Hello and welcome to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Big nonprofit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host, and I’m the pod father of your favorite hebdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with us. I’d be stricken with prosopagnosia if you blinded me with the idea that you missed this week’s show. Here’s our associate producer, Kate, with what’s up this week. Hey, Tony, this week it’s. Mid-level recruiting strategy and tactics. Mitch McDermott stresses the value of a strong middle management team and brings contrarian hiring and interviewing tactics, so you can recruit the best team possible. He shares advice for nonprofits and individuals on working with recruiters and as a pro tip on how to find emails of hiring managers. He also takes on what’s current in remote versus in office working. In person versus virtual interviewing. Assigning tasks to interviewees, the questionable value of salary surveys, and more. Mitch is CEO of Talent Ascension Group. On Tony’s take 2. YMCA National Conference. Here is mid-level recruiting strategy and tactics. It’s a pleasure to welcome an entrepreneur, talent advisor, and the founder and CEO of Talent Ascension Group. Mitch McDermott is advancing how companies evaluate, hire, and build mid-level leadership teams. He has built a modern approach to mid-level recruitment by applying executive search standards to manager, director, and vice president hiring. The layer of leadership that most directly shapes organizational performance. The company is at talent ascension.com. And Mitch McDermott is on LinkedIn. Welcome to nonprofit Radio, Mitch. Yeah, thanks for having me, Tony. I’m glad you’re with us to talk about, uh, the power of a strong middle management team. Why, why do you say that, uh, this is the layer of leadership that mostly directly, most directly shapes organizational performance? You, you, you love the mid-level. What is it about these people? Yeah, one of the reasons is I saw a gap in our industry between how sea-level search was conducted and everything below it, and I realized the same hiring. Process used for entry level hiring was what was relegated for mid-level leadership. So I saw an opportunity to blend two aspects of our industry into kind of a new model, specifically for that level of the org chart. Um, but I, I, I believe that because when I think about nonprofits, at the large organizations, the sea levels really driving higher level strategy. The mid-level team is responsible for translating that strategy into results. And you think about telephone, if that’s not accurately translated, results don’t follow. Uh, and at the smaller orgs that we work with, directors could be leading functions, you know, where they are playing that blend of strategy and execution. They’re sitting with the board, they’re sitting with the ED or CEO and they’re Carving out strategic initiatives, but they’re also on the front lines driving the implementation of those initiatives. What, what’s, what’s the gap that you observed, and, and our listeners are small and mid-sized nonprofit professionals. What was the gap between entry level and executive? Maybe it’s maybe some, some parts may be obvious, but flesh it out in detail for us. Yeah, our industry is broken into two segments. There’s retained executive search. Companies are being paid on a retainer basis. It’s very high-end, almost like management consulting and how they approach recruitment. And that’s typically for C-level hires. And then there’s contingent recruitment, which falls for almost everything below the sea level. You’re only being paid if you win. So the approach a lot of businesses take is volume. They work with a lot of clients, but they fill 15 to 20% of what they touch. Um, they send a lot of candidates. It’s more of the spray and pray model because you’re not being paid with your time. So you use that time to create a lot of activity. And if you do that, enough will close that you’re in that 20% range and your company’s happy with you. Is that really, is that really, is it really that low that like only about 20% of the assignments on contingency are filled? Yep, that’s, that’s from the firm side. That’s the industry average for contingent recruiting. Refill rate has been around 60%. So we recruit the same way executive search firms recruit. We’ve integrated it with more of a contingent model pricing, um, specifically for mid-level leadership. So we play and function more like a C-level search firm, but we price more like a contingent firm. So we’ve taken the, the best aspects about both sides of the industry. And melded it together. OK, so, and so what are the best aspects of, uh, of executive recruitment that, that you want to see us apply to mid-level? Yeah, headhunting. That’s the big, there’s a difference between recruiting and headhunting. That’s an OK word to use. I was gonna ask you later on, is it OK to call you a headhunter, or is that, yeah, I, I, I actually take pride to it because I do believe it’s different, right? OK, it’s not a pejorative. All right, yeah, for me, headhunting is. Going after who you want, not who’s looking. Uh, recruiting is just finding people whose resumes align with the job description, who are probably having resumes posted or applying to jobs. It’s headhunting to me is more of a sales job. It’s convincing someone why to look at a change when they’re not looking. Recruiting is more of just aggregating a group of people who are looking and then putting it forward to a client. Um, so that’s the biggest value add, I think C-level search firms provide. They’re being paid for their time, so they can take the time to actually target a market, do heavy research, and then build relationships. A lot of the contingent, again, it’s the volume, it’s going through Indeed, LinkedIn. To me, it’s doing what companies could already do for themselves if they want to save a few bucks. It’s almost replicating an internal recruiting strategy for companies that don’t have internal recruiters, but Paying the same fees as they’re using an external firm, but in my opinion, providing less of that value. And the other thing is the consulting piece. Retained firms are, again, function more like management consultancies. They’re being paid for their time, so they take the time to actually talk to their client about misalignments, right? You’re paying this, you want this, we need to connect dots because the market doesn’t bear what you’re looking for in your price point. A lot of the contingent approach is like you give it 2 or 3 weeks. If you see success, you stay with it. If you don’t, you move on. And I think that’s where recruiters get the stigma of like the used car salespeople of the business world, and I get it, right? They’re not being paid for their time, so that belief is I need to work with a lot more clients and put my time where I have the best chance of You know, completing a search, but it does create a very transactional relationship between the firms and the companies right out of the gate, where retained search and what we do is much more of a partnership-based approach and how we interact with our customers. Yeah, let’s talk