#61: State of the Industry - On The Trends That Will Shape Talent Acquisition in 2025

Speaker A: Welcome to the Changing State of Talent Acquisition, where your hosts Graham Thornton and Martin Kred share their unfiltered takes on what's happening in the world of talent acquisition today. Each week brings new guests who share their stories on the tools, trends and technologies currently impacting the changing state of talent acquisition. Have feedback or want to join the show, head on over to Changestate I.O. Uh, and now onto this week's episode.

Speaker B: All right, we're back with another episode, another season of, uh, the Changing State of Talent Acquisition podcast. Super excited to be back with you, Marty. What's new?

Speaker C: Yeah, man, Happy New Year. Busy, busy, busy, busy. We got a lot going on, a lot of lot planned for the year. I'm excited about our little trend survey. I don't know if people have heard about that, but we think we can really raise the bar on, uh, trend surveys. We all see them. Uh, some of them are better than others, of course. Obviously, you guys all know if you listen to the show, my background's in market research. So we see a real opportunity to level up and hopefully do something that's, um, super impactful and not just here are the top trends, which seem to be the same year over year. So on that note, if anyone wants to take our survey, you can go, uh, to changestate IO Survey would really appreciate the help, as many responses we get will help us be able to slice and dice and give everyone really valuable insights.

Speaker B: Yeah, I don't want to name names, but, you know, I do find it, uh, amusing that some of the larger, we'll call them consulting firms. You know, we see a 2025 trend survey and it's, hey, the top five trends are, you know, um, HR tech, you know, workforce planning, you know, and then you look at 2024 and it's, hey, the top five trends are workforce planning, HR tech, skills based hiring. It's the same five. And you know, the. Quite literally that was when you and I circled up and said, okay, yeah, enough is enough. Uh, maybe we get something, you know, maybe put something together that people would actually want to participate in and learn something from. So, you know, super excited about our study. And yeah, I would love, you know, would love, love the support for anyone that, you know, hasn't. Hasn't taken the survey. Now that said, I will say, like, you know, it's certainly trends season, right? And, uh, so we always like starting the year by diving into, you know, the surveys that we do, like, you know, perspectives that we do like, you know, on the future of ta, future tenant acquisition, future of hr. And, you know, we've got a couple guests, you know, coming up early on in the year that I'm pretty excited about. And, you know, with that said, I thought it would be, you know, pretty interesting for us to start the year by talking about, you know, three articles, uh, three studies, call it what you will, three predictions to set the stage for 2025. So those are going to be Korn Ferries 2025 talent acquisition trend Study. Love that one. Steve Hunt, who I believe Steve used to work over at SAP SuccessFactors. Now, um, he's ventured out on his own. He's written a couple books, his insights on HR predictions, and then our, uh, good friend James, uh, Ellis, uh, and his always provocative take on employer branding. So super excited to unpack what's changing, what's staying the same, where we might all be headed as an industry. So we've got a lot of stuff in the hopper. A lot of stuff in the hopper.

Speaker C: Awesome. Well, let's dig in.

Speaker B: Let's kick things off with, um. How about the Kornfury report? AI Focus, for sure. I'd say one of the things that Kornfury kind of emphasizes is we'll call it progress over perfection in town acquisition and, um, really pushing companies to use or embrace calculated risks to adopting AI. I think there's five key trends that they really, um, highlighted, and we'll kind of lean right into AI. Right. And this is not going to be a shock, but growing pains in AI. And maybe it's the year or the year that reality uh, really kicks in, as they might say. So, you know, 67% of respondents think that AI usage is going to be the top trend in 2025. And so it's, you know, you do the math. Two out of three, uh, two out of three people think that AI is going to dominate, you know, TA trends in 2025, but 40% of them are worried that we're just going to lose the personal touch, you know, make that process, the recruitment process, impersonal. So, you know, I guess, hey, with that in mind, um, all right. What do you think, Marty? What are we worried about with AI?

Speaker C: Well, I don't know how snarky we want to be to start the year, but one funny thing that just came to mind, 40% of people are worried that we'll make the process impersonal in an industry where it's the norm for people to apply for jobs and just never hear back. Or hear back like, 90 days later. I don't know if impersonality is the real big problem. I think most people would be thrilled to get a response from an AI quickly rather than no response.

