The men’s college basketball’s annual tournament (March Madness) recently finished with the University of Connecticut coming out on top.  For those of you not familiar with the tournament, it starts with 64 teams (68 now with the play-ins) and over a few weeks, 6 rounds and 59 games later there is one team left standing.  What makes the tournament so special is that every team in it has a chance to win it; even the underdogs, often referred to as ‘mid-majors’ have the chance to make a run every year.

This year two of the mid-majors did just that.  Butler and Virginia Commonwealth made it all the way to the final four and Butler to the finals amazingly for the second year in the row.  During and immediately following the tournament there was a lot of talk about how the coaches of these two teams could pretty much write their own ticket to a ‘bigger’ college basketball school, which would be a step up in their career that would give them more money, more publicity and a better shot to win the tournament on a yearly basis.

While nothing has happened yet, it appears that both coaches are going to stay where there are.  Yes that’s right, they are going stay with the their mid-major school.  Are they crazy?  That’s what many people are asking.  Why would you turn down the opportunity to take a position at a bigger, better, more prestigious school (or company)?

Of course I can’t speak for either of these coaches, but here’s my take on the situation.  We often hear people say that another civil engineering position is bigger, better, higher-paid, a better opportunity, however it doesn’t matter what people say, it only matters what the individual offered the position thinks.  These coaches may consider their current jobs, their dream jobs.  They are settled in the community with their family and they have no desire to move.  They actually like the organization they work for and want to stay where they are.  After all, if they took their mid-major school to the finals once (even twice) why can’t they do it again?

There is a huge parallel here for corporate professionals in the civil engineering community as we are often faced with similar positions.  Do we take a higher paying job with that has an additional 30 minutes of commuting time each day?  Do we sell our small company to a larger one?  These questions can only be answered by the individual receiving the offer based on their goals and with the support and guidance of their loved ones.  I just wanted to offer some food for thought in saying that bigger isn’t always better in your career!

Please offer your thoughts on this issue and if you were ever faced with a similar decision please share with us if you are comfortable doing so.

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

The great comedian Groucho Marx once said “…I don’t want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member.”  His self deprecating comment rings all too true with many civil engineering firms who wrongly believe that they are not worthy of attracting the profession’s top talent.  I call this “low company esteem.”What are the systems of this malady?  Frequently, they are manifested in comments made by principals and other hiring managers to external recruiters.  Here are samplings of recent exchanges:

•  ”This candidate has a great background and has tenure with their current firm. Why would they want to work here?”

•  ”This candidate will probably just interview with us to get a counter offer then reject us.”

• “This candidate has had great success in their past…they will be bored here.”

•  This candidate has always worked for top-tier firms.  Why would they  want to work at a firm like ours?”

While some of these concerns may be valid based on past experience, more often than not, insecurity leads to inertia.  Frequently, when receiving a search for a senior level hire, I am given the challenge to find someone that “will take us to the next level.”  While further prodding sometimes reveals that there is no internal consensus on what that actually means or entails, in the early stages of the sourcing phase, one thing becomes clear:  what they want is someone just like them who will achieve a level of practice excellence that they have been unable to through their own efforts and resources.

While no one would argue that ensuring a “fit” between the candidate and both the job and the company’s culture are essential to success, sometimes the counter-intuitive hire can bring a unique perspective, as well as seeing the firm through fresh eyes. This results in a renewed focus on using the firm’s talent, brand and market penetration to help it become what it can be, instead of the pattern of focusing on the past missteps and hurdles that accompany institutional knowledge.

The first interaction a strategic hire should have, that all-important “face of the company,” should be its best cheerleader who leaves every candidate hungering to join the firm whether or not the feeling is mutual. However, if interviewers suffer from low company esteem, they’ll consistently struggle with articulating the benefits of joining their firm over another and the quest for quality staff will continue to elude them.

Human resources and corporate leaders need to first find a way to assess, monitor and increase the morale and esteem of their key hiring authorities to ensure that they are adequately equipped to attract the level of candidates that will enable the firm to accomplish its strategic objectives.  They then need to identify and target the very best in the profession or market segment and approach their recruitment with the same unabashed abandoned as did Saturday Night Live’s “Stewart Smalley” character:  “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough and, gosh darn it, people like me.”

