpaid internanalogy.
If we do not expect amillion-dollar piece of software
to be something that you canjust plug and play and deliver
great results, why would weexpect an unpaid intern to be
able to do the same thing?
Speaker 2 (10:39):
That's pretty good.
Yeah, I think that's fair.
Maybe people see AI as just aneasy lever to pull, and so we
pull it a lot.
Ai is more accessible, it'scheaper, it's easy, it's easy to
use, but it doesn't necessarilymean it's easy to use
effectively.
(11:00):
Yeah, I like that a lot.
Yeah, and.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
I think this ties back to where we started the
impersonal thing.
Yeah, it can be impersonal ifyou just treat it like plug and
play.
If you want it to not beimpersonal, you have to put the
person in it, ie you, and spendtime learning how to use the
tool, become really good atinstructing the AI to do exactly
what you want, and I thinkthat's where the human side
actually comes in.
Of course, at the end of thefunnel too, but, like if we're
(11:23):
actually talking about makingthe AI experience more personal,
it needs to be directed by aperson.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah, I agree.
Well, you know a couple otherones that we'll call out.
On Corn Ferry, you know peopleare focused on L&D.
You know again, not a surprise,but I think at this point, like
learning development is nolonger optional.
Two-thirds of employees willstay with companies that offer
up-to-going opportunities.
We do this a lot over at ChangeState.
(11:50):
We pay to put our peoplethrough classes that are of
interest to them, with thecaveat that, hey, we're going to
pay for you to learn how tobuild.
You know build micro solutionsor micro.
You know tools using AI.
You know you're going to comeback to the team, the company
and show everyone hey, here'swhat I learned and how we can
(12:11):
apply it.
Right, and you know I almostwonder.
You know, I posit that.
You know this interest inlearning and development, this
increased interest in upskilling.
It's probably directly tied topeople wanting to learn more
about how to use AI.
You know you go see.
You know you go see your friendwho's working at, you know, xyz
(12:33):
company and like, oh, like,they're letting their company
pop around using co-pilots to,you know interact and you know,
rewrite their sales outreachemail, like, oh, that's pretty
cool, I would like to know howto do that too.
And, like you know, people areeither going to go you know,
learn how to do that on theirown, and you know and exit or,
like you got an opportunity to,you know, help your employees
(12:55):
stay, you know, by giving them abit more training and
development opportunitiesinternally.
Now I'd venture to guess that,boy, if we knew, you know,
upscale and opportune thesepeople are drawn towards, it's
probably largely skewed orfocused towards.
All right, ai is coming.
How can we better use it justas a whole?
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Yeah, I think you're right there.
I mean, obviously you're closerto learning development than I
am, but the obvious point thatcomes to mind is well, we all
feel kind of insecure outside ofour industry.
Just, ai is coming.
It's smarter than I am.
If you spend any time on chatGBT, you can see it do something
in 15 seconds that probablywould have taken you a day and
you have a worse output.
So you know, I think that hasdirect implications for learning
(13:37):
, not to say that we don't needto learn new skills in the
future, but the reality is thatwill be AI's domain, and the
question is how do we partnerwith AI in the context of
learning and development, whichI think is what you're saying?
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Yeah, yeah, a hundred percent.
Well, you know I'm not going touse this one as a throwaway, I
don't think.
You know.
I just don't want to talk abouthybrid offices, return to
office.
Like you know my opinions onremote work versus flexible work
, I mean, like I think we'rework versus flexible work.
I mean like I think we're.
You know we're in a unique spotchange state we're.
We're fully remote, right, andyou know I wrote an article I
don't even know where it'spublished at this point but, um,
(14:11):
you know, on return to officeand hey, like you know, for for
smaller orgs, totally get itlike it is very hard to hide.
If you know you're a productmarketer, uh, you're a program
manager at at a chain state,like you know, or a startup,
yeah, you're a program managerat a chain state or a startup.
If you're not doing your job,it's going to be pretty easy for
me to know, pretty easy to.
(14:33):
You can't really hide, but ifyou're in a big company, boy,
you can.
And if you never come, if youhave the world where you work
for a company, you've never beenin the office or met anyone, I
don't know, like that's tough,that's tough.
You know, we see this a lot.
You know we've seen this withclients, we've seen this in
industry.
Like you know, wells Fargo, letpeople go, but you know I had a
(14:56):
little plug in with just movetheir mouse every you know 10
remote call center employees.
Then you ship them theircomputers and you know, two days
later you see that they're inSouth Africa and like they've
outsourced that job to someoneelse.
These are real scenarios.
(15:17):
So like, yeah, you know, Isympathize with you know hybrid
and remote being, you know, apriority, that's what we are and
I don't see any scenario wherewe, where we change, you know,
but on the other side, like onsome level, like you know, if
you're an employer, you know youyou probably want to know that
your employees are working andlike you know that's it's tough,
(15:40):
you know it's tough, yeah well,you and I had a conversation
offline about it, but maybe I'llbring it in here briefly.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
It's just that the hilarious part about this to me
is that an organization of anysize does not know whether the
only way to tell whether theiremployees are actually working
is to detect whether they have amouse jiggler going on.
I mean, we might have biggerproblems than hybrid work if
that's the status quo, I think,in the same way that somehow
(16:07):
Elon Musk fired what 75% ofTwitter's staff on day one and
everyone thought that theplatform was going to fall apart
, and without weighing into thedirty, mucky water that is X now
, I'll just say the numbers seemto suggest that that did not
happen.
The sky did not fall and Ithink it has more users than
(16:29):
ever.
So I don't know.
It's just an interesting tidbit.
It seems like what we shouldreally be upset about as
organizations that we have somuch bloat that it's possible
for someone to not do any workand fool you by working from
home.
What the implication seems tobe is that it would be a better
case to bring people back intothe cubicles that we all hated.
(16:50):
I mean, I didn't, but lots ofpeople work in cubicles and we
can all have unnecessarymeetings and chat about around
the water cooler and not getanything done.
But at least we don't have amouse jiggler going yet.
So I don't know.
I think it's a very interestingtopic, but I think the general
opinion that's being expressedin the public is kind of missing
(17:10):
the point.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Yeah, well, and you know, I also think, like you
know at some level, like a lotof the work that you've all you
know done prior to change daytoo, is all like you know you
get paid for doing a job, or youknow finishing a project, and
like talk about like, uh, youknow a brand project, right.
Like you know you get paid Xdollars and it takes you Y hours
.
And like you know you're doingthe work and like, when you're
(17:32):
done, you're done.
And like you know companieslike that because they know that
they're paying for a project toget done.
And like you're paying forservices that are clearly
completed with a, with an output, right.
And you know, I almost wonder,is, like you know it gets harder
and harder, as, like you knowjobs, you know the lines are
blurred with what you know, withwhat your responsibilities even
(17:54):
are sometimes Right, and Ithink that I don't know how many
times we can use mouse jiggler.
Um, you know, this year, like,but like, yeah, I mean, I.
I think that's defining whatsomeone's you know, quote,
unquote job or responsibilitiesare is probably part of the
problem, part of the challengeto part of the problem, right,
(18:15):
you know, maybe five years ago,you and I talked about, you know
, that podcast episode BullshitJobs, right, and like, just like
boy, like we have a propensityto, like you know, create work
for people, just to create work,not because it matters, like
you know, it's just like hey,yep, you got a job, so we're
going to find something for youto do.
And thinking back two decadesin my first company, first job
(18:40):
yeah, I'm sure that was true wegot to find something for Bob to
do.
And that's not the world thatwe're in right now,
unfortunately.
Well, I guess it is in somespots, but should it be?
