• Thought For The Day: Why aren’t more business get-togethers about having fun?
• Building A Successful Job Board
  Very interesting conversation featuring several bright lights from the industry. A job board is best understood as a marketplace. What makes them great (and successful) is when both sides of the market get more value than they expend. It’s tough work, like building any business. The reason most job boards flop (or worse, die a whimpering death) is that their owners can not get their arms around a real business model that involves real results for real people.
• Rocking Recruitfest - Tantalizing Toronto - Jubliant Jason - 2008 - Things I learnt!!!!!!!
  The very essence of community.
• Recruitfest, the Video
  Feel the energy
• State of the Blogosphere 2008: Technorati Numbers Indicate Blogging Is Niche and Slowing
  "The average number of monthly unique visitors reported by these bloggers? In the US it’s only 18,000. That means 600 people per day. 600 people reading your thoughts each day is pretty fabulous for the vast majority of people on the planet, but as media goes it’s not very mainstream. Especially if there are only a million and a half people doing it."
• Why Isn’t Facebook Making More Money? (Hint: Advertiser Value and User Value Are Not Aligned)
  Read this if you want to make money with a social network.

(September 08, 2008) Reading through the industry news this morning, I had the weirdest sense that it was 1993 all over again. That winter and early spring, versions of xMosaic found their way onto computers.

At first, it seemed like a non-event. The first web browser was an text based exercise in hyperlinking. Formatting was non-existent. It took vision to see the potential. Real work, real vision. That a revolution was brewing was only obvious to the very early adopters.

It’s fifteen years later and we’ve been through an astonishing array of revolution. Productivity surged around the world as cel phones became ubiquitous. Man people who real this can’t remember a time when phone use was rationed and controlled (it was for the first hundred years or so).

Finding a place to log on to your email account used to be an enormous amount of work. Today, you are the place. The web is nearly omnipresent.

Who could have imagined that all human knowledge would be online in such a short amount of time? That a major peoccupation would be mining that content.

And, with each revolutionary step forward, there have been the missionaries. They shout "this is the one true revolution." This time, technology is different because it’s about communicating.

And it is and it isn’t.

(September 04, 2008) Thanks for patiently wading through the descriptions of Population Pyramids over the past week. I am struggling to make the idea simple enough for popular consumption. I think that population distribution maps have the potential to be very useful tools in the development of Recruiting Strategy, among other things.

Now that we have the fundamentals under our belts, let’s talk about the basic shapes. (If the image isn’t visible, click here to see it in a separate window)

For starters, it looks like there are six types of population distribution:

A. Pyramid
This is how societies have typically looked. The foundation of hierarchical thinking. Lots of young people, not too many elders. India, China and some of Africa still look like this.

B. House
This is the transition state. The population is aging, the elders are getting more elderly. A bulge is coming up from the bottom. This is what the baby boom impact looked like as the boomers entered their 30s.

C. Silo
The “mature” culture. Life expectancy extensions and reduced birthrates level the playing field. There are as many elders as youngsters. Most of the industrialized world looks like this. The world, in general is headed in this direction

D. Fencepost
The young people have left. If the sdilo isn’t managed correctly, all of the opportunity leaves a culture. This results in a declining base for the young and they go elsewhere. The fencepost is either the precursor to the Floating Box or the hourglass. Cleveland (and much of the midwest)

E. Floating Box
There are no young people left. Median age is high, the opportunity for inclusion of the young is absent. Manufacturing, The Metals Industry and the Energy Industries all look like this. This is a fatal condition.

F. Hourglass
Economic renewal has succeeded and the floating box has been avoided. Postwar Europe had this type of distribution.

These fundamental types can be used to diagnose any population…Country, city, industry, region, organization.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

(September 03, 2008) Here’s an example of a population pyramid (Canada, 1961). The left side is a bar graph that describes the percentage of men in a given age bracket. The right side describes the distribution of women by age. The term “pyramid” refers to the shape of the diagram.

You can see that the pyramid narrows toward the top. This is because the death rate is higher among older people than among younger people.  

There are also a few bulges and narrower parts in the middle part of the pyramid. For example, there are not as many people in their 20s as in their 30s in Canada in 1961. The people in their 20s in 1961 were born during the Depression, a time of economic hardship in Canada when people were having fewer children.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

In 1961, the pyramid had a wide base. In fact, when we add the percentages for the three lowest age groups, we find that 35% of the population was under 15. These are the “baby boomers,” a large group of people born between 1947 and 1966 when the economy was growing and prospering.

For the vast majority of human history, population distributions looked just like this example….Lots of young people, increasingly fewer old people.

Over the past 50 years, things have been really changing. Life expectancy has grown while family size has shrunk. There are many more older people and fewer young. Here are some examples of the kinds of pyramids that are emerging.

 

 Finally, here’s how you use the pyramid to analyze changes in a population.

 

Watch some of these animations. They display the changes in the pyramid in Canada’s provinces

(September 02, 2008) Good conversations have give and take. It’s hard to do that when there’s a lot of shouting. It’s hard to do that when manners get left at the door.

