Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Recruitment of a Star
Similar to Recruitment of a Star (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (14)
Recruitment of a Star
- 1. LEADING TALENT IN ORGANIZATIONS (MBSA 1623) LECTURER: DR. ROSSILAH JAMIL Case Analysis:Case Analysis: Recruitment of a StarRecruitment of a Star
- 2. Recruitment of aRecruitment of a PREPAREDBY: INDIRAN CHONG KUEN SOON MOHD. FAIZAL CHIA WI PAEW LEE YEWHOONG
- 3. Outline 1. Executive Summary Q1) Analyse the company & industry 1. Issues in the Case Study Problem Statements Q2) Whom Should Stephen Connor hire & Why 1. Identify & Forecast Critical Factors Q3) Evaluate the selection & hiring process at RSH. Q3) What changes, if any do you recommend. 1. Evaluate & Choose Best Alternatives Q4) Imagine yourself in the place of each the candidates. Q4) What strengths would you bring to light during the interview Q4) How would you distinguish yourself from the other candidates. 1. Recommendation & Alternatives to Decision The Theory of Hiring – Lou Adler ( From the book : The Essential Guide for Hiring & Getting Hired)
- 5. Company Analysis • Rubin, Stern & Hertz • Renowned Investment Institutional in The Big Apple • Strong Cooperate Culture Low Turnover • Open-door policies • Individual performance tied to group performance • foster team work and support within team members • Provides continuous career development options • workshops, and trainings • analysts analytical skills, writing skills ,communication skills SWOT
- 7. 2. Issues in the Case Study 1) Why did Peter Thomson take the decision to move without notice despite the proclaimed culture in the reputable firm RSH 2) Why did Stephen allow this to happen despite being hinted that Peter is uncomfortable and is looking for opportunities elsewhere? 3) Did Craig deliver potential good candidates or did he just grab the one from the II rank to satisfy Stephen rush request 4) What is the competitive advantage of this candidates comparable to and internal transfer or promotion? What is the sunk cost of hiring new candidates? 5) How effective is the hiring process which Stephen follows? 6) What is the implication if the new hire failed to deliver Stephen expectation, and how could Stephen avoid this? 7) Whom should Stephen hire and Why ? 8) What are the strengths and weakness of each candidate 9) What is lacking in the current hiring process and what could have been done better.
- 8. Whom should Stephen Connor hire? Why? Seth Horkum as he meet most of the requirement for the position. •Has an experience as a sell-side analyst & also a great stock picker •Currently is at number 5(Runner Up) in Institutional Investor Rank •Close contact and working experience with PowerChip •Long-term commitment to show loyalty and dependency •Has good communication with buy-side and companies •Hardworking person, not calculative in taking extra jobs •Has a good relationship with clients, good accessibility and quick response to customers
- 9. Whom should Stephen Connor hire? Why? (Cont.) • Approached Anita Armstrong to get the job at RSH – Can conclude that he is eager to join RSH - He is interested to work in RSH • Did not ask for compensation and interested to know about RSH • Intelligent, enthusiastic, team oriented and motivated
- 10. 3. Identify & Forecast Critical Factors Selection and Hiring Processes at RSH What Stephen Looking for: • Team oriented and willing guide junior analysts • Ability to build relations with sales force and traders • Motivated and independent • Experience & personality • Loyalty • Confidence • Star Power • Communication skills • Superior analytical and research skills • Industry knowledge • Good relationship and service with customers • Access to upper level management
- 11. Selection & Hiring Processes (Cont.’) Candidate who are first-rate analysts, team oriented and fit in well with the RSH’s culture is most preferable.
- 12. Recommendation: • Assigned a virtual task/project to test their capability. • Organize a debating session among the candidates. • Debate on: Why should you (the candidate) be hired but not others? • Evaluate how well you are fit with this position and what are the weakness of others candidate? • Upon the debating, RSH’s management should be able to judge on each of the candidate’s capability, attitude, intelligent and negotiation skills.
- 13. Evaluate & Choose Best Alternatives Q4) Imagine yourself in the place of each the candidates. Q4) What strengths would you bring to light during the interview Q4) How would you distinguish yourself from the other candidates.
