So the latest buzz seems to be to take data from other sources about your professional and personal life and tabulate it using some sort of algorithm and then show to the world as “where you stand among your peers” or “how you appear to the world” !

I say what???? So you think that taking data from sources like linked-In or Facebook or just scouring the web and then create your online “Picture” is something you will accept as a true picture of your abilities and your brawn…..

I say NOT ……

I mean that may work for a model of car or a computer but you are a Professional who has charted many trails to get to where you are today and there are many tales about your journey to success that no one knows anything about except you and some of your confidants and peers and close friends and family……so a real “You” is known by a few and only their input can paint a picture that is as close to you as you are….

That’s why we believe that providing a tool where your friends, peers and family members can provide honest and candid feedback is the way to go.

Now at many places you can get a “Recommendation” and post it online but what does that recommendation really say? Hmm…..”Bob is a nice hard working chap”………or…..”Andy is a great sales person with a focus on closing deals and delivering sales numbers”………or …….perhaps something like this…….”Jack went above and beyond the call of duty to help us get our system back up online and spent 3 days nonstop onsite until we were fully operational”…….

Well some of the above example do tell a good bit about what these folks are all about but other statements are just plain vanilla and non-computational……

We have created a platform where you can get a recommendation that truly highlights your abilities and your key differentiators. We provide the ability for your connections to rate you based on their real life interactions with you taking into consideration the circumstances of the interaction.

We believe that makes for a better “You” or “Me” picture ….don’t you agree?

Comments??…..post them below…. and happy trails through the jungle of life..

A new era of strong customer engagement is here with us. Today, marketers are adjusting to innovative ways of marketing, for example social-media management; different programs to enhance advertising campaigns on television, online, and in print; including added staff with Web skills to handle the outburst of digital consumer  environment. But according to experiences, that alone won’t bring real results home.

To really engage customers who drive advertising is growingly becoming irrelevant, businesses should do a lot more outside the limits of conventional marketing structures. Ultimately, consumers no longer divide the link between marketing and the item for consumption—it is the product. There’s no division between marketing from their online or in-store experience—it is the experience.

This shift obviously brings a huge challenge: if each person is responsible for marketing, who’s blamed? Also, what does this new certainty mean for the organization and charter of the department of marketing? It’s a predicament that matches the one that surfaced a while ago, the day’s of quality movement, actually before it was finally entrenched in the fabric of overall management.

Fundamentally, businesses need to be marketing vehicles, with the marketing team itself assumes the role of consumer-engagement engine, in charge for instituting priorities and fueling dialogue in the whole company as it looks to design, build, manage, and revamp advanced consumer-engagement approaches.

As that change takes center stage, the entire marketing institution won’t be the same: a greater allocation of existing marketing undertakings to other tasks will be experienced; additional councils and unofficial alliances that organize marketing tasks across the business will be realized; stronger affiliations with outside vendors, customers, and possibly even your competitors will become evident; and a huge role for data-driven consumer insights. Today’s editorial will show some real-life instances of these kinds of adjustments.

Marketing’s revolutionary is being redefined on a daily basis. Though, it’s still difficult to find definitive map illustrating how business can fruitfully take the helm in the epoch of engagement, we are optimistic to help top executives—and not just salespersons— begin to draw one.

Pervasive marketing

To engage consumers every time they interact with the company— be it on the phone; responding to an e-mail, an online review, a blog post, or physically in a store—marketing must spread through the entire organization. Businesses like Zappos and Starbucks have made strong engagement as their vital source of competitive upper hand from the start; already demonstrating some of these attributes. Such

Human Resource chiefs have inspired to be tactical advisers to industry leaders for no less than a generation. However, this hasn’t been easy for many since it’s so hard to quantify the business value of Human Resource acomplishments. For example, you’d ask your HR executive “Are we getting any ROI from training?” and “What is the best screening practice to capture the top performing recruits?” or “Which target-setting technique will most motivate performance?” Such questions have often been replied with loose answers.

Today, conversely, new tools and techniques for analyzing statistics enable HR to delineate the link between performance and “individual practices” more efficiently. It couldn’t have come at appropriate time, given that CEOs are hunting for value added service. The end result: if you haven’t of late discussed with your HR executive ideas for using data to develop a talent strategy that’s a bit closely connected to business results, it’s not too late.

