designing and refining talent acquisition · a customer-centric approach to talent acquisition 19...

Designing and Refining Talent Acquisition

The Role of Design Thinking in Creating a World-Class Talent Organization

SIGNATURESERIESAN HCI INSIGHT PARTNERSHIP

SIGNATURE SERIES | DESIGNING AND REFINING TALENT ACQUISITION—THE ROLE OF DESIGN THINKING IN CREATING A WORLD-CLASS TALENT ORGANIZATION | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3

Introduction 5

The Current State of Talent Acquisition 7

Challenges and Opportunities 7

Understanding the Talent Acquisition Experience 10

Change and the Talent Acquisition Process 15

A Customer-Centric Approach to Talent Acquisition 19

Design Thinking and Talent Acquisition 20

Design Thinking as a Change Strategy 20

Data that Informs Design 25

Outcomes 29

Conclusions and Recommendations 32

Recommendations for Your Design Thinking Journey 33

Design Thinking Process 34

Appendices 35

About the Research 35

Demographics 35

Classifying Design Thinking Modalities 36

About the Research Partners 37

Endnotes 38


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Frequently, the elements of the talent acquisition process HR leaders and practitioners consider most vital are among the least effective within their organizations. A suite of technological solutions is regularly assembled to meet these challenges, but without a thorough understanding of the problem, these tools are insufficient to resolve the issues at stake. The changing landscape of work, including increasing numbers of new and open positions and tighter competition for the talent with the best fit and most desirable skills, have amplified existing weaknesses in talent acquisition strategies. This has motivated many organizations to rethink not only their talent acquisition strategy, but also the approaches they use in problem-solving.

For a growing number of organizations, these problem-solving approaches now include Design Thinking. There are many definitions and various approaches to Design Thinking, but all adopt an iterative methodology that seeks understanding through empathy and creates solutions by prototyping, refining, and re-designing. Design Thinking focuses on the balance among the viability, feasibility, and desirability of the idea.1 By regarding individuals as customers, Design Thinking approaches attempt to clarify the needs, feelings, and values of all those connected by a shared experience. When applied to the problems of talent acquisition, recruiters, hiring managers, and candidates are re-envisioned as customers within particular types of interaction. The gaps between the most vital elements of the talent acquisition process and the most effective aspects can be understood by examining the experiences of these customers throughout the process.

To better understand the outcomes of Design Thinking approaches when applied to the challenges of talent acquisition, we conducted a survey of 307 HR practitioners and interviewed a panel of design specialists and talent acquisition professionals. The results of this study confirm the current challenges of talent acquisition, but they also indicate the ways in which Design Thinking approaches can productively resolve complex problems. Some key findings:


Design Thinking approaches are effective in meeting some of talent acquisition’s biggest challenges.

Organizations that use Design Thinking create better alignment of talent acquisition strategy and business strategy.

Design Thinking helps talent acquisition teams build sustainable talent pipelines.

Design Thinking addresses the communication between the customers of the talent acquisition process to improve its outcomes.

The candidate is given more timely and transparent information about their place in process, and more opportunities for feedback. This results in greater insight into the candidate experience and improves the organization’s employer brand.

The hiring manager’s needs are more clearly identified for recruiters and the relationships between hiring managers and recruiters are stronger. This contributes to improved quality of hire.

Recruiters better understand the needs of the hiring manager and are given the tools to better assess candidate skills and fit. Recruiters can help build a more robust talent pipeline for the business.

Higher quality of hire with better organizational fit contributes to higher rates of employee engagement across the organization.

Unlike traditional problem-solving efforts, organizations that rely on Design Thinking approaches are more likely to use a combination of qualitative and quantitative people data.

Organizations with Design Thinking are more likely to measure time to proficiency and time to productivity to better describe quality of hire.


A 2014 survey indicated that

87% of organizations are experiencing a shortage of skilled recruiting staff.

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of a robust and responsive talent acquisition strategy are so convincing that in a recent survey, more than 80% of business leaders indicated that talent acquisition is important to their organizations.2 Despite being a central concern for organizations however, as many as 61% still experience difficulty recruiting talent.3 The reasons for these difficulties stem from a wide range of sources. A 2014 survey indicated that 87% of organizations are experiencing a shortage of skilled recruiting staff.4 Research on global talent recruitment also suggested that only 32% of organizations headquartered in the United States are able to adequately measure the quality of hire, missing a key opportunity to better inform their talent acquisition strategy.5 Similarly, defining critical roles and desired proficiencies, optimizing the use of technology, identifying and attracting candidates with the best fit, and establishing clear lines of communication across stakeholders in the talent acquisition process remain persistent difficulties.

In response to these challenges, many organizations appear to be shifting their approach to talent acquisition. Fifty-eight percent of executives reported that they are “currently revamping” or “considering changes” to their talent sourcing and recruiting strategies.6 Yet, there is no clear playbook for creating a strategy that works, and the ways in which organizations are creating change in the talent acquisition process are as varied and complex as the problems they are trying to solve. Design Thinking methodologies offer a compelling alternative for designing and refining talent acquisition strategies to address the unique needs of the organization.

The term “Design Thinking” has different meanings depending on its context. For some, it is a toolkit of techniques for problem-solving. For others, it is a mindset that saturates organizational culture. Design Thinking has been defined in one instance as “a way of using systemic reasoning and intuition to explore ideal future states.”7 It is characterized by a concern for the physical, cognitive, and emotional experiences of all the people connected to a product or process. By empathizing with the perspectives of each individual and imagining their needs as customers of an experience, the practitioners of Design Thinking can produce elegant solutions to complex problems.


The elements of Design Thinking methodologies vary, but all involve an iterative process in which the discovery and definition of problems both inform, and are informed by, the ideation and prototyping of solutions. This process is built on the continuous, strategic improvement of processes and stakeholder experiences. Design Thinking complements, but is also distinct from other approaches to problem-solving, including those derived from General Systems Theory.8 In these approaches, a similar, iterative process is used, but often functionality, performance, and the understanding of interrelatedness are stressed at the expense of the experiential elements of a problem.

