Answer: I developed a plan of action for my client to identify successful leading-edge communicators in the social media space.
The key was to find candidates who had moved beyond a fascination with SM tools and were engaged in using them to execute their organization’s messaging strategy.
This new hire would understand that content was key and delivering a targeted message needed to be delivered through the right channels. If a candidate missed the point and jumped into discussing the exciting new SM channels, before asking the Who? Why? questions that immediately ruled him/her out.
Our finalist would understand that being an expert about the tools was one element in a comprehensive campaign and the decision about which SM outlets to use came at the end of the process. It was not the driver. Early adopters who were fascinated by the capabilities of the new tools were simply out of step with the needs of the maturing marketplace. I found that my research results were in complete alignment with the article I quoted in the previous post, Part 7, of this series.
Given my client’s goal of building relationships and encouraging personal endorsements from current and former customers, my research focused on professionals who had public relations and reputation building expertise. Healthcare would make sense, among a variety of care-focused industries. One of the recruiting advantages for the company is the unmet need for this healthcare service, and the fact that values-oriented Millennials would be attracted to the mission.
I would be seeking candidates with a track record of committing to the goals and values of an organization and creatively using social media to build communities. The focus of the research would be on top tier Public Relations firms that had established social media practices and/or non-profit or care focused organizations that were early adopters of social media tools.
I begin by researching potential companies/agencies in major markets in addition to the Midwest city where the position was based. I thought mobile Millennials would be more likely to relocate for a compelling new challenge, I quickly found out that was not the case.
There is a reason and it is consistent with their job-hunting expectations. If the likelihood is that a job will only last for a year or two, why uproot for essentially a temporary position? There could be exceptions, if for personal reasons, e.g. the location was desirable for a family. However, for the most part, I focused on candidates who were within commuting distance.