about the relationship part of, of, uh, headhunting. Um, so, you know, it, it, it, uh, I’ve, I’ve, I’ve always, um, I’ve always taken recruiters’ calls, even when I wasn’t looking. I mean, I, I haven’t, I haven’t been an employee for, I don’t know, 27 years or something like that. It’s been a long time, uh, and I’m not looking. But, but when I was, when I was, and I occasionally, I don’t know, maybe once or twice a year or something, I might hear from a recruiter, you know, I always take their, well, I always respond to their emails. Nobody calls anymore. I, but I used to take calls 25 years ago when recruiters would call. I used to take the call because I thought, you know, I, I might, I might like to use the person’s services or I might be in the market myself, my, myself sometime. But, so I just thought relationships would be valuable to have with, uh, uh, a couple of recruiters. But to talk about relationship building from the recruiter, the headhunting side, how does that, how do you keep up those relationships? Who do you, who do you have relationships with? Yeah, so we, we keep the relationships with the candidate. You know, what’s interesting though, when we get a search, we’re typically, it’s a bespoke search. So we go to who we know, but we also go to who we don’t know that best aligns with our clients need. Um, so it’s a very organic and holistic search process for every individual search. Um, a lot of it is just getting to know what they want. Uh, this is something I saw in our industry. A lot of recruiters do what I call sell jobs. So like, they would call you, hey, I’m working with this company, this role, this pay, and then you have the opportunity to say yes or no. Um. We actually put the candidate at the center of our recruitment strategy. So we pick up the phone, we do pick up the phone. That’s, I think one of our competitive advantages these days. And we ask them, hey, you’re probably not looking, but what, what would be exciting to you at this point in your career, whether it’s now, 1 year from down the line, 2 years, like, what would be a dream job that you would want us to pick up the phone and call you about? And we let them. Organically tell us what their goals are, what their vision for their career is, and then during that time, we’re also qualifying. So we start to ask them more about the role that they’ve done, uh, their experience, the impact that they’ve made at organizations, and if what they want long term aligns with what our client can offer and what they’ve done in their career aligns with what our client’s looking for, then we talk about the job. Uh, so it’s a very reverse process of how we engage with candidates. And if it’s not aligned, then we build that relationship, we’ve built that trust, we built the relationship, and we know exactly what they’re interested in to call them about in the future, versus just calling them every time we have a search with a certain title that sounds like their title. It’s much more personalized, I think, is how we build those kind of relationships with candidates. And if it is aligned, that’s where the magic is because What I find is people are open to exploring something if it’s the right thing, but there’s so much volume in today’s world, calls from recruiters, emails, and such low relevancy that when you actually have something that’s relevant, they are more willing to look than maybe they even thought when they first picked up the phone. OK. And that’s a part of what your work is, uh, you know, to help them see an opportunity that, that they don’t know about, and, but it, it seems to align with what you know about them. Um, You have some, uh. You have some ideas about contrarian interviewing tactics. What are, what are those? Why, why, why, why are you, first of all, why are you a contrarian? Yeah, I just personally think, why are you a troublemaker in your, in your industry? I think I, I, I like to say when we work with a client, half the time we’re rewiring how they think about hiring, and I’ll share a good example, and I think this applies specifically to nonprofits because Unfortunately, it’s just the nature of the beast. Oftentimes we get asked. That they can’t afford, they, they, the candidate they want and what they’re budgeting for don’t align. Um, and I find companies hire for criteria, not outcomes. My contrary belief is hire for outcomes. We had a nonprofit who was paying $30,000 below market for what they thought they needed. They, they put a list of all these check boxes and requirements that they felt would be required. They have to be this title and this experience. And we were on the search for a while. We showed them a lot of data. They weren’t going to raise the budget, which we understood, but at a certain point to be successful, we had to make changes, and we end up placing someone who is very, very successful, but wasn’t maybe who they thought they were looking for in the beginning, but could generate the outcomes that they were looking for, which didn’t check, didn’t check a lot of the requirements. Exactly, yeah, I think companies can get caught up, caught up on requirements and running a search based on a job description. In trying to match a job description with a, with a resume. Yeah, so, but how do we, how do we measure the person’s capacity for creating the outcomes that we need? Yeah, so like 11 way is to look at who they are. Like I have a belief people drive outcomes, not resumes. Um, and the ones with the best resumes are typically the ones who are looking all the time. This was a development role. So like, I was very, uh, critical to them that the person you want is not looking, because if they’re good right now, they’re being hung on to, and they were looking to diversify fundraising from institutional to individual giving due to some of the political changes in New York’s nonprofit landscape. And we found someone who didn’t check all the boxes, was lower in experience than what they thought, wasn’t the title that they thought, but she was at a very small nonprofit, and she stood up their individual giving program, uh, and, and was a player coach and leading it with a very small team, but also building it herself, um, and she’s done it. She’s, yeah, she did it, she did it at a smaller place. Let’s give her a shot to do it at a larger place. Exactly. And those are the kind of creative hires that I talk about. where they’re like, they need to be a VP, they need to have this title, and they need to be 15+ years. She was 8, she was half the experience they thought they needed. She’s been there 2 years and that client’s a raving fan of ours. So like those are the things that I look for is can the person achieve what you’re looking for them to achieve, less of the, the, the keywords and the requirements, but really focusing on what, what does success look like and can this person deliver that type of success. OK, that’s a, that’s a general hiring. Uh, approach that you have. What are there specific interview tactics, uh, like in, in the interview that can elicit this information, or you mentioned interviewing tactics. That’s what I’m focusing on. Yeah, to me, a lot of the interview tactics are about