Speaker B: I think that's a good point. Yeah. You know, what's interesting is in the fall, you know, we'll talk about the personal piece. You know, we had our. One of our latest virtual networking sessions in our office and, you know, there's a roundtable going on on AI and recruitment. And, you know, I do think it was interesting because we had a couple of leaders on there and, you know, they are all talking about using AI for, you know, candidate, uh, sourcing and, you know, really concerned that, like, hey, like, AI isn't really good at closing out or finding or screening out the right people. You know, I almost wonder if there's a correlation there to, you know, the personal nature or, you know, how recruiters need to be involved in, you know, the candidate selection side, just in general. Right. Like, you know, where's the connection between, you know, is, you know, is impersonal really the word that we're worried about? Or, you know, the, you know, the personal recruiter lens? Maybe, you know, something that we need to be more focused on. Becca Fraser question, you know, about our Marty, but what, you know, what do you, what do you think?

Speaker C: Yeah, well, I mean, I don't know if we've already retired the funnel metaphor for recruiting, but let's use it. I mean, AI seems very important at the top of the funnel. Sure. I think these, despite my scenario earlier, I do think that the question of whether it's impersonal and that's something we should think about is real. You and I, you know, we had a blog post about this idea that you can spit out some amazing content from ChatGPT, but there's some spidey sense among intelligent people that maybe a person didn't write this. And I don't even know what that means exactly. It feels a little odd. Uh, is it bad? I'm not sure. Is it good? Maybe. Is it something we need to get used to? Maybe. We're still figuring that all out. I think the same things really apply to recruiting. And again, given what I just said, how poor we are in general at reaching people at the top of the funnel and saying, hey, thanks for your application, or hey, recruiting decided not to move on with you because of this reason. Yeah. And AI won't be perfect, but I mean, we are so far from perfect as an organization that I just think that, um, we should leverage AI as much as we can to actually provide that kind of Custom experience to people that people expect in terms of consumer products and goods all the time. Just let them know you received that. Sure. Have an AI say. We've decided not to move on with your application for these three reasons and a nice way. Is it going to get some of them wrong? Are there some great catches that AA might screen out that a recruiter never saw? Probably. But if it delivers a pool of, say, the 10% that are really great and well suited that the recruiter can then talk to, I mean, I don't see a downside there. I think that's a win win for both sides of the transaction. What do you think?

Speaker B: Yeah, no, I completely agree. And I almost think that probably, um, dovetails nicely into one of the other highlights from Korn Ferry and that's, you know, hey, like, where are we going to focus in 2025? You know, it's really on more critical skills. I think that's where the connection point is to, you know, kind of what you just described, Marty. Right. It's like, hey, if we're, you know, the critical skills are like, you know, sure, leadership is one, but like problem solving, communication skills, you know, it's that type of stuff that is going to be more, um, important as AI becomes more, you know, a larger stake in the process. Right, right. And so, you know, whether it's critical thinking skills or problem, you know, solving skills around, boy, like something just feels off for how we're screening out certain, um, candidates, you know, or how we're communicating. Like, I think that is where, you know, some of the tie in, you know, probably comes into play. Marty. You know, it is, AI is great. I still, we use this analogy too often. You know, it's a free unpaid internal, you know, so it's more important that you have, you know, people that can critically think, people that know, um, how to communicate, people that can solve problems, you know, sort of owning, um, or overseeing, you know, how AI is being used in your process. And you know, I think that's probably where those two kind of marry up together. Right. You know, people are concerned about losing the personal touch. You know, people really, um, want to use AI a lot more. There's a large focus on hiring for critical skills and I think those skills are going to be pretty key in helping companies adopt um, and implement AI in their processes.