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

You are in your office trying to complete a set of civil engineering plans or wrap up a civil engineering project proposal that has to be submitted that afternoon, but there is this one co-worker who is always coming into your office and talking to you, and not about work-related issues.  Most of the time they gossip about co-workers or talk about their personal issues, a recent vacation, the game last night, or even complain about their job to you.  Yes I know, camaraderie and friendship are both important aspects of teamwork and morale, but when is enough, enough; and gossiping while in the office about co-workers, how unprofessional?

I see a few options for dealing with a chatty co-worker:

Close Your Door:  You can always close your door (assuming you have one).  That usually helps you to stay focused on the task at hand and increase productivity. However, you risk people getting upset with you for shutting them out and disconnecting yourself from the office. You may also get a few eyebrows raised as to why your door is closed often, especially from upper level managers.

Temporarily Relocate:  When I was working as a civil engineer and had to read a report or review a set of plans, I would utilize a conference room, simply to get away from distractions.  Not only does this save you from the gossiping co-workers, but it also gets you away from the phone and the computer.

Ask Nicely:  Another option is to ask your chatty co-worker to leave, in a nice way of course.  Maybe say something like, “John, I am sorry but I really have to get this report done in the next few hours, I will stop by when I am finished.”

Can you recommend any other options?

The reason I raise this topic is because I have heard many professionals complain about working late hours, only to see them chatting a good portion of their day away.  Again, I am all for building strong relationships with your co-workers and I do think you should take some time to get to know them, but where do we draw the line?

How do you maintain personal relationships with your co-workers without letting it affect your productivity?

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

Featured Guest Blogger: Babette  Ten Haken
Sales Aerobics for Engineers
Strategies and Toolkit for the Sales-Engineering Interface
Connect With Babette On Linkedin
Read The Sales Aerobics For Engineers Blog

Understanding the value of your employees (aka, “human assets”) and recognizing where there are gaps is essential to fulfilling your business goals and strategic objectives.  The workplace is changing, that’s for sure.  The economic downturn of 2008 resulted in downsized companies and a burgeoning pool of individuals available to keeping companies functioning – and profitable.

Evaluating the WHO of your business by aligning personnel with the WHAT you are trying to achieve is becoming a bit of an art form.

The architectural and engineering community has a long tradition of ramping their workforce up and down to meet project demands. Nothing new here. The accordion-like nature of the employment paradigm within this community has long been juxtaposed against a business model and employee expectations of  establishing a lifelong career with a company.

Now there are a lot more folks available to be deployed on a contractual basis on behalf of your company.  These are the folks who, perhaps, never were going to be lifelong company men or women for one reason or another. Yet they haven’t gone quietly into the night. Rather, they are very available and can become valuable, albeit transient, assets against a timeline or a project deadline.

I am quite certain that when these individuals entered their career path,  they never considered the changing face of the workforce of 2010 and forward. And then there’s the consideration that the newbies entering the workforce in 2008 were well aware of the difficulty it might take to land, and retain, employment.  While some are still waiting to become company men and women, others have joined the rank and file of the contract work force.

The fact is, the status quo has changed. The workforce paradigm is shifting. There is an entire career path consisting of project-oriented deployment. There is an entire workforce of experienced, deployable individuals – and newbies – who have come to understand that even if they are employed for the duration of the project, their success does not ensure a permanent position as reward for a project well done. The economic realities of their company may never permit permanent employment.

The paradigm of the mature, contracted workforce can play to their strong suit: some of these individuals will never be around long enough to be disruptive, which may have been their undoing in a former place of employment.  Having a resume of contracted projects may prove to make a stronger statement about their capabilities than a resume that is perceived as a track record of failure: no more than three to five year tenures with multiple companies.   While this type of individual is not unique to this time in history, the numbers of such individuals may be.

The problem is that the business model paradigms and the cultural paradigms into which the contracted workforce is placed remains based on outmoded mindset and structure.  I mean, how can you go from contracted job to contracted job without benefits? How can you describe these transient assignments to your advantage as a means of showing the value you provide to an organization?

For the time being, things are tremendously out of sync, aren’t they? Even when permanent employment is offered, no one is quite sure how long it’s going to last.  The cultural / societal infrastructure hasn’t quite caught up (or even begun to deal) with the reality of the contracted workforce.  And yes, we could and probably should discuss and debate this inequity for a long time. Not exactly the employment model, or career goal, that many individuals in the current workforce were brought up -  or taught –  to target.

