Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 6309
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 2:00 pm Post subject: Executive Job Candidates from Sears Low On Hiring List | |
|
I almost posted this in quest's LP thread since even associates are categorized in a similar fashion.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_37/b4146042031508.htm Businessweek article talks about what companies/corporations recruiters like to avoid and Sears is one of them. Cited an example of a successfull Coke exec who screwed up Revelon by listening to the financial types. Sound familiar ? Also recruiters didn't like companies who produced robot like execs: Intel used as an example. Don't like companies that like execs with alot of 'political skill' like A T T. They don't like specialists or execs who came from companies that were delegated or relegated specific tasks/functions-limits their skills. Note I keep on thinking about the wheelman Alan Lacy crew and ' the political skill ' they seemed to travel on. |
|
Joined: 08 Aug 2005
Posts: 519
| Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:53 am Post subject: | |
| Not many companies are looking for people who lower morale and cause stress in the work place. The way this company treats employees is a crime. No wonder they're always looking for new workers. | |
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 2110
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:22 am Post subject: | |||
And I've never seen morale this low since I started almost 20 years ago. Oh, and the STRESS!!!!  
|
|||
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 6309
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:14 am Post subject: Sears comments | |
|
One of the things I noticed was that I don't think Sears quite understood the nature of Business Week's question or inquiry. Sears said they get 325 applicants for every HQ position ? Sears should responded with how many execs successfully go to another company. Either it's offuscating bs or they didn't get it.
I also notice a couple commentors who seemed to take offense to the article. They said there are different corporate cultures-well yeah. Likes Sears/SHLD is the culture of suck. Hmmm, their company must of been mentioned in the article... ***I digress to a semi associated question. Message board rumors say SHLD has stopped actively recruiting HQ execs only opting to hire interns at this point ??? Would they be paid or volunteer interns ? |
|
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 6309
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:33 am Post subject: Coke , Coke and more Coke | |
|
One of things the article talked about was how many an exec starts out in a very good position and doesn't really develope skills in other areas -because they don't have to. They gave the brand recognition and pre existing excellent distribution system of Coke as an example. So basically an exec just has to sign off or delegate to the lower management.
I take this to mean anything from dumb luck or being spoiled. The Lacy era execs especially the DMs and VPs remind me of this. They just happen to start pushing PAs and Credit at time when credit was very easy. Many a customer bought because of EASY credit: not because you over came customer objections or you used the scripts. They bought because of seemingly easy money. So now you have the a bunch of execs thinking their strategy is working like Lacy wanted -push big ticket , a Sears PA and credit card and your done. And just like the execs who get spoiled by working at a corp like Coke you have a bunch of execs who stopped or never bothered to learn things like the importance of product and process knowledge and availability. The timing and use of the PA & Credit crutch made just enough Sears bozo execs look like they knew what they were doing while simultaneaously ruining the company. Besides the turmoil at Sears being a reason to overlook a Sears exec as a new hire I think many recruiters & hrs are savy enough to realize Sears has been running off it's name for quite a while. |
|