If we're trying to be moreefficient, if there's not a job
for you, maybe people are justgoing to end up being paid more
for projects, for something witha finite endpoint to it.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
Yeah, well, we're also worried rightly so, I think
about AI taking all the jobsand what will people do for
meaning and purpose?
And when you were talking juston it, it made me think that
maybe this transition has beengoing on for decades, you know,
and maybe we'll see a suddenspike here with AI.
But, like I imagine, there is aprofound shift that occurred in
workplaces.
If you look 100 years ago,versus starting in like 70s and
(19:28):
80s, is it imaginable that ourgrandparents' generation would
have just gotten paid sixfigures to go sit around in an
office in a job where they coulduse a mouse jiggler to fool
their boss?
Maybe I'm naive, maybe it waslike that, but I doubt it.
I think that's a relativelyrecent invention, if you will.
I don't know.
I think we're just seeingacceleration of trends that have
probably already been there fora while.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Yeah, I was saying it yesterday and his dad, but I
don't know.
There's something catharticabout hey, it's really nice if I
was selling widgets to know,hey, how much does it cost to
build a widget and how much areyou selling it for?
Cool, I build a widget for abuck and I sell it for two.
Like I make a dollar.
And like, hey, like that'sthat's great, like and like it's
(20:13):
a lot harder.
And like today, like all right,what are we selling?
We're selling uh, you know I'mnot going to talk about our
business, but like you know,it's a lot harder today in
business in general, like whenit's not like you know a clear,
linear path to like hey, like,yep, I gotta go, you know got to
go.
You know I got to go buy thematerial.
I got to, like I got to, youknow, investment that I'm making
(20:35):
like machines, blah blah, blahmodel is broken.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
It probably has been breaking for a while, as I was
hinting at a moment ago.
In a world where we havecomputers that can do most of
that busy work that people justdid, whether it was necessary or
not, to justify their existence, it makes even less.
It's impossible to ignore whenyou can have a computer do that
for you in 10 seconds right, aweek's worth of work in 10
seconds.
So we're probably going to haveto, whether we like it or not,
(21:14):
and many people may go kickingand screaming think about new
ways of compensating people.
It doesn't mean there won't bejobs, but does it make sense
anymore to pay someone by thehour rather than for some kind
of very specific body of workthat they complete?
I don't know if the hourlymodel will be around for too
much longer.
At least I would hope not,because I don't particularly
love it myself.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Yeah Well, you know, I just you know we'll close with
, like I think I saw, probably atweet from, like Reid Hoffman.
Like he said, you know I'mparaphrasing, for, obviously,
but you know, in the next decade, you know, people are going to
be using AI so much that, like,the cost of getting work done is
going to decrease sosubstantially that, like you
know, people are gonna have alot more free time but, like,
(21:54):
the most important skills aregoing to be, you know, those
that can critically think andlike recognize, you know, or
properly feed or train aialgorithms.
And you know the world's gonnalook very different, you know, I
think a world of work is goingto look a lot different, you
know.
You know everyone says now, butI don't think things are going
to move that much quickly, tooquickly, but it's going to be a
(22:16):
different world.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I just want to have my cabin in the wood before that
happens.
So that's my only request tothe universe.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
You and me both you and me both.
I think we'll move on toanother.
We'll call it a predictiontrend forecast.
I really love well, it's thepredictions coming out of Steve
Hunt's article, I think it was.
It's on LinkedIn, we'll shareit in the notes but a guide to
HR predictions, trends andforecasts.
So, steve, he's writtenmultiple books.
(22:47):
Actually, he might even live ina cabin, marty, I have no idea.
Never met Steve, but I know helives somewhere a couple hours
or an hour or so outside ofPortland.
So somewhere, maybe in a cabin,maybe close to a job Cabin,
beach house cabin, somethinglike that.
Yeah, but multiple books in theTA space.
Worked at SAP SuccessFactors asthe chief expert on technology
(23:11):
and was also their global VP ofHCM research too.
So I like his content quite abit.
I would say definitely followSteve.
And he wrote a guide that'sprobably just a lens more on HR
predictions, trends and justsome of his lessons for how you
navigate what he's called theflood of annual forecasts or
(23:32):
annual trends.
And boy we agree, and maybesome irony that we're talking
about him here.
Still, too, like a lot of thesetrends, people are always
repackaging.
You know old problems, right,and so you know let's just talk
(23:53):
about.
You know, quiet quitting, right, okay, well, it's just
retention of employees, right?
Like you know whether peopleare quitting, or you know, doing
it quietly, telling you likeyou know, at the end of the day,
like, yeah, you want torecognize underperformers, poor
(24:16):
performers, you know you want tofocus on.
You know, at the end of the day, like, yeah, you want to
recognize underperformers, poorperformers, you know you want to
focus on, um, you knowretention, right.
And you know, uh, I think youuse the phrase you know, old
wine and new bottles, uh, quitea bit, I like that.
Yeah, I like that too.
So, you know, pay attention to,you know, the repackaging of
old problems.
You know, in new bottles, uh,love that quite a bit.
You know, I think the other onethat you know probably stood
out, there was, like you know,moch, you know, it's just pay
(24:39):
attention to it what he's calleda slow adoption of hr tech and,
like moche, most hr techpredictions take years, even
decades, to material materialize, and so one of his examples is
just cloud-based HR systems.
But rapid adoption, especiallyfor something like generative AI
, is just going to be rare.
(25:00):
Now I'll pause and let yourespond to that one in
particular, marty, before I gotoo deep, into the weeds.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
I wasn't that familiar with Steve Hunt, but
I'm liking what I'm seeing herebased on this trend report.
I mean it's kind of an appealto common sense.
Like, yes, we all it's fun tolook at trend reports, but if
you're really like an HRexecutive, so detached from your
business where you're like boy,I better look on the internet
and see what I should be focusedon this year.
Like you know, maybe that's notthe best thing.
(25:29):
So I think what Steve is sayinga lot of this is just like use
common sense, don't getblindsided by rebrands,
essentially of old concepts.
Yes, you know we can talk aboutquiet quitting, but really, why
are we losing people,regardless of how we're losing
them or the method in which theyinform us of this is where you
should be focused.
In which they inform us of thisis where you should be focused.
Yeah, we should try to getSteve on the podcast, even if
(25:51):
you're out there.
Consider it an open invitation.
I'd love to chat with that guy.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
a little more.
We will reach out to Steve andsee if we can get him to join
for sure.
Yeah, I'll just kind of callout some.
What I'll call is practicalsuggestions.
This is one that I thinkeveryone should read.
It's the stuff that we do everyday, you know.
Start with your currentchallenges.
Right, you know diversity.
Diversify your data sources.
(26:16):
You know this is one you know,marty, you know I talk about.
Even with our trends survey.
I, like you know, disclaimer.
Like you, should not makebusiness decisions after reading
our report.
You shouldn't make businessdecisions after reading a
Gartner report.
You should give variedperspectives.
(26:36):
Again, we think our TAtransport is going to be great,
but that doesn't mean someoneshould pick it up and read it
and say you know what?
Applicant fraud is a growingconcern.
Yeah, we saw that happen once.
We need to revamp our wholeapplication process to make sure
that we're checking out wherepeople are, that applicants are
actually real.
Again, diversify your sources.
(26:58):
And then the other piece is Ilove this challenge the data and
ignore irrelevant trends.
There's going to be a lot ofstuff that doesn't necessarily
add add value, right, you know.
And so you know.
Know what problems you'retrying to solve.
You know, know what challengesyou're trying to solve, talk to
more than just one vendor, talkto more.
