Table of Contents
Top 25 Online Influencers in Leadership v3 2011 – June 22, 2011 (Bodega Bay, CA)
This is the 12th Top 25 Influencers List we’ve published since the project began in late 2009. In that time we’ve drawn a variety of praise, fury, yawns, indifference and curiosity. The lists document a universe that is evolving over time.
This is the third "leadership" list. This time, we’ve tried to tweak the keyword cloud so that it reflects the people you’d discover if you were trying to think about leadership. The results have an HR bias but mingle HR thought leaders with people who make a difference in leadership development.
The project is an attempt to understand how influence works in online settings. The Top 25 lists are not comprehensive views of who influences HR. Jac Fitz-Ens, Peter Capelli, John Boudreau, and a fair number of the folks on our hand-made top influencers list would have to be a part of the process. They don’t have big social media identities so they don’t make these lists.
But, it’s also increasingly difficult to see the impact of the old guard because most people use search engines to discover things. The people we put forth in our lists are the ones that you’d find in a search of social media (and increasingly, therefore) all of the web.
The lists are generated by algorithm. The web is scoured for the people who generate content that corresponds to the keywords we’ve associated with a topic. Then, those people are vetted for traffic, mentions, re-tweets, likes, inbound links, Twitter followers, Facebook friends and LinkedIn stuff.
Three scores are developed:
- Reach: An estimate of audience size
- Resonance: Re-tweets, likes, mentions, quotes , references
- Relevance: Relative match against the keyword "cloud" that defines the search
There are some emerging tools that measure some of this. Both Klout (which focuses on Twitter activity) and EmpireAvenue (which measures the people who sign up and helps them grow their influence) give related information about online influence.
I asked Pierre-Loic Assayag, the CEO of Traackr, to talk a little about the difference between Traackr and Klout:
"In a nutshell though, here are the main differences:
- Klout is a Twitter-only play. Anything they do/measure outside of Twitter (Facebook and since last week LinkedIn) is on an opt-in basis. So in other words, you have to be a Klout user and grant access to your account for Klout to get any data on you off these 2 sites.
- Klout has no concept of relevance, so what you get is a generic score attached to a twitter handle. They announced a couple of weeks ago +K, which is a way to tag Klout users to topics, for example, I could tag your profile for HR, Recruiting, etc. I’m dubious about this way of crowdsourcing relevance as it makes the process very easy to game unless millions are participating in the tagging, but we’ll see
Our advice to people who are looking at Klout is that it is a good post-processing tool, meaning, you’ve already identified the people you’re interested in (in other words, if you’ve already run a search on Google or LinkedIn to determine relevance manually), Klout can help you determine basic reach/resonance on Twitter for these people. Don’t try though to source people from Klout as you’ll always end up with the same louder voices of Twitter."
In other words, Klout can give you an individual score while Traackr is a discovery tool for people within discrete niches.
As always, we’re looking forward to your feedback. These lists are a work in progress and are evolving along with the technology and its adoption. Please let us know what you think.
It’s really pretty amazing that Anna Brekka isn’t on the Top 100 Influencers in HR list yet. The Danish born and bred New Englander is a landmark on the Recruiting map. Since 2003, she’s been involved in the development of the Kennedy Information businesses that ultimately merged with Onrec. If you’ve been to one of those shows over the last decade, you were looking directly at Anna’s work.
This year, she’s running the show. The dust has settled from the merger. Bits and pieces of adjacent audiences are all being rolled into one revitalized event.
This is the Anna show.
Don’t you find it interesting that not one of the major Recruiting industry conferences is woman led? That was true until now. With Anna at the helm, OnRec is headed into new and uncharted waters.
She’s trying to rethink the entire premise of the conference.
The event will be divided into two parts. Day one will be a series of panels with key industry experts discussing key issues. It’s like the sampler menu for Day Two.
On Day Two, everyone who was on the panels will be involved in a hands-on session digging into the practical details of the conversation from the panels. This way, you get a sense of everything at the show on the first day and then select an area to explore more fully.