If you have gaps in your ranks, give great consideration not only in how you will fill them but with whom.  These folks are hardly “stop gap” personalities, some having substantial careers under their belts. And if you are considering a career focused on filling gaps in the employment ranks, on an ongoing basis, don’t think of yourself as “less than,” but rather, an individual who is perhaps – in most instances – “more of” what is called for in the changing paradigm of the workforce of the future.

Something to think about, isn’t it?

For those of you football fans who watch ESPN’s Monday Night Countdown, you are likely familiar with their “C’Mon Man!” segment.  For those of you who don’t have the slightest clue as to what I am talking about, in a nutshell, the Monday Night Countdown crew members compile moments from the past weekend’s games that leave you scratching your head and saying to yourself (or out loud in their case) “C’Mon, Man!”

Here is segment to give you the gist of what I am talking about:

Now that you catch my drift, after speaking with a number of my recruiting colleagues across the country, I have compiled my Top 9  ”C’Mon, Man!” moments from the world of civil engineering recruiting over the past year:

1. A  candidate who has been out of work for 6 months goes through three stages of the interview process, she is on the cusp of receiving an offer contingent upon references checking out and she provides a poor reference that sells her down the river…C’MON MAN!
2. A candidate tells us all the motivations for him to consider a change, we provide an opportunity that meets all those needs and gives him a $25K/20%  increase in his base salary.  He verbally accepts to the hiring manager on Friday and then on Monday decides to stay where he is…C’MON MAN!
3. We successfully recruit a C-Level candidate for an extremely confidential CEO search.  The candidate is aware that this position must be treated with the highest level of confidentiality and agrees to abide by the “rules” of confidentiality.  After being shortlisted by the existing CEO as a candidate, said candidate decides to call a friend AT THAT COMPANY in attempt to get some inside information on the company and ultimately spilled the beans…needless to say he knocked himself out of contention…C’MON MAN!
4. A client asks us to conduct a search and bring candidates to the table for a Regional Manager position…a great candidate with a solid reputation is presented and interviewed, but the client is unable to provide ANY feedback until four weeks later, only to say “not interested.”  That’s it?   C’MON MAN!
5. A client company has two candidates they are considering interviewing …one is unemployed and has some of the skills they are looking for…the other is gainfully employed and fits most of what they are looking for.  The client company would rather interview the unemployed candidate first and make a decision because they are worried that the employed candidate may take a counteroffer…C’MON MAN!
6. A candidate has been so brainwashed as an employee that he tells us he will never leave his current employer because it is the “best company to work for in the history of all companies ever.”  Really?  The best company to work for in the history of all companies… ever?    C’MON MAN!
7. A company wants a” rainmaker” who will significantly increase top line revenues for their office or company, but they are not willing to pay market value…COME ON MAN!
8. We spoke with an engineer who diminishes the value of obtaining her PE because she says that she knows PE’s that she has worked with and she already knows WAY more than they do…C’MON MAN!
9. A candidate was referred to us by someone we respect in the industry, yet they respond to our contacting them by making a completely egotistical and arrogant statements about how great they are….C’MON MAN!

These are just a handful of “C’MON MAN” moments that have happened in our industry over the past year.   I know I am dishin’ it out here, but I will be the first to confess that we have had a few “C’MON MAN” moments on our end over the  years as well that we have learned from.  I guess it’s all a part of what makes our careers…and life  interesting! 

If you have any “C’MON MAN” moments from the world of recruiting or civil engineering that you would like to share, please feel free to do so!

One more thought…”Top 10″ lists, yes.   But who the heck ever heard of a “Top 9″ list?   C’MON MAN!!!!!

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

As discussed in a previous blog, civil engineering firms are cutting senior staff in favor of hiring less experienced, less expensive technologically savvy engineers. The blog received a variety of comments. Among them was insightful feedback from Principal Civil Engineer Mike Prett, PE. With permission, his comments are reprinted here:

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

Since the growth of LinkedIn, I find that I often am asked in an “inmail” to write an online endorsement for one of my connections. As an executive recruiter for 20+ years and as Co-Manager of the Civil Engineering Central Group on LinkedIn, I have many connections – many of whom I know better than others. For several of these recommendation requests, I have accepted and tried to write an honest evaluation of the person. Many, I have decided against writing. Why am I uncomfortable rejecting requests? Why did they ask me in the first place?

