Perks Matter

I have no clue how many surveys have been run in the just the past 5-10 years on the subject of what happens as the employment market turns from one favoring the buyers vs. one where the sellers have the leverage.

While we are not there yet, "barring injury" as they say, overall we seem slowly but surely (thank goodness) to be headed in that direction. I know, I know, that could change by dinner time, but I still prefer to think of it in positive terms.

As this happens, organizations might want to dust off some of those surveys and remind themselves that after bucks and benefits, what matters, especially to the GenXers (and indeed) lots of Boomers as well.

In the stats that have come across my desk in recent years, one "perk" that keeps coming up again and again and is usually at or near the top of the list is work schedule flexibility.  That stat by itself comes as no surprise.  What does make me scratch my head, however, is that many bosses still think that "by the book" structure is still what makes the world go round.

Any company or manager on the planet who has not yet gotten the word that as our economy has continued to gain traction the GenXers (and yes, a good percentage of the Boomers as well) are starting to vote with their feet in a big way must not have their EKG machines turned on.

Here at galactic headquarters we see these things manifesting themselves in any number of ways as the senior-level executives who make up our community report to us on what is often an hourly basis things like: people "landing" at a significantly higher rate; new members who report their status as "currently employed and thinking about making a change" to name a couple. They are, of course, responding to what they see in terms of the increased demand (e.g. our postings from recruiters year over year continue to be up.

So my question is this: If all those who say they are making a change because they want to find a work environment and/or a culture that is more in tune with their "wants," to what degree do they "get it?" Do they "get it" enough to really work to transform the cultures of the organizations to which they are going so that they meet the real needs of those already there and as part of which and as members of the executive team, they will be trying to recruit and retain?

If one examines the behavior of organizations in the past as they have attempted to adapt to the changing values of differing generations, it explains all too clearly why when it is a seller’s market that retention is always a big time issue. And the "war for talent" stats notwithstanding, it ain't just about numbers of warm bodies available.

There is in all this, it seems to me, both lesson and "learning." The companies who have not made addressing retention issues a strategic priority must be made up of people who believe the old saying: "History is something that happens to other people."

It would be my hope that in today's environment where we have the chance to apply both lessons and "learnings" that companies will be more inclined to view it as Alphonse De Lamartine put it: "History teaches everything including the future."

The Currency of Networking

When retained executive search finally emerged onto the scene in the U.S. the names that really became the face of the industry were those of Tom Neff at Spencer Stuart and Gerry Roche of Heidrick & Struggles.  They were the mega stars of CEO searches. 

Their names became so well known in part, because of the high profile competition between the two.  They were in two of the top firms and they were the points of the spear when it came to the most senior searches.  It was something that was fun to follow.

I can recall reading many articles that were focused on one or both of these icons, and one in particular that was in Fortune some years ago called Clash of the Corporate Kingmakers stuck with me then and still does because it talked a great deal about how Roche had built his practice.  I thought it was another important example of just how important networking is both personally as well as professionally.

One of the aspects of the story that really struck me was when it was pointed out that even with people who turned him down, Gerry continued to make a real effort to build a relationship, and the key way in which he did so was by using the universal currency of effective networking (information) and giving it freely and with no strings attached.  We talk to ExecuNet members about this all the time.

One could argue, I suppose, given that Roche effectively worked only at the most senior level of the Fortune 500 that every player in that space would want to be his "friend." Could well be true once he became the face of Heidrick, but certainly that was not the case when he was building what his practice became. The relationships he built over the years came back time and again to help him as the years went on until he retired in '09.

Bottom line, when I read the article it reminded me yet once again that effective networking is a process not a pick up, put down activity.  Said differently, and I can't recall where I saw this phrase but I thought it captured the core of what truly effective networking is all about:

There's a difference between doing something part time, full time, and all the time.

I'll Take Networking for $1000 Alex

No matter how cynical we can sometimes become the fact is, at least for me (and I certainly have developed my fair share of cynicism over time) when it comes to a new year you can't help but reflect on what has been, what might be to come, and what has changed. 

As we start a new year at ExecuNet, I can assure you, in between reading the crystal ball pieces written by all the bulls or bears telling us what to expect in 2012, I spent a fair amount of time over the last couple of weeks thinking about the career management world as well.

In the years we have been around, it doesn't seem possible that when we began in 1988 if you heard the phrase the Internet you would have thought it was a term from a Stephan King novel or an ad for the latest teen horror movie.  You could almost hear the voice-over booming "Time was running out; they were trapped in the never-ending web of The Internet!"  Talk about change!

Also as one does when thinking about the past, present, future and changes, I also reflected on some of the things that over time really haven't changed and for some crazy reason it brought to mind how many times I have been called by a reporter or writer who was doing a piece on career management and how the main focus of the story so often was and still is on the what a  Jeopardy clue might describe as "makes every job changer want to barf."  Answer: what is networking.

It felt like I have been talking to friends, members, reporters, writers, recruiters, and coaches about this subject for almost as long as I can remember.  Indeed, as this subject was crawling across my mind's radar screen, I was reminded of a conversation I had some years ago with a reporter from the WSJ who somehow tracked me down on my cell phone one Saturday.  It took me a while to get focused on what he was calling about because all I could think about was how the hell he got my cell number. 

Once I started to actually listen to him, he explained he wrote a column called CUBICLE CULTURE.  The column is still going strong today.

In any case, turns out he was writing about networking as a job search or business development technique, and the net of it (no pun intended) was that he wondered if it really was effective in this day and age or just something that technology and hype had created to annoy the heck out of people. We talked for quite a while, and at one point he gave me the following example which he was using in the piece and wanted my thoughts:

"...At another event, she was deep in conversation with an old friend when a fresh-faced young man starting out in financial services interrupted, introduced himself and then, after a long silence, came clean: "Well, can I get your business cards?" he asked them. "My boss told me I could only come to this event if I collect a certain number of business cards."

My answer was "That's not a relationship. It's a scavenger hunt!" and it reminded me yet again of how simplistic a world we live in, and how we are all looking for instant answers and how it is that so many people go through life worried about what's in it for them.  A attitude in life that is off-putting to say the least, and one which in the context of career management is the personification of a formula for guaranteed failure.

Turns out he liked the sound bite analogy of the scavenger hunt, but when the article was published what he didn't include in the column was what I tried to explain after I had made my flippant comment which was that there is "networking" and there is "effective networking" and the reason the word often makes the hair stand up on the back of people's necks (probably more PC than "barf" I guess) is because of the example he gave. It is the stereotypical image that many people have of what networking is when they hear the word.  They think the goal is number of business cards collected as opposed to relationships established.

