Jul 26, 2011

Linkedin's apply button and the India effect

Image representing LinkedIn as depicted in Cru...Image via CrunchBase
LinkedIn today announced a new plug-in that enables job seekers to easily submit their LinkedIn profile for job opportunities on an employer’s website. By clicking the newApply with LinkedIn button on a company’s website, consumers and companies alike will be able to find more opportunities, candidates and insights that will ultimately help them land them their dream job or dream candidate. 

“At LinkedIn, as we continue to grow India’s talent economy, our focus remains steady on connecting professionals with opportunities. Apply with LinkedIn will enable one-click access for professionals to jobs and will also empower companies with information to validate an applicant’s identity,” said Hari V. Krishnan, country manager of LinkedIn India.

“Apply with LinkedIn provides an easy way for job seekers to put their best foot forward when applying for new opportunities and demonstrates a confidence in their professional identity and brand which showcases their acquired skills, experiences and professional connections,” said Deep Nishar, SVP of products and user experience at LinkedIn. “Companies also gain access to one of the most qualified and coveted talent pools of more than 100 million LinkedIn professionals around the world.”

When job applicants click the Apply with LinkedIn button, they will have the opportunity to edit their profile before submitting or they can go directly to the one-click “Submit Application” button, which will automatically send the candidate’s public LinkedIn profile data to the employer or pre-populate the employer's online employment application. Applicants receive immediate confirmation of their submission and will be prompted with professional connections that they can contact to increase their chances of getting hired at the company. Job candidates will also be able to manage any job submissions using the Apply with LinkedIn button when they go to their LinkedIn.com “Saved Jobs” tab to allow for added efficiency and organization in their job search.

This will depend on usage by corporate career sites - typically career sites in corporate websites are not maintained well... If Linkedin has to impact the process then careers sites need to be much more dynamic

The other issue is that in places like India middle management and upper management search is still confidential - and these posts are never put on career sites



Enhanced by Zemanta

Jul 25, 2011

There are more Indian CEOs than any other nationality except American

Time magazine claims CEOs are India's new export

The Banga brothers are two of a growing roster of global Indian business leaders, a roster that includes CEOs such as Citigroup's Vikram Pandit and PepsiCo's Indra Nooyi as well as the deans of both Harvard Business School and INSEAD. Yes, ArcelorMittal's Lakshmi Mittal had the advantage of growing up in the family business, but now the family business has grown into a global powerhouse under his leadership.

What factors account for the rise and rise of India-trained business minds? "Our colleagues in our Asian offices are asking the same question," laughs Jill Ader, head of CEO succession at the executive-search firm Egon Zehnder International. "Their clients in China and Southeast Asia are saying, 'How come it's the Indians getting all the top jobs?'" It could be because today's generation of Indian managers grew up in a country that provided them with the experience so critical for today's global boss. Multiculturalism? Check. Complex competitive environment? Check. Resource-constrained developing economy? You got that right. And they grew up speaking English, the global business language.

It's risky to generalize about India, a subcontinent of 1.2 billion people, just as it's simplistic to stereotype the Western executive or the Chinese business leader. Motorola's Sanjay Jha or Berkshire Hathaway's Ajit Jain, one of those tipped as Warren Buffett's successor, succeed due to talent and drive, not because they're Indian. And bosses like Nooyi spend most of their formative career years outside the country. Is it that they may just happen to be Indian? As Ajay Banga notes, "You are who you are because of what you do, not the color of your skin."

The data suggest Indians are scaling corporate heights. In a study of S&P 500 companies, Egon Zehnder found more Indian CEOs than any other nationality except American. Indians lead seven companies; Canadians, four. Among the C-suite executives in the 2009 FORTUNE 500 were two mainland Chinese, two North American Chinese and 13 Indians, according to a study by two professors from Wharton and China Europe International Business School.

For multinationals, it makes good sense to have leaders experienced in working with expanding Asian markets. And India is already the location of many of their operations. "If you look at companies like Pepsi or Hewlett-Packard or IBM, a huge chunk of their global workforce is sitting out in India," says Anshuman Das, a co-founder of CareerNet, a Bangalore executive-search company. "India and China are also the countries of future profits for the multinationals, so they may want their global leaders to come out of them."

Competitive and complex, India has evolved from a poorly run, centrally controlled economy into the perfect petri dish in which to grow a 21st century CEO. "The Indians are the friendly and familiar faces of Asia," says Ader. "They think in English, they're used to multinationals in their country, they're very adaptive, and they're supremely confident." The subcontinent has been global for centuries, having endured, and absorbed, waves of foreign colonizers, from the Mughals to the British. Practiced traders and migrants, Indians have impressive transnational networks. "The earth is full of Indians," wrote Salman Rushdie. "We get everywhere." Unlike, say, a Swede or a German, an Indian executive is raised in a multiethnic, multifaith, multilingual society, one nearly as diverse as the modern global marketplace.