- 14. Gerald Baum: Strengths and Distinguishing Points Strengths: •Superior intelligent - great stock picker, ranked at 11th in 18 months, with good academic background and good skills •Broad experience - has research background, worked in large institutions and electronic industry •Highly enthusiastic - still perform despite sharing the assistants and working with below average junior analyst •Good communication skills - clients would move with him for exceptional services •Highly motivated - interested in exciting environment rather than remains static
- 15. Distinguishing Points: •I will highlight my vast experience in the industry and extraordinary achievements, with the capabilities and competencies that I have, I am the right candidate to replace Peter’s position in RSH. •As long as RSH provides me with exciting and innovative environment, I am ready to suit with RSH organization culture. •I need RSH to achieve higher ranking in II, RSH also needs me to remains competitively advantage in the industry •I only request for a dedicated and competent team in RSH. Once I am accepted, then I will guarantee success as research and innovative environment in RSH excite me. •My track records and client evaluations prove that I am capable of achieve it. Gerald Baum: Strengths and Distinguishing Points (cont’)
- 16. Strengths: •Highly experienced – 22 years of experience as semiconductor analysts. •Vast industry knowledge - razor-sharp mind and rare interpersonal skills. •Celebrity in Wall Street – Ranked 1st four times, 2nd five times and 3rd or runner-up for six times. •Large client base – Expand the client base on his reputation in the industry. •Excellent mentor – team player and enthusiast to share his skills, knowledge and expertise with junior members. •Loyalty – Been with Spenser’s and Company for 15 years. David Hughes: Strengths and Distinguishing Points
- 17. David Hughes: Strengths and Distinguish (cont’) Distinguish Points: • I will let Stephen know that my recent slow down was due to growing bored at current company and looking hoping for new challenges. • I will convince Stephen that my maturity is an advantage because my experience makes me an expert problem-solver and make better judgement. • I am able to deal with people of all ages and backgrounds, difficult clients are less likely to make me upset. • I will show my passion in mentoring the junior members • Propose a plan to bring up a rank II from junior members within first 2 years of joining RSH.
- 18. Seth Horkum:Seth Horkum: Strengths and Distinguish Strengths: • Punctual – reached restaurant before Stephen arrived • Extremely intelligent, enthusiastic and motivated – great stock- picker, ranked II runner-up, worked long hours (12-16 hrs a day) • Accessibility & Responsiveness – answer phone call and reply email promptly, willing travel on short notice. • Loyalty – been with Jefferson Brothers for 15 years. • Strong connections at PowerChip – close contact with buy side, networking skills • Friendly/likeable – praising & testimonials from clients, feedback from firm
- 19. Seth Horkum:Seth Horkum: Strengths and Distinguish (cont’) Distinguish Points: • I’ll highlight the connections with high-level management at PowerChip and I’m the best person in handling the PowerChip deal. • Showing my previous record/portfolio on how successful of stock picks. Good stock picker is hard to find. • I need RSH as a platform to achieve higher ranking; while RSH need a Star. • Make a deal with Stephen for 1 year contract, if my performance is below expectation, RSH could terminate my contract after 1 year. Otherwise, convert me to permanent. • I’m confidence to achieve higher ranking and I’ll return such dedication with an equal commitment to the firm.
- 20. Sonia Meetha:Sonia Meetha: Strengths BEHAVIORAL TRAITS •Motivated overachiever •Team oriented •Committed/Hard worker •Intelligent •Enthusiastic •Confident SKILLS •Good stock picker •Good client service •Communication skills •Superior analytical/research skills •Industry & global markets knowledge
- 21. Sonia Meetha:Sonia Meetha: Strengths Strengths: •Recognized as “up-and-comer” by II •Technical and sales background •Excellent writer •Emphasizes on global markets •Dedicated towards career •Emphasis on culture which is a key feature of RSH •Have connection with CEOs of some major company
- 22. Sonia Meetha: Distinguish Points • I will ask Stephen what type of senior analyst he want to hire then I will point out all the strength I have and the excellent job I did in WHS. • I will share out my technical research and sales experience background and with both it helps in communicate and fast respond to clients. As an excellent writer to give the quality report to clients. • I will point out I had honored with an up & comer ranking from Institutional Investor with sharing junior analyst. • I will point out the value I can give to RSH example the global focus in semiconductor industry. • I will show my interest to work in RSH by point out the work culture in RSH and I am fit in the team.
- 23. Recommendation & Alternatives to Decision Summarizes how human nature causes people to make bad career decision • When negatives of any job outweighs the positive, people start looking • The magnitude of these differences determines how active they look for new jobs • People accept jobs when positive outweighs the negatives • Most people overvalue the short-term positives when changing jobs, as a result, take jobs for the wrong reason • Companies reinforce this wrong choice by screening candidates on the wrong criteria, emphasizing the short-term positives and force-fitting people into ill defined jobs • Hiring managers need to fully understand the job scope and has to invest the time necessary to do it right, to The Theory of Hiring
- 25. A great career move should provide at least a 30% non-monetary increase. •This consists of job stretch (big job), •job satisfaction (the mix is more personally satisfying) and •job growth (there is more long-term upside).