Before writing a recommendation you should ask yourself: Do I want my name attached to this person? Am I really able to write something that would help this person be a standout? Are they a talented architect, civil engineer, marketer or planner? Would I want them on my team? Would I want them to oversee one of my designs, plans or projects? Would I feel comfortable sending them out to a client? Would I refer someone to work for them on a daily basis? Did I really learn anything from working with them? Do I respect them enough that I would want them to evaluate my abilities? And, again: Do I want my name attached to this person!

Who should you select to write on your behalf? One should choose their recommendation writer carefully. This person should be knowledgeable of you and be able to describe several strengths you possess. They should be able to discuss specific situations in which they have worked with you and seen your performance. Notable anecdotes they can provide are of interest. It is helpful for you to choose people who know you in a variety of different roles. Recommendations from clients, colleagues, supervisors and subordinates are preferred. Friends’ letters are of little interest. Community and religious leaders are OK but many employers tend to not weigh their feedback as strongly as those from your “business” life.

Should you write a recommendation for everyone who asks you? Of course not. If you have an uncomfortable “twinge” when you read the request to write the recommendation, don’t feel you know the person well enough to comment or don’t have the time to write something of use to a reader, then DON’T write! Be polite and professional and tell the requester that while you appreciate their asking, you will be unable to write an assessment that would be valuable.

Social networking makes it as easy as a “click” to send out requests for recommendations to each and every person with whom you are connected. Think before you ask someone to write a recommendation for you and think before you write one!

Thoughts?

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

Imagine that you are asked to interview with an architectural or engineering firm. The corporate recruiter tells you “The interview will last 45 minutes. There are 5 candidates coming in to interview for 1 opening. You have 45 minutes to talk to the hiring authority. We will let you know in a couple of weeks who our chosen candidate is.” Anywhere in that conversation did you hear “We are excited that you are coming to meet with us. Hopefully we have a good fit with our opportunity and your talents.” ??? If this were a date, I would not have even shown up for coffee!

Even though there can be hundreds of applicants for one job, there are no excuses for recruiters AND hiring managers to forget that they need to sell their firms. Over the past couple of years, employers have realized that they are in the driver’s seat for many open jobs. Outstanding talent find themselves in a situation of competing for jobs with other really outstanding talent. Many firms, corporate recruiters and hiring managers have become arrogant and lazy. This behavior will lead to future recruiting and retention issues.

Several years ago one of my highly sought after senior candidates interviewed with my client. He was also interviewing with one of their competitors.  While my client was very interested to have him join their firm, their competitor pulled out all the stops throughout the interview process. The competitor’s CEO and a variety of other key company leaders called the candidate at various times over a week to tell him how thrilled they were to have the opportunity to meet him and that they were excited to have the potential to work with him. They did everything but send a new sports car to his house! He was direct in telling me that while he had established a great relationship with me and the executive he would report to at my client, the competitor just simply “out courted my client.” The competitor made him “feel” that they were excited “as a company” to have him on board. He was overwhelmed with the enthusiasm from his prospective colleagues. My client and I were crushed. Tough to hear.

The job market is increasing and firms that don’t step up their dating habits will find themselves with mediocre talent and an increase in open jobs as employees run to firms that know how to win them over! What are your thoughts? Have you seen this with your own firm or with your own interviews?

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

Owner, Larry Courtney Consulting

Management Consulting and Business Brokerage for Professional Services Firms and other    Businesses

http://www.linkedin.com/in/larrycourtney

The Wall Street Journal recently published an article about performance reviews by Samuel A. Culbert.  The article was adapted from “Get Rid of the Performance Review! How Companies Can Stop Intimidating, Start Managing — and Focus on What Really Matters.”*  Essentially the article makes the point that formal performance reviews, based on a recurring periodic calendar date, do not work, they are disliked by employees, and could even be detrimental from a legal perspective, especially when managers tend to provide inflated ratings.  Instead the article maintains, managers should be providing nearly daily feedback to employees on their performance.

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion

The Charlotte Observer ran an AP article in January of this year. It cited study statistical findings:

civil engineering jobs :: civil engineering resumes :: civil engineering blog :: civil engineering discussion