What I wish he had the time to tell people is that "effective networking", at least based on my personal experience as well as the 24 years of involvement with ExecuNet is really about an attitude of simply being willing to help someone else without worrying about any quid pro quo, and actions whose cumulative effect is to equate your name with trust, or as Karen Armon, who facilitates our networking meetings in the Denver metro area likes to say, "Give first and results will follow."

She couldn't be more right.

It's Still Personal

Okay, I admit it, I am a bit of a "machineophile" or maybe in the current era and vernacular a "gadget geek."  I love the apps, the widgets, and the QR stuff.  I have no idea what most of it does, worry to death about which ones come preloaded with a virus and then end up deleting the vast majority about every 6 months to make sure I still have disk space on my PC and cell phone.

Well, yesterday when I needed something to take my mind off of how badly I had done in this week's office football pool I decided it was deletion time again, and it was during that process that I came across a reference to an app that if you believed what they were saying, was supposed to be the job seeker's answer to automated responses and messages that come from many job board postings, which, loosely translated, stop just short of "Dear Occupant."

Apparently, after this certain piece of software is up and running, the applicant can send out an automatic message to any posting on any site it searches for the keywords one sets as the criteria. If true, this would make my list of finalists for the ultimate recruiter's nightmare and the job changer's time-waster of the year award.

I recall when the Internet first showed up on most of our radar screens, many of the industry pundits were forecasting the early demise of the whole executive search industry, and what we could expect before too long was all job openings would be filled as we slept. Okay, a bit of an overstatement to make a point, but that is what it was starting to sound like. Here we are a couple of decades or so later, and for sure the death of the industry was, as Mark Twain said, "greatly exaggerated."

Admittedly, at ExecuNet be it career issues or business issues, we are focused on only one segment of the market (i.e. C-level executives and their direct reports) but by observing and interacting with that segment (as well as the executive search community) on a daily basis, we continue to see more of an emphasis on human judgment and less on robotic matching, and for all its impact on the speed of research and communications, the search community keeps telling us that the time to fill the assignments really hasn't changed all that much, the Internet notwithstanding.

Indeed, in our 19 year old annual survey (Executive Job Market Intelligence Report) we have always asked search consultants about the time it takes to fill positions. With the exception of the height of the '08/'09 recession, when they say it took on average a month longer, the answer has always been between 3 to 4 months.

As I think about this issue, and keep reading about the latest and greatest technological enablers that often literally "pop up" it just keeps reminding me of three things:

1. There is no substitute for quality, and

2. There is no substitute for making qualitative judgments, and

3. As a consumer, no matter what the economic conditions, I am always willing to pay a premium for quality, and so, by the way when it comes to talent, are companies - in any market.

Negative Feedback Loops

For sure, like the one Fortune ran for their cover story in the May 16th issue way back in 2005 (50 and Fired) are attention grabbers designed to sell the magazine, but I wonder if those who read that piece or others like it these days come away feeling anything like I did.

What a downer! After reading it back then and checking out the look on the faces of some of the folks they featured, one would think that the only option if you were unemployed and over 50 is to adjourn to your garage, shut all the doors, fire up the car, and drift away listening to Stairway to Heaven!

Why bring all this up again now?  Because stuff like this tends to surface again and again depending on what the economy is doing at any given point in time.  The tougher the times the more the media seems to invest their time and resources into trying to make us all feel worse.  No wonder they call it a "negative feedback loop."

This isn't to say that there isn't rampant age discrimination in this country. Of course there is, just like there is rampant discrimination of about any flavor you want. It has all been around for far too long to be sure, but around none the less. The way that article came across one would think that there is simply nothing to be done and you might as well cash in your chips and head for HR department at Wal-Mart or Home Depot unless you are really into cultural stuff and want to be a guide at a local historic site.

Is age an issue? For sure! Is making a change easy? Absolutely not, but it is a long way from having to swallow a gun which is the impression one gets from articles like these.  What a disservice to the tens of thousands of people impacted by the recession, and the further up the organizational hierarchy one goes, the more the age factor comes into play.

As tough s it is, however, making a job change is really a process with which most of us (age notwithstanding) are all too familiar.  It is a sales process and for most people I know, in order to be successful in sales, you need to really believe in your product, understand how its features and benefits will help the buyer and even more importantly, understand the objections the buyer might have and provide the information and answers that help the buyer to see that their objection is really not the problem they might have thought.

This may be an over simplified way of stating it, but when you peel away the anxiety and fear of rejection that is inherent in any sales process, and which is even more pronounced when the product is "you," the fact remains that this is really what it's about.

Maybe I am overly sensitive because I'm 72 and still feel I am still a long way from having to be kick started in the morning. It also might be because the average age of ExecuNet members is 52, so we talk to 50 somethings all the time.

But most of all, I think it's because we hear from and talk to members every day who are telling us about how they moved on to their next gig, and we get pretty excited each and every time.

The most recent came just the other day when I got an email from a member (age: 60) who was writing to tell me that he was about to start his new job as the CFO for a pharma company in the Northeast or the member (age 58) who had accepted the CEO position at a consumer products company in California.

Bottom line, I think and hope those who are working as hard as they know how to get on with their lives and careers are way too busy to take the time to read something as de-motivating as the one that appeared in Fortune back then and continue to show up in other magazines, blogs, and 2 minute "reports" on the tube these days.

When one reflects on the challenges facing the country, especially in terms of the economic competition and the numerical advantages faced by the U.S. versus the more rapidly developing economies, you would think that as a nation we would want to take advantage of every ounce of experience we can lay our hands on.

But then this is the country where our elected officials seem to think they are helping people deal with all this by spending their waking hours doing nothing except wringing their hands and calling each other names.

Defining What Effective Means

Gerry Crispin and Mark Mehler are well known in the staffing world, and with good reason. Their consultancy called CareerXRoads has been adding value to the world of talent acquisition for quite a while now. 

One of the things they do is to publish a (free) quarterly newsletter they call CareerXRoads Update. In the most recent edition, there was a piece called: Measuring the Right Thing is Crucial to Social Media in the Future*.  It is well worth the read for both recruiter and candidate alike.

Worth it for the recruiter because it helps to put some important factors into perspective such as the difference between what really constitutes a "source of hire" and the process by which hiring decisions are made.