“An ad hominem argument consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.” (Wikipedia)

A filibuster is a tactic for disrupting conversation (or the legislative process) by rambling on and on and on. A filibuster works by taking all of the air out of the conversation.

A bozo filter (or “kill file”) is a tool that allows the reader of an online conversation to completely ignore the posts of a list of people. “Her filibuster was so obnoxious that I added her to my bozo filter.” “His ad hominems were so extreme that I added him to my kill file.”

The bozo filter makes freedom of speech possible in online communications. Freedom of speech requires the freedom to ignore, the freedom to not have to listen. Diversity flourishes best when individual choice is the foundation of the conversation.

This weekend’s strong responses to a filibuster made me dream about having a bozo filter for my online communities. With a bozo filter, conversation moves forward smoothly because it can route around the interruption. Bozo filters are a good technical implementation of the philosophy that makes the internet work.

It might be best to think of the conversation that went haywire as an example of a flaw in the technology.

(August 28, 2008) Conversation is a difficult standard to achieve online in a public forum. The crossfire reciprocal shouting model in which each commentator is an advocate for a preexisting point of view is good entertainment. It’s really bad conversation.

There are not many examples of nuanced movement towards a shared understanding of a new idea. There are few, if any (the WeLL is a sometimes exception) real collaborative dialogs. Mostly it’s verbal combat more suited to a courtroom than a living room.

In my email and my personal life, I have actual conversations about actual stuff with actual people. We don’t yell at each other. We don’t take extreme points and refine our extremities. We work together to try to see a picture that can’t be seen by either of us alone.

It’s not that I don’t love the fuss and tumble. It’s just that wrestling with new ideas doesn’t always happen easily in a cauldron. The impulse to defend gets in the way of clarity.

In a good conversation, each partner works hard to make sure that the other understands. The responsibility for the communication rests entirely with each person (That’s 100% plus 100% divided by two equals 100%). Not half responsible, completely responsible.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

Over the years, I have had the good fortune to have this sort of relationship with Colin Kingsbury, President of HRMDirect (and an exceptional writer when he writes). Online and off, we have this great conversation. He always pokes holes in my story and my story always gets better as a result. That’s because Colin wants to learn, not fight.

This week, Colin took the time to respond to my blathering about pyramids. I can’t reprint his note for competitive reasons. To summarize, Colin believes that the Recruiting Funnel is a fact of life regardless of the state of the population. He gave a strong example from a new customer (HRMDirect is in the Applicant Tracking System business).

Here’s my response to his note:

As usual, you stretch me.

If the only problem were thin supply, I think your analysis would be perfect. What’s happening, though, is a change in the quality  and depth of the supply. I’m coming to the conclusion that “shortage” is a real misnomer (at least in the US and all of the world except the other top 50 industrialized countries).

Generally, population is growing and will for another generation at least.

But, there are pockets of strangeness. Cleveland, for example, has no young people. There actually are jobs that are better done by young people (as impolitic as that is). You simply can’t do them in Cleveland.

In the steel industry, the recruiting problem boils down to retention issues…They can’t keep the few young people they can get. They have to broaden their definition of what works (just as is the case in your example).

It was probably a mistake to use the recruiting funnel as an example of the pyramid stuff. I’m reaching for an idea that is just at the edges of my thinking. It’s a struggle. Something about the “few at the top, lots at the bottom” perspective has changed. I think it’s really big. I explain it terribly. I am working on simplifying and clarifying what is a powerful but vague concept.

Maybe it’s a question of selectivity and standards. In a time of abundance and unrestrained growth, one could be strict about what was in the pyramid. Today (in some cases but not young men in China) to have a pyramid, standards have to stretch. I’m not sure that’s it either.

 

I really appreciate your notes. You always push me in a positive direction.

Good conversations have real give and take. It’s very hard to do that while shouting.

(August 27, 2008) I am going to stick with the pyramid idea just a little longer. The theme is so embedded in our world view that it shapes the way we see, imagine and execute our possibilities.

The "Recruiting Funnel", where masses of candidates are winnowed down to a select few, is an example of pyramid theory.

The whole notion emerges from the longstanding shape of families and governments: a few old people running things, lots of younger people ‘being run’. It’s mommy, daddy and five kids.

It’s the foundation of hierarchical management.

Large organizations, with their single point (winnowing) authority perpetuate the view that pyramids are essential elements of society.

The reality is that family structure has changed. One or two kids and two parents is not an organization that can be run hierarchically. Combined with technology that is flattening our organizations, we’re in a transition period. The pyramid is built into our perceptual framework and it’s outmoded.

Historically, economic growth depends on a pyramid structure. More people, more work, more jobs, more goods. We have no idea how to engineer growth without an underlying impetus of population expansion.

And that’s just the point.

In all of the industrialized countries except the USA, population is leveling off or declining. That means that what used to be population pyramids are becoming rectangles or "silos". In those economies, the birthrate has fallen below the replacement level. As a result, the population declines while the median age rises.