(27:18):
You know, dig into more thanone data source.
You know and you know, justknow, that, like you know,
there's gonna be a lot of trendsthat are out there that are
just not going to be unique orhelpful to your organization.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Absolutely, absolutely.
I mean I think that I'm amarket researcher, so let me
just underscore that point.
I mean trends.
We often see the numbers, like65% of people said that the AI
is the top priority for nextyear.
Okay, but what that also meansis 35% of people said it's not a
top priority for the next year.
And I think it's easy, ifyou're not used to looking at
data or if you're just beingpresented a infographic style
(27:53):
statistic, to think boy, I'mreally missing the boat here.
Fair to ask the question am Imissing the boat?
But also keep in mind thatthree to four out of 10 people
are also quote unquote missingthe boat, and maybe you're right
where you're supposed to be.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Yeah, yeah, I completely agree.
I mean, you know I still lovemy favorite book, how to Lie
with Statistics, and like Iscreenshot.
You know examples almost everyday.
You know across.
You know Twitter and you knowwhere else right, wherever else
I'm.
You know reading and like, hey,like at the end of the day,
like a lot of folks are, youknow, in these data reports, you
(28:26):
know we're aligned withstatistics, right, and so
challenge the data.
You know, fully agree with youon that, steve.
You know, challenge the data.
And then you know let's pivotto.
You know one final one we don'twant to gloss over.
You know employer brand nearand dear to your heart.
You know your good friend.
You know, Mr James Ellis, youknow I'll.
(28:47):
You know I'll lead by sayinglike hey, mr James Ellis, I'll
lead by saying hey.
In the Korn Ferry report one oftheir trends was like hey, your
EVP is finally VIP.
So almost 50% of HR pros areprioritizing cultural values to
attract and retain talent.
Strong EVPs are important andthey better align to the
(29:09):
employee experience and beshowcased during recruitment.
So on one side, korn Ferry says, oh boy, this is something to
pay attention to.
Yeah, James Ellis had a littlebit more of a provocative take.
I think he said hey, my bigprediction is I think employer
branding is going to become aquote bad word in 2025.
(29:30):
So you know the question is.
So the question to you, martydo we need to rebrand right?
Do we need to change how we'rethinking about employer brand?
Like, tell me, tell me, waxpoetic on your thoughts here.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
James Ellis is always .
I would call him a provocateurand I think that he would
actually really take that as acompliment.
At least I think he would.
You know he's always gotinteresting takes.
I always enjoy reading whatJames has to write and I don't
necessarily disagree with him onthis point.
I mean, we've all been talkingabout this stuff for such a long
time.
Part of my struggle gettinginto this and we've talked at
(30:07):
length on the podcast about thisis like what's this thing
called employer brand?
At length on the podcast aboutthis is like what's this thing
called employer brand?
Most people in the organizationdon't know about it.
It's kind of new.
How does it relate to ourmaster brand?
Obviously, this is what we spendlots of time with our clients
talking about these questions,and it's always been our point
of view that the employer brandis really just another face of
the master brand of theorganization that has different
faces.
Usually you're thinking aboutthe consumer facing face, but
(30:30):
there's employer facing faces.
You could even talk about theperceptions that a company has
to its vendors.
That'd be another example.
I don't think anyone's talkingabout vendor brand, but it's
just a point that there are lotsof different faces to it.
So to have carved this out as anindustry and say, no, no, we've
got our own separate thingcalled employer brand, always
(30:51):
seemed a little bit off to me, Isuppose.
Now I don't know if that makesit a bad or a dirty word.
I do think people are probablyjust tired of hearing about EVPs
and employer brand.
I mean, I love doing this stuffand I'm kind of tired of it.
So, yeah, I think you know,ironically, we need a rebrand of
employer brand.
That's kind of what James issaying, and I'm not sure I
(31:13):
disagree, but we should have himon to ask him what his ideas
are.
How would he rebrand?
Speaker 2 (31:19):
it?
Yeah, I mean, I guess myquestion would be like do we
just change the approach for howwe approach employer brand
projects?
Why does it feel like a dirtyword, I think?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
it feels like a dirty word because he kind of walks
you through the history of it alittle bit, which was
enlightening to me becauseobviously I've only been in this
space for five years.
But like, oh, it was like anovel concept that an
organization should have to evenprovide a reason why someone
should work for them.
You know, the power balanceprobably 50, 80 years ago was
completely inverted and it wasjust like you should be, this is
(32:01):
a privilege to come, have achance to work for us and you
know, come and find out was kindof the attitude.
Then we got into this employerbranding area where there's this
novel idea, that boy, maybe weshould tell people why they
should work here, and I thinkhe's arguing that we have been
in that era for some time.
The problem is and you know thisis preaching to the choir I
love to hear James talk about itis that people just focused on
(32:23):
tactics and it became kind ofslimy.
And I think this is where thedirtiness of it comes in.
It's squeaky clean If you lookat somebody's career side and
they all have the same tiredcopy.
I mean, we've gone on and onabout it.
I won't dwell on it, buteverything just feels a bit
corporate, sterile, lacking inpersonality, lacking in
(32:43):
uniqueness, lacking indistinctiveness, and people are
tired and there's been a lot ofbait and switch.
People have treated brand likea trick.
You need to pull over someoneto get them to work for you,
rather than hey, let's just behonest and get really honest,
but to the core of what makes usspecial and if that sounds good
to you, come on board.
(33:04):
I don't know that was a ramblingresponse, but I think the
dirtiness relates, at least tome, for the sense that people
have where it's justexploitative.
It's no different than anyother marketing.
You know brands that have realresonance and they're authentic
and that's why you choose tohave relationships with them,
and you know the slimy ads thatare bait and switch billboard
advertising, and there's adistinct difference in terms of
(33:26):
how you feel about thatmarketing, and I think our
industry has been a lot moretowards the used car salesman
side of that spectrum,unfortunately.
Hopefully it's changing, though.
I think that's what James is atleast hoping or expecting.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
Yeah, I do wonder if there's.
I just don't know how.
You know how we best as anindustry, you know, educate you
know leaders on the importanceof a brand, like how you define,
manage or promote your employerbrand.
I think you know one of our youknow questions in our you know
(33:58):
study is around.
You know obstacles in defining,managing and promoting your
employer brand and you knowyou'll probably yell at me later
for my interpretation of data,but I would say like, hey,
securing budget and you know, isthe largest obstacle, at least
the way I interpret the data,marty, you'll tell me I'm wrong.
When you're done with it period, it's the largest you know
(34:19):
obstacle that an organizationreally faces.
Right, it's securing budget and, like you know, I think you
know brand leaders, you know, Ithink that's a problem, right,
and and if you have troublegetting budget for brand type
initiatives, you know, I almostwonder, like, is that just a
reflection on you know notunderstanding how to you know,
(34:39):
prove your you know, prove whyan employer brand exists, prove
why you're investing in yourbrand period.
Call it an employer brand, callit what you will is important.
Again, you should tell me I'mwrong, because I like to hear it
.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
No, I don't think you're wrong.
I mean, I do often think you'rewrong, but not on this program.
You know it is incumbent uponemployer brand managers,
directors, those sort ofmid-level people to help
leadership understand whatemployer brand is.
I mean, on the one hand, I wantto say the CEO should get it
(35:14):
because it's super important anda profound concept, even though
it's kind of gotten a bad rapmaybe for overuse.
But like, yeah, you do have todo it.
So if I see securing budget isone of the biggest obstacles or
the biggest obstacle, well, whyis that?
Historically, we may have had akind of sarcastic response to
that and say, well, theorganization is just lame and
(35:35):
they don't see the value.