Speaker C: Yeah, absolutely. It reminds me of this idea of prompt engineer, which I don't know if that term is still being used, but the idea is that, sure, anyone could log into a chatgpt and ask a Question. Uh, but as we have firsthand experience ourselves, you get better at asking better questions to get better outputs out of an AI over time. ChatGPT, of course, is a very general case, but in the context of recruiting, it stands to reason that you would have people that would become subject matter experts in getting AI to find the right kinds of candidates or asking the right questions that maybe humans wouldn't necessarily think of to find the person that's going to be the best fit for the organization. I think one caution on that note for the, uh, industry is just that, again, I'll be gentle. But we're, as an industry, the status quo can be, hey, we just spent a million dollars on a new ats. We kind of expect that we're just going to flip a switch and it's going to transform our recruitment function. Anyone who's implemented an ATS knows that really what you need is a paid consultant that's on, uh, staff full time for several months, if not a year to customize and configure the ATS so that it actually does what you want it to do. And using your unpaid intern analogy, if we do not expect a million dollar piece of software to be something that you can just plug and play and deliver great results, why would we expect an UNPAI to be able to do the same thing?

Speaker B: That's pretty good. Yeah, I think that's fair. Maybe people see AI as just an easy, um, lever to pull. And so we pull it a lot. Right. AI is more accessible, it's cheaper, it's easy, it's easy to use, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's easy to use effectively. Yeah, I like that a lot.

Speaker C: Yeah. And I think this ties back to where we started, the impersonal thing. Yeah, it can be impersonal if you just treat it like plug and play. If you want it to not be, uh, impersonal, you have to put the person in it, I. E. You, and spend time learning how to use the tool. Become really good at instructing the AI to do exactly what you want. And I think that's where the human side actually comes in, of course, at the end of the funnel too. But if we're actually talking about making the AI experience more personal, it needs to be directed by a person.

Speaker B: Yeah, I agree. Well, um, a couple other ones that we'll call out on kornferry. Um, people are focused on L and D. You know, again, not a surprise, but I think at this point, like, learning development is no longer optional. Um, you know, 2/3 of employees stay with companies, you know, that offer upskilling opportunities. You know, I do. We, you know, we do this a lot over at Change State, right? Um, you know, we pay to, you know, put our people through classes that are of interest to them, you know, with a caveat that, like, hey, like, we're gonna, you know, know, pay for you to learn how to, you know, build micro, uh, solutions or micro, you know, tools, um, using AI. You know, you're going to come back to the team, the company and show everyone, hey, here's what I learned and how we can apply it, right? And, you know, I almost wonder, you know, I posit that, you know, this interest in learning and development, this increased interest in upskilling, it's probably directly tied to, to people wanted to learn more about how to use AI. You know, you go see, you know, you go see your friend who's working at, you know, XYZ company and like, oh, uh, like they're letting their company pop around with using copilots to, you know, interact and, you know, rewrite their sales outreach emails. Like, oh, uh, that's pretty cool. I would like to know how to do that too. And like, you know, people are either gonna go, you know, learn how to do that on their own and, you know, and exit, or like, you got an opportunity to, you know, help your employees stay, you know, by giving them a bit more training and development opportunities internally. Now, I'd venture to guess that, boy, if we knew, you know, what type of, you know, upscale and opportunities people are drawn towards, you know, it's probably largely skewed or focused towards. All right, AI is coming. How can we better use it? Um, just as a whole.

Speaker C: Yeah, I think you're right there. I mean, obviously you're closer to learning development than I am, but the obvious point that comes to mind is, well, we all feel kind of insecure outside of our industry. Just, AI is coming. It's smarter than I am. If you spend any time on ChatGPT, you can see it, do something in 15 seconds that probably would have taken you a day, and you have a worse output. So I think that has direct implications for learning. Not to say that we don't need to learn new skills in the future, but the reality is that will be AI's domain. And the question is, how do we partner with AI, uh, in the context of learning and development, which I think is what you're saying.

Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, 100%. Well, you know, I'm not going to use this one as a throwaway I don't think, you know, I just don't want to talk about hybrid offices. Return to office. You know, my opinions on remote work versus flexible work. I mean, like, I think we're, you know, we're in a unique spot chain state where we're fully remote. Right. And, you know, I wrote an article. I don't even know where it's published at this point. But, um, you know, on return to office and hey, like, you know, for, for smaller orgs. Totally get it. Like, it is very hard to hide if, you know, you're a product marketer, uh, you're a program manager at a change state, like, you know, or a startup. Yeah. If you don't, you know, if you're not doing. Doing your job, uh, it's gonna be pretty easy for me to know. Right? Pretty easy to, like, can't really hide. But if you're at a big company, boy, like, you can. And if you never come in the world where, like, you know, you work for a company, you've never been in the office or met anyone. I know, like, that's tough. That's tough. You know, we see this a lot. You know, we've seen this with clients. You've seen this in an industry like, you know, Wells Fargo let people go because, you know, had a little plug in, would just move their mouse every, you know, 10 seconds, um, to make it look like they were working. You know, uh, we've had, you know, companies where you hire, you know, 100 remote call center employees and then you ship them their computers and, you know, two days later you see that they're in South Africa and, like, they've outsourced that job to someone else. Um, these are real scenarios. So, like, yeah, you know, I sympathize with, you know, hybrid and, you know, remote being, you know, a priority. That's what we are. And, like, I don't see any scenario where we change, you know, but on the other side, like, on some level, like, you know, if you're an employer, you know, you. You probably want to know that your employees are working and, like, you know, that's. It's tough, you know, it's tough.

Speaker C: Yeah. Well, you and I had a conversation offline about it, but maybe I'll bring it in here briefly. It's just that the hilarious part about this, to me is that an organization of any size does not know whether. The only way to tell whether their employees are actually working is to detect whether they have a, uh, mouse jiggler going on. I mean, we might have Bigger problems than hybrid work if that's the status quo. You know, I think, uh, in the same way that somehow Elon Musk fired, what, 75% of Twitter's staff, uh, on day one, and everyone thought that the platform was going to fall apart and without weighing into the dirty, mucky water that is X. Now, I'll just say the numbers seem to suggest that that did not happen, the sky did not fall, and I think it has more users than ever. So I don't know, it's just an interesting tidbit. It seems like what we should really be upset about as organizations that we have so much bloat that it's possible for someone to not do any work, um, and fool you by working from home. You know, what the implication seems to be is that it would be a better case to bring people back into the cubicles that we all hated. I mean, I didn't, but lots of people work in cubicles, uh, and we can all have unnecessary meetings and chat about around the water cooler and not get anything done, but at least we don't have a mouse jiggler going yet. So, I don't know. I think it's a very interesting topic, but we. I think the general opinion that's being expressed in the public is kind of missing the point.

Speaker B: Yeah. Well, and, you know, I also think, like, you know, at some level, like, a lot of the work that you've all, you know, done prior to change day, too, is all like, you know, you get paid for doing a job or, uh, you know, finishing a project and like, talk about like, uh, you know, a brand project. Right? Like, you know, you get paid X dollars and it takes you Y hours and like, you know, you're doing the work and like, when you're done, you're done. And like, you know, companies like that, because they know that they're paying for a project to get done and like, you're paying for services that are clearly completed with a. With an output. Right. Um, and, you know, I almost wonder, like, you know, it gets harder and harder as, like, you know, jobs. You know, the lines are blurred with what, you know, with what your responsibilities even are sometimes. Right. And I think that keep me. I don't know how many times we could use mouse jiggler, um, you know, this year, like. Yeah, I mean, I, I think that's defining what someone's job or responsibilities are, is probably part of the challenge too. Part of the problem. Right. Maybe five years ago, you and I talked about that, uh, podcast episode bullshit jobs Right. And just like, boy, we have a propensity to create work for people, just to create work, not because it matters. It's just like, hey, yep, you got a job, so we're going to find something for you to do. And like, you know, thinking back two decades, like in my first company, you know, first job, like, yeah, I'm sure that was true. Like, we got to find something for, you know, Bob to do. And like, that's not like the world that we're in right now, unfortunately. Like, we're just, you know. Well, I guess it is, like, in some spots. But like, should it be, like, if we're trying to be more efficient, you know, if there's not a job for you, like, maybe people are just going to end up being paid more for projects, for something with a finite endpoint m to it.

Speaker C: Yeah. Well, we're also worried, rightly so, I think about AI taking all the jobs and what will people do for meaning and purpose. And when you were talking just then, it made me think that maybe this transition has been going on for decades and maybe we'll see a sudden spike here with AI. But I imagine there is a profound shift that occurred in workplaces if you look 100 years ago versus starting in the 70s and 80s, like, is it imaginable that our grandparents generation would have just gotten paid six figures to go sit around in an office, uh, in a job where they could use a mouse jiggler to fool their boss? Like, maybe I'm naive, maybe it was like that, but I doubt it. You know, I think that's a relatively recent invention, if you will. I don't know. I think we're just kind of seeing acceleration of trends that have probably already been there for a while.