After all, if one looks at the track record of hiring decisions that turn out to be really good ones, it becomes pretty clear pretty fast that the source from which a contact is first made isn't nearly as important as the quality of the process that leads to the decision to hire since it is common knowledge that a very high percentage of hiring decisions that everyone hoped were home runs end up going South.

Point being that at the end of the day, the corporate recruiters add up the "source of hire" stats and then pat themselves on the back because of all the money they saved on ads or search fees or whatever because they sourced "X"% of their candidates from Facebook, Twitter, employee referral or some other free source.

If you read the piece, you will quickly understand the foregoing assertion that the original point of contact is not nearly as important as the process in terms of trying to measure "effectiveness" fo the hire.

Worth it for the candidate because what is really (or should be) critical to them is not how they "found" the opportunity but rather did they do their homework before saying yes in order to do all they could to make sure that they were making the right decision. After all, if it turns out that what everyone hoped was going to be a good 'marriage' ends up in a divorce, it is the candidate's life that is the one most damaged, not the company's.

So, given that ExecuNet is not in the recruiting business, why would I take up space on this topic?

Answer: Because like any business, we are frequently asked by prospective members "how effective are you" or "what is your "success" rate? A very fair question if you happen to be in a job search and your definition of”success" or "effectiveness" is defined as "a job offer"

Now, don't get me wrong, we post jobs on ExecuNet (have for all 23 years that we have been around) and I lost count long ago as to the number of members who have ended up with acepting offers as a result. And if I were to extend the definition to "interviews" (F2F or phone) I couldn't even begin to count, but that's not the point.

The point that so many forget is the percentage of job changers who actually make a change as the result of responding to a job posting is quite small especially when compared to those made as the result of networking.

And at the senior executive level, those who get jobs as the result of ads (i.e. postings) even less.  While the stats I have seen over the years in terms of jobs obtained as the result of postings runs around 10-15% give or take, when I talk to our members who have 'landed' 70% tell us that the "source" was networking, and that's just those that I hear from, my guess is that the percentage is actually higher.

So where I am going with all this is simply to say to the corporate staffing world that Gerry and Mark's update makes a lot of sense.

To the executive job seeker my point is that in measuring the effectiveness of a resource you are utilizing in a job search, look at and determine the "value" of what you feel the resource brings to your effort so that when the opportunity surfaces, by whatever channel, are you better prepared to take full advantage of the opportunity than you otherwise might have been because of the investment of time and/or money that you have made in that resource.

Said differently, when the "what" (i.e. the interview) comes along, how much did the resource help you with the "how" so that you were able to sell yourself as the aspirin for their headache and actually get an offer? 

If you don't know what the "how's" are and more importantly how to use them, knowing where to see thousands of "what's" is more often than not nothing more than an exercise in frustration.


*  Re-published with permission of Gerry Crispin and Mark Mehler of CareerXroads, your staffing strategy connection. To reach Gerry or Mark, email mmc@careerxroads.com or visit their web site at http://www.careerxroads.com

Start with Why

It used to be tough enough to pick a few columnists to follow, but when blogging grew into a hydra it became impossible to pick "just a few." 

Indeed, even if you wrote off the millions who when you saw what they were doing you wished for a universal block & report spam button, there was still so much "good" stuff that one could not begin with any organized approach, and even if there were a "system" I am too undisciplined to have followed it.

I have to say that despite all the issues we face in the country on more levels than I can count, I am encouraged by what seems like a never-ending stream of creative, thoughtful, and often very insightful writing that I come across either by chance or because someone sends me a link because they think I would be interested, which, thruth be known, has turned out to be Dave's "search engine" of blogs that interest me.

So, such was the case when I discovered Matt Youngquist's blog which he calls Career Horizons The Blog.  Given that I am a recovering HR person of some 40+ years and the fact that ExecuNet is deeply committed to the career and business challenges of the senior level executive, that I would want to check out a blog with Career Horizons as its moniker is no surprise.  If you haven't had a chance to check it out, I would.  You can tell by the way Matt writes that he is a "giver" not a "taker" which by definition makes me a fan.

Anyway, last week he ran a piece he called Leadership, Wherefore Art Thou? and among other links he included to help him make his point was one that took the reader to the TED site and an 18 minute talk given in 2009 by Simon Sinek called How Great Leaders Inspire Action.  His talk was the result of a book he wrote around his theory called Start With Why.  My guess is that many readers here have heard of it and/or read it.  If not, put it on your summer reading list, or if you want the cliff notes, listen to the TED talk.

I think that most of us who find ourselves in leadership roles either by happenstance or design struggle with the challenges, and maybe this is the reason why Senek's approach resonated so profoundly and reminded me of exactly why it is that people so often have said to me "boy Dave it is really clear that you are passionate about what you do!"  And usually when they say that, I can't figure out what they have seen or heard that makes them feel that way.  When I listened  to Sinek's talk, I realized again where all that comes from.  What they sense and feel is (for good or ill) so much a part of who I am, that I don't even think about it which is why I am surprised when they say it. 

It doesn't come from what we as a company do or how we do it, although for sure both make me very excited and proud.  But that is hardly unique.  I am sure that any business leader would feel the same way.  So where does the inspiration/passion come from?

If you have listened to Sinek's talk you already know, if you haven't better you should listen rather than my trying to put it into words here.  He is far more eloquent.

It is indeed all about the why.

If I Had A Nickel

Everyone knows the "If I only had a nickel..."  phrase, and I know we all have dozens if not hundreds of situations where we have thought of those famouns words as we sat frustrated over one thing or another.

The most recent instance for me actually wasn't one of frustration but rather was much more positive, although it didn't necessarily start out that way.  So why did the "If I only had a nickel..." phrase run through my mind? 

Essentially, it did because ever since I moved from an "us" to a "them" in the management world, I have been fascinated by the books that seem to be published every other week by professors, consultants, and current or former CEOs - all of which promise to answer my every prayer in terms of managing, leadership, and overall organizationall effectiveness.  So, it was pretty natural to think, "Here's another one" when I picked up Workarounds That Work by Russell Bishop.

All that turned positive, however, after I had been fortunate enough to have him join me on a weekly call that I do with ExecuNet members; we it call Six Figure Hotline, and members can raise questions on any subject they want, be it career related or business related. 

At the time of the call, I only knew of Russell by reputation as an editor and columnist for Huffington Post and a consultant with a long history of success. I was anxious to have him on the call, however, because logic suggested that his experieince and success was likely built the same way it is for most of us - by dealing with one person at a time, and if his approach worked for organizaitons, it probably would work for those who make up the organizaiton.