getting to know the person, not the resume. I’m very big on asking for someone’s vision for their career. I find people who have clear personal and professional goals tend to work towards them. People who don’t tend to look for a job, and to me a job is something that pays the bills. A career is something more than that. It’s something where they’re driven by impact. They’re fueled by contributions, by growth. So a lot of it is around like one of the big interview questions we ask every candidate is, what’s your vision? Where do you want to be in 5 years? Uh, and making sure that if we’re looking for a builder, they have something personally they’re building towards right now. Yeah. Others, how about other, other strategies or tactics? Yeah, a big one is again, getting to know the person. So vision is a good way to do it. I think, um, just understanding like what environments they thrive in. What I find is a lot of companies tell the candidate the environment. You know, hey, we’re lean, we need people who can do this, X, Y, Z. I try to ask questions without giving any of the answers. So I say, hey, where do you thrive? Do you thrive in an environment with a lot of structure, uh, a lot of support from a people’s standpoint, or do you thrive more in an entrepreneurial environment where there’s growth, there’s constant changes in direction, and I let them give me their organic answer. Um, that’s a big thing that we see clients do is, is they, they, they want to be honest, and they’re afraid that someone’s not going to work in that environment. So they give the answer to the question and then ask, which I find. People are gonna tell you what they’re gonna want, what you’re gonna wanna hear. Yes, uh, yeah, especially in this context, um, but so, but how do you assess what the culture is at the organization? So, you know, you’re asking a qualifying question for the candidate to give what, what the kind of environment they want to work in. But, but you need to know what the culture is like at the client that you’re recruiting for, because if the two are a mismatch, if the, if the candidate wants an entrepreneurial, wants an entrepreneurial setting, and it’s a micromanaging setting, that’s not, that, that’s not gonna, that’s not gonna work. But, but how do you assess the organizational culture? Nobody’s gonna tell you we’re a micromanaging institution here. Yeah, and you’ll be surprised how honest. Leaders are about the environment that they have. Uh, we normally, we, we interview the client, right? Throughout our sales process and intake process of a new search, we spent a lot of time getting to know them, where they’re headed, their biggest bottlenecks and obstacles, areas for improvement in their culture, where they think they win, where they think there’s, there’s room for improvement. Uh, and, and it’s about a lot of people reading. It’s, it’s one of those things where I think what we do as a science is some, it’s part asking the right questions. It’s part an art form of being able to actually pick up on the nonverbal cues and putting a story together. OK, well, we picked up on this, we picked up on that. I get the sense that here’s what’s going on. Um, so it’s a lot of just being honest and asking direct questions that can be a little bit uncomfortable sometimes from a cultural standpoint or challenge standpoint. You know, sometimes clients will say, hey, we’ve had 3 people in this role. Well, that concerns me, you know, eventually the company becomes a common denominator. So we dig in, we pulled the string on that, we want to understand. Tell us why every person didn’t work. Was it the wrong hire? Is it the wrong environment? Are you pushing good people away? And we’ll be honest with clients and tell them, I think for the 4th person to work, something’s gonna have to change with this department, you know, and this was another search we worked on where This is an actual story, and we ended up talking to the board. They, they, they met, they ended up changing the role a little bit and actually hiring for two roles underneath that person to make sure that when we get the right person, they actually have the support they need to be successful, because that department was understaffed and They hadn’t looked at that as a problem, but we ask those tougher questions and dig deep to make sure that, again, if we’re taking someone from a place they’re happy at, we want to make sure it’s a company they could stay at for a long time. We don’t want to put someone in an environment ethically where, you know, it, it’s a short term thing because they don’t have the right support. Uh, I, I work with a, I do, uh, planned giving fundraising. That’s, that’s my, that’s this podcast is a, A aside. Uh, a joy. It’s more than a side hustle or a gig. It’s a joy. But the way I make a living is plan giving fundraising. I, I’m, I, I’m working with a client that’s hiring. Uh, for a fundraising position. And the, one of the candidates didn’t, didn’t want to come to the office for the first interview. You know, he wanted, he wanted the first interview to be on Zoom or whatever, you know, virtual. We thought, I mean, that’s like, that’s a, to, to, to us, that was a disqualifier. Like you’re not even gonna come for a first interview. I mean, I don’t know, maybe, maybe a 3rd or 4th interview. Although if you, if you really want to work here, um, you know, all right, so, uh, it’s not, I mean, it’s, it’s in a suburb of New York City, so it’s not. It’s not, maybe, you know, maybe you had to take a train to get there or something, but I don’t know. What, what, what’s your, what’s your opinion of that? Is, was the, was the, was the candidate unreasonable or, or was the, was the nonprofit unreasonable to disqualify them based on that? It depends on the scenario. Is that candidate currently working? I don’t know. It wasn’t, it wasn’t a position that I work with, yeah, so I don’t know. I’ll answer in two ways. If they’re not working, I think it’s a concern. If they’re out of work, you want to see that, hey, they’re willing to do whatever it takes. And again, developments like sales, you want to see that initiative, that drive of, hey, I don’t mind how far it is. Like I’m gonna show up. If they are working, I would actually advise the client on, hey, this is a two-way interview. They have a job, so like, You’re gonna have to sell them as much as they’re gonna have to sell themselves. It’s gotta be a two-way street, and if they’re taking time away from work for a job they haven’t even learned about directly from the company. You know, it’s a softer commitment for them to do a video first and then come in the 2nd round. Let them be sold on the role of the company, why this would be a great career move for them. And give them the reason to really take that time off of work, because it is, you know, very confidential. People don’t want to know, don’t don’t want word to get out that they’re looking. So if they’re, they’re not an active candidate, I normally try to encourage a virtual first because it’s less pressure for that candidate to get away from their current role and company to spend that kind of time, and it gives the client a chance for the candidate