When we use Design Thinking for the problems in talent acquisition, the emotional, physical, and cognitive needs of all the stakeholders in this process are carefully considered. Whether they are hiring managers, recruiters, or candidates, all are viewed as customers of a shared experience. By understanding what the talent acquisition process looks and feels like to each of these customers, Design Thinking organizations can improve communication across roles, creating a consistent and predictable process that more effectively engages candidates, improves their employer brand, and aligns talent acquisition strategies to business strategies.

These outcomes are supported in the findings of HCI’s 2017 survey research. Conducted in partnership with Lever, the three-week-long survey received 307 complete responses to questions on talent acquisition and Design Thinking strategies. More than three-quarters of respondents hold leadership positions (78%), and most are from organizations headquartered in North America (73%). A large majority of survey participants indicated that the talent acquisition team is part of the Human Resource function within their organizations (87%) (Figure 1). More than half of these teams are specialists in the talent acquisition process (52%). Of those who were aware of Design Thinking approaches, 52% indicated that Design Thinking was currently in use within their organizations.

When we use Design Thinking for the problems in talent acquisition, the emotional, physical, and cognitive needs of all the stakeholders in this process are carefully considered.


Where is the talent acquisition team placed within your organization?FIGURE 1

In this report, the survey responses are summarized and then analyzed in the context of subject-matter expert interviews to understand the impact of Design Thinking approaches on talent acquisition strategies. The extent to which Design Thinking is currently used within organizations was compared to responses indicating the relative effectiveness of their talent acquisition process.

THE CURRENT STATE OF TALENT ACQUISITION

Challenges and Opportunities

The desire for new approaches to talent acquisition is driven in part by an increase in the number of positions for which organizations are hiring. Seventy-seven percent of survey participants indicated that the number of positions for which their organizations are hiring has increased (Figure 3). In addition, the tightening of labor markets and changing roles and demands within organizations have created new challenges for talent acquisition teams. Some of these challenges are revealed in tensions between those elements of talent acquisition that organizations indicated were important and those in which they rate themselves as effective. Out of 15 talent acquisition elements surveyed, only one (“Negotiating offers”) was rated higher for effectiveness (57%) than for importance (56%).

By contrast, although sourcing candidates was rated most important by survey participants (89%), ratings for its effectiveness were much

In HR, as generalist activities

35%

52%

7%

4%

2%

In a separate function that does not report to HR leadership

With a vendor, third-party

In HR, as a specialist function/role

Within business units reporting to business leaders

77% of survey participants indicated that the number of positions for which their organizations are hiring has either somewhat or greatly increased.


lower (37%). The gap of 52 percentage points between the importance and effectiveness of sourcing activities aligns with research suggesting that globally, more than half (53%) of business leaders indicate weak capabilities relative to new sourcing and talent pools.9 A similar gap can be seen in the survey results between the importance and effectiveness for building sustainable talent pipelines (52 points).

These gaps point to a need to refine or redesign these elements of the talent acquisition process. Some of the remedies for closing these gaps have been identified in the use of analytics and technologies to inform sourcing channels and establish sustainable talent supply chains.10, 11 It is interesting to note, however, that survey participants assigned the least amount of importance both to the use of analytics to measure and improve talent acquisition (52%), as well as to the use of talent acquisition technologies for the entire hiring process (51%). The use of analytics in the talent acquisition process also received the lowest rating of effectiveness (13%) in the survey, suggesting that efforts to improve the sourcing of candidates and create a sustainable talent pipeline may continue to pose significant challenges in the near-term.

Another significant gap is observed between the importance of aligning talent acquisition strategies to business strategies (78%) and its effectiveness (36%). This indicates another opportunity for an enhancement of the talent acquisition process that can yield substantial returns to the business. Studies suggest that improved alignment results in increased productivity, lower turnover, and stronger financial performance for the organization as a whole.12, 13 Similar gaps between importance and effectiveness exist for building the employee value proposition (41 percentage points), workforce planning and segmenting of critical roles (40 percentage points), improving the candidate experience (39 percentage points), and marketing employer brand (38 percentage points), all of which provide opportunities for change and growth.

Studies suggest that improved alignment results in increased

productivity,

lower turnover, and

stronger financial performance for the organization as a whole.


Importance versus Effectiveness Comparison for the Components in the Talent Acquisition Process.

FIGURE 2

Negotiating offers

57%

56%

Sourcing candidates for critical positions

37%

89%

-52%

Interviewing candidates

58%

85%

-27%

Assessing candidates’ skills and fit

52%

84%

-32%

Screening candidates

57%

80%

-23%

Aligning talent acquisition strategies

to business strategies

36%

78%

-42%

Onboarding new hires

45%

76%

-31%

Building your employee

value proposition

30%

71%

-41%

Improving candidate

experience

30%

69%

-39%

Marketing your employer

brand

30%

68%

-38%

Workforce planning/

segmenting critical roles

23%

63%

-40%

Managing candidate

feedback from stakeholders

32%

60%

-28%

Using analytics to

measure and improve talent

acquisition

13%

52%

-39%

Using talent acquisition

technologies for the entire

hiring process

23%

51%

-28%

Building sustainable

talent pipelines

16%

70%

-54%

Important Effective


Understanding the Talent Acquisition Experience

Organizations use many variables to understand and assess the success of their recruitment efforts and the experiences of those involved in the talent acquisition process. Some of these metrics are useful in addressing the challenges of sourcing and alignment, and most organizations rely on measures that emphasize the importance of filling critical positions with quality candidates. The top three metrics used by organizations represented in the survey include time to fill critical positions (71%), turnover of critical positions (50%), and hiring manager satisfaction (47%) (Figure 3).

Although time to fill critical positions is used by a large majority of organizations as a key metric in understanding outcomes of their talent acquisition process, this data point reveals relatively little about how well the hiring manager’s needs are being met, or the performance of the recruiter in identifying the right talent. Moreover, movement in this measure is relatively flat. Sixty-two percent of survey participants reported that their time to fill critical positions either stayed the same or increased over the past two years (Figure 4).

