Recruitment and retention nightmares were the subject of many a grisly watercooler chat and the cause of many a sleepless night for PR hiring managers last year. As we
enter 2001, the war for talent shows no signs of losing steam despite an influx of dotcom refugees into the marketplace. The conversation that follows has been adapted from a
Dec. 12 conference call orchestrated by DC-based Public Affairs Group/Best Practices in Corporate Communications (BPCC). More than 35 corporate communications counselors
participated in the call, along with executive recruiters William Heyman (Heyman Associates) and Judith Cushman (Judith Cushman & Associates). BPCC founder and CEO Edie
Fraser served as moderator.
Fraser: How important is salary in the hiring equation today?
Heyman: [We recently] conducted a survey to get beyond compensation issues. What we were finding is that companies were not allowing money to stand in the way of hiring
top talent (most of the time). We wanted to examine what kinds of things were motivating people to make moves.
The survey (PRN, Nov. 13) was sent to an excess of 2,800 people and we got 614 responses. What was fascinating to us was that while salary was certainly a
consideration, the most important thing that people looked at was the culture and the reputation of the organization.
The second most important factor to candidates was the notion of who their manager was going to be and what kind of chemistry they were going to have.
Fraser: What do you look for these days in terms of talent and skill sets in specific technical or disciplinary areas?
Heyman: Our biggest task is to find what we commonly call, "great athletes." We need to find people for our clients where the chemistry with the hiring manager is
right and the cultural fit with the organization is right.
Fraser: Who or what are the drivers of change in compensation packages?
Heyman: The financial service companies and - certainly for the early part of this year - dotcom and technology companies were able to dwarf some of the traditional
consumer product and legacy companies in what they could offer candidates. This was in terms of total compensation with the middle plug being the performance-based bonus.
Fraser: Is there a general movement more toward performance-based bonuses?
Cushman: It's a double-edged sword. If you're going to switch to performance-based work, you have to meet a base line in terms of recruiting, because the marketplace is
still a mix. While people want to take a performance-based approach to things, on the other hand they are looking at making a mortgage.
Heyman: One way we see our clients handling this is often times they will not budge on the salary. What they will do is in the first year they will guarantee the bonus
or they will put on a sign-on bonus. Some companies will actually create cost of living adjustments that will ease the person in over time. If they are going from a lower cost of
living area to a higher cost of living area, they may get a $50,000 cost of living adjustment year one, and that may be reduced to $30,000 in year two, $20,000 in year three and
go away in year four. They do not want to put that in the person's salary because it will throw the salary with that particular individual out of whack with the rest of the
department.
If you think about it, this is very similar to what Wall Street has done for years. They give people what we commonly refer to as a livable wage - here's what you pay your
mortgage with, here's what you can make your car payment with, but if you want other fancy things in life, that's going to be based on your bonuses and stock options and things.
This is what the technology industry started doing. What happened was people started saying, "I can't make it on this; you have to do more for me." They were trying to be more
creative, but without breaking their entrepreneurial code.
Cushman: People say on the one hand that they are willing step up to the challenge of performance-based [compensation], but only so far. That is exactly why the
recruiting in the whole dotcom world has changed. Everybody was willing to take risks as long as there were only upsides. All of a sudden, people are finding out that there
really is a significant downside to the tune of about 75% fallout. People are going right back to where they were before saying, "I'm not that kind of person; I'm happy to be
back in a more normal environment. I'm also happy to work towards some performance incentives, but I'm not going to put the whole thing at risk."
Fraser: What about stock options?
Heyman: More companies are digging down deeper into the organization to give stock options to middle management people. In some company cases, everybody gets stock
options. It's the rare exception that we get a search with a public company that doesn't give the executive stock options.
Fraser: Where are you seeing the greatest competition for candidates?
Heyman: The agencies have certainly become more viable competitors for two reasons. Number one, their businesses have grown significantly, so they have been able to
offer salaries that are equivalent to those in the corporate world. The other thing is that the agencies today are [mostly] owned by publicly traded companies. There is an
opportunity for either ADRs or straight stock with the Omnicoms and the Interpublics.