Speaker B: Yeah, well, I saying it yesterday, um, Emma's dad, but like, you know, I don't know, there's something cathartic about like, hey, like, it's really nice if I was selling widgets to know, hey, how much does it cost to build a widget? And like, how much are you selling it for? Like, cool, I build a widget for a buck and I sell it for two. Like, I make a dollar. And like, hey, like, that's. That's great. And like, it's a lot harder today. Like, all right, what are we selling? We're selling, you know, I'm not going to talk about our business, but like, you know, it's a lot harder today in business in general. Like, when it's not like, you know, a clear linear path to like, hey, like, yep, I got to go, you know, I got to go buy the material. I got to, like, I got a, uh, you know, investment that I'm making, like machines, blah, blah, blah. Um, yeah, anyway.

Speaker C: And do you think it. It just speaks to a future where our compensation, our labor model is broken? It probably has been breaking for a while. As I was hinting at a moment ago. In a world where we have computers that can do most of that busy work that people just did, whether it was necessary or not to justify their existence, it makes even less. It's, like, impossible to ignore when you can have a computer do that for you in ten seconds. Right? A week's worth of work in ten seconds. Um, so we're probably going to have to, whether we like it or not. And most many people may go kicking and screaming, think about new ways of compensating people. It doesn't mean there won't be jobs. But does it make sense anymore to pay someone by the hour rather than for some kind of very specific body of work that they complete? I don't know if the hourly model will be around, uh, for m. Too much longer. At least I would hope not, because I don't particularly love it myself.

Speaker B: Yeah, well, close with. I think I saw, um, probably a tweet from Reid Hoffman who said, I'm paraphrasing, obviously, but in the next decade, people are going to be using AI so much that the cost of getting work done is going to decrease so substantially that, you know, people have a lot more free time. But, like, the most important skills are going to be, you know, those that can critically think and, like, recognize, you know, or properly feed or train AI algorithms. And, you know, the world's going to look very different, you know, and I think a world of work is going to look different, you know. You know, everyone says 10 years from now, but I don't think things are going to move, um, that much quickly, but too quickly. But, um, it's going to be different world, um, just one.

Speaker C: I just want to have my cabin in the woods before. Before that happens. So that's my only request to the universe.

Speaker B: You and me both. You and me both. I think we'll move on to another. We'll call it a prediction trend forecast. Um, I really love. Well, it's the predictions coming out of Steve, um, Hunt's article, I think it was. It's, uh, on LinkedIn. We'll share it in the notes, but a guide to HR predictions, trends and forecasts. So Steve, he's written multiple books uh, actually, he might even live in a cabin. Marty, I have no idea. Never met Steve, but I know he lives somewhere a couple hours or an hour or so outside of, uh, Portland. So, you know, somewhere maybe in a

Speaker C: cabin, maybe close to beach house cabin, something like that.

Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, but multiple books in, you know, in the TA space, you know, worked at SAP SuccessFactors as the chief, you know, expert on technology and, you know, is also their global VP of, you know, HCM Research too. So, you know, like, his content quite a bit. You know, I would say definitely follow Steve, you know, and he wrote, you know, a guide that, you know, probably just a lens, you know, more on HR predictions, trends, and just, you know, some of his lessons for how you navigate, you know, what he's called the flood of annual forecasts or annual trends. And like, boy, like, we agree and like, you know, maybe some irony that, like, we're talking about him here, uh, still too, you know, and I'd say, like, you know, some of the ones that stand up, uh, stand out from him. A lot of these trends, uh, people are always repackaging, you know, old problems. Right. And so, you know, let's just talk about, you know, quiet, uh, quitting. Right? Um, okay. It's just retention of employees, right? Like, you know, whether people are quitting or, you know, doing it quietly, telling you, like, you know, at the end of the day, like, yeah, you want to recognize underperformers, poor performers, you know, you want to focus on, um, you know, retention. Right. And, you know, I think you used the phrase, you know, old wine in new bottles quite a bit.