Direct measures of quality of hire are more relevant for understanding the performance of the talent acquisition strategy since they address the extent to which talent with the right skills and organizational fit is consistently identified, recruited, and retained. Despite this, quality of hire is measured by only 41% of respondents. Other metrics important to the performance of the hire include time to proficiency (4%), time to minimum productivity (4%), and training/assessment scores (16%), yet each had among the lowest response rates.

62% of survey participants suggested that their time to fill critical positions either stayed the same or increased over the past two years.

SIGNATURE SERIES | DESIGNING AND REFINING TALENT ACQUISITION—THE ROLE OF DESIGN THINKING IN CREATING A WORLD-CLASS TALENT ORGANIZATION | 1 1

What metrics are used in your organization to measure the success of recruitment efforts? (Select all that apply.)

FIGURE 3

Time to fill, critical positions 71%

50%

47%

46%

45%

41%

37%

36%

33%

33%

31%

24%

23%

19%

19%

17%

16%

12%

5%

4%

4%

2%

Hiring manager satisfaction

Time to fill, non-critical positions

Turnover, critical positions

Number of open positions

Quality of hire

Turnover, non-critical positions

Offer acceptance rate

New hire satisfaction with hiring process

Cost per hire

Performance appraisal/ review scores

Candidate feedback/ survey ratings

Recruiter performance on hiring targets/plan

Recruiter response times

New hire engagement

Time to accept

Training/assessment test scores

Starting salaries

Time to complete application

Time to proficiency

Time to minimum productivity

Applicant persistence rates


How have the following changed in the past two years? (Decrease is Desirable)*

FIGURE 4

Time to fill, non-critical positions 44% 35% 21%

40% 23% 38%

38% 31% 31%

29% 47% 24%

23% 50% 27%

16% 31% 53%

10% 30% 60%

Time to fill, critical positions

Turnover, critical positions

Cost per hire


Number of open positions


*Only items with 10% or more of the total number of respondents are reported here.

Decreased Stayed the same Increased

How have the following changed in the past two years? (Increase is Desirable)*

FIGURE 5

Recruiter performance on hiring targets/plan 5% 23% 72%

9% 21% 70%

2% 32% 67%

5% 35% 60%

41% 59%

5% 50% 45%

8% 65% 27%

Quality of hire


New hire engagement

Hiring manager satisfaction

Performance appraisal/ review scores

Offer acceptance rate

Decreased Stayed the same Increased


Although 60% of those surveyed indicated an increase in recruiter response times over the past two years, most organizations also noted an increase in recruiter performance on hiring targets over the same period (72%), with a similar increasing trend in the quality of hire (67%) (Figure 5). Recruiting technologies are important for maintaining this balance and can help organizations to more effectively meet expectations for time to fill critical positions, lessen the burden on recruiters, further reduce turnover in critical positions, and improve communication between stakeholders in the recruitment process.

Organizations reported using a mean of 6.2 different recruiting technologies in their talent acquisition processes with some organizations using as many as 15 different technologies. However, there were significant discrepancies between technology usage and reported effectiveness. More than three-quarters of survey participants indicated that they used job boards (79%), social networks (79%), and a company career site (78%) as part of their talent acquisition strategy (Figure 6). However, less than half of respondents rate these as effective. In addition, although 69% of respondents indicated that their organization uses an applicant tracking system (ATS), less than half of these respondents see it as an effective tool (47%) These gaps suggest that some technologies fall short of expectations in meeting the needs of the talent acquisition process.

By contrast, some of the recruiting tools with the least reported use are rated as among the most effective. Survey respondents are clearly intrigued by the potential of predictive analytics and interview management tools to positively shape talent acquisition. The use of predictive analytics as a powerful tool for identifying and profiling talent, evaluating recruitment sources, driving employee engagement, and retaining critical talent are frequently described in the secondary literature.14 Yet, while 52% of respondents rated predictive analytics as effective, only 7% of survey respondents use it in their talent acquisition process. The gap of 45 percentage points between use and effectiveness is striking compared to other technologies used in talent acquisition. Similarly, interview management tools (including videos and mobile apps) and online onboarding platforms had comparable rates of reported effectiveness (52% each), with just less than a quarter of survey participants (24% each) indicating that these were in use at their organizations.

“Talent acquisition is very plugged into technology. Because that’s the case, part of what they have to constantly assess is, is there a way that we can incorporate new technologies? How are we going to integrate them? How is it going to allow us to perform our function better? They’re also using it to assess people differently. There’s a lot that can be done from an assessment standpoint and people are asking themselves—not only how do we assess for a variety of skills—but how will we know whether they’re going to make it through the first six months or not? How do we get to culture fit?”

— BILL CRAIB HCI Instructor and Talent Management Thought Leader


Importance versus Effectiveness Comparison for Talent Acquisition Technologies.

FIGURE 6

Job boards

38%

79%

-41%

Social networks (e.g., LinkedIn,

Facebook)

40%

79%

-39%

Company career site

37%

78%

-41%

Applicant tracking systems

47%

69%

-22%

Third-party staffing solution platform

29%

36%

7%

Interview management

tools (e.g., video, mobile

apps)

24%

52%

28%

Online onboarding platforms

24%

52%

28%

Employer brand

creation and management

tools

15%

38%

23%

Predictive analytics

7%

52%

45%

Candidate relationship

management tools

11%

29%

18%

Social search tools

36%

39%3%

In use Effective

Employee referral tools

45%

50%

-5%

Assessments (skills or

personality)

48%

54%

6%

Recommen- dations and reference

checking tools

44%

49%

5%

Online talent marketplaces

24%

5%

19%

Human capital management

systems/suites

21%

39%

18%


Change and the Talent Acquisition Process

Given the disparities between the perceived importance and reported effectiveness of varied elements of the talent acquisition process, it is perhaps unsurprising that organizations are seeking changes to their talent acquisition strategy. Of those surveyed, 85% are either planning for change, or have introduced changes in the past two years (Figure 7).

In planning for these changes, organizations assign different importance to separate elements of the talent acquisition process, but most agree that communication among stakeholders in the process and technologies can be improved. When asked to reflect on the candidate experience, more than half say there are personal, friendly interactions with potential hires but poor communication with candidates and inadequate technologies can be improved (Figure 8). It is clear that organizations feel a need to improve in their ability to share information with candidates.