to really get invested in why they should spend that time in the 2nd round. OK. Interesting perspective. Yeah, yeah. I, yeah, like I said, I don’t know the answer. OK, but, uh, but it does matter. What about, uh, What about, uh, you know, I, I’m so removed from what you do because I, like I said, I haven’t been an employee for over 20 years. Um, uh, uh, after-hours interviews, does that ever, does that ever happen? Like, OK, you know, we don’t mind, we don’t mind seeing you at 6 o’clock if you can get here. If you, if you can do that, is that, is that reasonable or is that unreasonable? It, it is reasonable, and normally the candidates are the ones that drive that personally. Like I find the candidates are like, hey, I have the boarded next week. Like I don’t want anyone to get wind of this. Can we do something at 6 o’clock? I can leave at 4:30, but I, I don’t want to take a 3 hour window to get on a train and, you know, be able to get back to the office, especially. Now in persons are harder because most environments are hybrid or fully in the office. It was different when things were more remote. It was easier. Now, you know, people are being seen by their companies a little bit more where they don’t want to raise a red flag. But yeah, they’re, they’re fairly common. Normally I find the candidates are the ones driving those instead of the client though. Interesting. OK. What about that? You just raised, you know, hybrid versus, I guess, in office full-time, uh, versus, versus full-time, uh, remote. What, what are, what are, Does it, what are candidates looking for, but that’s so generalized. Is it based on age? Is, is it based on, I mean, if, if we’re talking about mid-level performers, mid-level, uh, employees, what are, I don’t know, can you generalize or? What are, what are, what are folks looking for? It’s so case by case. I used to say generationally, the early career people who hadn’t been in an office before and COVID, they’re reluctant to come in. And then also the, the later career folks who feel like they’ve earned their stripes don’t want to as much. I haven’t worked on a fully remote role with a nonprofit organization in probably 3 years, so it’s always typically what we see is somewhere between. 3 to 5, maybe 2, but 3 is kind of the norm I would say in office 3 days in office, yeah, and it also depends on the role. Could we do more than just development, right? Some program related roles are tough to do unless you’re there touching things be right, um. And some clients are just, hey, we’re a 5 day a week culture, like, and either people fit that culture or they don’t. Um, so it’s very case by case. I wouldn’t say there’s as many patterns now generationally. I think it’s kind of a personal thing. If they have it, they don’t want to give it up. If they’ve been going in 33 days a week, 5 is not horrible, but they probably don’t want to come in more than 3. You know, it’s very person to person based on what they have now and what they may or may not have to give up. OK, and it’s been a few years and you haven’t done a fully remote search yet in those, in those couple of years, in the, in the last 2 to 3 years, not one fully remote search. Interesting. OK. OK. All right. You got, you bring an interesting perspective, well, valuable, valuable perspective, Mitch. It’s time for Tony’s take 2. Thank you, Kate. Uh, this week, as you are listening, uh, I am at the. YMCA National Development Conference, uh, it’s called NATO for North American YMCA Development Officers, NATO. Uh, so if you are there, please come see, uh, us. Uh, I say us because I’m presenting along with Brian Saber. You might know Brian. He’s the founder of Asking Matters. Uh, they have the, uh, the different, and Brian’s been on the show several times. They have the different asking styles, whether you’re, uh, an intuitive or a go-getter, or a, or a, uh, rainmaker, and I forget the fourth one. But You know, the asking, the asking styles, they’re very popular. So he and I together are presenting on Friday at the NATO conference. Gifts and wills, the ABCs of how to ask, and we’re gonna talk through. The, the format and the flow of your solicitation meetings around gifts and wills. Uh, lead up to it, how to get the meeting, how to conduct the meeting and, and lead it. And then how to follow up. So all about the, uh, the solicitation process specific to the most popular planned gift of all, the gifts and wills. So if you’re in Long Beach, this is all in Long Beach, California. This week. So if you’re in Long Beach at the NATO conference, I hope you’ll check us uh at the, uh, at that presentation, which is, uh, it’s on Friday, Friday morning. And that is Tony’s take 2. Well, actually, let me add, uh, I’m grateful to be at the NATO conference. This is the 3rd year in a row that I’ve spoken. Uh, and this year doing it with, uh, with Brian. So, very grateful to have the YMCA North American uh organization always always bringing me back year after year. I appreciate that. And that is Tony’s. Well, actually there’s one, no, that’s it. That is Tony’s take 2. Kate. I must just like hit my mic, um, to say break a leg at your presentation. That’s so exciting. Thank you. Thank you very much. We’ve got Bu butt loads more time. Here’s the rest of mid-level recruiting strategy and tactics with Mitch McDermott. What about the idea of having the person do some work? Like write a, write a, write a letter to a donor. Write, write, uh, you know, so, hopefully it’s not like so burdensome, like it takes 3 hours, but, you know, write a donor communication or something like that. Is that, is that kind of, is that kind of childish or is that, is that? Reasonable. You put it either way, I’m, I’m not invested in this. I, I don’t, I don’t do this. I don’t do these things. I have a one-person company. I don’t hire people, so I’m not, I’m not picking your brain from my, I’m not trying to get free advice. It’s just things I’ve seen through the years. I’m, I’m, I’m questioning. 9 out of 10 development searches have some type of written project. Do they? Interesting. Yes, to me, I think it can be helpful. I also think sometimes it’s not. It really depends on the level of the candidate. Like to me, if someone’s been doing something successfully, we can run reference checks to make sure that their performance on their resume and what they tell us is accurate, um. You know, they’ve been a VP for 7 years and they have a 20-year career in development. They’re, they’re probably credible, right? If they haven’t jumped around a lot and they’ve stayed at organizations through growth, you can kind of make the case that this might be a little elementary for this candidate, and sometimes we’ve had that happen where we really have to coach the candidate. The client is adamant about, you know, at the end of the day, we can provide consultation, but the client’s gonna do what they want, and we have to be OK with that. So like coaching the candidate like, hey, it’ll only take an hour, I know it’s elementary. But if you want this, show them, show them why, you know, give them a taste of what you can get. We’ve had some candidates feel like it’s like giving free work. Sometimes it’s more