Unlike Americans, they're well versed in negotiating India's byzantine bureaucracy, a key skill to have in emerging markets. And unlike the Chinese, they can handle the messiness of a litigious democracy. "In China, you want something done, you talk to a bureaucrat and a politician — it gets done," observes Ajay. "In India, if you talk to a bureaucrat or a politician, there are going to be 600 other people with their own points of view." There's an old saw about Asian business cultures: "The Chinese roll out the red carpet; Indians roll out the red tape."

Maybe that's why Indian managers are good at managing it. They have cut their teeth in a country ranked 134th by the World Bank for ease of doing business. To be fair, it's also the reason some of them left home. They're practiced in the exasperating culture of local, state and national permits. "To build a factory in China, a CEO will have to get two or three different permissions from various departments," observes Signe Spencer, a co-author of The Indian CEO, a 2007 study from the HayGroup consultancy. "An Indian CEO may have to get 80 different permissions from 80 different places." No wonder Indian executives spend much of their time networking and lobbying — tasks Western CEOs leave to their corporate public-affairs departments.

India's economic liberalization, which began in 1991, was another blessing for this generation of executives. It gave them exposure to a young and fast-growing consumer market. "Liberalization unleashed a level of competition that makes you stand on your toes," recalls Vindi. "We had to learn to compete with international players but also with very good, extremely fast local ones." In 1987, when Vindi was CEO of Hindustan Unilever, the company's leading detergent, Surf, faced off against Nirma, a locally produced brand. "It didn't cost 5% less, or 10% less," says Vindi, shaking his head. "It cost a third of our product. We had to make a product that was better, for the same price." Within 12 months, they had.

What Students think about careers

Interesting research by CPP (pdf) finds that students:

· Are career-minded
o 81% are “constantly” or “frequently” thinking about their future career
o 12% think about their career only “occasionally”
o Not a single respondent reported “rarely” or “never” thinking about it
·
 Feel careers should be personally fulfilling
o 80% believe a career should be something that brings enjoyment and fulfillment to their life
o 72% want a career that aligns with their passion
o 53% believe their career will play a role in defining them as an individual

· Don’t believe their parents have this privilege
o 57% said their parents either “like what they do, but suspect they’d rather do something else” or “don’t like what they do, but feel they need to do it for the money” (as compared to 25% who believe their parents “love what they do”)

· Connect career success with enjoyment of work
o 78% believe they will achieve the most success in a career for which they have a passion
o When identifying specific motivators for successful people, the largest group of respondents (58%) believe “enjoyment of the work itself” as the primary motivator for career success over money and a desire for power, influence, and respect among other choices

· See their studies as steps to career fulfillment and success
o The majority (55%) believe that knowing their ideal career path will improve their college performance
o For specifics on what motivates them to study, the largest group of respondents (27%) cited “interest in the subject” as their primary motivator compared to only 9% who cited “getting into a good college”

· Gain clarity about their career direction from assessments
o 72% reported they were more enthusiastic about their future career after taking CPP’s Strong Interest Inventory assessment
o 85% said they became aware of more appealing career options after reviewing their assessment results
o 50% reported that knowing their results made them more likely to study

Superstitious Learning

I believe one of the issues with organizational reflection and reason is attribution theory, - the ability to ascribe all the good to what we do, and all the negative to other factors.

On the same line Rita McGrath writes On the Pitfalls of Superstitious Learning :
"Superstitious learning takes place when the connection between the cause of an action and the outcomes experienced aren't clear, or are misattributed. For example, consider a manager in a company that fortuitously entered a growing market just at the right moment. This manager appears successful and is rewarded with several promotions into the senior ranks. Obviously, the guy must know what he's doing, because he has always experienced success, right? Actually, no — one of the least fair realities of modern business is that it is entirely possible to have good outcomes without being particularly skillful (why else would Dilbert be so popular?). Often, the only antidote to everyone thinking the person is golden is to have some kind of setback take place. Let this manager encounter a problem, and his or her true abilities will emerge to be tested."

The Human reasons why M&As fail

Interesting study by Dennis and Michelle Reina who say M&As fail because "execs focus on the business and financial issues but not the human issues." Workers, as a result, lose trust in leadership and "withhold the very talent and energy needed for success." The Reinas spell out seven "trust busters," or failures of leadership, and how to avoid them. Highlights:

1. Failure to acknowledge what's happening

Acknowledge, preferably in a public way, that you know the merger hasn't been easy. Tune in to how people respond, and show them that their views matter. A little acknowledgment can go a long way in helping employees feel better.