Have your leaders made any changes to the talent acquisition process in the past two years?

FIGURE 7

Yes62%

23%

15%No

No, but changes are planned

85% of those surveyed are either planning for change, or have introduced changes in the past two years.


How well does your organization’s current talent acquisition process address the following aspects of the candidates’ experience compared to your competitors? Total percentage of “Above Average” and “One of the Best” responses.

FIGURE 8

Personal, friendly interaction 65%

39%Opportunities for feedback from hiring managers or recruiters

34%Seamless onboarding procedures

48%Easily accessible information about the company

36%Timely and transparent communication

34%Easily accessible information about the role

29%Intuitive, usable technology

31%Updates of candidate status in the process

26%Opportunities for feedback from candidates

Consistent and predictable process 33%


Disconnects between perceptions and the availability of information are unevenly distributed throughout the talent acquisition process. Discovering these gaps can usefully inform the redesign process. For instance, although 71% of respondents agree that their recruiters build strong relationships with candidates during the hiring process, only 51% believe their organizations have adequate insight into the candidate experience (Figure 9). This suggests that organizations are still seeking additional information on the candidate experience beyond the recruiters’ initial interactions.

The results of this survey indicate that while recruiters are fulfilling their responsibilities, organizations are still challenged by skill shortages, insufficient sourcing strategies, and inadequate candidate experience. These challenges threaten the sustainability of talent acquisition strategies and contribute to the need for change and ongoing redesign of associated processes. Underscoring this fact, half of the organizations surveyed indicated that there are areas in their talent acquisition function that are overly complex and need simplification. Only 34% agreed that their organization provided a candidate experience that extends into onboarding and throughout their first year of hire. Changes in the talent acquisition process can be directed to resolving these challenges, but this requires approaches and frameworks that coordinate efforts, streamline procedures, and improve the individual stakeholder experience at the same time as these changes offer better returns for the business.

The results of this survey indicate that while recruiters are fulfilling their responsibilities, organizations are still challenged by

skill shortages,

insufficient sourcing strategies, and

inadequate candidate experience.


Percentage of “Agree” and “Strongly Agree” Responses.FIGURE 9

Our recruiters build strong relationships with hiring managers during the hiring process to understand their needs. 84%Our recruiters build strong relationships with candidates during the hiring process to understand their needs. 71%Our employer brand attracts top talent. 57%We have adequate insight into the candidate experience. 51%We build an exceptional candidate experience that extends into onboarding and throughout the hire’s first year. 34%We have a strong talent pipeline for business critical positions. 31%

SIGNATURE SERIES | MODERNIZING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT TO ENABLE THE WORKFORCE OF THE FUTURE | 19

A CUSTOMER-CENTRIC APPROACH TO TALENT ACQUISITIONA new way of thinking in talent acquisition is emerging out of the need to improve the candidate experience. A customer-centric approach by talent acquisition professionals pushes them out of the compliance mindset and into a space where the recruiter’s needs are equally considered with those of the candidate and the hiring manager.

When designing a recruitment process it is important to consider: What is the candidate experience? What is the hiring manager’s experience? What is the company’s experience? And, from each of those “customer”

perspectives, consider: What do they need, want, and value? This approach, which integrates the needs of each of these key stakeholders, will translate into a superior and robust talent acquisition strategy.

HCI’s model of customer-centric talent acquisition (Figure 10) aligns with Design Thinking. A focus on the roles, responsibilities, and experiences of the business, the hiring manager, and the candidate allows an organization to create action plans for improving its talent acquisition process.

HCI’s Strategic Talent Acquisition Model

FIGURE 10


DESIGN THINKING AND TALENT ACQUISITION

Design Thinking as a Change Strategy

Design Thinking offers one approach for addressing challenges in the talent acquisition process and facilitating changes in its design. One recent study found that companies where HR delivers programs with the highest levels of value are nearly five times more likely to be using Design Thinking.15 As a result, the use of Design Thinking continues to gain attention and credibility among business leaders. As many as 79% of executives indicate that Design Thinking continues to be an important trend.16 As a workplace paradigm for uncovering new solutions to old problems, Design Thinking focuses on the human experience in developing and refining new processes. Using this framework, stakeholders in the talent acquisition process are not strictly defined by their specific role, but are thought of as customers of a shared experience. By empathizing with the experiences of each customer, Design Thinkers can provide context for problems and challenges in designing and refining the talent acquisition process.

Although the elements of Design Thinking can vary, all include discovering, ideating, and implementing plans in an iterative way and can be collaboratively deployed by individuals, by teams, or across entire functions. The processes driven by Design Thinking address users’ physical, cognitive, and emotional needs to personalize and optimize the stakeholders’ experiences. By using customer-centric language, and encouraging efforts to empathize with others, Design Thinking creatively explores the perceptions and experiences of others and co-creates solutions that meet the needs of all those connected to a product, event, or process.17

Just over half of all survey participants recognized the use of Design Thinking in some part of their organization. Although a scant 2% of survey respondents indicated that Design Thinking was intrinsic to their organizations, nearly a third (29%) suggested that their personal view of Design Thinking was as a culture or mindset. Others indicated they viewed Design Thinking as a methodology (21%) or as a toolbox of problem-solving strategies (15%) that can be individually deployed whenever needed. This complements the reported use of Design Thinking approaches by select teams or departments (24%) or by individuals (14%) (see page 36 for a more detailed analysis). These

“Design thinking is directed towards solving human problems and making meaning out of complex situations to find desirable solutions. It’s collaborative; it’s co-creative; it’s action-oriented; and it’s optimistic about creating a preferred future.”

— LINDA NAIMAN Founder of Creativity at Work. Expert in Design Thinking, Arts-based Learning, Creativity & Innovation


findings are also consistent with other studies indicating that most organizations localize their Design Thinking practice in specific functions, while at the same time subscribing to the view that Design Thinking works best as a wider-reaching organizational mindset.18

A combination of survey participants’ personal understandings of Design Thinking along with its reported use within their organizations was associated with distinct talent acquisition processes and outcomes. Three groups best characterize these patterns:

No Design Thinking. This group may be acquainted with Design Thinking, but the organization does not use Design Thinking, or uses it in only a limited way. While some individuals use Design Thinking approaches, most are either personally unaware of Design Thinking principles, or view it as a re-branding of existing approaches.