No, maybe it's an organizationthat's for 20 years has been
told how important an employerbrand is and every year the
budget increases so you can buymore tactic based approaches to
employer brand and we neverreally see a result and no one
knows why the hell people workhere.
You know that could also be areason why it's hard to see your
budget and if that's why, Ican't necessarily disagree with
(35:58):
it.
Um, so again, I think it doestie back to the sliminess of the
industry, the dirtiness of someof the tactics, why would we
want to invest in it?
And I think James made anotherinteresting point, which is that
if it's all about tactics andthe latest shiniest new bells
and whistles that you can put onyour career site or the newest
(36:18):
greatest enhanced employer brandprofile whatever that is that
XYZ vendor is selling you'regoing to lose because you
probably don't have the biggestwar chest.
So do you really want it to bea spending war is kind of the
question he poses to people, andmost of us don't work for
Fortune.
You know top 10 revenuecompanies in the world, right,
and the irony, of course, isthose companies don't actually
(36:40):
need to spend the money becausethey have such strong brands
that people know about them.
So I don't know.
There's an interesting paradoxthere, I suppose.
Yes, it's going to cost money,but I don't think you need a lot
of money to do effectiveemployer branding.
You can make up for a lot ofthe lack of budget through
smarts, critical thinking andelbow grease, and I'm just not
(37:03):
sure a lot of teams are equippedto be able to do that.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Yeah, I'm going to leave that one and I think
that's going to be the logicalplace for us to end.
We'll certainly see if we getJames back on to share some
additional thoughts on that Samething with Steve.
And hey, hopefully we get somefolks from Corn Fairy on here as
well soon, because you know, Ithink all three articles you
(37:26):
know reports, predictions orwhatever you want to label them,
you know three of the better,you know sort of attention
getters that you know I think wesaw, you know, to start the
year and super excited to youknow, challenge everyone.
To, you know, think a littlebit differently.
And you know, don't just acceptthat.
Hey, like someone says, hey,the biggest trend is HR
technology, like that doesn'tmean anything.
(37:48):
Um, you know, it just doesn'tlike.
And you know, maybe we'll be alittle bit more vocal, um, this
year.
I'm like, you know it justdoesn't mean anything.
And so, you know, let's getsome practical examples of you
know, the biggest trend inbusiness for 2025 is making
money.
Speaker 3 (38:08):
That means about as much as that.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
Growth, growth.
Well, I think that's a goodplace to put another pin in it,
marty, but super excited foreverything that we have going
this year.
We got a lot of fresh content.
Fresh, everything comingeveryone's way.
So, um, don't forget to, youknow, share the episode with
your broader network and, uh,we'll catch you take our survey,
(38:34):
don't forget change statesurvey yeah, all right.
All right, everyone.
Have a good one.
Take care, mart, marty, allright.
Thanks for tuning in.
As always, head on over tochangestateio or shoot us a note
on all the social media.
We'd love to hear from you andwe'll check you guys next week.
Welcome to the Changing State of Talent
Acquisition, where your hosts,graham Thornton and Martin Credd
, share their unfiltered takeson what's happening in the world
of talent acquisition today.
Each week brings new guests whoshare their stories on the
tools, trends and technologiescurrently impacting the changing
state of talent acquisition.
Have feedback or want to jointhe show?
(00:21):
Head on over to changestateio.
And now on to this week'sepisode.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
All right, we're back with another episode, another
season of the Changing State ofTown Acquisition Podcast.
Super excited to be back withyou, Marty.
What's new?
Speaker 3 (00:37):
Yeah, man, happy New Year.
Busy, busy, busy, busy.
We got a lot going on, a lotplanned for the year.
I'm excited about our littletrend survey.
I don't know if people haveheard about that, but we think
we can really raise the bar ontrend surveys.
We all see them.
Some of them are better thanothers.
Of course, obviously, you guysall know, if you've listened to
the show, my background is inmarket research, so we see a
(00:58):
real opportunity to level up andhopefully do something that's
super impactful and not just.
Here are the top trends, whichseem to be the same year over
year.
So, on that note, if anyonewants to take our survey, you
can go to changestateio slashsurvey Would really appreciate
the help, as many responses weget will help us be able to
(01:18):
slice and dice and give everyonereally valuable insights
everyone really valuableinsights.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
Yeah, I don't want to name names, but you know, I do
find it amusing that some of thelarger I don't know, we'll call
them consulting firms we see a2025 trend survey and it's hey,
the top five trends are, youknow, hr tech, you know,
workforce planning, you know.
And then you look at 2024 andit's hey, the top five trends
are workforce planning, hr tech,skills-based hiring.
(01:45):
It's the same five.
And you know, quite literally,that was when you and I circled
up and said, okay, yeah, enoughis enough.
Maybe we get something, youknow, maybe we put something
together that people wouldactually want to participate in
and learn something from.
So, you know, super excitedabout our study and, yeah, I
would love, you know, would lovelove the support for anyone
(02:08):
that hasn't hasn't taken thesurvey.
Now, that said, I will say, likeyou know, it certainly trends
season, right, and uh, so wealways like starting the year by
diving into, you know, thesurveys that we do, like you
know, perspectives that we do,like you know, on the future of
TA, future of tenant acquisition, future of HR.
And you know, we've got acouple guests, you know, coming
(02:30):
up early on in the year that I'mpretty excited about and, you
know, with that said, I thoughtit would be, you know, pretty
interesting for us to start theyear by talking about, you know,
three articles, three studies,call it what you will three
predictions to set the stage for2025.
So those are going to be CornFairy's 2025 Town Acquisition
(02:51):
Trend Study.
Love that one, steve Hunt, who Ibelieve Steve used to work over
at SAP Success Factors.
Now he's ventured out on hisown.
He's written a couple books hisinsights on HR predictions, and
then our good friend JamesEllis and his always provocative
take on employer branding.
(03:13):
So, super excited to unpackwhat's changing, what's staying
the same, where we might all beheaded as an industry.
So we've got a lot of stuff inthe hopper.
A lot of stuff in the hopper.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
Awesome.
Well, let's dig in.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Let's kick things off with.
How about that Korn Ferryreport?
Ai focus.
For sure, you know, I'd say youknow, one of the things that
Korn Ferry kind of emphasizes isyou know, we'll call it.
You know, progress overperfection, right In talent
acquisition and, you know,really pushing companies to
calculated risks to adopting AI.
(03:47):
I think there's five key trendsthat they really highlighted.
We'll lean right into AI.
This is not going to be a shock, but growing pains in AI.
Maybe it's the year or the yearthat reality really kicks in,
as they might say.
So 67% of respondents thinkthat AI usage is going to be the
(04:09):
top trend in 2025.
And so you can do the math twoout of three, two out of three
people think that AI is going todominate TA trends in 2025.
But 40% of them are worriedthat we're just going to lose
the personal touch, make thatprocess, the recruitment process
, impersonal.
So I guess, hey, with that inmind, all right, what do you
(04:32):
think, marty?
What are we worried about withAI?
Speaker 3 (04:36):
Well, I don't know how snarky we want to be to
start the year.
Funny thing that just came tomind 40% of people are worried
that it will make the processimpersonal.
In an industry where it's thenorm for people to apply for
jobs and just never hear back,or hear back like 90 days later,
I mean I don't know ifimpersonality is the real big
problem.
I think most people would bethrilled to get a response from
(04:58):
an AI quickly, rather than noresponse.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
I think that's a good point.
Yeah, you know what'sinteresting is in the fall.
You know we'll talk about thepersonal piece.
