Category Archives: Talent

People are the most important resource in today’s global economy!

Especially since, with the retirement of the baby boomer generation, there will be fewer of them with the necessary skills who will be able and ready to work for your organization in the coming years.

So, don’t just manage your talent, as more and more articles are telling you to do, train your talent, empower your talent, reward your talent, and trust your talent.

With employee morale at an all-time low and the number of employees looking to change jobs at an all time high, you need to be different. How about you stop treating them like expendable resources and liabilities and start treating them like irreplaceable assets who can be trusted to do the job they were hired for? Just a thought.

The Most Important Question a Manager Can Ask

“The most important question a manager can ask, according to the HBR blogs, is also important for CPOs since they are managers too. So, while you’re thinking about savings targets, perfect order percentages, and supplier risk, don’t forget to ask your employees:

What can I do to help you be more effective.

Even though the answers you will get at first may be irrelevant and along the lines of “I’m doing fine” and “Give me a raise”, once your employees understand that your goal is to remove barriers to their success, you will start to get real answers, and once you understand how you can make them more effective by breaking down organizational barriers, getting them the tools and data they need, and increasing their supply management skills, you will start to see more organizational success.

Is It Time To Dust Off the Resume?

The annual salary surveys are reporting that salaries are rising again. In addition to Next Level Purchasing’s survey, which was discussed in yesterday afternoon’s post, we have the Logistics Management 27th Annual Salary Survey, which found that median salaries increased for the third year in a row. And even though the average increase was only 2.2%, that’s still good given the economy, and a 12.5% increase since 2007.

The article notes that a number of search firms are saying, including Kimmel & Associates, are saying that the time is right for seasoned pros looking for a new job, but is it? While I agree that your average manufacturer and retailer is as lean as they can get and that they are not going to be able to build their top lines if they don’t staff up their supply chain departments, I still don’t know if the average company is ready to hire. While it’s true that the impending crunch for seasoned supply chain and logistics talent is going to put any seasoned pro with a good education at a premium, I still don’t see a plentiful job market. But I guess it never hurts to be ready with a polished resume when it does return. Any thoughts?

How Relevant is Africa to the Purchasing Equation?

Quickly reviewing Next Level Purchasing’s “2011 Purchasing & Supply Management Career & Skills Report”, one statistic jumped out at me — 37.5% of the respondents are from Africa. Considering that the GDP of Africa is only 2 Trillion, give or take a few hundred billion depending upon whether you prefer the IMF, World Bank, or CIA Factbook calculations, or about 3% of global GDP, as compared to the roughly 16 Trillion for North America, 18 Trillion for Asia, and 20 Trillion for Europe, the first question that jumped to my mind was relevancy. (And the fact that Europe only accounted for 6.7% of respondents didn’t help.)

It might be the case that Purchasing managers in developing areas are a lot more interested in surveys since they are trying to establish the importance of their profession, and it might be the case that most of Next Level Purchasing’s students and/or association members are from developing areas since they would be the least likely to have access to local training and eduction options (and Next Level Purchasing’s courses and certification is completely web based), which would account for a strong showing from these areas, but it makes one wonder how relevant the results are to Europe and North America, which are still the dominant locales for international purchasing (even though Asia is rising).

While it likely doesn’t affect the responses to skills, education, and certification related questions, as the top answers to the most important skills response are typical, the expected results from certification trend normally, and people who study for certification generally believe in its importance, it does put some suspicion on the applicability of the average annual cost savings & avoidance results. While I do agree that savings will increase by years of experience, annual hours of training, certification, and degree status, I’m not sure that I would trust the unweighted averages, especially since the average cost savings go from about 800K in Africa to 3.7M in Europe. It would be nice to see the savings and avoidance statistics broken down by continent, or at least weighted by continent, to clearly illustrate the impact of education and training.

Relevancy aside, it is nice to see interest in professional purchasing spreading through Africa and Asia.

Overqualified Candidates are Truly Rare …

… and rarer still are instances when you should pass on these candidates. A recent post over on the HBR blogs that asked if you “should hire an overqualified candidate” made some great points about the assumptions made by Hiring Managers when presented with “overqualified candidates”, and hinted at a few others.

Most Hiring Managers misunderstand what overqualified is
A candidate is only over-qualified if they exceed the skill requirements of the job. This means that the following candidates are not overqualified:

  • candidates with an advanced degree that exceeds stated educational requirements
    because the education might not be that relevant anyway
  • candidates with considerably more years of professional experienced than expected
    because if most of a candidate’s experience is in a different role (because they just changed career paths a few years ago), the experience with respect to specific skill requirements could still be minimal
  • candidates with a lot of experience in similar roles in the function
    because candidates with 20 years in tactical order placement and processing would not have a lot of experience in strategic negotiation, a major requirement for sourcing professionals today

Today’s job definition will not be tomorrow’s job definition.
Business is evolving as rapidly as the technology that drives it evolves, and this means that the requirements for a role are no longer static. If the job responsibilities are evolving rapidly, you will need a candidate with more education, skills, and experience than the job requires today to keep up.

There’s nothing stopping you from paying a candidate what he or she is worth.
Maybe you planned to pay 60K, but if you get a candidate who is so perfect for the role that he or she will be twice as productive, and you can get that candidate for 90K, you’re getting someone who can do the work of two people for only 75% of what it would cost you to hire two lesser skilled candidates.

Just because a candidate is overqualified doesn’t mean that he or she will be bored or move on quickly.
This particular misconception drives me nuts. Some jobs are always challenging. Like sales. You never know what the customer is going to want. Or development. Technology is always changing and you never know what new technology is going to pop up that you will have to integrate with or what new bug will appear in the next release that you will have to track down.

Not every candidate wants your job.
Not everyone wants to be the boss … and, in fact, a candidate who has been the boss and decides that she would rather spend her days getting work done instead of fighting fires, going to a never ending stream of management meetings, and micro-managing lesser qualified employees who can’t keep on track without constant guidance is less likely to try and take you job than an overly ambitious over-achieving up-and-comer. If you create the right position for the individual with the most impressive non-boss title you can give them, pay them well, and free them to do what they want to do, they will likely be more than happy to leave you to you own personal boss-hell while they build systems that work, successfully source strategic categories, and design and implement new processes for efficient operations.

Bottom line, there are very few overqualified candidates and fewer still who would not make a good hire if you pay them well and give them the opportunity to shine (because most people would rather complete a task and have a sense of accomplishment than “be the boss”). So if you get a very qualified candidate, the first thing you should do is get her in for an interview before the competition does — because she is the type of candidate you want.