The pyramid is being replaced.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

(August 26, 2008) For the entire history of the human race, with virtually no exceptions. the age distribution of population has had the shape of a pyramid. As people get older, there are fewer of them. The pyramid shape means that there are few old people and lots of young people. The older that people get, the more of them die.

Little more than 100 years ago, people lived to be about 50. The average life expectancy was 47.8. The pyramid had very few old people and lots and lots of young people.

This historic pyramid structure of population influences the way we see and think about lots of things.

• Families have traditionally had fewer old people and lots of young people. The traditional model of parenting is built on the idea of power resting in the hands of an older few.
• Organizations are typically envisioned in this way (tiny leadership group, large workforce).
• Government used to be organized this way.
• Our ideas of excellence (winnowing the exceptional from the mass) has its roots in the pyramid structure.
• Selection processes are always described as an inverted pyramid: the funnel

The pyramid has been the backbone of our communities for so long that we overlook the depth  of its impact on our perception. Consider:

• Pinnacle of achievement
• Reaching the highest point.
• Rise to the top.
• The highest honor
• Climbing the ladder

Surprisingly, important parts of our world no longer resemble a pyramid. While life expectancy was growing, the average number of people in a family has been declining rapidly. Since 1970 the percentage of households containing five or more people has fallen by half. Overall, the average number of people per household decreased from 3.14 to 2.57.

More old people and fewer kids means that the so-called pyramid no longer resembles a pyramid in the US and all of the industrialized world.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

(August 25, 2008) Recruiting is a market at the intersection of people and opportunity. People, the supply, and opportunity, the demand, are combined to make organizations more able to fulfill their potential. Recruiters sift, sort and select in order to meet the need of the groups they represent.

That sounds painfully obvious.

But, that’s where the big picture lives. A strategic perspective comes from considering things that are ridiculously apparent. Competitive advantage comes from finding a way to view the basics differently.

Basic Questions about the Labor Supply include

• How many people are there?
• How many of them work in the profession?
• How many of them live in the neighborhood?
• How old are they?

In order to fully grasp the responsibilities and consequences, you need a deep understanding of the supply and the demand factors for the labor market. In the end, all you need is enough data to navigate the confines of your niche. In the beginning, you have to learn the location of the ditch.

Population distribution is a good way of thinking about the labor supply. Population distribution means dividing the whole in various ways (age, gender, occupation, zipcode, kind of car and so on). An understanding of population distribution allows you to compare one place with another, one group of people across places and so on.

The most common map of population distribution is the “Population Pyramid”. This graph shows age and gender distribution for a country, region, city or planet. It gets its name from its basic shape. Here is a huge collection of examples of population pyramids.

Read the Entire Population Distribution Series

• 080825 Population I
• 080826 Population II
• 080827 Population III
• 080828 Population IV
• 080903 Population V
• 080904 Population VI (Types)

(August 22, 2008) Every morning, I take a five mile walk around the perimeter of Schollenberger Park. It’s a wetlands area with 200 varieties of bird. This morning, I saw a juvenile mountain lion.

I am a huge fan of tropical birds and love big white flying things. The park obliges me with swans, herons, egrets and American Pelicans. Daily visits give me a growing inisght into the behavior of a range of species.

One of the interesting things that I have been learning is that birds imitate each other. In some cases, herons eat in ways that are characteristic of pelicans. Though one species is known for a certain behavior, a different bird will do the exact same thing under some circumstances. Crows act like hawks when the wind is right.

The other thing I notice is my tendency to idealize. I like to imagine perfect instances of the wildlife I encounter. I’m always somewhat surprised when the reality is a little (or a lot) different.

The ducks around Schollengerger are a great example. They line the banks of the pond. When they swim, it’s a graceful paddle. I never cease to be astonished when I hear the slurping noises in the paddy-like parts of the marsh. These lovely little creatures feed themselves by wallowing in the mud, mouth first. They scoop it up, gargle with it and spray it out.

I prefer my more idyllic version.

American Pelicans are beautiful from afar. Pure white elegance with an orange bill and distinct black markings on the wings (you can only see it when they fly), they are fun to watch and imagine.

Up close, things are a little nastier. These are water birds. Their fathers, always damp, are smelly and dirty. They, too, scoop mud in search of a bug or two. An older Pelican tends to have the most unlovely charateristics of a worn out teddy bear.

Still, when I look, the first thing I see is my idealized version.

In Recruiting, we tend to idealize both jobs and candidates.

Great writers are often unpleasnt cubicle mates. Brilliant workers rarely make effective managers. Great managers predictably have monstrous egos. Well appointed offices can feel like prisons. Certain desirable traits always have a balancing set of the undesirable. Really nice people are often terrible at their jobs.

But, we skip and jump happily through the selection process acting as if the beautiful Pelican  is the bird we’re moving into the bedroom. Sometimes, we even try to run background checks to make sure that it isn’t smelly.