It’s a brilliant solution to the standard trade show problem: you have to pick from an expansive menu with little real way to understand whether or not it will be useful. Once you’re committed to a session, you lose the option of experiencing the others. Even the best events suffer from this bad menu choice problem.
We’ll be there to see this new approach in action. Hopefully you’ll join in the fun.
The idea that Recruiting, in its current shape, is some sort of a strategic function is completely laughable. At best, most Recruiters are “fixers” or “firefighters”. They respond to immediate crises.
In most business functions, one plans in order to either avoid or minimize crises. When a commodity is essential to smooth operations, one manages the supply. Predictability in the supply chain is what differentiates a great company from an erratic lifestyle business.
The most obvious example is the cherished position occupied by the search function. Searching is what desperate people have to do when they are unprepared for a shortage. Searching is a profoundly reactive function.
Instead of being the model of industry excellence, searching should be understood as the method of last resort. It represents a failure of the planning necessary to run a successful business. One searches for replacement personnel because one is not prepared.
Because there is no meaningful educational infrastructure in our industry, some extraordinary myths get repeated:
- Using free software is a cost effective approach to Recruiting;
- Technology solves Recruiting problems;
- Someone who isn’t looking for a job is preferable to someone who is;
- Recruiting is not local, industry or job specific; and
- Planning is impossible in Recruiting.
The list goes on and on. Everywhere you look, being busy and doing stuff appears to be valued over producing results.
It’s easy with “All You Can Post” from Beyond.com, the world’s largest network of niche career communities. Advertise all of your jobs on all relevant sites across the network for a low fixed price.
“All You Can Post” is based on your specific recruitment needs, so you won’t overpay. In fact, our quarterly trial is a great way to stretch your remaining 2011 recruitment budget.
If you are a journalist or blogger and plan on being in Las Vegas for SHRM next week, you should put this on your calendar.
I got the following note the other day. I hadn’t been following the issue closely (though the folks at ERE tell me it’s been gurgling for a while.) A significant number of ex SHRM Board Directors, ex SHRM Foundation Board Chairs, State and local leaders and key figures (like Gerry Crispin and Jac Fitz-Enz) are really dissatisfied with a series of things that are going on at SHRM HQ.
TO: Human Resource Management Journalists and Authors/Bloggers
SUBJECT: Important Press Conference
Attached is an invitation to attend a very important press conference and luncheon at Las Vegas’ famous Piero’s Italian Restaurant on June 26, 2011, at 12 PM.
This press conference will be held in conjunction with the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Annual Conference and Exhibition on Sunday. The press conference is sponsored by a voluntary group of SHRM members who are trying to reinstate transparency within the Society’s governance process. Our group has assumed the name of SHRM Members for Transparency (SMFT).
This group was established in 2010 after many long-time SHRM volunteers and members became concerned about the establishment of some SHRM Board of Directors’ policies that the group believes were not in SHRM members’ best interests and, in some cases, were unknown to SHRM members. In addition, there are concerns about SHRM’s financial and operating performance and long-term direction.
Examples of such issues are summarized on our website: www.shrmmembersfortransparency.com
Since August 2010, the SHRM Members for Transparency group has repeatedly requested to meet with the SHRM Board of Directors to work cooperatively and discreetly in reviewing those policies and to take other efforts to restore transparency to the society’s governance pressures.
As had been previously reported, to date, the SHRM Board has refused to meet and/or discuss these issues with our group. Thus we have taken our issues directly to the SHRM regional and state leadership.
At the press conference we shall briefly summarize our group’s progress, make an important announcement, and provide an opportunity for questions.
We anticipate that some professional associates of yours may not be known to us, yet may also have an interest in attending our luncheon and press conference. If so, feel free to share this invitation with them, after checking with us to ensure space availability. You can reserve space by emailing Kate Herbst, event coordinator, at Kate.L.Herbst (at) altria.com.
This is not your standard-issue social media war party. It’s a collection of long time SHRM members who have demonstrated their commitment with service and leadership. They are upset by the behavior of SHRM’s board and refusal to meet with the group.