Emergent Design Thinking. Design Thinking is used by individuals, by catalyst groups (those who have learned Design Thinking approaches and can serve as a resource to others throughout the organization), or by select teams within an organization. In general, there is a more nuanced view of Design Thinking as a toolbox of problem solving strategies, a broader methodology, or as an integral part of workplace culture.

Developed Design Thinking. This group holds sophisticated personal views of Design Thinking and typically understands it as a culture or organizational mindset. Design Thinking is used in teams, across departments, or is an integral part of functions throughout the organization.

No Design

Thinking

Emergent Design

Thinking

Developed Design

Thinking


Designing and Refining the Talent Acquisition Process

Organizations that rely on Design Thinking strategies in at least some part of their organization tend to approach their talent acquisition process differently than those that are either unfamiliar with Design Thinking, or do not purposefully apply its methods. When Design Thinking is introduced to the HR function, it “transforms HR from a ‘process developer’ to an ‘experience architect’” and “empowers HR to re-imagine every aspect of work.”19 Whether talent acquisition fully resides inside a design-centric HR function or not, the use of Design Thinking by teams or stakeholders connected to the talent acquisition strategy helps frame solutions in terms of customer needs. Hiring managers, recruiters, candidates, and all other stakeholders in the talent acquisition process are viewed as customers of a shared experience. Because Design Thinking focuses on building empathy with these customers, team members in the design process “discuss the emotional resonance of a value proposition as much they discuss utility.”20 The emotional experience of each individual is given equal consideration alongside their physical and cognitive needs in the talent acquisition process.

The emotional, physical, and cognitive domains of an experience are intentionally and holistically evaluated in the design process (Figure 11). The more developed an organization’s approach to Design Thinking, the more likely it is to give equal attention to each of these domains for the customers of the talent acquisition process. When asked which domains of experience are most important to consider in designing or refining talent acquisition, organizations with a Developed Design Thinking model placed a stronger emphasis on the cognitive factors of the hiring manager, as well as on the emotional factors of both candidates and recruiters (Figure 12).

Factors in Design ThinkingFIGURE 11

Cognitive Factors These include thinking styles and knowledge base

Physical Factors These include infrastructure, environment, and tools, but also physical capacities of the body

Emotional Factors These include experiential factors, including impressions and comfort level

“HR is generally better at the concept of Design Thinking than talent acquisition is. I think that they’ve seen the idea of collective thinking and collaborative thinking longer than the talent acquisition function has. Talent acquisition has tended to sit by itself and hasn’t had the opportunity, or the expectation, of collaborating much with the rest of the organization.”

— BILL CRAIB HCI Instructor and Talent Management Thought Leader


All No Design Thinking

Emergent Design Thinking Developed Design Thinking

Cognitive Factors of the

Hiring Manager are Considered

Emotional Factors of the Candidate are

Considered

Emotional Factors of the Recruiter are Considered

33%38%

28%

44%

59%

69%

47%

63%

72%75%76%

83%

What factors were considered when designing the changes to your talent acquisition process for the following stakeholders? (Select all that apply.)

FIGURE 12


The disproportionately larger emphasis on these elements of the talent acquisition experience by Design Thinking organizations reflects a clearer understanding of user needs. For instance, recruiters need to understand the thinking styles and knowledge base of hiring managers needs in order to better identify candidates that meet their requirements. Recent studies have suggested that while 80% of recruiters believe they have a high understanding of the jobs they are attempting to fill, 61% of hiring managers say that recruiters have only a low understanding of the jobs for which they recruit.21 Understanding the cognitive factors of the hiring manager helps recruiters better meet their demands.

Similarly, recruiters must source for an increasing volume of open and new positions, and understanding the needs of the hiring manager takes time and additional communication. This can increase time to fill, but results in better outcomes with respect to quality of hire. Recruiters are better able to communicate with both candidates and hiring managers in the talent acquisition process if they have tools to effectively manage the exchange of information, timelines, and targets for hiring. Creating a more even work flow and better channels of communication can help recruiters manage the stress of addressing the needs and expectations of multiple customers in the talent acquisition process.

Finally, the comfort level of candidates in the talent acquisition process is given considerable attention within Design Thinking organizations. This is due, at least in part, to a heightened concern over employer branding since a talent acquisition strategy that includes a strong candidate experience and leaves prospects with favorable impressions of the organization produces better outcomes for the business. Organizations with a stronger employer brand are better able to attract talent and are three times more likely to make a quality hire.22

Although organizations that rely on Design Thinking approaches are primarily focused on experiential elements of the talent acquisition process, this does not imply a rejection of data to inform best practices. Frequently, the organizations that most rely on Design Thinking in developing and refining their talent acquisition processes are also the most likely to rely on data to inform their understanding of systems and problems.

Candidate experience is the number one priority. When speaking with candidates, be genuine and narrate the real life stories of why people want to work and stay at your organization. This helps candidates envision themselves as employees and part of something much bigger than themselves.”

— ANNETTE CARROLL Director of Talent Acquisition at PROCON, Inc.


Data that Informs Design

A reliance on both quantitative and qualitative data from tracking systems and focus groups significantly correlates to the use of Design Thinking within organizations (Figure 13). Of particular note, more than 80% of organizations with a Developed Design Thinking model rely on an ATS to help understand the demands of the talent acquisition process. Given that less than half of those who use an ATS see it as an effective tool (47%), the greater use of ATS by design-centric organizations suggests they are more selective in their choice of ATS. In addition, while not significant in this sample, a larger proportion of Emergent and Developed Design Thinking groups relied on interview and other qualitative data collection techniques.

What methods and tools are used to gain an understanding of the overall talent acquisition experience at your organization? (Select all that apply.)