I am not reviewing it here - you can go to Amazon for that if you like. I bring it up on this blog only to say that while I cannot begin to bring Russell's experience as a consultant or his skills as a communicator to this space, I can and do think any executive who feels the need for some insights into trying to figure out the workaround situations that face us almost daily, would do well to check out this book.

And there is another reason as well, and which is, of course, the real reason as to why I am so thumbs up on this book: because much of what the book suggests makes me feel my own theory about organizational issues has been vindicated by a source that has real credentials. Now I can say: "If you don't believe me, then see what Russell Bishop has to say and then tell me I'm nuts."

Work Life Balance: The Oxymoron of the 21st Century?

A number of people, both on our staff and off, who have stopped by my office over the years have often remarked about the fact that I seem to have an awful lot of pictures for such a small office. Indeed, they say I have a lot of them even for a big office! I guess I never noticed or thought that it seemed like picture overkill, although now that I look around I guess I see what they mean. I just counted them and there are 25. That's practically enough for a one man show for Pete's sake.

I guess the behavior gurus would say that all the pictures (wife, kids, vacation spots, grandchilden, etc. are supposed to give off vibes as to my "warm and fuzzy" MBTS profile. What they would say about the one with me dressed up in a court jester costume I have no idea. (We dress up at the office on Halloween, but that's another story) I guess they would just think to themselves "I hope he has outpatient psychiatric coverage" and move on.

In any case, when I look at these pictures now, as much as anything else, they serve to remind me that I undoubtedly spend and have spent, far too much of my life in my office focused on the care and feeding of "my job" than physically being with and caring enough about the people and places those pictures represent.

They remind me too of a profile of ExecuNet that was in the NY Times some years ago. One of the labels they pinned on me in that article was "workaholic". Not exactly my proudest moment.

As the old saying goes, you have never seen a tombstone that says "I wish I had spent more time at the office." However, I am of The Organization Man generation but on reflection, even that feels more like an excuse than a chronological factoid. I’ve learned that work and time with family are not mutually exclusive, but the tipping point is difficult to find, and it is different for everyone. 

What many find encouraging is that over the years, our annual Executive Job Market Intelligence Report survey has revealed that more senior level executives are moving toward simplifying their lives. While certainly 9/11 had much to do with this trend starting, it has not gone away either.

While salary remains the biggest motivator, many respondents also report that relocation, personal growth potential, improved work/life balance, and corporate culture were key factors in job acceptance.

It is going to be interesting indeed to see how these trends develop, particularly as technology continues to make it easier for us to work outside our physical office space.

If this combination really flies, there are a lot of us type A's who will probably think they had found the universal solvent. Or will they?

Are you a teleworker, and if so, what are you finding from the experience that you like and/or don't like?

Making Your Own Luck

As you might guess having been part of ExecuNet for 23 years during which time there have been at least three recessions and given the depth of the most recent one, we could probably say four and not get too much of an argument, I have talked with thousands of executives about more career related issues than I can remember.

Given the economic turmoil of recent times, it isn't surprising that many of the conversations have revolved around the frustrations associated with making a job change, and especially trying to make that change when the unemployment rate is getting better but is still where none of us likes to see it, and the recovery isn't going fast enough. 

Then, of course, many add to that minor administrative details such as having kids in college, a mortgage to pay, and being on the other side of 45 and getting tired of hearing that they are "over qualified" if and when they hear anything at all which isn't often and which just adds to the frustration.

Since most of our members come to us by referral, it is also not unusual that by the time they "find" ExecuNet they have been travelling around the career changing universe long enough to be almost deaf from all the noise.

With that as the backdrop, when we talk to prospective members one of the first things we often hear is that they say they have tried about every job board known to man, and to use their words "haven't had any luck" to which I will then often ask: "What do you mean by luck?"  The answers vary, but can be pretty well summarized by the fact that they have sent out hundreds if not thousands of resumes and have gotten very few if any phone calls and/or interviews much less even acknowledgment that they responded in the first place.

It is at that point that I often will ask them if they have ever heard this definition of luck?

Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunituy.

Most say they have, as have I. I even tried to find out where it came from at one point and at least for now the consensus seems to attribute it to the Roman philosopher Seneca, and am happy to give him the credit.  Indeed, if this was one of his "keepers" then we owe him a real debt of thanks because it puts something very important into perspective, at least in terms of the frustration I am talking about here.

So what's the point?  Just this:

When we're trying to help many of the executives we talk with to understand the why of "no luck" it usually comes down to the person admitting that their "preparation" to date was pretty much focused on responding to online postings, even though they were generally aware that most job changes don't come about via job postings in general and is even more the case at senior levels. 

Indeed, in our 19th Executive Job Market  Intelligence Report which was just released, many are surprised to learn that 92% of the openings at $200,000 and up are not posted at all!

All of which is to try and help the person understand that if they really want to have "luck" come their way in this process they have to invest the time, research, and energy to prepare themselves to take advantage an opportunity when it surfaces.  And this is the real reason why when I explain that we are a private career and business network and not a job board per se but rather a community where we invest the time and effort to provide the member not just with the "whats" of  "preparation" but as or more importantly with the ways and means to implement the "hows" things begin to make more sense.   

Clicking and praying is easy, but not particularly productive for most.

Quiet and determined preparation may sound harder, but when you are part of a professional environment with the committment to showing you "how" it beats noise every time.

Where's Our Boy Donny Q. When We Need Him?

I need some help! Probably not the best way to start this post as it begs the question of "so tell me something I don't know."

Anyone who knows me would probably say this isn't a question of Dave needing help, we have known him long enough to know that he is well beyond that at this stage!

As true as I know that is, at least at this point, that’s not the kind of help I had in mind.

My need comes from something that has been bothering me for a long time, indeed it was something I had thought about even well before ExecuNet's founding some 23 years ago, but for now, I'll just stick to recent history.

If you follow ExecuNet at all, then you might be aware that around this time every year for the past 19 we have published the results of a survey we do called The Executive Job Market Intelligence Report (EJMIR). 

This year's report is, as they say, coming off the presses as we speak, and if there is any "perk" that comes with being the founder of something it is that you get a "sneak peek" at stuff before it goes public.

So I had my "sneak peek" and there is some really interesting stuff as there always is, and given that we are coming out of a very tough couple of years, the data for 2011 will be gone over with a fine tooth comb for sure, so stay tuned.

