SHRM Survey Findings: 2014 EconomicConditions—CaliforniaGlobal Competition and Hiring Strategies
October 30, 2014
•This is Part 3 of the California results from a series of SHRM surveyresults about the state of jobs and skills in the current economiccondition, which relates to a SHRM survey series about the ongoingimpact of the U.S. and global recession from 2007 to 2012. Californiaand U.S. results are compared, and statistically significant differencesare indicated in separate slides in the report.
•California results will be reported separately in three different topicareas:
Overall financial health and hiring.
Recruiting and skills gaps.
Global competition and hiring strategies.
•Overall results (including industry-specific information) for 2013 canbe found on our website athttp://www.shrm.org/research/surveyfindings/articles/pages/shrmpolltheongoingimpactoftherecession.aspx
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
2
Introduction
•What strategies have California organizations been using to deal with recruiting challengesfor full-time regular positions? A little more than one-half (51%) oforganizations in California indicated using social media to deal withsuch challenges, followed by the use of a recruitment agency (44%) andcollaborating with educational institutions (40%). Organizations havealso applied strategies that focus on using current employees, includingtraining existing employees to take on the hard-to-fill positions (37%)and expanding training programs to help improve skills of new hires(35%).
Organizations in California were less likely to report collaboratingwith educational institutions (40%) and seeking talent fromnontraditional sources (24%) to deal with recruiting challenges,compared with 49% and 33% in the rest of the U.S.
•What recruiting strategies do California organizations cite as most effective? The mosteffective strategies for dealing with recruiting challenges inCalifornia included using a recruitment agency (54%), using social media(52%), expanding advertising efforts (51%) and targeting passivejobseekers (51%).
Compared with the rest of the U.S., organizations in California weremore likely to cite targeting passive job seekers as an effectivestrategy for dealing with recruiting challenges (42% for the U.S.and 51% for California).
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
3
Key Findings
•Have California organizations been hiring workers from outside the U.S. for jobs that havebeen difficult to fill? Nearly one-quarter (23%) of California organizationshave sponsored foreign nationals for H-1B visas in an attempt to fillkey full-time regular positions that have been difficult to fill withqualified U.S. employees. For O visas, TN visas and other visas, thepercentages were 4%, 11% and 9%, respectively.
•Have California organizations been hiring U.S. veterans for jobs that have been difficult tofill? One-half (50%) of organizations in California reported hiring U.S.veterans for full-time regular positions in the last 12 months, comparedwith almost two-thirds (64%) in the rest of the U.S.
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
4
Key Findings (continued)
•In their desire to find workers with skills that match theirorganization’s job openings, HR professionals should considerpartnerships or some form of outreach with local educationalinstitutions. Private-sector collaboration with vocational schools,which can involve developing curricula that help build skills requiredby local employers, has become a popular approach in some U.S. cities.Two out of five organizations in California, and nearly 50% of overallU.S. organizations, said they have collaborated with educationalinstitutions to deal with recruiting challenges.
•Recent research by SHRM has shown that many employers have cut back onfunding for some forms of professional and career development, such astuition assistance and cross-training for employees. This runscounterintuitive to efforts to find properly skilled individuals foropen positions, and may be due only to economic conditions that havecaused some employers to tighten their budgets. Nonetheless,professional development assistance should be an important tool for HRprofessionals to strengthen the skills of their employees. Nearly halfof California organizations (48%) and overall U.S. organizations (49%)said training existing employees for hard-to-fill positions waseffective when dealing with recruiting challenges.
•Across all industries in the U.S., high-tech appears to have thegreatest demand for highly skilled workers. The sector has been a strongperformer in the U.S. economy, but HR professionals in that industryshould make concerted efforts to train employees and developpartnerships to recruit and retain high-skilled workers. The high-techindustry in California (23%) and in the U.S. (20%) is the most likely torecruit globally for hard-to-fill positions. Its HR professionals, morefrequently than all other sectors, also identify global competition fortalent as a recruiting challenge for their organization.
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
5
What Do These Findings Mean for the HRProfession?
Strategies Organizations Used to Deal withRecruiting Challenges for Full-Time RegularPositions
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
6
Note: Respondents who answered "don't know" were excluded from this analysis. Percentages do not equal 100% dueto multiple response options.