comprehensive than just like, hey, write up a program for individual giving or kind of a campaign that you would do high level, one or two pages. Sometimes it’s in-depth strategic planning where they would probably pay a consultant to do that kind of work. That’s where it gets a little dicey because candidates feel like, hey, I’m doing free work at this strategic plan, like write a strategic plan for us. Like an annual plan for year one, how you would approach this job, and I think again it comes from having limited resources, so they want certainty. When anyone hires, they want certainty. They want to know that the person they hire is going to do what they want them to do and achieve what they want, and they want certainty that person’s going to be around for 10 years. Neither of those you’re ever really gonna get, um, and I think those longer projects are for them to feel really certain that if they hire that person, they’re going to get the outcome they want. OK. Very interesting. Um, yeah, my advice for, for companies doing that is keep it easy, no more than an hour of work and no more than one page worth of work sample. Like keep it easy, get a sense of their strategic thinking, get a sense of their work product, but don’t put a big obstacle in front of you where you might lose the person you want by asking for too much. And again, it’s different if someone’s not working. It is different because the companies have more leverage. And the person doesn’t have as much going on in their work life to be able to put that time in. But when someone’s working and they have families and the weekend’s time for that, and you put an eight-hour assignment in front of them, it, it can be a bottleneck for them. Yeah, yeah. Well, I, I was just thinking, I mean, 8-hour assignment, yeah. Well, no, but you know, like if you’re, if you’re a, if you’re gonna be, you know, chief development officer. Uh, you know, put together a plan for the office. You know, we’ve got 12 people who’ll be working with you. Put together your first-year plan. That sounds burdensome. Yeah, Uh, versus, versus, you know, put together a, maybe a plan for a campaign. Or something like, you know, something discreet. Maybe an email campaign or a peer to peer campaign, you know, around our, you know, whatever. All right, all right. Um, I’ve seen candidates be very proactive with, uh, bringing, like bringing an outline or something, you know, that, that isn’t solicited. Um, I think that that’s impressive. Like if you’ve, if you’ve spent time going through, you know, here are the, here are the major points that I would focus on and how I would focus on each one. Like, you know, maybe enhancing, deepening your relationships, acquiring new donors. I mean, those are very different, you know, but whatever the, whatever the job requires, uh, you know, like put together a one-pager, I think that’s impressive. I agree, I agree. Again, I think it all comes down to who it is, right? If, uh, and we’ve had some Passive candidates put things like that on their own, or they just have one. It’s kind of like their playbook of, hey, if I come into any organization, here’s my playbook for how to drive or build a giving strategy in a certain segment of giving. Um, I’ve seen candidates who, again, I think if you’re not working, I would encourage you to take the time to do that, do everything you can to put your best foot forward and wow, the, the company you’re looking at. When people aren’t working, it is different because we’ve had candidates get an offer and they turned it down because they just felt like what they had now is better. So it is kind of that that balancing act of the company also needing to kind of show the candidate why they should make that move, because there’s risk for them too, uh, if they leave a company they’re relatively happy at, they want to know that this is going to be better. If we’re hiring at a lower level, let’s say it’s maybe it’s entry level or maybe it’s not quite mid-level, like mid between entry and mid, and, you know, uh, it’s, it’s likely. Gonna be filled by someone who’s Gen Z, you know, like, or, or just, you know, barely over. Um, you mentioned, you know, moving around a lot. That’s still, that’s still a red flag. Like, if you spend 12 to 18 months at a play, you know, and you’ve done that only like 33 times or something in a row. That’s not a red flag. That’s not a red flag. That’s not a red flag. I, I think it’s relatively normal, and this is across any industry. OK. The 1st 5 years of career, people are kind of figuring out the industry, the job, the functional area they play in. So I think that’s relatively OK. Where I get concerned is the 1 to 2 year stints over a 10 or more year career. And we see a lot of that in development, especially in the frontline facing fundraisers, where, you know, and, and that concerns me because if you go into somewhere for a year or 2, you’re not really seeing a lot of impact. Year one, right, the impact compounds. So you gotta build your collecting a paycheck and moving on before the business actually gets the ROI from the higher. So they’re jumping, they’re jumping because somebody will pay them $200,000 or $25,000 more exactly. Yeah, that’s a red, OK, that’s where it concerns me, but early career, I think is relatively normal, uh, again, across, across any industry, any function, most 5 sub 5 year experience candidates hop around a little bit because they’re figuring out what they want to do. Uh, after 5 years, I’d want to see some 3+ year stints, but to be honest, and this is across averages, most, the average tenure now is 2.5, 3 years. If you look at, you know, someone’s last 5 years, they probably worked at 2 places. It would be more surprising to see someone only worked at 1 in the last 5 years. In, in what kinds of roles you’re talking about? Across the board, anything. Yeah, yeah, this is, this is across industries and functions. 3 years, 2, 2.5 to 3 is somewhat of the average. You see some of the 1.5, maybe a 5 here or there, um, but finding the people who stay at companies 5 years on average is almost hard to come by nowadays. There’s a lot more movement and I think also, um. You know, COVID-related stuff, you know, um, companies doing downsizings or, you know, a lot of changes in the corporate environment. What I find now is not a lot of organizations offer a 10-year career. Um, I think earlier in the 2000s, you could go to a company, you had growth, you had development. A lot of that’s changed. The synergy between employee and employer is kind of disintegrated in certain ways on both sides. Yeah, now when you say company, you, when you say company, you’re including nonprofits. Yeah, even nonprofits, yeah, yeah, yeah, I think that’s very unfortunate, you know. I, I, I, I don’t expect that you’re gonna be able to keep somebody like for a career, you know, 35, 40 years with us. But You know, but the, the mentality on the employer side that You know, they’re, they’re probably only gonna be with us for a few years anyway. So, you know, let’s not invest in professional development. Let’s not invest in a career progression plan for them or, uh, what, maybe that’s overstating, but a, a