I am under penalty of being cut off from my latte lite for a month if I reveal anything before our members get their copies next week, but when I read the report, I felt I could raise this issue since it is something that has been part of EJMIR every year and has bugged me for so long.

So, here's the deal: One of the questions that the survey has posed every year to both the recruiting as well as the HR communities is for them to rank what they feel are the most sought-after executive characteristics.

Each year three things have always topped the list: industry specific experience; functional expertise, and leadership skills, and while there were a number of other things on the list, these three were always way ahead of everything else.

So, when you have 19 straight years of the same result it is kind of hard to argue with the notion that obviously companies think these are pretty important, and if the employers thought these important, then it’s no surprise that the recruiters followed suit. It all seemed to make reasonable sense.

If I was going to hire someone for sure I would want them to be competent in their functional area, understand the industry segment and to have "leadership skills."

But here's what bothers me and where I need someone, as Rachel Maddow says, to "talk me down."

Functional expertise I get, and leadership skills are a whole other ballgame.

My hang up is on industry specific experience. If it is so damn important then why do we keep trying to back fill openings that become vacant because the last incumbent was carried out on his shield with another person who "must have" industry specific experience?

Point being, if this characteristic was so critical to success, then one would think that we should not experience the turnover that we do.

All of which leads me to the feeling that while the survey data show the three characteristics I have mentioned here as being so closely aligned that there is no statistical difference between them - in other words they are essentially equally important in the eyes of the more than 3,100+ who responded - that the real "make or break" characteristic is leadership skills or as many respondents put it this year "...the ability to build and lead high performance teams."

So my convoluted logic says I really don't think that functional expertise or industry specific experience are the "show stoppers" - sure they play a role, but they don't hold the proverbial candle to leadership skills, and I just don't understand how the three can be seen as equally important.

So, if the real deal is around leadership skills, then through the wonders of modern technology we’ve got it made. All we have to do is ID "leadership skills" and we’re golden on the hiring front, right?

With that in mind and as a public service to my fellow travellers on the leadership quest, you’ll be relieved to know the answer lies somewhere in the 37,500,000 hits I got on Bing when I asked for "leadership skills" or to make it less time intensive since we all have other things to do as well, the same ask on Google narrowed things down to only 17,200,000.

Now that we have that "solved" we can move on to the next problem - once we have found the leaders, how do we keep 'em because as this year's EJMIR will show, if this an issue that you think has gone away, there’s a bridge in Brooklyn that's on sale and that you are going to have a hard time passing up!

The Why of Work

For the past several years, we have worked with any number of thought leaders and practioners who are experts in a wide variety of fields and subjects.  With ExecuNet being both a career and business network the opportunity to learn from these folks has and continues to be a terrific experience and a major perk.

A couple of weeks ago, I got a chance to experience this once again when I hosted a program for our members that featured Dave and Wendy Ulrich, authors of  the national best-seller The Why of Work. 

When the program had ended and Dave, Wendy and I were chatting afterwards, one of the things I told them was how incrediably timely I thought the timing of this book was because as we continue to come out of the recession, executives, be they currently in transition or not, were going to be doing some super serious thinking about not just what they put "into" work, but more importantly to both themselves and their employers what they are getting "out of work." 

It is a question that is critical not only for companies who are going to be faced with retaining key players but equally critical for those who are faced with job offers and trying to decide if this is the move they really want to make.

In trying to help the listeners think about all this, the Ulrich's built their presentation around the following list of quesrtions: 

1. Identify: What am I known for?
2. Purpose and Direction: Where am I going?
3. Relationships and Teamwork: Whom do I travel with?
4. Positive Work Environment: How do I build a positive work environment?
5. Engagement/ Challenge: What challenges interest me?
6. Resilience and Learning: How do I learn from setbacks?
7. Civility and Delight: What delights me?

I still can't believe how much they packed into the 60 minutes of this program, but I was particularly taken with their remarks around #6 on their list (Resilience and Learning). 

I am not exactly sure why this particular section stuck in my mind expcet maybe as I thought about where we are in terms of the recovery and more importantly where we have been.  Talk about "setbacks" both collectively and individually! 

It is so easy to get discouraged, especially when there isn't a lot of postive stuff coming your way, and this is true for the company trying to sustain itself through tough times, or an indiviudal trying to fight their way back in a job market that is much more about rejection than acceptance.

If you are a member of ExecuNet and didn't get a chance to listen in to this program, it is, as are all our programs, available to you on demand, but member or not, this is a book you will want to have going forward as I think you'll find its content a roadmap for the role you're in or one that you are considering taking on.

Oh, and if at any point you feel like you have been knocked down more often than is "fair", the Ulrich's reminded us all of some of the stuff that a certain A. Lincolon had to deal with:

His parents were forced out of their home. He had to work to support them.

1. His mother died.
2. He failed in business.
3. He ran for state legislature and was defeated.
4. He lost his job. He wanted to go to law school but couldn't get in.
5. He borrowed money from a friend to begin a business and lost it all by the end of the year. 
6. He spent the next 17 years paying off his debt. 
7. He ran for state legislature again and won. 
8. He was engaged to be married when his sweetheart died and his heart was broken.
9. He had a total nervous breakdown and was in bed for six months.
10. He sought to become speaker of the state legislature and was defeated.
11. He sought to become elector and was defeated.
12. He ran for Congress and was defeated.
13. He ran for Congress again and won. He went to Washington and did well.
14. He ran for re-election to Congress and was defeated.
15. He sought the job of land officer in his home state and was rejected.
16. He ran for Senate of the United States and was defeated.
17. He sought the Vice Presidential nomination at his party's national convention and got less than 100 votes.
18. He ran for the U.S. Senate again and was defeated.
19. He ran for, and was elected, President of the United States

I don't know about you, but I can't tell you how glad I am that he kept on 'truckin.

It's Not So Much The What As It Is The How

217,000,000 was the approximate number of "hits" that I got when I typed in "online profiles." When I "refined" the search to "online user profiles" it went up to about 461,000,000. So much for narrowing things down.

The whole thing kind of made we wonder if "profiles" would be in the running for one of the most used words these days. If not in the world, then certainly in the U.S.

I don't know about you, but to me it feels like every time you turn on anything electronic, someone wants your profile and given the hype around segmented and "personal" marketing efforts, it's little wonder.  It would not surprise me that as the technology continues to advance, pretty soon they'll want DNA samples!