The other thing, which has more to do with the general trend in the hiring process, is that [employers] are far more forgiving today about people who change jobs frequently.
When I got into this business, if you had 12 years of experience and had more than three jobs, we would want to have you psychologically analyzed. Today, clients sometimes frown
on a person who has had only three jobs because they're looking for a diversity of experience.
Fraser: So job-hopping isn't just accepted, it's expected?
Heyman: Yes. Just [recently] when they announced Jack Welch's successor [at GE], the real story there was that seven major corporations looking for CEOs looked to the
two runner-ups in the Welch derby (3M and the Home Depot). This showed that it was OK that the CEO was not going to be someone that came up through the mailroom.
Fraser: The talent wars are ongoing, and many companies are now experiencing the post-honeymoon period following a merger or acquisition. As such, it seems the internal
communications function is more important than ever for change management. Are companies recruiting more candidates to fill this role?
Cushman: On the West Coast I would just say that what I have seen on the internal communication side is only a growing of awareness. So many young companies are driven
by market factors, that their livelihood, their focus, everything, is external. This is going to have to give way. This whole issue of retention is going to be the key to the
upgrading of the function in a lot of these young companies.
Fraser: Which skills are most in demand right now among PR candidates?
Heyman: Business understanding and acumen. This function is no longer an academic pursuit. You need to have that business literacy. I would also tell you that despite
the fact that the market has been robust, we are seeing far more hands-on kinds of jobs. Our clients are asking questions that they were asking 19 years ago, like "Who do you
know in the media?" And the writing credential is extremely important.
Fraser: What should hiring managers be prepared to bring to the table?
Heyman: There must be a career path focus. One of the first things we'll say to the client is, "Where does the job go from here?" The more enlightened companies
interview on the basis of where the person they are about to hire will be in their second promotion within an organization.
Cushman: At the other end of this, we're in a world of change. Larger companies take with them a history and an expectation that they will have a future that is
somewhat predictable.
In a technologically-oriented and/or fast-growth [market], we work in an environment where companies groom themselves to change ownership, to restructure, to go from public to
private and private to public. Career planning then means looking at what skill sets am I developing? What will I have accomplished? How marketable will I be either within the
company or outside the organization? In many organizations that are not quite in the mature category you have to factor in what [the company may look like a year or two from now.
(Cushman, 425/392-8660; Fraser, 202/466-8209; Heyman, 212/784-2704)
Corporate Comment Gallery
Client-side PR execs share their most pressing recruitment and retention concerns...
Roberta Bowman, Duke Energy
"We look for generalists who have a certain talent or function, but are really multi-dimensional. They understand working in a global environment, corporate branding,
developing an integrated communications function and are comfortable working in an ambiguous and changing environment."
Dean Rodenbough, Hallmark
"We've gone through some significant changes in the last 2-3 year period - trying to position [PR] managers across the organization. The thing that keeps me awake the most is
making sure that [our] people have the skills that we promised when we sold the design for the new organization. This is particularly true of business acumen and being able to
think as a strategic business partner."
Jill Feldon, The Limited
"I'm almost the opposite. Our biggest challenge is not so much making sure we have people that meet the design, but making sure that we have a design that meets the people
skills. The organization is changing so quickly that [each] time somebody comes on board, the expectations are a little bit different. It's moving really fast and we need to find
people who are flexible enough to fit the different needs of the company."
Sue Tardanico, Textron
"One thing that keeps me awake are the changing needs of the folks we already have in place. Many are starting new families, or have existing families. They are experiencing
increased demands on their time and we need to provide them with flexibility."
Doug Draper, Mead Corp.
"[Hiring people with] a business understanding and the ability to communicate with senior executives is vital. Something else that is important - and yet is getting
harder - is recruiting people with good writing skills."
Source: Best Practices in Corporate Communications, "War for Communication Talent: Retention and Recruitment," Dec. 12, 2000.