progression plan for them here at the organization. Let’s, let’s not talk about that with folks, you know, because they’re not gonna be around long enough. That, I, I think that, I mean, that’s self-perpetuating. I think, I mean, self-fulfilling, you know, OK, so there’s no, you, you can’t do professional development. I don’t see any growth here. Uh, you know, so that, that’s self-fulfilling. You’re gonna drive people away. Yeah, and it’s interesting, the candidates who get an offer and turn it down are the ones that have been 7 years and they feel a sense of loyalty because the companies, the things that they’ve gained, the skills, the experience, that loyalty isn’t worth breaking. Um, but again, right, not enough organizations, nonprofits do that these days. So it’s the, the problem is on both sides, and I think the solution starts with the organizations only because you got to show people a reason why they shouldn’t leave. Yeah, and you got almost recondition your employee group to go, this is a place that’s going to give me everything I want. I don’t need to leave for 5 or 100 because I’m not going to get all those things there. Yeah, no, I agree. I, I think it starts with the employer. I don’t think the employees should be asking for these things. I think the employer should be offering. Professional development, uh, uh, progression opportunities, mentoring, you know, a buddy system, something like that, you know, for onboarding, um, OK, so I just created my own nice segue. I want, uh, I’d like to hear your advice on onboarding a new employee. What, what, what do you like to see there? Yeah, I think with mid-level it’s different than, yeah, mid-level, um. I think give people the trust and autonomy up front, where I see hiring go wrong is when leaders are reluctant to give away the responsibilities all at once. So like I’ll give you an example, like if you hire down, like we talked about finding someone who can create outcomes, but maybe don’t meet your criteria, sometimes clients will put a but, but then I don’t want them to lead the team right away. I want to give them, you know, time to ramp before this. And then the people start to feel underutilized uh in those roles. So I think if you, if you make a hire, hire the right person and trust that you did and give them trust day one, and allow them to prove and, and keep that trust, where I see some of the onboarding fail is where they have to earn trust, and that becomes very real for the candidate, and then they start to feel undervalued or underutilized, and they start to wonder what is a year here going to look like, um. Because they’re not feeling that sense of autonomy and empowerment, um, so I think it’s very big on, again, giving people trust on day one. Trust that you, you, you made the right hire and let them prove to you. That you made the right choice and and give them that leeway out of the gate versus kind of setting, I guess, emotional levers of when you feel they’re ready for certain things. Trust that you hired the person who’s ready for the job today. Hire the right person, yeah, yeah, yeah. But what else about onboarding? Other advice? Yeah, I think, um, like check-ins. I think sometimes people forget that again, like you’re the kid is interviewing you as much as them and and they’re interviewing you the 1st 90 days. They’re evaluating, is this a place I’m going to spend the rest of the year? Is this a place I can spend 3 years. So I think almost. Making established check-ins and being really open to feedback, um, and not having too much of an ego from an employer standpoint around things. Again, if I think if you hire the right person, they’re gonna find things, they’re gonna find gaps and challenges. So be open minded to those things, knowing that someone’s gonna want to make the environment and the organization better. I’ve seen people say they want to hire someone who can bring ideas and help, but when it actually happens, yeah, right, now we’ve never, yeah, we’ve never done it that way. Yeah, you hired me to do things differently. Yeah, those are where I see hires not work, right? Yeah, they just don’t have, that’s maybe more of an empowerment thing or, or, or empowerment of ideas and, and impact. Um, so that would be the advice there too is, you know, be open to ideas, be open to change. Again, if you hire the right person, their goals are the same as yours. So be open-minded on maybe a different or better way of getting to that outcome. What’s your advice for nonprofits, uh, how to work best with a, Recruiter, headhunter. Yeah, yeah, I think it depends because I do think there is a lot of noise in our industry. I would say really dig into the firm that you use on how they recruit, their methodology, because there, there’s not a lot of headhunting agencies out there anymore. There’s a lot of the high volume models. So I would dig into what’s your fill rate? How many candidates should I expect to see? If you’re hearing more than 5, they’re likely just going to be throwing things at the wall and move on. when success isn’t there. Um, you know, how long does it take typically for you to fill a role like this? What’s your average timeline? What do you do if you have challenges, 3 or 4 weeks in? Do you move away? Or do you come back to us and give us feedback and data to help us? Um, so I think finding a true organization that’s gonna go after who you want, not just who’s looking is going to be key. And also trust the partner, just like the hire, right? Trust that if you pick the right partner. They’re gonna come back with probably challenges and obstacles and budgetary constraints and be open-minded on their counsel on how to solve those challenges and bottlenecks. What are, what are, what are some of those challenges, bottlenecks that you see that, that result in I guess when you’re saying there’s, there’s we’re getting bad outcomes like we don’t have enough applicants, we’re not getting the right kinds of applicants. What are, what are some of the causes of that? To be honest, 80% of our searches are misaligned comp. What they want and what they’re paying don’t match. 