Editor's Notes
- What is this case Study about : Recruitment of a star case study is Human Resource Management (HRM) sample scenario. Where did this case study take place : New York’s IBF – Rubin, Stern and Hertz (RSH) Why did this case study took place : ҉ analyst (Peter Thompson) resigned – Without notice – Join competitor Director of Research (Stephen Connor) seeking new replacement When did this case study took highlights: In the midst of covering an important upcoming deal in the semiconductor industry with Power Chip. How was the climax being mellowed down: Temporarily promoted Rina Shea Talked to Tom Walters – Senior Telecommunication analyst in RSH on second opinion Contacted headhunter Craig Robertson - possible candidate. Craig recommended 3 potential candidate David Hughes a veteran experienced top ranker champion in the semiconductor industry, Gerald Baum a well-established enthuastic who is within the ranks and Sonia Meetha; an underdog who is ambitious, qualified and capable of growing in the right platform. Surprise call - Head hunter Anita Armstrong - recommended Seth Horkum Who are the characters in this case study Peter Thompson, Stephen Connor, Tom Walters, Rina Shea, Craig Robertson, David Hughes, Gerald Baum, Sonia Meetha, Anita Armstrong, Seth Horkum. The Finale: Interview process started and Stephen has to asses and choose 1 best fit as Peter’s replacement
- Rubin, Stern & Hertz (RSH) is one of the renowned Investment Institutional in New York. RSH has a very strong cooperate culture which caters the employee’s career path on a long term approach. Most analyst in RSH started of as a junior position and then further moved the rank to Senior analyst according to their efforts, ranking in II, performance and the revenue brought from their research. RSH practiced a family like culture that supported one another rather then competing within colleagues which many find it as RSH’s unique competitive advantage. The Director tied analysts bonuses not only to individual success but also group success to foster this culture. On top of that, RSH equips their employee with workshops, and trainings to sharpen their analysts analytical skills, writing skills communication and trust. RSH has a record breaking low turnover due to its dedication towards their employee and expects the similar in return.
- Theory of Hiring. It summarizes how human nature often causes people to make bad career decisions: The Theory of Hiring in a Graphical Nutshell People leave jobs for the reasons shown in the bottom half of the grid and accept them for those on top. Unfortunately, when comparing and accepting jobs, too many people focus on the short-term extrinsic reasons, both positive and negative shown on the left, instead of the long-term intrinsic reasons shown on the right. More unfortunate, companies set up transactional hiring practices that first filter candidates based on their level of skills and then emphasize the short-term positives (Getting – Day 1) as the criteria for negotiating offers. Since little is known about the real job (Doing – Year 1) and the long-term career opportunity or what motivates the person to excel, the process sets up the “vicious cycle” of disengagement, dissatisfaction and underperformance leading to “Going Nowhere” careers. This is shown by the dotted red line in the graphic as the process repeats itself over and over again until people just give up trying. To break this cycle, companies need to screen and hire people based on their performance and results, not their skills and experiences, emphasizing what the person will be learning, doing and becoming. This is the “Doing – Year 1” intrinsic positive motivators shown in the upper right quadrant of the grid. Every job can be defined as a series of 6-8 performance objectives like these. By creating these types of performance-based job descriptions it’s possible to hire more highly engaged employees by screening and assessing people based on their past performance and motivation to perform the “Doing – Year 1” work required. Clarifying expectations upfront in this manner has been shown to be the number one driver of employee engagement in Gallup’s Q12 work and in Google’s Project Oxygen study on the characteristics of their strongest managers.
- The Theory of Hiring in a Graphical Nutshell People leave jobs for the reasons shown in the bottom half of the grid and accept them for those on top. Unfortunately, when comparing and accepting jobs, too many people focus on the short-term extrinsic reasons, both positive and negative shown on the left, instead of the long-term intrinsic reasons shown on the right. More unfortunate, companies set up transactional hiring practices that first filter candidates based on their level of skills and then emphasize the short-term positives (Getting – Day 1) as the criteria for negotiating offers. Since little is known about the real job (Doing – Year 1) and the long-term career opportunity or what motivates the person to excel, the process sets up the “vicious cycle” of disengagement, dissatisfaction and underperformance leading to “Going Nowhere” careers. This is shown by the dotted red line in the graphic as the process repeats itself over and over again until people just give up trying. To break this cycle, companies need to screen and hire people based on their performance and results, not their skills and experiences, emphasizing what the person will be learning, doing and becoming. This is the “Doing – Year 1” intrinsic positive motivators shown in the upper right quadrant of the grid. Every job can be defined as a series of 6-8 performance objectives like these. By creating these types of performance-based job descriptions it’s possible to hire more highly engaged employees by screening and assessing people based on their past performance and motivation to perform the “Doing – Year 1” work required. Clarifying expectations upfront in this manner has been shown to be the number one driver of employee engagement in Gallup’s Q12 work and in Google’s Project Oxygen study on the characteristics of their strongest managers.