Given the degree to which ExecuNet is part of the business and career networking space, we are certainly interested in profiles as well and talk about this with our members frequently as the member email below demonstrates: :

Dave,

How do you "truly distinguish" yourself from the thousands of other executives competing for the same VP or C level position? All of which have strong LinkedIn and ExecuNet profiles\networks.

When all is said and done, doesn't it come down to a personal recommendation from a contact\friend\colleague who's in a position to stick their neck out for you?

As I thought about his question I also thought I was hearing that there was a fair amount of frustration built into it, meaning that while he recognized that "profile" was the buzz word of the week, he was really wondering why really put the effort into it if as he said "...when all is said and done" it almost always comes down to a personal referral.

Well, for sure that's true, at least in my experience both on a personal level as well as the data we have gathered in survey after survey. Upwards of 70% of the time, the change comes about as the result of networking aka referrals.

In trying to formulate a response that I hoped would make some sense and be helpful, what I tried to do was separate things into two separate but very much related issues.

What follows was my response:

It isn’t so much the “what” you can do that makes you stand out as much as “how” you make people aware of what you do and “how” it is going to help them solve problems that they need fixed. Most of which comes down to research that is focused on organizations you have targeted because you have a genuine interest in what they make and/or the services they provide.

Your research (much of which can and will be helped by expanding your personal and professional network) will help you to be really well informed as to what the key business issues are that they face. Once known, you can then market the “what” that you will bring to them as you network your way into decision makers in the company.

When it comes to the "what", a profile is certainly one example of a what. Other "whats" can be things like: a resume, a blog you’ve written, an online portfolio, your active participation in events and organizations, etc. They are simply a framework.

The "how" is the style and tone (visual and written) that helps someone to get a more complete picture of you as not just someone with technical expertise, but as a person as well.

To answer the obvious question of why this is so important, it's because when someone is hired and something goes south, 9 times out of 10 (maybe more) it isn't because the technical skills weren't there, it was because the "chemistry" wasn't what both parties thought it was going in, and "chemistry" is about the person! (As if we didn't know!)

Another way to think about this is to think back at how you have made changes in the past. Organizations hired you because you “stood out” from other candidates. Whatever those traits/skill sets that attracted them to you are still there. You need to find vehicles that will put those on display.

Your challenge in today's world is to utilize the "framework" alternatives available to you to so others can see who's really there, and when it comes to profiles, you can do that by going beyond the name, rank and serial number approach of here's where I worked, for how long and for what I was "responsible."

What they want to know is "how" you made things happen!

If someone had asked this question of you, how would you have explained it to them?

Well Connected

Given that most of us have gone through our business and personal lives either knowing intuitively or having learned through experience just how important networking is to both our personal and/or career success, it should come as no surprise that when I see a book that talks to that subject that immediately want to check it out.

That's what I did when Gordon Curtis sent me a copy of his new book titled Well Connected, An Unconventional Approach to Building Genuine, Effective Business Relationships, and I'm glad I did.

Over the years, as anyone who knows me or ExecuNet is well aware we have tried to figure out 1001 ways to help people understand that when it comes to either your professional life or your personal life, by far and away the most powerful tool you have is your ability to build a network that you can call upon for any number of reasons.

There are times when I think that people have heard us talk or write about this that they just roll their eyes in a way that clearly says "Dave, don't tell me again, I have heard this all before."  I don't blame them, when I hear the same thing from the same source a lot, I certainly can and do tune out.

On the other hand, when I hear (or in this case read) how a different person comes at the same topic it often will resonate in a different and stimulating way, and this was another reason why I wanted to see how Gordon approached a topic that a lot of folks think they understand but not too many really know how it should be applied, especially when it comes to managing a career change.

In a sense, I think Gordon really has captured the essence of all this by choosing a title like Well Connected, because most of us can readily relate to and understand that there is a world of difference between being "connected" and being "well connected."

Whether it's your business or your career, success comes from the "well."  Indeed, that becomes even more important if the career piece is about making a job change. 

Our members know well the phrase "to be remembered and be referred."  We use it all the time to underscore the fact that the biggest percentage of job changes happen as the result of networking, and the name of the game when it comes to your network is to be remembered and referred.  The same, of course, is true in business as well, especially if you are in a service business as millions of us are.

My point, however, is that I might "know you" and be happy to refer you to my dry cleaners, gas station, or plumber, but when it comes to things where I am really putting my reputation on the line, I need to "know you well."

Wether you are interested from a business perspective or a careers perspective, Gordon's book, I believe, will do a lot to help with the operative word in the title: Effective.

It's About Giving, Not About Getting

Unless you have been in a time capsule, when it comes to managing a successful job search, everyone knows (or at least has heard - maybe more times than they wanted to) that the most effective strategy is networking.  That doesn't mean you don't do anything else, it just means where the biggest ROI is in terms of where you invest your time and energy.

Saying the word ‘networking’, reminds me of the conversations I used have in a former life around the subject of performance appraisals. We all agreed that it was needed, but nobody liked them. On the other hand, nobody has come up with something better either.

Those of you who follow this blog have seen this stat before but for those who haven't, I can tell you that over the years ExecuNet has been around (i.e. 23) of the members we have talked to who have made a change, 70% told us networking was the key for them.

But I also know people sometimes think that since we are always trying to drive home this message that somehow we have a plug and play answer on making it work for them, and preferably making it work like yesterday!

Would that we did and would that we could, but the truth is that when it comes to networking, it is a classic case of "leading the horse to water...."

What we do try to do, however, is not just talking about it, but putting all sorts of resources together to not only show people how, but also to provide them (both online and off) with the ways and means to implement their personal plan effectively. 

Said differently, what we try to do is not only tell people about the tool but give them the tools and show them how to use them.

One of the key components of the "how" is to try to get people to buy into the idea that if they really want networking to work for them that they need both a mindset and genuine belief that to be effective they need to be focused on giving, not getting. As Karen Armon who hosts our meetings in the Denver area likes to say: “Give first and results will follow.”

To that point, I came across a video the other day from a site called Simple Truths. It runs just over three and a half minutes. Title: The Power of Kindness.

Check it out. If you are in a job search, maybe the way this notion is expressed in the video will have a different impact than hearing it from me or others.  And, even if you are not in a job search, given some of the "noise" we are subjected to from inside and outside of Washington, it might be worth a look as well.

The Scam Artist All-Star List

As we all know, there are top 25, 50 or 100 lists for almost everything such as the top 50 NFL players of the decade or the 25 Best Costumes for Lady Gaga, Most Important Inventions of All Time, Best Political Scandals of the Decade, etc.