Does it even make any sense at the moment? Of course it does, well, for starters – the corporate trend to embrace HR information systems and enterprise resource forecasts has made information on business performance, operations, and personnel more standardized and accessible. Besides, the growth of HR information systems has built a society of software and technology third parties that can assist business executives and HR use data to unearth connections between labor productivity and talent management. Lastly, the strengthening and outsourcing of operational HR work has driven most leaders to take a first step in quantifying and detailing HR expenditures and performance.

The Bon-Ton chain of close to 285 department stores in the US, for instance, leveraged its statistics to spot elements that made sales representatives dealing with cosmetics successful. Currently, it’s screening potential representatives by employing test of situational judgment, cognitive ability, initiative taking, including other relevant characteristics. Those who manage to score on the top half have a tendency to sell 10% more products compared to those who tend to love their work more. From 2008, the company has witnessed growth of about $1,400 in sales per rep.

More establishments are emerging, predominantly in businesses where workers are vital to value creation (especially financial sectors, retailing, and health care) and more so where inadequate technical skill governs growth (for example technology and upstream oil exploration). Although specific individual-related practices that put in value will vary by organization—industry dynamics, growth rates, talent scarcity, and corporate customs all shape the answers— most businesses witnessed that obtain additional value from investing in HR data used some variation of these undertakings.

Most companies thought increasing wages was the best way to motivate employees. Workers were given bonuses for achieving their objectives, salaries were increased to members of staff with exceptional performance, and over-achievers were granted additional stock options.

However, when the thorny global economy took a different direction a few years ago, many firms were pushed to cut down on financial incentive programs in order to stay economically viable.

So, what is the best way to motivate employees when a company has lost its previous grip to offer financial incentives or wishes to look beyond tranditional compensation and movitational sturctures? And, most importantly, how can employees motivate themselves in such a scenario.

According to McKinsey research, “workers motivation is wilting all over the world – self-esteem has dropped at nearly half of all organizations.”  Which means it’s more crucial than ever for executives to seek ways to successfully retain and motivate top performing employees. This also means workers need to contemplate on better ways improve their morale and keep themselves motivated.

Interestingly, the McKinsey survey illustrates how three non-cash motivators are “even more valuable motivators compared to most highest-rated financial incentives”:

ü Leadership attention (for example one-on-one conversations)

ü Praise from direct managers

ü An opportunity to direct projects or tasks

Employees should work one-on-one with top management and human resources to find cost effective ways develop their skills, hence remain even more valuable to the firm.

Today global economies are showing signs of recovery and we are optimistic that organizations will embark on reinstating financial rewards in the future.  Nonetheless, it’s imperative for both parties (managers and employees) to reflect on creative, non-econ

In a recent study carried out by researchers Joanna Lahey and Emily Johnson, “post-high school training and education, like from a professional training program or a college, are main factors in determining  if a woman would secure an interview.”

Unemployment today has risen up to 9% and most of all, women are having difficulty securing a gainful employment, particularly if they are making a re- entry to  the workforce subsequent to a long absence. This encouraged researchers Lahey and Johnson to carry out a résumé audit. “The point of this research was to find out which resume attributes are considered significant by potential employers of working-class women coming back to the workforce,” according to the researchers.

According to the study, Lahey and Johnson came up with roughly 8,000 different résumés which they later submitted pairs of résumés that were randomly categorized to 3,996 hiring firms across US. The firms chosen represented a range of industries such as manufacturing, sales, law firms, services and health care. Of course all included entry-level jobs that needed up to at least a year of post-high school education in addition to experience. The researchers observed at the effects of one’s age, vocational training, job-related experience, other non-work related activities and span of gaps in employment history. What they discovered was rather unexpected:

Employment-related experience included on a résumé doesn’t increase the likelihood of an applicant to secure an interview: Although these results were “varied and statistically irrelevant.” Employers showed more interested in education compared to previous employment experience.

Including activities outside of work also doesn’t necessarily increase the possibility of securing an interview: Surprisingly, this seemed to contrast across geographic regions. For instance, “in Massachusetts, volunteerism poises an important positive effect on one’s résumé, while sports is statistically irrelevant. On the contrary, in Florida, sports initiated a positive effect on the possibility of securing an interview, whereas volunteerism has no important effect,” according to the researchers.

Showing a gap in employment history between jobs doesn’t affect any odds an applicant will secure an interview: This finding in reality runs counter to what most résumé coaches advise their clients in relation to employment gaps. Contradictory to what researchers expected would happen, “showing a gap in employment history has nearly no effect on the likelihood an applicant will receive an interview ca

you recommendation your online picture me ranking online