Speaker C: I like that.

Speaker B: Yeah, I like that too. So, you know, pay attention to, you know, the repackaging of old problems, you know, in new bottles. Love, uh, that quite a bit. You know, I think the other one that, you know, price stood out though is like, you know, Mo, you know, it's just pay attention to it or what he's called a slow adoption of HR tech. And like Mochi, most HR tech predictions take years, even decades to materialize. And so, you know, one of his examples is just, you know, cloud based HR systems. But, you know, rapid adoption, you know, especially something like generative AI is just going to be rare. Now, I'll pause and let you respond, um, to that one in particular, Marty. But before I go too deep in

Speaker C: the weeds, I wasn't that familiar with Steve Hunt, but I'm liking what I'm seeing, uh, here, based on this trend report. I mean, it's kind of an appeal to common sense. Like, yes, we all. It's fun to look at trend reports, but if you're really, like, an HR executive so detached from your business, where you're like, boy, I better look on the Internet and see what I should be focused on this year, maybe that's not the best thing. So I think what Steve is saying, a lot of this is just, like, use common sense. Don't get blindsided by rebrands, essentially, of old concepts. Yes, we can talk about quiet quitting, but really, um, why are we losing people? Regardless of how we're losing them or the method in which they, uh, inform us of? This is where you should be focused. Yeah, we should try to get Steve on the podcast. Steve, if you're out there, consider an open invitation. I'd love to chat with that guy a little more.

Speaker B: We will reach out to Steve and see if we can get him to join. For sure. Yeah, I'll just kind of, you know, call out some. What. You know, so what I'll call is practical suggestions. Um, and, like, this is one that I think everyone should read. You know, it's, you know, the stuff that we do every day. You know, start with your current challenges, right? You know, diversity, Diversify your data sources. You know, this is one, you know, Marty, you and I talk about. Even with our trends survey, Ike, like, you know, disclaimer like, you should not make business decisions after reading our report. Uh, you shouldn't make business decisions after reading, uh, a Gartner report. Like, you know, you should give varied, um, you know, varied perspectives. Right. Again, we think RTA transport is gonna be great, but that doesn't mean someone should pick it up and read it and say, you know what? Applicant fraud is a growing concern. Yeah, we saw that happen once. We need to revamp our whole application process to make sure that we're, uh, you know, checking out where people are like, that applicants are actually real. Like, you know, again, like, diversify your sources, you know, and then the other piece is like, you know, I love this. You know, challenge the data, um, and ignore irrelevant trends. You know, um, there's going to be a lot of stuff that doesn't necessarily, um, add value. Right. You know, and so, you know, know what problems you're trying to solve, know what challenges you're trying to solve. Talk to more than just one vendor. Talk to more, you know, dig into more than one data source, you know, and, you know, just know that, like, you know, there's going to be a lot of trends that are out there that are just not going to be unique, um, or helpful, you know, to your organization.

Speaker C: Absolutely, absolutely. I mean, I think that I'm a market researcher, so let me just underscore that point. I mean, trends, we often see the numbers, like, 65% of people said that the AI is a top priority for next year. Okay. But what that also means is 35% of people said it's not a top priority for the next year. And I think it's easy if you're not used to looking at data or if you're just being presented a infographic style statistic, to think, boy, I'm really missing the boat here. Fair to ask the question, am I missing the boat? But also keep in mind that 3 to 4 out of 10 people are also, quote, unquote, missing the boat. And maybe you're right where you're supposed to be.

Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. Uh, completely agree. I mean, you know, I still love my favorite book, how to Lie with Statistics. And, like, I screenshot, you know, examples almost every day at this point, you know, across, uh, Twitter and where else? Right? Wherever else I'm reading. And like, hey, at the end of the day, a lot of folks are in these data reports. We're aligned with statistics. And so challenge the data. Fully agree with you on that, Steve. Challenge the data. And then let's pivot to, uh, one final one. We don't want to gloss over employer. Employer brand, near and dear to your heart and your good friend, Mr. James Ellis. I'll lead by saying, hey, in the Korn Ferry report, one of their trends is like, hey, your EVP is finally, um, VIP. So almost 50% of HR pros are prioritizing cultural values to attract and retain talent. Right. Strong EVPs are important, and they better align to the employee experience and be showcased during recruitment. So, like, you know, on one side, Korn Ferry says, oh, boy, this is something to pay attention to. Um, yeah, James Ellis had a little bit, you know, a bit more of a provocative take. I think he said, hey, my big prediction is, I think employer branding is going to become a, quote, bad word in 2025. So, you know, the question is like, hey, do. So my question to you, Marty, do we need a rebrand? Right? Do we need to change how we're thinking about employer brand? Like, tell me, uh, wax poetic on your thoughts here.