You know we had our what one ofour latest virtual networking
sessions in our office and youknow there was a round table
going on on AI and recruitmentand you know, I do think it was
interesting because we had acouple leaders on there and you
know they are all talking aboutusing AI, for you know candidate
(05:24):
sourcing there and you knowthey are all talking about using
AI for you know candidatesourcing and you know really
concerned that like hey, like AIisn't really good at closing
out or finding or screening outthe right people.
You know, I almost wonder ifthere's a correlation there to
you know the personal nature oryou know how recruiters need to
be involved in you know thecandidate selection side, just
(05:45):
in general.
Where's the connection betweenis impersonal really the word
that we're worried about, or thepersonal recruiter lens may be
something that we need to bemore focused on.
I can phrase that questionbetter, Marty, but what do you
think?
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Yeah.
Well, I don't know if we'vealready retired the funnel
metaphor for recruiting, butlet's use it.
I mean, ai seems very importantat the top of the funnel, sure,
I think.
Despite my scenario earlier, Ido think that the question of
whether it's impersonal or notis something we should think
about is real.
You and I we had a blog postabout this idea that you can
spit out some amazing contentfrom chat GPT.
(06:25):
But there's some spidey senseamong intelligent people that
maybe a person didn't write thisand I don't even know what that
means exactly.
It feels a little odd.
Is it bad?
I'm not sure.
Is it good?
Maybe Is it something we needto get used to?
Maybe we're still figuring thatall out.
I think the same things reallyapply to recruiting and again,
given what I just said, how poorwe are in general at reaching
(06:49):
people at the top of the funneland saying, hey, thanks for your
application, or hey, we'vedecided not to move on with you
because of this reason.
Yeah, and.
AI won't be perfect organizationthat.
I just think that we shouldleverage AI as much as we can to
actually provide that kind ofcustom experience to people that
people expect in terms ofconsumer products and goods all
(07:11):
the time.
Just let them know you receivedthat.
Sure, have an AI say we'vedecided not to move on with your
application for these threereasons in a nice way.
Is it going to get some of themwrong?
Are there some great catchesthat AA might screen out that a
recruiter never saw?
Probably.
But if it delivers a pool of,say, the 10% that are really
great and well-suited that therecruiter can then talk to, I
(07:34):
mean I don't see a downsidethere.
I think that's a win-win forboth sides of the transaction.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Yeah, no, I completely agree, and I almost
think you know that probablydovetails nicely into one of the
other highlights from KornFerry and that's you know, hey,
like, where are we going tofocus in 2025?
You know, it's really on morecritical skills.
I think that's where theconnection point is to you know,
kind of what you just described, marty, right, it's like, hey,
(08:00):
if we're, you know the criticalskills are like, you know, sure,
leadership is one, but likeproblem solving, communication
skills, you know it's that typeof stuff that is going to be
more important as AI becomesmore, you know, a larger stake
in the process, right, and soyou know whether it's critical
thinking skills or problem youknow solving skills around, boy,
(08:20):
like something just feels offfor how we're screening out
certain candidates, you know, orhow we're communicating, like I
think that is where you knowsome of the tie-in, you know,
probably comes into play, marty,you know it is.
Ai is great.
I still, we use this analogy toooften.
You know it's a free, unpaidintern, you know, so it's more
(08:41):
important that you have, youknow, people that can critically
think, people that know how tocommunicate, people that can
solve problems, sort of owningor overseeing how AI is being
used in your process, and Ithink that's probably where
those two kind of marry uptogether.
People are concerned aboutlosing the personal touch.
(09:02):
People really want to use AI alot more.
There's a large focus on hiringfor critical skills, and I
think those skills are going tobe pretty key in helping
companies adopt and implement AIin their processes.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
Absolutely.
It reminds me of this idea ofprompt engineer, which I don't
know if that term is still beingused, but the idea is that
anyone could log into a chat GPTand ask a question, but, as we
have firsthand experienceourselves, you get better at
asking better questions to getbetter outputs out of an AI over
time.
Chat GPT, of course, is standsto reason that you would have
(09:42):
people that would become subjectmatter experts in getting AI to
find the right kinds ofcandidates or asking the right
questions that maybe humanswouldn't necessarily think of to
find the person that's going tobe the best fit for the
organization.
I think one caution on that notefor the industry is just that
we're again, I'll be gentle, butwe're, as an industry, this is
(10:03):
the status quo can be.
Hey, we just spent a milliondollars on a new ATS.
We kind of expect that we'rejust going to flip a switch and
it's going to transform ourrecruitment function.
Anyone who's implemented an ATSknows that really what you need
is a paid consultant that's onstaff full time for several
months, if not a year, tocustomize and configure the ATS
(10:24):
so that it actually does whatyou want it to do.
And, using your unpaid internanalogy.
If we do not expect amillion-dollar piece of software
to be something that you canjust plug and play and deliver
great results, why would weexpect an unpaid intern to be
able to do the same thing?
Speaker 2 (10:39):
That's pretty good.
Yeah, I think that's fair.
Maybe people see AI as just aneasy lever to pull, and so we
pull it a lot.
Ai is more accessible, it'scheaper, it's easy, it's easy to
use, but it doesn't necessarilymean it's easy to use
effectively.
(11:00):
Yeah, I like that a lot.
Yeah, and.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
I think this ties back to where we started the
impersonal thing.
Yeah, it can be impersonal ifyou just treat it like plug and
play.
If you want it to not beimpersonal, you have to put the
person in it, ie you, and spendtime learning how to use the
tool, become really good atinstructing the AI to do exactly
what you want, and I thinkthat's where the human side
actually comes in.
Of course, at the end of thefunnel too, but, like if we're
(11:23):
actually talking about makingthe AI experience more personal,
it needs to be directed by aperson.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah, I agree.
Well, you know a couple otherones that we'll call out.
On Corn Ferry, you know peopleare focused on L&D.
You know again, not a surprise,but I think at this point, like
learning development is nolonger optional.
Two-thirds of employees willstay with companies that offer
up-to-going opportunities.
We do this a lot over at ChangeState.
(11:50):
We pay to put our peoplethrough classes that are of
interest to them, with thecaveat that, hey, we're going to
pay for you to learn how tobuild.
You know build micro solutionsor micro.
You know tools using AI.
You know you're going to comeback to the team, the company
and show everyone hey, here'swhat I learned and how we can
(12:11):
apply it.
Right, and you know I almostwonder.
You know, I posit that.
You know this interest inlearning and development, this
increased interest in upskilling.
It's probably directly tied topeople wanting to learn more
about how to use AI.
You know you go see.
You know you go see your friendwho's working at, you know, xyz
(12:33):
company and like, oh, like,they're letting their company
pop around using co-pilots to,you know interact and you know,
rewrite their sales outreachemail, like, oh, that's pretty
cool, I would like to know howto do that too.
And, like you know, people areeither going to go you know,
learn how to do that on theirown, and you know and exit or,
like you got an opportunity to,you know, help your employees
(12:55):
stay, you know, by giving them abit more training and
development opportunitiesinternally.
Now I'd venture to guess that,boy, if we knew, you know,
upscale and opportune thesepeople are drawn towards, it's
probably largely skewed orfocused towards.
All right, ai is coming.
How can we better use it justas a whole?
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Yeah, I think you're right there.
I mean, obviously you're closerto learning development than I
am, but the obvious point thatcomes to mind is well, we all
feel kind of insecure outside ofour industry.
Just, ai is coming.
It's smarter than I am.
If you spend any time on chatGBT, you can see it do something
in 15 seconds that probablywould have taken you a day and
you have a worse output.