FIGURE 13

Recruitment management/applicant tracking systems data

Phone interviews

Competitor research

Developed Design Thinking Emergent Design Thinking

No Design Thinking All

Focus groups

72%61%

72%

81%

31%15%

25%

31%

28%26%

34%

43%

25%31%

35%

48%


Not only are organizations which rely on Design Thinking more likely to use data to understand systems and processes, but they tend to focus on variables that monitor critical positions, new hire satisfaction, and candidate feedback, as well as cost per hire, and recruiter performance on hiring targets (Figure 14). While time to fill remains a critical measure of interest, organizations with a Developed Design Thinking model look more closely than their counterparts at new hire satisfaction, and recruiter performance on hiring targets. It also appears that design-centric organizations are beginning to make strides in measuring time to proficiency and time to productivity to better assess quality of hire.


What metrics are used in your organization to measure the success of recruitment efforts? (Select all that apply.)

FIGURE 14

Time to fill, critical positions

Cost per hire

Recruiter performance on hiring targets/plan

Candidate feedback/ survey ratings



Time to complete application

Time to proficiency

Time to minimum productivity




66%64%

71%

88%

31%26%

36%

48%

38%25%

33%

48%

22%15%

23%

36%

38%15%

24%

33%

19%14%

19%

31%

31%43%

37%

26%

6%0%

4%

10%

0%1%

5%

17%

3%1%

4%

10%


The technologies used at design-centered organizations reflect a greater commitment to using data to understand the dimensions of the talent acquisition experience and address its challenges. Nearly all Developed Design Thinking organizations rely on social networks to drive better communication with job candidates and develop their employer brand (Figure 15). Likewise, Developed Design Thinking organizations are more likely to rely on employee referral tools and assessments. Elsewhere in the survey, these tools were given relatively high ratings of effectiveness (45% and 54% respectively, Figure 6). The increased attention given to these alternatives in a design-centered talent acquisition process suggests greater insight into which tools provide the greatest return on investment, since Developed Design Thinking Organizations also keep a careful eye on cost per hire (Figure 14).

What recruiting technologies and/or platforms are used at your organization? (Select all that apply.)

FIGURE 15

Social networks (e.g., LinkedIn, Facebook)

Assessments (skills or personality)

Employee referral tools

75%84%

79%

95%

69%38%

50%

71%

63%42%

48%

64%




Outcomes

Design Thinking organizations’ use of data, ability to empathize with the emotional, physical and cognitive domains of the customer’s experience, and commitment to the creation of solutions through iterative, collaborative methods yields better outcomes, particularly with respect to communication between the customers of talent acquisition. Developed Design Thinking organizations, for instance, report a significantly better candidate experience by delivering more timely and transparent communication, providing more complete status updates to candidates, creating better opportunities for them to provide feedback, and making the talent acquisition process more consistent and predictable (Figure 16).

How well does your organization’s current talent acquisition process address the following aspects of the candidates’ experience compared to your competitors?

FIGURE 16

Updates of candidate status in the process

27%22%

31%

46%

Timely and transparent communication

40%27%

36%

46%

Opportunities for feedback from candidates

27%18%

26%

41%

Consistent and predictable process

37%21%

33%

53%




Design Thinking organizations also report higher ratings of effectiveness with respect to important stages of the talent acquisition process (Figure 17). Organizations with a Developed Design Thinking model are especially effective at interviewing candidates and assessing their skill and fit. The greatest contrasts with organizations that do not use Design Thinking are found around building sustainable talent pipelines and aligning talent acquisition strategies to business strategies. It is interesting to note that these two elements of the talent acquisition process are among those with the widest gaps in the survey between their rated importance and effectiveness (42 percentage point gap for alignment, and a 54 percentage point gap for talent pipelines, Figure 2).

Please rate how effective (i.e., successful) your organization is at each of the following stages in talent acquisition.

FIGURE 17

Screening candidates

Interviewing candidates

Building your employee value proposition

Building sustainable talent pipelines

Assessing candidates’ skills and fit

Aligning talent acquisition strategies to business strategies

Marketing your employer brand

59%53%

57%

71%

28%22%

30%

48%

53%56%

58%

76%

34%23%

30%

55%

23%12%

16%

31%

53%44%

52%

76%

38%27%

36%

57%




Designing and refining the talent acquisition process using Design Thinking strategies helps organizations build and strengthen crucial relationships between recruiters and hiring managers, gaining better insight into the candidate experience (Figure 18).

Percentage of agreement by Design Thinking CategoryFIGURE 18

We measure high employee engagement across the

organization.

72%47%

57%

64%

We have adequate insight into the candidate experience.

50%38%

51%

76%

We have a strong talent pipeline for business critical positions.

28%23%

31%

55%

Our recruiters build strong relationships with hiring managers

during the hiring process to understand their needs.

75%77%

84%

95%




CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The tightening of labor markets, shortages in skilled recruiters, increases in the number of open and new positions, and gaps between the importance of varied elements of the talent acquisition process and their effectiveness, are all pushing organizations to reconsider their talent acquisition strategies. Although there are a variety of tactics and approaches to choose from, the use of Design Thinking in some organizations has helped address some of the most current and pressing challenges of talent acquisition.

The use of Design Thinking strategies in designing and refining the talent acquisition process yields important benefits to its stakeholders. A focus on collaboration and co-creation in the design effort promotes and strengthens pathways of communication between hiring managers, recruiters, and candidates. It creates empathy for the customers of talent acquisition by adopting their perspective in identifying and resolving problems.

Design Thinking approaches help reduce the cognitive overload for hiring managers in the talent acquisition process and help them make better, more focused and well-informed decisions about candidates. This improves the degree of certainty in identifying the right talent for the right position. Organizations using a Developed Design Thinking model maintain the same focus on infrastructure and the physical demands of the talent acquisition process as other organizations, but place a stronger emphasis on the emotional elements of both the recruiter and candidate. Greater attention to emotional factors, however, do not diminish their use of data to inform decisions. In fact, Design Thinkers increase their reliance on assessments, focus groups, and tracking systems to provide concise and validated data. They focus on those metrics describing success in filling critical positions, perhaps because they are more adept at identifying and defining these positions.

By using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to enhance the emotional and experiential domains of the talent acquisition process, Design Thinking organizations create a more consistent and predictable process that contributes to their employer brand and improves outcomes with respect to employee engagement and communication.