2. Failure to hear people out

Provide employees with non-threatening environments to express their feelings so emotions don't go underground. Regular feedback sessions at all levels can help people reflect on what it will take to regain their confidence, commitment, and energy.

3. Failure to provide information

Make sure no one is moving ahead blindly. Help employees feel involved and in the know by sharing as much as information as possible.

4. Failure to put the situation into a larger context

Help workers see the bigger picture by sharing the business reasons behind the merger or acquisition -- why it's happening, what makes it the best course of action, and how the company will be better as a result.

5. Failure to take responsibility

Own up to your mistakes and, by creating a safe, open environment, help employees do the same. Acknowledge lessons learned and, as an organization, commit to concentrating on problem solving, not blaming.

6. Failure to help people move on

Challenge employees to buy into the company's future, starting with the new opportunities it can offer them. They may not soon forget the present perils and pitfalls, but they can choose to look forward rather than stay stuck in the past.

7. Failure to walk the talk

Successful M&As demand artful, authentic leadership, and that starts with consistently walking your talk. If your actions don't match the vision and values you claim for yourself and the company, your credibility as a leader is lost.

Have you worked in a post M&A organization? What do you think makes it work or not?
Enhanced by Zemanta

Jul 21, 2011

Why the case for social organizations? I speak on @vineetnayar's blog

I recently did a series of video blogs for HCL CEO Vineet Nayar's blog - and the first video has been posted here.

As Vineet writes:

The fact is that people – specially young people – don’t want to stand on the sidelines any more. They want to be engaged with those who have a stake in their lives, and stay connected with each other. Rather than being “pure” listeners, they want to be part of the creative process, to get their views out – and are using these low cost technologies to do so.

What's the benefit for the employee in #e20 or #socbiz ?

Once upon a time - a long, long time ago - I was in Sales.

One of the biggest advice our sales trainer gave us was that the organization thinks FAB i.e. Features, Advantages and then Benefits of its products. However, when you sell it to a customer you have to think outside it - articulate the benefit , then the advantage and finally the feature. Talking about just the feature will not help the customer visualise the benefit.

Same in the case of Enterprise 2.0 or Social Business - as Jacob Morgan points out in this insightful article - and this is not just true for external vendors, but also internal social champions in the organization
This means that instead of telling employees that they can post status updates, create their own rich profiles, or collaboratively edit a document tell them about the value that all of this brings to their lives. Will it help employees save time with tasks that usually take a while to do? Will it make life easier when it comes time to finding information that they need to get access to? Will it help create a sense of community within an otherwise siloed and non-communicative organization? Will they be able to spend more time with time with their families instead of working longer hours? Will their dependence on email be reduced so that they can actually focus on getting work done and not on answering messages?

Whatever the value is, that is what you need to convey. The technology and the features are just enablers that exist in order to make the lives of the employees and users easier. Focusing on the cool things that a technology can do will not help with adoption but focusing on the value for the employees will.

Jul 14, 2011

#Mumbaiblasts - how people used social media to help themselves

Municipal Corporation of Greater MumbaiImage via WikipediaYesterday, I wasn't online till later at 9 pm. On my Google+ stream I saw links to a blog post being posted by Dina Mehta it was called "Can we help?"

Alarmed I scanned Google+, Facebook, Twitter to find that Mumbai had been rocked by three bomb blasts in busy areas like Opera House, Zaveri Bazaar and Dadar Kabootarkhana.

The blog post provided links to various resources people could call and know.

Then I saw another post on Google+. Someone has started compiling a Google document on who was offering help and who needed help. The document was to ensure that people who were stranded in these areas could get back home in case the traffic situation worsened.

People then on Twitter started two hashtags, offering help using #heretohelp and #here2help and those who needed help, using #needhelp

A wikipedia page was soon up and running, and a spreadsheet with the people who were available to donate blood was also compiled.

So as mainstream media was debating on who was responsible and why the attacks took place where they took place, ordinary citizens turned to eachother, with tools to communicate and collaborate and helped each other.

So when people mock the hackneyed term "The spirit of Mumbai" I disagree with them - I have seen exactly what it means!
Enhanced by Zemanta

Jul 12, 2011

Trying out the Nokia E6 - first impressions

Some days ago, I "saw" a conversation on Twitter between Joy and WomWorldNokia - about Joy getting a Nokia E6 to try out.

It's been quite a while since I've used a smartphone, my Nokia X6 having crashed last December and needing a software upgrade - I have been using a very basic Nokia "feature phone" for the last 7 months. Yeah, I've always been a Nokia user, except for a small time when I tried one of the HTC phones. No money yet to try one of the new-fangled iPhones or Android devices. See this Afaqs article on how Nokia still rules the mindshare in India

So when my trial E6 arrived I was blown away by the phone.