California (n = 514)
United States (n =2,900)
Using social media
51%
54%
Using a recruitment agency
44%
39%
Collaborating witheducational institutions
40%
48%
Expanding advertisingefforts
39%
41%
Training existingemployees to take on thehard-to-fill positions
37%
39%
Expanding trainingprograms to help improveskills of new hires
35%
37%
Targeting passive jobseekers
33%
33%
Expanding geographicsearch region
25%
30%
Seeking talent fromnontraditional sources(e.g., veterans, retirees)
24%
32%
Strategies Organizations Used to Deal withRecruiting Challenges for Full-Time RegularPositions (continued)
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
7
Note: Respondents who answered "don't know" were excluded from this analysis. Percentages do not equal 100% dueto multiple response options.
California (n = 514)
United States (n =2,900)
Increasing retentionefforts
32%
37%
Improving compensation
28%
24%
Using/enhancing employeereferral program
25%
26%
Providing monetaryincentives to candidates(e.g., signing bonus)
20%
19%
Offering more flexiblework arrangements
20%
23%
Improving benefits package
13%
14%
Offering new job perks
6%
7%
Other
3%
3%
None; we are not using anyof the above recruitingstrategies
10%
7%
Strategies Organizations Used to Deal withRecruiting Challenges for Full-Time RegularPositions (continued)
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
8
Note: Only statistically significant differences are shown. California responses were excluded from the UnitedStates group for this analysis.
United States—California Comparison
•Organizations in California were less likely to collaborate with educationalinstitutions to deal with recruiting challenges for full-time regular positionscompared with the rest of the U.S.
•Organizations in California were less likely to seek talent from nontraditionalsources (e.g., veterans, retirees) to deal with recruiting challenges for full-timeregular positions compared with the rest of the U.S.
Collaborating with Educational Institutions
California (40%)
<
United States (49%)
Seeking Talent from Nontraditional Sources
California (24%)
<
United States (33%)
Recruiting Strategies Organizations Feel AreMost Effective
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
9
Note: Respondents who answered “don't know” were excluded from this analysis. Respondents were asked only aboutthose recruiting strategies that their organizations were using and were allowed to select up to three options.Percentages do not equal 100% due to multiple response options.
California (n = 20-261)
United States (n =102-1,571)
Using a recruitment agency
54%
51%
Using social media
52%
51%
Expanding advertisingefforts
51%
51%
Targeting passive jobseekers
51%
42%
Training existingemployees to take on thehard-to-fill positions
48%
49%
Collaborating witheducational institutions
36%
37%
Expanding geographicsearch region
35%
33%
Expanding trainingprograms to help improveskills of new hires
31%
37%
Seeking talent fromnontraditional sources(e.g., veterans, retirees)
27%
27%
Recruiting Strategies Organizations Feel AreMost Effective (continued)
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
10
Note: Respondents who answered “don't know” were excluded from this analysis. Respondents were asked only aboutthose recruiting strategies that their organizations were using and were allowed to select up to three options.Percentages do not equal 100% due to multiple response options.
California (n = 20-261)
United States (n =102-1,571)
Offering more flexiblework arrangements
43%
40%
Improving compensationpackage
41%
41%
Using/enhancing employeereferral program
40%
42%
Increasing retentionefforts
35%
33%
Providing monetaryincentives to candidates(e.g., signing bonus)
34%
31%
Improving benefits package
20%
29%
Offering new job perks
10%
12%
Other
40%
31%
Recruiting Strategies Organizations Feel AreMost Effective
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
11
Note: Only statistically significant differences are shown. California responses were excluded from the UnitedStates group for this analysis.
United States—California Comparison
•Organizations in California were more likely to target passive job seekers as one ofthe three most effective recruiting strategies compared with the rest of the U.S.
Targeting Passive Job Seekers
California (51%)
>
United States (41%)
Sponsorship for Foreign Nationals for KeyFull-Time Positions That Are Difficult toFill with Qualified U.S. Employees
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
12
Note: Respondents who answered "don't know" were excluded from this analysis. Percentages may not equal 100% dueto rounding.