The purpose of being in business, besides making a profit, is to enhance quality of life and work. The purpose of design is to improve the quality of your products, processes, and services to optimize customer experiences (internal and external), and increase the value of your offerings.”

— LINDA NAIMAN Founder of Creativity at Work. Expert in Design Thinking, Arts-based Learning, Creativity & Innovation


RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOUR DESIGN THINKING JOURNEY

On the basis of these findings, we offer a number of recommendations to help inform next steps for organizations at varied places in their Design Thinking journey:

In organizations not currently using Design Thinking:

Consider the experiential elements of the talent acquisition process for hiring managers, recruiters, and candidates to address barriers to communication across roles and create more opportunities for feedback.

Work to create a talent acquisition process with greater consistency and predictability that more effectively engages candidates and improves employer brand.

More closely align talent acquisition with business strategies through problem-solving approaches that use iterative approaches to evaluating how well the outcomes of the talent acquisition process meet the needs of the business.

Embrace collaboration and understand most changes cannot happen by working alone and new ideas occur from diversity of thought.

In organizations where Design Thinking is currently in limited use:

Use data more effectively by linking the right variables with intended outcomes. Instead of time to fill or turnover, combine an emphasis on hiring manager satisfaction with metrics that directly assess the quality of hire.

Focus more closely on the cognitive factors of the hiring manager to strengthen relationships between managers and recruiters and more fully develop the talent acquisition process.

Move to incorporate more qualitative data, such as focus groups, to give context to quantitative findings.

Stay open-minded and be curious about others and new ideas.

No Design

Thinking

Emergent Design

Thinking


In organizations with developed approaches to Design Thinking:

Gather information on “what works” in building sustainable talent pipelines to identify strategies for closing the gaps in sourcing.

Continue to use data-informed prototyping approaches to map solutions for workforce planning issues.

Generate unique solutions by looking inwards and resist the impulse to find best practices from other companies.

Design Thinking Process

For more information on how to use Design Thinking methodologies, watch the video “Design Thinking for Talent Acquisition: An Essential Primer for Developing and Applying Creativity in Your Work.”

Empathize Ideate

Define Prototype

Test

Design Thinking ProcessFIGURE 19

STEP 1—Empathize: Empathize with your user and collect data on what they say, do, think, and feel.

STEP 2—Define: Figure out what problem you want to solve and ask the right questions first instead of jumping into problem-solving mode.

STEP 3—Ideate: Consider all the ways you can solve it by generating quality solutions over quantity.

STEP 4—Prototype: Choose a few ideas to prototype to make the idea come alive.

STEP 5—Test: Try the ideas out to gain more feedback. Then repeat the cycle until you meet your goal.

Developed Design

Thinking

http://www.hci.org/lib/design-thinking-talent-acquisition-essential-primer-developing-and-applying-creativity-your-work

http://www.hci.org/lib/design-thinking-talent-acquisition-essential-primer-developing-and-applying-creativity-your-work


ABOUT THE RESEARCH

From March 3rd to March 23rd, 2017, a link to an on-line questionnaire was distributed via e-mail to opt-in members of HCI’s Survey Panel and electronic mailing lists. In addition to receiving 307 completed surveys, we interviewed three subject-matter experts on this topic, including:

Linda Naiman—Founder of Creativity at Work. Expert in Design Thinking, Arts-based Learning, Creativity & Innovation

Annette Carroll—Director of Talent Acquisition at PROCON, Inc.

Bill Craib—HCI Instructor and Talent Management Thought Leader

Researchers also reviewed relevant information from a variety of secondary sources, including academic journal articles, white papers, articles, books, blogs, and case studies. The results of the questionnaire, subject-matter expert interviews, and secondary sources form the basis of this research.

APPENDICES

Total Participation 307 respondents

73% HQ in North America

Level of Seniority C-level 7%VP-level 11%Director-level 30%Manager-level 30%Individual Contributor 19%Independent Consultant 3%

Number of Employees Fewer than 101 14%101 to 1,000 39%1,001 to 5,000 22%5,001 to 10,000 9%Greater than 10,000 16%

Role*Human Resources/ Talent Management

49%

Recruiting 23%Executive Management 13%

Industry* Business/Professional Services

15%

Financial Services/ Real Estate/Insurance

12%

Manufacturing 11%Healthcare 10% IT Hardware/Software 7% Non-Profit 6% Chemicals/Energy/Utilities 6%Higher-Education 5%

DEMOGRAPHICS

* Only proportions 5% and greater are listed


Highest Scoring Design Thinking Concept Reported

n = 155

I don’t use Design Thinking

Design Thinking is a label or brand for existing practices

Design Thinking is a toolbox of problem solving strategies

Design Thinking is a methodology or process

Design Thinking is a culture or a mindset Total

We do not use Design Thinking, or, I don’t know

26% 5% 9% 7% 47%

Design Thinking was attempted, but abandoned

1% 1%

Design Thinking is used by individuals 1% 1% 5% 1% 5% 14%

On demand—through workshops led by catalyst groups or consultants

1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 5%

By select teams or departments 3% 3% 8% 10% 24%

Across most departments and organizational functions

1% 1% 5% 7%

Intrinsic to all aspects of the organization 1% 1% 1% 2%

Total 32% 3% 15% 21% 29%52% = No Design Thinking (n = 81) 21% = Emergent Design Thinking (n = 32) 27% = Developed Design Thinking (n = 42)

How

wou

ld y

ou b

est c

hara

cter

ize

the

usag

e of

D

esig

n Th

inki

ng a

t you

r org

aniz

atio

n?

Classifying Design Thinking Modalities

The uses and personal views of Design Thinking can be seen as a continuum from least to most complex or sophisticated. These range from narrow perceptions of Design Thinking as a label or brand for existing practices, to a fully integrated mindset across the organization. When ordered in this way, and compared, three patterns of Design Thinking within organizations can be identified.

Research Categories Derived from Design Thinking at the Organization Level Compared to Design Thinking at the Personal Level

FIGURE 20


We believe that strategic talent management is the only long-term, sustainable competitive advantage left today, and that most organizations around the world are struggling in this critical area. At our best, we change both paradigms and practices, and enable executives to make better, faster decisions than they could on their own.