So you know, I think that hasdirect implications for learning
(13:37):
, not to say that we don't needto learn new skills in the
future, but the reality is thatwill be AI's domain, and the
question is how do we partnerwith AI in the context of
learning and development, whichI think is what you're saying?
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Yeah, yeah, a hundred percent.
Well, you know I'm not going touse this one as a throwaway, I
don't think.
You know.
I just don't want to talk abouthybrid offices, return to
office.
Like you know my opinions onremote work versus flexible work
, I mean, like I think we'rework versus flexible work.
I mean like I think we're.
You know we're in a unique spotchange state we're.
We're fully remote, right, andyou know I wrote an article I
don't even know where it'spublished at this point but, um,
(14:11):
you know, on return to officeand hey, like you know, for for
smaller orgs, totally get itlike it is very hard to hide.
If you know you're a productmarketer, uh, you're a program
manager at at a chain state,like you know, or a startup,
yeah, you're a program managerat a chain state or a startup.
If you're not doing your job,it's going to be pretty easy for
me to know, pretty easy to.
(14:33):
You can't really hide, but ifyou're in a big company, boy,
you can.
And if you never come, if youhave the world where you work
for a company, you've never beenin the office or met anyone, I
don't know, like that's tough,that's tough.
You know, we see this a lot.
You know we've seen this withclients, we've seen this in
industry.
Like you know, wells Fargo, letpeople go, but you know I had a
(14:56):
little plug in with just movetheir mouse every you know 10
remote call center employees.
Then you ship them theircomputers and you know, two days
later you see that they're inSouth Africa and like they've
outsourced that job to someoneelse.
These are real scenarios.
(15:17):
So like, yeah, you know, Isympathize with you know hybrid
and remote being, you know, apriority, that's what we are and
I don't see any scenario wherewe, where we change, you know,
but on the other side, like onsome level, like you know, if
you're an employer, you know youyou probably want to know that
your employees are working andlike you know that's it's tough,
(15:40):
you know it's tough, yeah well,you and I had a conversation
offline about it, but maybe I'llbring it in here briefly.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
It's just that the hilarious part about this to me
is that an organization of anysize does not know whether the
only way to tell whether theiremployees are actually working
is to detect whether they have amouse jiggler going on.
I mean, we might have biggerproblems than hybrid work if
that's the status quo, I think,in the same way that somehow
(16:07):
Elon Musk fired what 75% ofTwitter's staff on day one and
everyone thought that theplatform was going to fall apart
, and without weighing into thedirty, mucky water that is X now
, I'll just say the numbers seemto suggest that that did not
happen.
The sky did not fall and Ithink it has more users than
(16:29):
ever.
So I don't know.
It's just an interesting tidbit.
It seems like what we shouldreally be upset about as
organizations that we have somuch bloat that it's possible
for someone to not do any workand fool you by working from
home.
What the implication seems tobe is that it would be a better
case to bring people back intothe cubicles that we all hated.
(16:50):
I mean, I didn't, but lots ofpeople work in cubicles and we
can all have unnecessarymeetings and chat about around
the water cooler and not getanything done.
But at least we don't have amouse jiggler going yet.
So I don't know.
I think it's a very interestingtopic, but I think the general
opinion that's being expressedin the public is kind of missing
(17:10):
the point.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Yeah, well, and you know, I also think, like you
know at some level, like a lotof the work that you've all you
know done prior to change daytoo, is all like you know you
get paid for doing a job, or youknow finishing a project, and
like talk about like, uh, youknow a brand project, right.
Like you know you get paid Xdollars and it takes you Y hours
.
And like you know you're doingthe work and like, when you're
(17:32):
done, you're done.
And like you know companieslike that because they know that
they're paying for a project toget done.
And like you're paying forservices that are clearly
completed with a, with an output, right.
And you know, I almost wonder,is, like you know it gets harder
and harder, as, like you knowjobs, you know the lines are
blurred with what you know, withwhat your responsibilities even
(17:54):
are sometimes Right, and Ithink that I don't know how many
times we can use mouse jiggler.
Um, you know, this year, like,but like, yeah, I mean, I.
I think that's defining whatsomeone's you know, quote,
unquote job or responsibilitiesare is probably part of the
problem, part of the challengeto part of the problem, right,
(18:15):
you know, maybe five years ago,you and I talked about, you know
, that podcast episode BullshitJobs, right, and like, just like
boy, like we have a propensityto, like you know, create work
for people, just to create work,not because it matters, like
you know, it's just like hey,yep, you got a job, so we're
going to find something for youto do.
And thinking back two decadesin my first company, first job
(18:40):
yeah, I'm sure that was true wegot to find something for Bob to
do.
And that's not the world thatwe're in right now,
unfortunately.
Well, I guess it is in somespots, but should it be?
If we're trying to be moreefficient, if there's not a job
for you, maybe people are justgoing to end up being paid more
for projects, for something witha finite endpoint to it.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
Yeah, well, we're also worried rightly so, I think
about AI taking all the jobsand what will people do for
meaning and purpose?
And when you were talking juston it, it made me think that
maybe this transition has beengoing on for decades, you know,
and maybe we'll see a suddenspike here with AI.
But, like I imagine, there is aprofound shift that occurred in
workplaces.
If you look 100 years ago,versus starting in like 70s and
(19:28):
80s, is it imaginable that ourgrandparents' generation would
have just gotten paid sixfigures to go sit around in an
office in a job where they coulduse a mouse jiggler to fool
their boss?
Maybe I'm naive, maybe it waslike that, but I doubt it.
I think that's a relativelyrecent invention, if you will.
I don't know.
I think we're just seeingacceleration of trends that have
probably already been there fora while.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Yeah, I was saying it yesterday and his dad, but I
don't know.
There's something catharticabout hey, it's really nice if I
was selling widgets to know,hey, how much does it cost to
build a widget and how much areyou selling it for?
Cool, I build a widget for abuck and I sell it for two.
Like I make a dollar.
And like, hey, like that'sthat's great, like and like it's
(20:13):
a lot harder.
And like today, like all right,what are we selling?
We're selling uh, you know I'mnot going to talk about our
business, but like you know,it's a lot harder today in
business in general, like whenit's not like you know a clear,
linear path to like hey, like,yep, I gotta go, you know got to
go.
You know I got to go buy thematerial.
I got to, like I got to, youknow, investment that I'm making
(20:35):
like machines, blah blah, blahmodel is broken.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
It probably has been breaking for a while, as I was
hinting at a moment ago.
In a world where we havecomputers that can do most of
that busy work that people justdid, whether it was necessary or
not, to justify their existence, it makes even less.
It's impossible to ignore whenyou can have a computer do that
for you in 10 seconds right, aweek's worth of work in 10
seconds.
So we're probably going to haveto, whether we like it or not,
(21:14):
and many people may go kickingand screaming think about new
ways of compensating people.
It doesn't mean there won't bejobs, but does it make sense
anymore to pay someone by thehour rather than for some kind
of very specific body of workthat they complete?
I don't know if the hourlymodel will be around for too
much longer.
At least I would hope not,because I don't particularly
love it myself.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Yeah Well, you know, I just you know we'll close with
, like I think I saw, probably atweet from, like Reid Hoffman.
Like he said, you know I'mparaphrasing, for, obviously,
but you know, in the next decade, you know, people are going to
be using AI so much that, like,the cost of getting work done is
going to decrease sosubstantially that, like you
know, people are gonna have alot more free time but, like,
(21:54):
the most important skills aregoing to be, you know, those
that can critically think andlike recognize, you know, or
properly feed or train aialgorithms.
And you know the world's gonnalook very different, you know, I
think a world of work is goingto look a lot different, you
know.
