Slugging Through the War for Talent
- Author: Amitai Givertz
- Posted: March 19, 2007
- Category: Talent Management, Business Matters
- Tags: White Papers
- Comments:
One of the problems with surveys and white papers commissioned by marketers whose purpose is in posturing it seems is that the content often falls short in substance and general usefulness. Slugging Through the War for Talent — put out jointly by DDI and Monster — seems to me to be one of the more obvious attempts to hype the “war for talent” rather than hypothesize any original thinking for those who are embattled in it.
Call-outs like:
THE WAR FOR TALENT HEATS UP
Staffing directors overwhelmingly reported that competition for talent had increased since 2005. Moreover, 79% expected it to heat up even more in 2007. The war for talent is hot and getting hotter.
…and statements like this one:
Employers won’t be able to attract the best job candidates if their messages fail to address their target audience’s interests. You can’t lure the right fish if you don’t use the right bait.
…make me wonder who the authors imagine are reading or what readers are expected to do with the information.
Don’t misunderstand me; there is nothing wrong with publishing surveys and white papers — or blog posts for that matter — that serve to market and promote a provider who is otherwise shamelessly selling stuff. More, if that research and know-how serves the needs of people who are not being asked for anything in exchange, then I suggest we might need more good content to choose from.
Then again, perhaps I have been spoiled, my expectations set too high. Comparing Slugging Through the War for Talent with these DDI offerings for example, I don’t think it is unfair to say it falls short:
- The CEOs Guide to Talent Management
- Nine Best Practices of Effective Talent Management
- The New People Leader Imperatives
Potential customers are no different from the potential hires we seek to attract and engage in much the same way. So here is some helpful advice — I hope — for would-be marketers whose purpose might be too self-serving, obvious:
Vendors won’t be able to attract the best clients if their messages fail to address their target audience’s interests. You can’t lure the right fish if you don’t use the right bait.
That’s my two cents-worth. What do you think?
Trackbacks
Trackback by Business and Personal Finance, September 10, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Business and Personal Finance
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting
Comments (5)
Comment by laurence haughton, March 23, 2007 at 3:21 pm
When I was a kid a schoolmate told me, “You’re so ugly your mama has to tie a pork chop around your neck to get the dog to play with you.”
It took me a few minutes but I finally got his point. My appearance was unpleasant enough to repel pets. And my only means of attraction was to wear a scrumptious doggie snack as a necklace.
I think the kind of marketing you see in that white paper is the result of marketers spending their time and energy inventing pork chops to tie around ugly products instead of understanding the client and making their company’s products irresistible.
Comment by Amitai Givertz, March 23, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Laurence, an interesting take but I would disagree on your description of DDI’s products being ugly, in need of a pork chop.
I think the screening and assessment tools that they provide, like DDI’s usual standard of subject matter, adds a lot to the mix.
What makes this paper hard to swallow is that it falls short of what we should expect as consumers of professional services, not adding much to our understanding of the underlying issues or appreciation for the possible solutions.
Of course, when you get a “scholarly” paper co-authored by Monster’s VP of Alliances, one has to wonder if it is Monster that needs the pork chop, DDI trying to oblige. If that is the case, DDI may have failed on both counts.
Comment by laurence haughton, March 23, 2007 at 5:14 pm
You know the product better than I do so I accept your opinion. I wasn’t knocking their offer. I am suggesting a big reason why bright marketers publish stuff that doesn’t add “much to our understanding of the underlying issues or appreciation for the possible solutions.” And why those same marketers don’t understand clients well enough to avoid stuff “that falls short of what [clients] should expect as consumers of professional services.” That pork chop thing has taken over.
Comment by Amitai Givertz, March 24, 2007 at 7:04 am
Laurence, we are in agreement. Thanks for your comments and point of view.