HCI seeks to educate, empower, and validate strategic talent management professionals to impact business results through the acquisition of insights, skills and tools that are contextualized through research, practice, expert guidance, peer learning, and self-discovery. Visit HCI.org to learn more.

Built from the conviction that recruiting is the responsibility of everyone at the company, Lever’s Talent Acquisition Suite draws the entire team together to efficiently source, nurture, interview, and hire top talent through effortless collaboration. Lever has been intentionally designed with integrated ATS + CRM functionality, and a modern interface to help build stronger relationships between recruiters, hiring managers and candidates in fewer clicks. We are proud to work with over 1,300 companies globally including Netflix, Lyft, KPMG New Zealand and Cirque du Soleil, and to celebrate diversity and inclusion as a core element of our culture. Visit lever.co for more details.

ABOUT THE RESEARCH PARTNERS

http://www.hci.org/

http://www.lever.co


ENDNOTES 1. Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking

2. Deloitte. (2017). Global Human Capital Trends. p.39

3. Berklich, P. (2014). Global Trends in RPO & Talent Recruitment 2014. Kelly OCG Outsourcing and Consulting Group. Retrieved from http://www.kellyocg.com/uploadedFiles/7-KellyOCG/2-Knowledge/Workforce_Trends/2013_Global_RPO_Report.pdf.

4. Ibid.

5. Abbot, L., Batty, R., & Bevegni, S. (2016). Global Recruiting Trends 2016. LinkedIn Talent Solutions. Retrieved from https://business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/recruiting-tips/global-recruiting-trends-2017

6. Bohdal-Spiegelhoff, U. et al. (2014). Talent Acquisition Revisited. Retrieved from https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2014/hc-trends-2014-talent-acquisition.html

7. Killiam, J. (March 2016). The Power of Design-thinking. Podcast retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/the-power-of-design-thinking

8. Pourdehnas, J., Wexler, E., & Wilson, D. (2011). Systems and Design Thinking: A conceptual framework for their integration. Organizational Dynamics Working Papers, 10, 3. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/od_working_papers/10

9. Stephan, M., Brown, D., & Erikson, R. (2017). Talent Acquisition: Enter the cognitive recruiter. Retrieved from https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2017/predictive-hiring-talent-acquisition.html

10. Isson, J. & Harriott, J. (2016). People Analytics in the Era of Big Data. Wiley and Sons. Hoboken, New Jersey.

11. Harris, J., Craig E., & Light, D. (2011). Talent and analytics: new approaches, higher ROI. Journal of Business Strategy, 32(6), 4-13.

12. Huselid, M. (1995). The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672.

https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking

http://www.kellyocg.com/uploadedFiles/7-KellyOCG/2-Knowledge/Workforce_Trends/2013_Global_RPO_Report.pdf

http://www.kellyocg.com/uploadedFiles/7-KellyOCG/2-Knowledge/Workforce_Trends/2013_Global_RPO_Report.pdf

https://business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/recruiting-tips/global-recruiting-trends-2017



https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2014/hc-trends-2014-talent-acquisition.html

https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2014/hc-trends-2014-talent-acquisition.html

http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/the-power-of-design-thinking

http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/the-power-of-design-thinking

http://repository.upenn.edu/od_working_papers/10

https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2017/predictive-hiring-talent-acquisition.html




13. Ashton, C. & Morton, L. (2005). Managing talent for competitive advantage: Taking a systemic approach to talent management. Strategic HR Review, 4(5), 28-31.

14. Davenport, T., Harris, J., & Shapiro, J. (2010). Competing on Talent Analytics. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://www.harvardbusiness.org/sites/default/files/HBR_Competing_on_Talent_Analytics.pdf

15. Bersin, J. Solow, M., & Wakefield, N. (2016). Design Thinking: Crafting the employee experience. Retrieved from https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2016/employee-experience-management-design-thinking.html

16. Ibid.

17. Design Management Institute. What is Design Thinking? Retrieved from http://www.dmi.org/?WhatisDesignThink

18. Schmiedgen, J., Rhinow, H., Koppen, E., & Meinel, C. (2015). Parts Without a Whole?: The Current State of Design Thinking Practice in Organizations. Technische Berichte, 97(9). Retrieved from https://idw-online.de/en/attachmentdata45603.pdf

19. Bersin, J. Solow, M., & Wakefield, N. (2016). Design Thinking: Crafting the employee experience. Retrieved from https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2016/employee-experience-management-design-thinking.html

20. Kolko, J., (2015). Design Thinking Comes of Age. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age

21. iCims and hire expectations institute. (2014). Strategies to Improve the Recruiter and Hiring Manager Relationship. Retrieved from https://www.icims.com/sites/www.icims.com/files/public/Hiring_Manager_Recruiter_Relationship.pdf

22. Hall, B. (2015). The True Cost of a Bad Hire. Retrieved from http://resources.glassdoor.com/the-true-cost-of-a-bad-hire.html

http://www.harvardbusiness.org/sites/default/files/HBR_Competing_on_Talent_Analytics.pdf



https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2016/employee-experience-management-design-thinking.html



http://www.dmi.org/?WhatisDesignThink

https://idw-online.de/en/attachmentdata45603.pdf

https://idw-online.de/en/attachmentdata45603.pdf




https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age

https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age

https://www.icims.com/sites/www.icims.com/files/public/Hiring_Manager_Recruiter_Relationship.pdf

https://www.icims.com/sites/www.icims.com/files/public/Hiring_Manager_Recruiter_Relationship.pdf

http://resources.glassdoor.com/the-true-cost-of-a-bad-hire.html

http://resources.glassdoor.com/the-true-cost-of-a-bad-hire.html

Copyright © 2017 Human Capital Institute. All rights reserved.

Publication date: June 28, 2017 v.2

1130 Main Street | Cincinnati, OH 45202Facebook “f ” Logo CMYK / .eps Facebook “f ” Logo CMYK / .eps

https://www.linkedin.com/company/human-capital-institute-hci

https://twitter.com/Human_Capital?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

https://www.facebook.com/humancapital/

designing and refining talent acquisition · a customer-centric approach to talent acquisition 19...

Documents