You know everyone says now, butI don't think things are going
to move that much quickly, tooquickly, but it's going to be a
(22:16):
different world.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I just want to have my cabin in the wood before that
happens.
So that's my only request tothe universe.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
You and me both you and me both.
I think we'll move on toanother.
We'll call it a predictiontrend forecast.
I really love well, it's thepredictions coming out of Steve
Hunt's article, I think it was.
It's on LinkedIn, we'll shareit in the notes but a guide to
HR predictions, trends andforecasts.
So, steve, he's writtenmultiple books.
(22:47):
Actually, he might even live ina cabin, marty, I have no idea.
Never met Steve, but I know helives somewhere a couple hours
or an hour or so outside ofPortland.
So somewhere, maybe in a cabin,maybe close to a job Cabin,
beach house cabin, somethinglike that.
Yeah, but multiple books in theTA space.
Worked at SAP SuccessFactors asthe chief expert on technology
(23:11):
and was also their global VP ofHCM research too.
So I like his content quite abit.
I would say definitely followSteve.
And he wrote a guide that'sprobably just a lens more on HR
predictions, trends and justsome of his lessons for how you
navigate what he's called theflood of annual forecasts or
(23:32):
annual trends.
And boy we agree, and maybesome irony that we're talking
about him here.
Still, too, like a lot of thesetrends, people are always
repackaging.
You know old problems, right,and so you know let's just talk
(23:53):
about.
You know, quiet quitting, right, okay, well, it's just
retention of employees, right?
Like you know whether peopleare quitting, or you know, doing
it quietly, telling you likeyou know, at the end of the day,
like, yeah, you want torecognize underperformers, poor
(24:16):
performers, you know you want tofocus on.
You know, at the end of the day, like, yeah, you want to
recognize underperformers, poorperformers, you know you want to
focus on, um, you knowretention, right.
And you know, uh, I think youuse the phrase you know, old
wine and new bottles, uh, quitea bit, I like that.
Yeah, I like that too.
So, you know, pay attention to,you know, the repackaging of
old problems.
You know, in new bottles, uh,love that quite a bit.
You know, I think the other onethat you know probably stood
out, there was, like you know,moch, you know, it's just pay
(24:39):
attention to it what he's calleda slow adoption of hr tech and,
like moche, most hr techpredictions take years, even
decades, to material materialize, and so one of his examples is
just cloud-based HR systems.
But rapid adoption, especiallyfor something like generative AI
, is just going to be rare.
(25:00):
Now I'll pause and let yourespond to that one in
particular, marty, before I gotoo deep, into the weeds.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
I wasn't that familiar with Steve Hunt, but
I'm liking what I'm seeing herebased on this trend report.
I mean it's kind of an appealto common sense.
Like, yes, we all it's fun tolook at trend reports, but if
you're really like an HRexecutive, so detached from your
business where you're like boy,I better look on the internet
and see what I should be focusedon this year.
Like you know, maybe that's notthe best thing.
(25:29):
So I think what Steve is sayinga lot of this is just like use
common sense, don't getblindsided by rebrands,
essentially of old concepts.
Yes, you know we can talk aboutquiet quitting, but really, why
are we losing people,regardless of how we're losing
them or the method in which theyinform us of this is where you
should be focused.
In which they inform us of thisis where you should be focused.
Yeah, we should try to getSteve on the podcast, even if
(25:51):
you're out there.
Consider it an open invitation.
I'd love to chat with that guy.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
a little more.
We will reach out to Steve andsee if we can get him to join
for sure.
Yeah, I'll just kind of callout some.
What I'll call is practicalsuggestions.
This is one that I thinkeveryone should read.
It's the stuff that we do everyday, you know.
Start with your currentchallenges.
Right, you know diversity.
Diversify your data sources.
(26:16):
You know this is one you know,marty, you know I talk about.
Even with our trends survey.
I, like you know, disclaimer.
Like you, should not makebusiness decisions after reading
our report.
You shouldn't make businessdecisions after reading a
Gartner report.
You should give variedperspectives.
(26:36):
Again, we think our TAtransport is going to be great,
but that doesn't mean someoneshould pick it up and read it
and say you know what?
Applicant fraud is a growingconcern.
Yeah, we saw that happen once.
We need to revamp our wholeapplication process to make sure
that we're checking out wherepeople are, that applicants are
actually real.
Again, diversify your sources.
(26:58):
And then the other piece is Ilove this challenge the data and
ignore irrelevant trends.
There's going to be a lot ofstuff that doesn't necessarily
add add value, right, you know.
And so you know.
Know what problems you'retrying to solve.
You know, know what challengesyou're trying to solve, talk to
more than just one vendor, talkto more.
(27:18):
You know, dig into more thanone data source.
You know and you know, justknow, that, like you know,
there's gonna be a lot of trendsthat are out there that are
just not going to be unique orhelpful to your organization.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Absolutely, absolutely.
I mean I think that I'm amarket researcher, so let me
just underscore that point.
I mean trends.
We often see the numbers, like65% of people said that the AI
is the top priority for nextyear.
Okay, but what that also meansis 35% of people said it's not a
top priority for the next year.
And I think it's easy, ifyou're not used to looking at
data or if you're just beingpresented a infographic style
(27:53):
statistic, to think boy, I'mreally missing the boat here.
Fair to ask the question am Imissing the boat?
But also keep in mind thatthree to four out of 10 people
are also quote unquote missingthe boat, and maybe you're right
where you're supposed to be.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Yeah, yeah, I completely agree.
I mean, you know I still lovemy favorite book, how to Lie
with Statistics, and like Iscreenshot.
You know examples almost everyday.
You know across.
You know Twitter and you knowwhere else right, wherever else
I'm.
You know reading and like, hey,like at the end of the day,
like a lot of folks are, youknow, in these data reports, you
(28:26):
know we're aligned withstatistics, right, and so
challenge the data.
You know, fully agree with youon that, steve.
You know, challenge the data.
And then you know let's pivotto.
You know one final one we don'twant to gloss over.
You know employer brand nearand dear to your heart.
You know your good friend.
You know, Mr James Ellis, youknow I'll.
(28:47):
You know I'll lead by sayinglike hey, mr James Ellis, I'll
lead by saying hey.
In the Korn Ferry report one oftheir trends was like hey, your
EVP is finally VIP.
So almost 50% of HR pros areprioritizing cultural values to
attract and retain talent.
Strong EVPs are important andthey better align to the
(29:09):
employee experience and beshowcased during recruitment.
So on one side, korn Ferry says, oh boy, this is something to
pay attention to.
Yeah, James Ellis had a littlebit more of a provocative take.
I think he said hey, my bigprediction is I think employer
branding is going to become aquote bad word in 2025.
(29:30):
So you know the question is.
So the question to you, martydo we need to rebrand right?
Do we need to change how we'rethinking about employer brand?
Like, tell me, tell me, waxpoetic on your thoughts here.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
James Ellis is always .
I would call him a provocateurand I think that he would
actually really take that as acompliment.
At least I think he would.
You know he's always gotinteresting takes.
I always enjoy reading whatJames has to write and I don't
necessarily disagree with him onthis point.
I mean, we've all been talkingabout this stuff for such a long
time.
Part of my struggle gettinginto this and we've talked at
(30:07):
length on the podcast about thisis like what's this thing
called employer brand?
At length on the podcast aboutthis is like what's this thing
called employer brand?
Most people in the organizationdon't know about it.
It's kind of new.
How does it relate to ourmaster brand?
Obviously, this is what we spendlots of time with our clients
talking about these questions,and it's always been our point
of view that the employer brandis really just another face of
the master brand of theorganization that has different
faces.