Speaker C: James Ellis is always. I would call him a provocateur, and I think that he would actually really take that as a compliment. At least I think he would. He's always got interesting takes. I always enjoy reading what James has to write. And I don't necessarily disagree with him, uh, on this point. I mean, we've all been talking about this stuff for such a long time. Part of my struggle getting into this, and we've talked at length on the podcast about this is like, what's, uh, this thing called employer brand. Most people in the organization don't know about it. It's kind of new. How does it relate to our master brand? Obviously this is what we spend lots of time with our clients talking about these questions. And it's always been our point of view that the employer brand is really just another face of the master brand of the organization that has different faces. Usually you're thinking about the consumer facing face, um, but there's employer facing faces. You could even talk about, um, the perceptions that um A has to its vendors. That'd be another example. Um, I don't think anyone's talking about vendor brand, but it's just a point that there are lots of different faces to it. So to have carved this out as an industry and say, no, no, we've got our own separate thing called employer brand always seemed a little bit off to me, I suppose. Now I don't know if that makes it a bad or a dirty word. I do think people are probably just tired of hearing about EVPs and employer brand. I mean, I love doing this stuff and I'm kind of tired of it. So, yeah, I think, uh, ironically we need a rebrand of employer brand is kind of what James is saying. And I'm not sure I disagree, but I want to. We should have him on to ask him what his uh, ideas are. How would he rebrand it?

Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, I guess my question would be like, do we just change the approach for how we approach employer brand projects? Uh, why does it feel like a dirty word? Right? Like, you know, I wonder. Well, are we.

Speaker C: I think, uh, I think it, I think it feels like a dirty word because, uh, he kind of walks you through the history of it a little bit, which is enlightening to me because obviously I'm only been in this space for five years, but like, oh, it was like a novel concept that an organization should have to even provide a reason why someone should work for them. You know, that the power balance probably 50, 80 years ago was completely inverted. And um, it was just like you should be. This is the privilege to come have a chance to work for us and come and find out was kind of the attitude. Then we got into this employer branding area where there's this novel Idea that boy, maybe we should tell people why they should work here. Um, and I think he's arguing that we have been in that era for some time. The problem is, and this is preaching to the choir, I love to hear James talk about it, is that people just focused on tactics and it became kind of slimy. And I think this is where the dirtiness of it comes in. It's squeaky clean. Um, if you look at somebody's prayer side and they all have the same tired copy, I mean, we've gone on and on about it. I won't dwell on it, but everything, um, just feels a bit corporate, sterile, lacking in personality, lacking in uniqueness, lacking in distinctiveness. And people are tired. And there's been a lot of bait and switch. People have treated brand like something you need, a trick, you need to pull over someone to get them to work for you, rather than, hey, let's just be honest and like, get really honest, but to the core of what makes us special. And if that sounds good to you, come, come on board. You know, I don't know. That was a rambling response. But I think the dirtiness relates at least to me for the sense that people have where it's just exploitative. You know, it's no different than any other marketing, uh, you know, brands that have, uh, real resonance and they're authentic and that's why you choose to have relationships with them. And, and, you know, the slimy ads that are bait and switch billboard advertising. And there's a distinct difference in terms of how you feel about that marketing. And I think our industry has been a lot more towards the used car salesman side of that spectrum, unfortunately. Hopefully it's changing though. I think that's what James is at least hoping or expecting.

