Rahul
Mirror,
Mirror on the Wall
In
my yesterday’s note, at the bottom of this Webpage Write-up, I have added,
“Want
your current employees to rate you without registering? Send me an
email!”
Obviously,
no HR Manager would want his current employees to register on IndiaRecruiter
and lose them to competitors!
But
—
If there was a way/a method whereby his current employees can rate the
organization without registering, then quite a few HR Managers may want
to explore such a possibility.
In
such a method, we would have addressed his fear and still offered him
his organization’s
- PIP
/ rank-score
- relative
position (vis-à-vis other companies).
This/such
offer may prompt some HR Managers to come forward and ask for our proposal
before deciding.
Our
proposal (essence) would be as follows:
- On
a CD/from email, company will give us a database as follows:
|
Company
Name: |
|
|
Sr.
No. of Employee |
User
ID |
Based
on our instructions, company itself will generate User ID / Password for each
of its existing employees.
- We
will store these in our database (online) on IndiaRecruiter.
- Company
will now ask its employees to log into the “EVE calling” page of
IndiaRecruiter and login using their unique User ID / Password.
- Our
server will match these (in our online database) and honour/accept
the same (as valid), without insisting that the person be “registered,”
having submitted his resume (a special case).
Would
you like me to continue transcribing the remaining four pages (3/6 to 6/6)
next, and then assemble all six into a fully formatted Word document titled
“Mirror,
Mirror on the Wall — HR Employee Rating Proposal (11 April 2006)”?
As
soon as our server recognizes the User ID / Password, it will open up the Rating
Form, allowing the employee to fill in and submit.
Depending
upon our prior dialogue with the HR Manager, we may split/divide the Rating
Form into 3 parts, as follows:
RATING
FORM
|
Part
A |
Company
Name: __________________________ |
|
Employee
Status |
☐ Permanent ☐ Temporary |
|
Designation |
☐ Manager ☐ Supervisor ☐ Trainee |
|
Length
of Tenure |
☐ Less than 1 year ☐ 1 to 5 years ☐ 5+ years |
It
is quite possible that the company may want to analyze the feedback
received along the above-mentioned sub-populations (of employees) and even
compare different sub-populations.
(Hand-drawn
graph showing different curves for “Trainees,” “Supervisors,” and “Managers,”
each with different feedback distributions on an X–Y axis labeled “% of
Employees.”)
If
the company wants such Employee Feedback (Employee Attitude Survey) to
become an ongoing process, they could, over a period of time, even see
any shift taking place, e.g.
(Graph
showing June 2006 vs June 2007 curves for “Managers,” indicating a rightward
shift in satisfaction distribution.)
Such
shifts (towards left or towards right) would even tell them (the HR Managers):
1️⃣ Whether there is any improvement
or deterioration in the feedback from a given sub-population of
employees.
2️⃣ Whether management’s
actions to modify/alter certain policies/practices (based on initial
feedback) are leading to improvements (a shift to the right).
That
would be proof that management actions are yielding the desired results!
Would
you like me to continue with pages 5/6 and 6/6 next, and then
compile the full 6-page document into a polished Word version titled
“Mirror,
Mirror on the Wall — Employee Attitude Survey via IndiaRecruiter (11 April
2006)”?
Part B of the form will remain the
same for all cases (for past as well as current employees — and whether registered
or not registered employees).
We will not allow the HR Manager to
see any individual rating form — even though the form does not carry the
employee’s name or any other clue to his identity.
Obviously, a company wanting to use our Online
Mirror service would need to register as a Corporate Subscriber (with any
partner website).
Whereas other companies will not be
able to see one specific company’s Online Mirror graphs, we will use their overall
average score (raw score) and plug it into our DTP formulation to plot
graphs.
They have to agree to this (after all, we are giving a fabulous service, free
of cost!).
Company would have to agree that their Online
Mirror graphs
…will
also become visible/viewable by any of their current employees:
•
to whom they have issued a User ID / Password, and
•
who has actually logged in and submitted his duly filled-in Rating Form first.
We
may agree that the individual employees are able to see/view only the
overall graph (for the entire employee population) and cannot see
sub-population-wise graphs.
What
is our advantage?
- Once,
through such free/fabulous offers, we succeed in bringing millions of current
employees to IndiaRecruiter, hopefully they will see Sample
ImageBuilder and get tempted to register!
Rahul
– Saurabh – Pranav
Examine
the words used to describe this technology:
- Snapshot
- Subset
- Vast
storehouse
- Optimized
- Content
density
- Captured
& compressed info
- Sample
- Millions
of answers
- Google
/ Yahoo
All
of the above apply to a specific “search query” — as in Google/Yahoo and the
search results.
Our
Function Profile Graphs too are such a “snapshot” or photograph.
(Hand-drawn
bell curve labeled “Function = Sales,” with total population 18,293 and
sub-population 265, showing percentiles from 30–90.)
Data/info
about 18,293 executives is “squeezed/condensed” into a small graph!
Hence, the graph has a very high Content Density.
And
someday, one of our Resume Search methods will involve:
- Displaying
the graph, based on an HR Manager’s “Search Parameters.”
- Enabling
the HR Manager to place his cursor on the 70th percentile — then dragging
to 90th percentile (thereby highlighting the graph’s area in between)
& clicking.
- This
will result in a short display tabulation containing one-line
summaries of only those executives whose percentile score lies between 70
& 90 — in descending order too!
Even
before clicking, the highlighted section has told him that he can expect to see
results for 265 executives meeting his criteria.
Any area shaded or graphically indicated will show the number of executives
covered in that range.
12/04/06
No comments:
Post a Comment