Nokia's really surpassed itself

The phone combines touch and type - so is suited for someone like me for whom the only touch interface of the X6 wasn't so great. And its a sleek phone - like the earlier E63 I had

It has push-email and setting up one's Gmail is super easy.

For a "social media addict" like me the ability to post to Facebook, Twitter is very essential and the native app also lets me easily upload photos to both these networks. In addition I downloaded the WhatsApp app from the Ovi Store - to connect cross platform with folks who have Blackberry, Andriods, iPhone or other Nokia phones. Makes messaging super simple and convenient.

Due to this fact I hardly have had to use the browser in the phone at all.

It's really helped my productivity go up - and the J headset, which is bluetooth enabled is great when you want to keep your hands free.

Jul 11, 2011

Workshop in Pune on Social Media and HR

I am conducting my second workshop on "Improving Employee Engagement using social tools under the aegis of the National HRD Network, this time in the lovely city of Pune.

The date is this Saturday, 16-07-2011 and the venue being Indira School of Business Studies, `Abhinavan`, 89/2A, New Pune - Mumbai Highway,Tathwade, Pune

If' you're in Pune or nearby and want to attend the workshop contact
1. Syed Quasim Ali - quasim.ali@nationalhrd.org or call +91 9560989534
2. Radhika Nabar- nhrdpune@gmail.com or call +91 9011062582

Jul 5, 2011

7 Reasons Why Google+ won't be an enterprise social business

Image representing Google as depicted in Crunc...Image via CrunchBaseIt's been about 5 days that I've been on Google+ and one of the recurring posts and comments both there, as well as on blogs and twitter is whether Google+ when it launches for Google Apps will be a valid competition for enterprise social vendors like Yammer, Salesforce's Chatter, Socialtext, VMWare's Socialcast and Qontext.

Ray Wang had an article about it on Forbes.com

Here's why I think Google+ won't be any serious threat for such services:


  1.  Google's revenues are driven by advertising. Hence it understands the dynamics of building consumer facing applications and selling advertising space. And while it has an enterprise business, it has never been its main focus.
  2. Google Apps users are mostly small to medium businesses - and while they may experiment with Google+ when it launches, they would find it difficult to adopt it without external help.
  3. Even if Google+ offers integration with Google Docs and Calendering soon, the vast majority of small and medium business still are stuck in Win-tel (Windows+Intel) paradigm to really leverage it.
  4. Stand alone enterprise social networking is passe. More and more suites are offering integration with other business applications like HRIS systems, CRM systems, Supply Chain apps. Don't see this on the horizon for Google+, unless they make a radically different product for the enterprise (which they won't - see point 1)
  5. The concept of circles is already confusing even the early adopters (see this presentation by Ross Mayfield) - one can only guess the confusion it will cause in the enterprise, and the amount of training and education it will be required to make people understand it properly.
  6. No private workspaces. This is a big one. Enterprises need groups which are private and secret to discuss confidential issues. Though, I guess this could be added.
  7. No hosted version. Without a dedicated hosting plan Google+ will face resistance to be adopted by large enterprises. Even a private cloud option would be helpful. I am not sure if Google+ team is interested in any such move
What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Jul 1, 2011

First thoughts on Google Plus

Yesterday I got access to Google's new social networking effort - Google Plus or Google+ (pic of my public profile below)

First thoughts so far:

Google has introduced a social networking where you focus on whom you want to share stuff with. To do so you add people in your "circles" - for example I have circles for "social media people", "HR professionals" , "family" and "friends"

The big difference with regards to Facebook? Two things stand out:

  1. You do not need to "friend" a person. You add a person to a circle and even if he/she does not add you you a circle you can still follow their public shares
  2. I use facebook lists to edit out people (e.g. status updates visible to everyone except "Limited Profile") but Google+ is to add people - when you share you say "am sharing this with x, y and z circles".
Therefore Google+ would trigger a different kind of social behavior.. for self promotion we'll stick to twitter and FB pages, but move to Google+ for better conversations... hopefully!
The two features that stand out is "Hangout" - which offers a group video chat facility - and by doing so takes aim at Skype's revenue model by offering for free what they sell. It adds a richer experience to social networking.

Then there's Sparks - which is sort of like Google News+Google Reader content that you can search through and share with your circles. Great for starting conversations and much easier to share content than cut pasting a URL in the status box.

The big drawback? As of now, the fact that new comments on your friends' post push them back to the top of the stream. And you have to manually "mute" them to ensure you don't see them again

What about you? Have you used Google+ ? What do you think will be the use cases compared to Facebook/Twitter?
Enhanced by Zemanta