Speaker B: Yeah. Um, I do wonder if there's. I just don't know how we best, as an industry educate, you know, leaders on the importance of a brand, like how you define, manage or promote your employer brand. I think, you know, one of our questions in our, um, study is around, you know, obstacles in defining, managing and promoting your employer brand. And, you know, you'll probably yell at me later for, uh, my interpretation of data, but I would say, like, hey, securing budget and, you know, is the largest obstacle, at least the way I interpret the data. Marty, you'll tell me I'm wrong when you're done with it, period. Um, it's the largest obstacle that an organization really faces. Right? It's securing budget and like, you know, I think, you know, brand leaders, you know, I think That's a problem. Right? And, and if you have trouble getting budget for brand type initiatives, you know, I almost wonder like is that just a reflection on, you know, not understanding how to, you know, prove your uh, you know, prove why an employer brand exists, prove why, you know, you're investing in your brand, period. Call it employer brand, call it what you will is important. Again, you should, you know, tell me I'm wrong because you know, I like to hear it.

Speaker C: I don't think you're wrong. I mean I do often think you're wrong, but not, not on this one. You know, it is on. It is incumbent upon employer brand managers, uh, directors, those sort of mid level people to help leadership understand what employer brand is. I mean on the one hand I want to say the CEO should get it, uh, because it's super important and a profound concept even though it's kind of gotten a bad rap maybe for overuse. But like, yeah, you do have to do it. So if I see securing budget is one of the biggest obstacles or the biggest obstacle. Well, why is that? Historically we may have had a kind of sarcastic response to that and say, well, the organization is just lame and they don't, they don't um, see the value. Uh, no, maybe it's an organization that for 20 years has been told how important an employer brand is and every year the budget increases so you can buy more tactic based approaches to employer brand and we never really see a result and no one knows why the hell people work here. That could also be a reason why it's hard to see your budget. And if that's why, I can't necessarily disagree with it. Um, so again I think it does tie back to the sliminess of the industry, the dirtiness of some of the tactics. Why would we want to invest in it? And I think um, James made another interesting point which is that if it's all about tactics and the latest, shiniest new bells and whistles that you can put on your screen or your career site or the newest greatest enhanced employer brand profile, whatever that is that XYZ vendors selling, uh, you're going to lose because you probably don't have the biggest war chest. So do you really want it to be a spending war? Is kind of the question he poses to people. And most of us don't work for um, Fortune top 10 revenue companies in the world. Right. And the irony of course is those companies don't actually need to spend the money because they have such strong brands that people know about them. So I don't Know, there's an interesting paradox there, I suppose. Yes, it's going to cost money, but I don't think you need a lot of money to do effective employer branding. Um, you can make up for a lot of the lack of budget through smarts, critical thinking and elbow grease, you know, and I'm just not sure a lot of teams are equipped to be able to do that.

Speaker B: Yeah, I'm going to leave that one and I think that's going to be the logical place for us to end. You know, we'll certainly, you know, see if we get James back on to, uh, share some additional thoughts on that. And you know, same thing with, you know, with Steve and you know, hey, hopefully we get some folks from Korn Ferry on here as well soon because, you know, I think all three articles, you know, reports, predictions or whatever we want to label them, you know, um, you know, three of the better, you know, sort of attention getters that, you know, I think we saw, you know, the start the year and super excited to, uh, you know, challenge everyone to, you know, think a little bit differently and you know, don't just accept that, hey, like someone says, hey, the biggest trend is HR technology. Like that doesn't mean anything. Um, you know, let's say it just doesn't like. And you know, maybe we'll be a little bit more vocal, um, this year on like, you know, that it just doesn't mean anything. And so, you know, let's get some practical examples of, you know, how people.

Speaker C: The biggest trend in business for 2025 is making money. That's. That means about as much as that.

Speaker B: Growth. Growth, yeah. Uh, well, I think that's a good place to put another pin in it, Marty. But, uh, you know, super excited for everything that we have going this year. We got a lot of fresh content, fresh everything coming everyone's way. So, um, don't forget to, you know, share the episode with your broader network and we'll, uh, catch you Take our survey.

Speaker C: Don't forget changestate.I survey. Yep.

Speaker B: Love it. All right, everyone have, ah, a good one. Take care, Marty. All right, thanks for tuning in as always. Head on over to Changestate I.O. or shoot us a note on all the social media. We'd love to hear from you and we'll check you guys next week, weekend.