Usually you're thinking aboutthe consumer facing face, but
(30:30):
there's employer facing faces.
You could even talk about theperceptions that a company has
to its vendors.
That'd be another example.
I don't think anyone's talkingabout vendor brand, but it's
just a point that there are lotsof different faces to it.
So to have carved this out as anindustry and say, no, no, we've
got our own separate thingcalled employer brand, always
(30:51):
seemed a little bit off to me, Isuppose.
Now I don't know if that makesit a bad or a dirty word.
I do think people are probablyjust tired of hearing about EVPs
and employer brand.
I mean, I love doing this stuffand I'm kind of tired of it.
So, yeah, I think you know,ironically, we need a rebrand of
employer brand.
That's kind of what James issaying, and I'm not sure I
(31:13):
disagree, but we should have himon to ask him what his ideas
are.
How would he rebrand?
Speaker 2 (31:19):
it?
Yeah, I mean, I guess myquestion would be like do we
just change the approach for howwe approach employer brand
projects?
Why does it feel like a dirtyword, I think?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
it feels like a dirty word because he kind of walks
you through the history of it alittle bit, which was
enlightening to me becauseobviously I've only been in this
space for five years.
But like, oh, it was like anovel concept that an
organization should have to evenprovide a reason why someone
should work for them.
You know, the power balanceprobably 50, 80 years ago was
completely inverted and it wasjust like you should be, this is
(32:01):
a privilege to come, have achance to work for us and you
know, come and find out was kindof the attitude.
Then we got into this employerbranding area where there's this
novel idea, that boy, maybe weshould tell people why they
should work here, and I thinkhe's arguing that we have been
in that era for some time.
The problem is and you know thisis preaching to the choir I
love to hear James talk about itis that people just focused on
(32:23):
tactics and it became kind ofslimy.
And I think this is where thedirtiness of it comes in.
It's squeaky clean If you lookat somebody's career side and
they all have the same tiredcopy.
I mean, we've gone on and onabout it.
I won't dwell on it, buteverything just feels a bit
corporate, sterile, lacking inpersonality, lacking in
(32:43):
uniqueness, lacking indistinctiveness, and people are
tired and there's been a lot ofbait and switch.
People have treated brand likea trick.
You need to pull over someoneto get them to work for you,
rather than hey, let's just behonest and get really honest,
but to the core of what makes usspecial and if that sounds good
to you, come on board.
(33:04):
I don't know that was a ramblingresponse, but I think the
dirtiness relates, at least tome, for the sense that people
have where it's justexploitative.
It's no different than anyother marketing.
You know brands that have realresonance and they're authentic
and that's why you choose tohave relationships with them,
and you know the slimy ads thatare bait and switch billboard
advertising, and there's adistinct difference in terms of
(33:26):
how you feel about thatmarketing, and I think our
industry has been a lot moretowards the used car salesman
side of that spectrum,unfortunately.
Hopefully it's changing, though.
I think that's what James is atleast hoping or expecting.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
Yeah, I do wonder if there's.
I just don't know how.
You know how we best as anindustry, you know, educate you
know leaders on the importanceof a brand, like how you define,
manage or promote your employerbrand.
I think you know one of our youknow questions in our you know
(33:58):
study is around.
You know obstacles in defining,managing and promoting your
employer brand and you knowyou'll probably yell at me later
for my interpretation of data,but I would say like, hey,
securing budget and you know, isthe largest obstacle, at least
the way I interpret the data,marty, you'll tell me I'm wrong.
When you're done with it period, it's the largest you know
(34:19):
obstacle that an organizationreally faces.
Right, it's securing budget and, like you know, I think you
know brand leaders, you know, Ithink that's a problem, right,
and and if you have troublegetting budget for brand type
initiatives, you know, I almostwonder, like, is that just a
reflection on you know notunderstanding how to you know,
(34:39):
prove your you know, prove whyan employer brand exists, prove
why you're investing in yourbrand period.
Call it an employer brand, callit what you will is important.
Again, you should tell me I'mwrong, because I like to hear it
.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
No, I don't think you're wrong.
I mean, I do often think you'rewrong, but not on this program.
You know it is incumbent uponemployer brand managers,
directors, those sort ofmid-level people to help
leadership understand whatemployer brand is.
I mean, on the one hand, I wantto say the CEO should get it
(35:14):
because it's super important anda profound concept, even though
it's kind of gotten a bad rapmaybe for overuse.
But like, yeah, you do have todo it.
So if I see securing budget isone of the biggest obstacles or
the biggest obstacle, well, whyis that?
Historically, we may have had akind of sarcastic response to
that and say, well, theorganization is just lame and
(35:35):
they don't see the value.
No, maybe it's an organizationthat's for 20 years has been
told how important an employerbrand is and every year the
budget increases so you can buymore tactic based approaches to
employer brand and we neverreally see a result and no one
knows why the hell people workhere.
You know that could also be areason why it's hard to see your
budget and if that's why, Ican't necessarily disagree with
(35:58):
it.
Um, so again, I think it doestie back to the sliminess of the
industry, the dirtiness of someof the tactics, why would we
want to invest in it?
And I think James made anotherinteresting point, which is that
if it's all about tactics andthe latest shiniest new bells
and whistles that you can put onyour career site or the newest
(36:18):
greatest enhanced employer brandprofile whatever that is that
XYZ vendor is selling you'regoing to lose because you
probably don't have the biggestwar chest.
So do you really want it to bea spending war is kind of the
question he poses to people, andmost of us don't work for
Fortune.
You know top 10 revenuecompanies in the world, right,
and the irony, of course, isthose companies don't actually
(36:40):
need to spend the money becausethey have such strong brands
that people know about them.
So I don't know.
There's an interesting paradoxthere, I suppose.
Yes, it's going to cost money,but I don't think you need a lot
of money to do effectiveemployer branding.
You can make up for a lot ofthe lack of budget through
smarts, critical thinking andelbow grease, and I'm just not
(37:03):
sure a lot of teams are equippedto be able to do that.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Yeah, I'm going to leave that one and I think
that's going to be the logicalplace for us to end.
We'll certainly see if we getJames back on to share some
additional thoughts on that Samething with Steve.
And hey, hopefully we get somefolks from Corn Fairy on here as
well soon, because you know, Ithink all three articles you
(37:26):
know reports, predictions orwhatever you want to label them,
you know three of the better,you know sort of attention
getters that you know I think wesaw, you know, to start the
year and super excited to youknow, challenge everyone.
To, you know, think a littlebit differently.
And you know, don't just acceptthat.
Hey, like someone says, hey,the biggest trend is HR
technology, like that doesn'tmean anything.
(37:48):
Um, you know, it just doesn'tlike.
And you know, maybe we'll be alittle bit more vocal, um, this
year.
I'm like, you know it justdoesn't mean anything.
And so, you know, let's getsome practical examples of you
know, the biggest trend inbusiness for 2025 is making
money.
Speaker 3 (38:08):
That means about as much as that.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
Growth, growth.
Well, I think that's a goodplace to put another pin in it,
marty, but super excited foreverything that we have going
this year.
We got a lot of fresh content.
Fresh, everything comingeveryone's way.
So, um, don't forget to, youknow, share the episode with
your broader network and, uh,we'll catch you take our survey,
(38:34):
don't forget change statesurvey yeah, all right.
All right, everyone.
Have a good one.
Take care, mart, marty, allright.
Thanks for tuning in.
As always, head on over tochangestateio or shoot us a note
on all the social media.
We'd love to hear from you andwe'll check you guys next week.
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!