80% of our nonprofit searches across every function, finance, operations and programs, especially development. They want all the bells and whistles, but they’re paying for a role one or two levels below where those people play. You know, they’ll hire a VP but they’re paying for like a manager, senior manager type of candidate. Um, that’s The biggest constraint. More often than not, the searches we work on have those constraints with nonprofits. So I think being realistic, I also think Hiring is always looked at as a cost because you’re working with a fixed budget. Where I look at certain and I look at hiring as an investment and I try to coach my clients on that. If it’s a finance role, it’s tougher to make the case. If it’s a program role that can develop revenue through contracts. That could be, there could be an ROI of paying $200,000 more. If it’s development and someone can bring in half a million dollars of new funding versus someone who could do a million dollars in a year, that delta is probably worth paying another $2,500,000 to get an All-Star. So I, I try to recondition my clients to look at certain roles that have an actual ROI and the ROI of even spending 10,000 or $200,000 more to get a greater ROI from that higher. What about looking at the salary benchmark studies, uh, you know, Candid has one. I think they’re, they’re typically what they’re typically wrong. Like where we see challenges is where clients do work with a compensation company. If I hear they’re working with a compensation company, it almost turns me off from wanting to search because then they use that data as the law. Like we know this is the market. Those are almost never accurate, because what you think about is maybe someone makes, let’s say 1:30 today, and maybe the benchmark is 130 at the ceiling, but they’re not going to leave for less than 140. You know, at the end of the day, you got to pay people what it takes for them to actually make a move, um, you know, and, and oftentimes people are already currently making more than what our clients paying, but they do, they want someone from a big, let’s say they’re a grassroots nonprofit. We want someone who can create structure and development. We want someone from a more established that someone that did this already. Well, guess what? They’re at a They went from a 10 person company to 100. Now they’re making way more than what you’re offering based on your compensation study benchmark for a company your size. So your comp range is accurate, but not based on the market you want us to look at. So that’s where we see people get caught up is. Sometimes it can be accurate, but it all comes down to who you want and where they’re at, what kind of organization they’re at, and bigger companies are gonna likely pay more than the smaller nonprofits. You make a really, well, you make several valuable points. The, the one that struck me especially is, You know, you gotta pay people to move. You don’t, pay them what they’re getting now. Why would they go to an unknown when they’ve got, they’ve got the known that they’re comfortable in. So you’ve gotta pay a premium to get the good talent to make a move. Yeah, absolutely, and I, I personally think it’s worth it, because I find when people are out of work, and I hate to generalize, but I find especially In development or any kind of sales or revenue driving role, companies are fighting to hang on to those people, even in tough times because that’s their way out of the hole. Um, you can get some really good people who are out of work or have been out of work and maybe they’re doing some consulting and taking their time to find the right thing, um, but you never know if they’re taking the first thing they get, or if they really are attracted to you. And I’ve seen some of these roles where it’s like, hey, we hired this person, you know, people aren’t sticking, but they’re hiring people who have been out of work for a year. They take the first thing they get, and then they use the time to find what they really want. Or again, if I, I, I think people make moves for two reasons. You’re running away from something, sometimes running away from unemployment, uh, or a really bad environment. Or you’re running towards something. The people who run towards something, that’s how you get a 3 to 5 year career stint out of someone is they chose you over what they had, um, because of what you can offer as a company, as a culture. Interesting. Um, so I look at those things as, yeah, you might spend a little more, but if that person sticks around and you’re not replacing this person and paying us another fee in 2 years, and you get more performance out of that person. Spend the money on the right people, they’ll, they’ll pay you back tenfold. It sounds like you, you, you maybe have a bias against folks who have been out of work for, for a, for a while. You’re more, it sounds, it’s, uh, it sounds like you’re more scrupulous of those folks. If they’ve been out of work 6 months or a year. Yeah, I don’t have a bias or or scrutinizing, scrupulous, yeah, scrupulous, yeah, I don’t know. OK, I’m sorry. I just wanna make sure I I use the right word. OK, yeah, I, I’m not biased, but you got to dig into the story. Like for sure, you know, I’ve had people where, hey, this job, you know, the company was horrible, right? I, I look at the common denominators of the right story. If it’s someone, hey, we had really hard times, they fought to keep me on. I was the last person. I, I definitely send that person. Again, you just don’t know though if they’re gonna take the right job or the first job, and that’s the only thing I want to really dig into through the interview process is how aligned is this versus you need a job and you’re going to take it if you get it. Uh, and is this a place you could see yourself spending a long career at? Because you just don’t know, um, but what I find is you get told what you want to hear when they need the job. When they don’t, you get a little bit more authenticity, so. I’m not biased by any means. There’s really good people who have been out of work. And, and again, the story’s got to make sense, depending on who they are. Um, but I find, you know, again, it’s, you got to dig in more to make sure you’re getting authenticity versus being told, you know, what you want to hear, essentially. Let’s flip a little bit for the benefit of, uh, no longer now nonprofit leaders who might be hiring, but individuals who may get contacted may want a relationship with a recruiter. So on the individual, on the candidate side, what’s your advice for dealing with you and the folk, the folks of your ilk in your, in your work? it’s always good to have a conversation like you said. You never know when you’re gonna need a job. You know, you could be stable, thinking everything’s good, 6 months go by, you could be out of work, the nonprofit could have had a really hard time. So I think it’s always good to proactively build a relationship. People think about, well, I don’t need a recruiter now, but it’s easier for us to help you if we already know you, and we know who you are, what you bring to the table, what you’re looking for. And again, I kind of look at us like agents in the sports world, right? You tell us what you want in a year. We can call you back in a year with the perfect thing. You still might not be looking, but it’s the right time and the right opportunity. So I think proactively building relationships can be helpful. Um, and I also think like when it comes to a job search, let’s say you are in a place where you’re not working, um, I find people are out of work a lot longer because the way people look for jobs five years ago, no longer creates the same output. There’s a lot of AI. There’s a lot of fluff and noise in applying and interviewing and being seen. I actually encourage candidates to apply for jobs like people did before LinkedIn. Make a list of the top 50 nonprofits you’d love to work for. And reach out, LinkedIn, email, phone call, go into an office, you know, do things like that that separate you and allow you to be seen as a person, not just the resume. Uh, we’ve had a lot of success coaching people on kind of old school tactics of how to find work and getting away from the, you know, applying to 100 