As we all also know, it seems that whenever something awful happens, be it large or small, man-made or natural, there are always some folks lying in wait to take advantage of people when they are down and at their most vulnerable.

We read about it every day: con artists scamming seniors, sub-prime lenders, quacks selling phony cancer cures, or those who think of ways to take advantage of people whose lives have been shattered by Katrina or, of course, the Bernie Madoffs of the world be they on Wall Street or, as we hear about almost daily, another elected official who has betrayed the trust given to them.

The list is dreadful, long and always makes you wonder how or why it is that one person would do something like that to someone else. Even more depressing is the fact that lots of these people are actually parents!

At any rate, what got me going on this subject was a question that one of our members asked on a teleconference I host every week in which members can ask anything they want to on any subject be it about ExecuNet, executive job search, executive search, headhunters or whatever.

In this case, the question was: “Are professional career marketing services effective and worth the cost to assist in landing an executive-level position?”

Every time I am asked about this topic I have to take a deep breath before responding and compose myself so that I don’t sound quite as angry as I feel.

Indeed, I posted some thoughts on this subject a few years ago in a post I called: There’s a Reason They Call it Caveat Emptor and given that title it is pretty obvious what my feelings are about how some of these executive marketing firms operate.

Talk about taking advantage of people when they are most vulnerable! As they say, “I could tell you stories…”

Technically we may be out of the recession but when you are still trying to find a job, it sure doesn’t feel like it, and given the current economic environment, many of these outfits have re-surfaced as hundreds of thousands of people try to fight their way back from the recession.

In any event, in trying to pass along a few tips to the caller in terms of “red flags” when it comes to services that claim they can work magic for you, it occurred to me that while some of it was still fresh in my mind, maybe posting a few things to keep in mind here, might be of help to others who weren’t members with us but who certainly are as vulnerable as anyone else.

So, here are a few things to keep in mind if before you sign a check:

Beware of firms that “guarantee” placement, promise an astoundingly high success rate or a job in certain period of time. Of course, they won’t really put it in these specific terms, but it will be implied and you are going to think that is what you heard.

Real world: There is no one better at selling you than you, and therefore no one who can get you a job but you.

Be careful if asked for big bucks up front. Outplacement services and executive recruiters are normally paid by companies and not individuals so these scam career firms sometimes will often have names that suggest they are in the same arena and might explain their services as “retail outplacement” or “reverse recruiters” to try to legitimize themselves in the prospect’s eyes when, in fact, they have no intention of providing the sort of help that the legitimate career services firms and practitioners do. The fact that the career services industry is unregulated, makes it very easy for the unethical firms to pass themselves off as legitimate.

Go to the company's website. Is there easy-to-find contact information with names, addresses and phone numbers? Are there pictures and bios for the management team? Research them online too.

Conduct thorough due diligence. These firms are masterful at initially creating positive search engine results but once a steady stream of complaints build online and/or with the Better Business Bureau or sites like RipoffReport, they go out of business and change names. They are all-stars at walking the legal line to the edge.

Worse, they know that most of their "marks" are in transition and therefore don't have the money to take real legal action and/or are too embarrassed at falling for the scam and just want to move on. Point being, they know their risk is very slight at best.

Watch out for the bait and switch. These low life outfits have lots of ways to get leads such as: posting bogus positions on job boards, watch the résumés stream in, and then they’ll make contact with some sort of pitch to get you into their offices: e.g. “This job has been filled but your background makes you perfect for…” They also scan résumés on public job boards and reach out to those whose backgrounds look like they were in jobs that paid well enough to get someone to write fat five figure checks.

Find out what they’re promising. Break down and quantify the list of services they’re providing. You’ll find some you can do yourself, some are free, some are less expensive, and some aren’t worth it at all.

They are exceptionally strong sales closers. Every contact – email, phone and in-person meeting – is to draw you closer to writing a check or handing over your credit card. They will often invite you to bring your spouse or significant other to the office with you so as not to delay your financial decision or give you too much time to change your mind.

Don’t be tempted by an “easy” solution. Job search is not an easy road, and there is certainly a tendency for most of us that once we have paid for a service, we can sit back and wait for the service to be delivered.

Better yet, when we give money to someone and are expecting them to do the work, the candidate is thinking that they now don't have to worry about dealing with the inevitable rejections that comes along with the process of a job search. Outfits like these make it sound like an “easy” answer because of all their “contacts” and access to the hidden job market, etc.

Bottom line: As the old saying goes, “If it sounds too good to be true, it’s too good to be true.” Full stop.

Oxymoron of the Week: Working With Recruiters

So just for the heck of it, I googled working with recruiters and back came nearly 5.2 million hits give or take.

That was almost enough to make me think that writing about what was wrong with the Mets and Red Sox might serve a more useful purpose. But before cashing in my chips, I took out my Google user's manual and tried "working with recruiters" in quotes and felt a bit better when only 11,600 hits showed up.

Of course, even with that I knew I was only kidding myself that whatever my thoughts were on this subject it was hardly going to break new ground and more importantly probably wasn't going to change anyone's mind on the subject be they on the candidate side or the recruiter side.

Idealist that I am however, I thought what the hell, at least I can share an opinion because even with all that has been written about this subject, the sheer volume suggests that there continue to be lots of folks remaining who still go into a career change thinking that one of their prime strategies is going to one of "working with recruiters."

For sure it's a logical thought; unfortunately it just isn't reality. While it is true that recruiters whether they are internal to a company or hired by a company do, in fact, "recruit" it does not follow at all, however, that a person who would like to be hired simply decides to contact the recruiter and "work with them" in order to achieve the candidate's objective of being hired.

On the remote chance that you are not aware of this already, here's news:

Recruiters work for clients not candidates. Why? Simple: They get paid by the clients. Indeed, and to further rain on the parade, a fair amount of what they are being paid for is to screen candidates OUT, not screen them IN.

I know, maybe that sounds harsh, but most people I know who have been in the business world for more than a few years really do know this and probably have hired a recruiter to do exactly this, but somehow when all of a sudden they find themselves on the candidate side of the job changing desk their memory disk gets erased and they become incensed when they reach out to recruiters and hear nothing.

Too boot, if that outreach is made by responding to a posting somewhere (as is often the case) and silence is all they hear it just makes people even more ticked off. No surprise there either.

Unhappily and from my own personal experience along with being a part of ExecuNet for the past 22 years, it doesn't look like that experience is going to change any time soon.

So, why bring all this up yet again?