These days, SHRM’s legal counsel has a hair trigger on his straight from the 1950s tendency to threaten legal action against anyone who would criticize the organization in public. Here’s how SMFT tells the story:
In September, 2010, following the recommendation of a MAC representative, a member of our group, Michael R. Losey, SPHR, CAE, former SHRM President & CEO, outlined the SHRM Members for Transparency concerns to Hank Jackson,SHRM’s CEO. Mr. Jackson, after reviewing our concerns, told Mr. Losey that “The Board should see this.” Since then SMFT representatives have been trying to obtain a meeting with the Board to more fully discuss our concerns.
Prior to the SHRM Leadership Conference we sent to the Board Chair and the CEO of the Society a copy of exactly what the SHRM Members for Transparency were planning to share with the Regional and State Council leadership and, if necessary, subsequently the general membership. At the same time, we extended the Board the professional courtesy of reviewing and identifying any statements or content that they thought were incorrect or misleading. We offered to make any required changes prior to publication on our proposed website and dissemination of our information to the Regional and State Council leadership.
Our response was a prompt reply from SHRM’s General Counsel, Mr. Henry Hart, threatening to sue Mr. Losey personally and our group collectively on unjustified and intimidating grounds if we published our findings and recommendations for improving SHRM. SHRM’s legal counsel also suggested there were a number of errors in our proposed message to SHRM leaders and members. We have continued to ask repeatedly for identification of any such errors and SHRM either refuses or cannot specifically indentify errors.
Last week, I had the chance to speak with a member of SHRM’s leadership team. He assured me, when I suggested that the organization may be out of touch, that the members are happy and that these are the best of times. It was one of those Nixon style conversations where every question was taken as an opportunity to define the problem away. He was really good at it.
Professional Associations, like the music business and the news industry, had a long monopoly rooted in their control of information distribution. The time has ended and they are taking their last laps around the track. Increasingly, the real strength of the SHRM organization involves local chapters. My conversation partner was quick to point out that they (the local chapters) weren’t really part of SHRM.
That said, the story seems to be like the old fairy tale about the Princess and the Pea. In that tale, a princess is someone who is sensitive to something small, many layers below the surface. It’s a great metaphor for describing the difference between appearances (symptoms … like the princess’ sleeplessness) and actual causes (a pea under 20 layers of mattress).
A quick scan of the outstanding issues raises the question of what the real issue is. SMFT describes seven issues:
- Board Compensation (SHRM’s Board gets paid, many non profit boards don’t)
- Board Perks (notably First Class travel)
- Dues Linked to CPI (SHRM intends to raise its dues to match inflation)
- Lack of HCI Priorities (SMFT believes that board members should be HCI certified)
- CEO Job Specifications (The hunt for a new CEO is taking too long and the spec doesn’t require an HR background)
- Board Election Issues (The last election didn’t involve the required staggered terms which gives the board an advantage in pursuing its agenda)
- Reversed Policies (The Board changed policy on Board member speaking fees – it’s okay now; the CEO is now a voting Board Member; and, the custom of publishing board meeting summaries was discontinued for a year.)
From way outside the politics, this looks like a battle over whether the SHRM Board is supposed to be a Board of Directors or a representative body. It smacks of an organization in deep transition for cultural, political and technological reasons. It feels and smells just like newspaper boardrooms did in the late 1990s. It’s the non-profit version of the Board reform that is sweeping the private sector.
The SHRM board has a certain Marie Antoinette quality to its handling of the issues. The SMFT faction evokes a bit of the Arab Spring. Hopefully, SMFT has a game plan for the moment that the board says “Hey, this is a low paying gig at a non-profit. Maybe, we should turn this over to the membership.”
What’s missing from this polarized situation is any teensy-weensy bit of conversation. The SMFT sounds shrill while the SHRM Board stonewalls.
If you’re in Las Vegas on the 26th, this ought to be an interesting show.
In the meantime, you owe it to yourself to visit the SMFT website, review the issues and form an opinion.