jobs or 50 jobs a day, but taking more of a targeted approach to being seen by the right companies. Interesting. I, I love your, uh, I love the old school approach. I mean, I’m 64 years old. That’s probably, that’s probably how I got my last job 2028 years ago or something. Um, yeah, no, actually it was. I was talking to the, uh, Yeah, I was talking to the director of development before he was ready to hire for director of planned giving, but he knew he had a hire coming up, and I was a director at a, at a, a director of planned giving at a smaller college, and this was a bigger, this was a bigger university. So yeah, so actually we had, uh, Probably two breakfasts, you know, before hours, like 88 o’clock, 8:00 a.m. breakfast meetings. I, I asked you about after hours, I guess you could do before hours. Yeah. So he was pretty savvy. Uh, and then he did, he did recruit me when he was ready to hire. But he talked to me before, like a year before he, he had the job opening. Yeah, yeah, and I find people unfortunately these days, again, not to generalize, but I see a pattern. People don’t want to invest the time like that. Well, I don’t need a job. Why would I have breakfast with them, you know, I have my own stuff to do. People don’t see the value in building their network and relationships. Yeah, it’s your career though, man. It’s your career. Like, like you just, you know, you spend 8 hours a night in bed, you should have a good quality bed. You, you’re spending 8 to 10 hours a year, a day at work. You know, you wanna, you wanna have a quality of life, a quality of career. You gotta invest in it. Uh, I, OK, you know, again, at 64 years old, I love the old school approach. Yeah, me too. A lot of stuff we do is, is leveraging kind of that old school relationship driven. Can you, I’m, I’m putting you on the spot. Can you share a story of somebody who did that, who invested time in whatever way, and they ended up taking a job that was very good for their career? Yeah, I mean, it was someone I basically, I, I, I have this saying, it doesn’t matter what your job. The title is Everyone’s in sales and uh he wasn’t a salesperson, but I told him exactly what to do, you know, build a list of the 50 companies. I gave him free tools that you can use to find email addresses for people, uh, showed him how to find hiring managers on LinkedIn that he could associate the job posting to and then gave him some templates and sequences that he could use, you know, send a connection, no message, just connect, send an email, attach your resume with kind of a. A scripted email template I gave him and within a month he had like 2 offers, uh, and one of them wasn’t even a company that had a posting. And that’s the other thing we get calls from roles that aren’t online because they’re replacing someone so people don’t think about the hidden job market. I would say half of our current roles nobody could apply for or would know about. Um, their searches happening in the background. So doing that one, keep someone in mind for you, like what happened with you maybe a couple months down the line. And also, you might fall into an opportunity you didn’t even know existed, but focus on finding the right company that aligns with what you want to do, the mission that aligns with the mission you’re inspired by, and where you can make an impact. So, yeah, I had someone that I kind of coached through that process, did some cold outreach, got a a a really early win, started interviewing, um, so yeah, it it definitely does work, and, uh, even one of the offers was from a really, really big nonprofit. And you’ll, you’ll think this is funny. The last interview was with HR. Instead of the reverse process where you apply in the first interviews with HR, the hiring manager is like, Let’s grab lunch. Like, I wanna, like, you know, picked up the phone. They had a phone call. Let’s grab lunch. The last interview was actually the HR interview, and at that point he already had the job. Um, but yeah, the hiring I passed the process, and you kind of create your own way of getting in, which, in my opinion, can be better sometimes. Oh, absolutely. Yeah, if the hiring manager knows they want you, HR is gonna come along. I mean, they’re not gonna object unless they, you know, unless they, they, you know, they don’t, assuming they don’t find some red flag, you know, whatever. But assuming nothing like that. The person who’s gonna be, who’s gonna be working with the, the, the new hire tells HR this, this is the person I want. It becomes pro forma with the, with, with human resources. Yeah, exactly, yeah, and I find people the wrong buyers, right? They, they market themselves to the HR person who doesn’t really have the authority. They’re working off a criteria list where the hiring manager. Might be willing to be flexible for the right person if you can prove to them that you’re that person. So, I normally encourage people who are looking, shoot high. If you’re in development, reach out to the CDO or even executive director, depending on the size, like go as high as you can and let them introduce you down. It creates more leverage in that process of being seen and trying to work your way slowly up that ladder. Love this. What about that, uh, you mentioned ways of finding. Managers’s emails that you can associate with. Is that a, is that a proprietary secret? No, no, proprietary trade secret. All right, can you share it with nonprofit radio listeners? It’s a, it’s a website called hunter. H U N T E R. O. Uh, you make an account, you get free 50 credits a month. It’s like 100 bucks for like 500 emails. So like it’s not even expensive if someone needed more, but you get 50 free emails a month, uh, and literally you put in the website domain of the company, and it tells you the nomenclature, you know, first dot last name at or first initial. So you don’t need if you have 3 people at a company, just use one credit and you have everyone’s email and you can kind of use the names on LinkedIn to figure it out, yeah. Outstanding. Thank you for that, Mitch. What, what’s the, what’s the site again? Hunter.io. Hunter.io. All right. Yeah, thanks for sharing that. Yeah, of course. This is great. Uh, you got a lot of good advice, savvy, savvy, uh, savvy advice, you know, from the nonprofit side, a little on the individual side. Um, And uh you’re, you’re, uh, you’re bringing senior-level search strategies to, to mid-level positions. All right. He’s Mitch McDermott, founder and CEO of Talent Ascension Group. They’re at talent ascension.com. Connect with Mitch on LinkedIn. Appreciate you very much. I loved it. Thank you very much, Mitch. Yeah, thanks for having me, Tony. This is a great conversation. I’m glad. Next week, mission driven mergers. If you missed any part of this week’s show, I beseech you, find it at Tony Martignetti.com. Our creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff. I’m your associate producer Kate Martignetti. The show’s social media is by Susan Chavez. Mark Silverman is our web guy, and this music is by Scott Stein. Thank you for that affirmation, Scotty. Be with us next week for nonprofit Radio. Big nonprofit ideas for the other 95%. Go out and be great.