Answer: Because even though I thought everyone on the planet knows all this already, I keep getting reminded daily, if not hourly, that just because I thought that to be the case, the fact of the matter is that there are still thousands if not tens of thousands of poeple in an executive job searche who either don't know it or at least, don't want to believe it.

For sure I can understand their frustration. I've been there.

Both by phone and email (and sometimes in person) I talk with ExecuNet members who are PO'd beyond belief both at what they feel is an outrageous lack of professional courtesy not to mention the anxiety that comes from not knowing where to else turn.

Aside from trying to help them understand what's going on from the recruiter's perspective (and I emphasize "understand" as opposed to "condone") I offer up statistics in terms of the percentage of openings filled by the search world (maybe 12-15% tops) vs. networking where the numbers are more like 70%+ vs. the inordinate amount of time invested in "working with recruiters."

Of course building and effective network is a lot harder than "clicking and praying" or firing off emails and/or resumes to recruiters, stats notwithstanding.

So, if you still think "working with recruiters" is the most critical piece to the puzzle, then at least you owe it to yourself to get the best information and insights available on the subject.

If you are a member of ExecuNet then hopefully you already know that we have a special section of the site dedicated solely to this area. We call in Recruiter Connections.

If you want more info (along with additonal answers and ideas) then I know of no better resource to point you toward than checking out Nick Corcodilos and more specifically his book How To Work With Headhunters.

The book's tag line is 62 Myth-busting answers for fearless job hunters and believe me when I tell you he is not afraid to "break the myths."

Given his background as a recruiter coupled with his "tell it like it is" style, you will have no difficulty whatever in understanding his point-of-view and why he feels as he does.

All of which is to say, if you are going to invest precious time and energy in "working with recruiters" then arm yourself with information that can give you the best shot at a decent ROI but also which will help you channel some of that extra energy that comes from anger and frustration and apply it in directions that will shorten the "hunt" as well as lower your blood pressure.

Letting the World Happen to You

It is really very hard these days to take anything positive from the challenges faced by millions of Americans trying to work their way out of a recession that has "ended" but where the jobs engine is not yet operating on all eight to say the least.

And as if it were not bad enough as we read the newspapers, magazines, blogs, and/or see and hear about it all on TV 24/7 it feels like 99% of what we see or read is not just negative but offers no pragmatic or practical steps that an individual can take to deal with the situation.

It was with this in mind that when the information about Pete Weddle's latest book came across my desk that it made me smile.

I have known Pete for more than 20 years and for those who are part of the world of recruiting, retention, and career self-management his is a name that we all know and respect.

In terms of my relationship with him, one of the traits that has always stood out when I think of him (and I don't know if this comes from his West Point education, parents or simply his outlook on life) but if there is a problem, Pete always is looking for ways to solve issues, rather than wring his hands and wonder what to do next.

This attitude comes through 5x5 in his latest book called The Career Activist Republic.

The picture Pete paints can maybe best be understood if you know how he defines what a Career Activist Republic is vs. A Republic.

Here is what he says:

A Republic

A state without a monarch - a political system in which the supreme power lies in the body of its citizens.

The Career Activist Republic

An economic system without omnipotent employers - a workplace where the supreme power lies with people of talent.

When ExecuNet began in 1988, virtually every executive I talked with was looking for a job due to a corporate restructure, merger, or whatever. Over the years, one of the key lessons that thousands of us have learned is that we can either sit back and let the world happen to us (as almost certainly it will) or we can decide to do all we can to make sure that we are the ones "happening to the world" rather than the other way around.

I suspect that it is a significant part of that "learning" that accounts for the fact that a very large percentage of our membership is made up of executives who are currently working but knowing what they know from past experience, want to make sure that they can not only keep up with what is going on in the business world but also can tap into the "learnings" of their peers, confidentially if need be, along with being able to monitor the executive marketplace.

We believe that we are a Career Activist organization, and as such would urge all "activists" who are tired of letting the world happen to them to pick up a copy of Pete's book either on WEDDLE's or via Amazon.

So Many Questions - So Few Answers

While there are literally dozens of issues where job changers look for answers such as on: resumes (functional vs. chronological), interviewing (what are the best ways to deal with questions that feel like they have no good answers), networking (how do you build one, keep it, expand it?), salary negotiation (when asked about compensation, what's the right answer?), age discrimination (how do you fight it?), follow-up (what's too little or too much?), changing industries (how is it done?) And the list goes on.

Unhappily, ginning up the list is easy. Knowing what to do next, however, is definitely a different issue.

All you have to do is go to your local bookstore (remember those?) or cruise around Amazon and check out the number of books available on career management to see what I mean.

The mere fact that there are literally thousands of books and probably tens of thousands of articles is enough to provide a clue that while most of us want "answers" the fact is that in the real world you get "opinions" and in most cases that will have to do.

To be sure, this fact is a source of no little frustration for many, especially senior level executives whose DNA is almost always type "A" and whose attention spans are measured in nanoseconds.

As I talk with ExecuNet members I certainly hear the frustration and once past the rants irrespective of subject, the question I get asked a lot is what, if anything, can I do about this stuff?

My short answer is it depends on your approach to problem solving.

My longer answer (i.e. suggestion) is to ask people to put on their business problem solving hat and focus on dealing with a job search as a business challenge because in essence that's what it is.

You are the product and your job as GM is to overcome the market hurdles for the product. That said, however, no one is asking you to fight through all this alone (that's why you have staff) and in terms of their membership, we are their staff.

Looking at it in this light, as GM, what would you do? Answer: You would do an analysis of the situation including sorting out the things over which you have no control and focus on the things you can control.

In terms of looking for a job, among other things, this would mean market research, product development, sales training, a product launch plan, monitoring the results and adjusting as needed.

It also would mean setting the appropriate expectations so as to help manage the inevitable "foul balls" and inherent impatience referred to above.

Alan Lakein is often given credit for the "Failing to Plan is Planning to Fail" line. I am not sure who said it first, but whoever did they were, as the Brits say, spot on and if ever there was a situation to which this statement applies, it is job changing.

Yet, so much of the frustration that people feel is driven by the understandable pressure that comes from the product being themselves and the fact that the product's entry into the market place is self-funded.

Patience is a lot easier when it's not your money supporting the enterprise.

Understood, but my point is that if you succumb to the pressure to act before you really have a plan to manage (read: click and pray), you are going to find yourself even more frustrated when your customer is not responding because they really don't understand what you are selling, why they need it and certainly don't have the time to find out.