HaveRecruited/Hiredand Plan toContinue
HaveRecruited/Hiredbut Do NOT Planto Continue
Have NotRecruited/Hiredbut Plan to inthe Next 12Months
Have NotRecruited/Hiredand Do NOT Planto in the Next 12Months
CA(n =474)
U.S.(n =2,560)
CA(n =413)
U.S.(n =2,261)
CA(n =424)
U.S.(n =2,301)
CA(n =387)
U.S.(n =2,131)
H-1B visas(specialtyoccupationworkers)
23%
20%
8%
7%
2%
2%
68%
71%
O visas(individualswithextraordinaryability orachievement)
4%
2%
1%
1%
2%
3%
93%
94%
TN visas(Treaty NAFTAvisas forMexican andCanadianbusinesspeople)
11%
8%
3%
2%
2%
3%
84%
88%
Other visas
9%
7%
3%
2%
1%
2%
87%
89%
Hired U.S. Veterans for Full-Time RegularPositions in the Last 12 Months
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
13
Note: Respondents who answered "don't know" were excluded from this analysis. Percentages may not equal 100% dueto rounding.
Hired U.S. Veterans for Full-Time RegularPositions in the Last 12 Months
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
14
Note: Only statistically significant differences are shown. California responses were excluded from the UnitedStates group for this analysis.
United States—California Comparison
•Organizations in California were less likely to have hired U.S. veterans for full-time positions in the last 12 months compared with the rest of the U.S.
Hired U.S. Veterans
California (50%)
>
United States (65%)
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
15
Demographics (California)
Demographics (CA): Organization Industry
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
16
Note: n = 572. Percentages do not equal 100% due to multiple response options.
Percentage
Professional, scientific, and technical services
16%
Accommodation and food services, retail/wholesale trade
11%
Health care and social assistance
11%
Manufacturing
11%
High-tech
10%
Other industry
9%
Government agencies
9%
Finance, insurance, real estate and rental and leasing
8%
Educational services
7%
Construction, mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction
6%
Demographics (CA): Organization Sector
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
17
Note: n = 572. Percentages do not equal 100% due to rounding.
Demographics (CA): Organization Staff Size
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
18
n = 504
n = 535
Demographics (CA): Other
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
19
U.S.-based operationsonly
67%
Multinationaloperations
33%
Single-unit organization: Anorganization in which thelocation and the organizationare one and the same.
30%
Multi-unit organization: Anorganization that has morethan one location.
70%
Multi-unit headquarters determinesHR policies and practices
48%
Each work location determines HRpolicies and practices
3%
A combination of both the worklocation and the multi-unitheadquarters determines HRpolicies and practices
49%
Is your organization a single-unit organization or amulti-unit organization?
For multi-unit organizations, are HR policies and practicesdetermined by the multi-unit headquarters, by each worklocation or by both?
Does your organization have U.S.-basedoperations (business units) only, or does itoperate multinationally?
n = 542
n = 398
20
SHRM Survey Findings
•3,655 HR professionals participated in this survey from a randomlyselected sample of SHRM’s membership from the entire United Statesand an additional random sample from California
•U.S. respondents (including CA) = 3,335, response rate = 13%, marginof error = +/-2%
•CA respondents = 572, response rate = 10%, margin of error = +/-4%
•Survey fielded December 16, 2013 - January 16, 2014
Survey Methodology
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
•SHRM California Resources
•SHRM Leading Indicators of National Employment (LINE)
•SHRM Jobs Outlook Survey (JOS)
•SHRM Metro Economic Outlooks
•SHRM’s Workforce Readiness Resource Page
•SHRM Foundation: What’s Next: Future Global Trends Affecting YourOrganization, Evolution of Work and the Worker
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
21
Additional SHRM Resources
For more survey/poll findings, visit shrm.org/surveys
Follow us on Twitter @SHRM_Research
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
22
About SHRM Research
Project lead:
Tanya Mulvey, researcher, SHRM Research
Project contributors:
Alexander Alonso, Ph.D., SPHR, vice president, SHRM Research
Evren Esen, director, Survey Programs, SHRM Research
Yan Dong, Survey Research Center, SHRM Research
Christina Lee, researcher, SHRM Research
Qikun Niu, intern, SHRM Research
Jennifer Schramm, manager, Workplace Trends and Forecasting,SHRM Research
Joseph Coombs, senior analyst, Workforce Trends, SHRM Research
Copy editor:
Katya Scanlan, SHRM Knowledge Center
Founded in 1948, the Society for Human Resource Management(SHRM) is the world’s largest HR membership organizationdevoted to human resource management. Representing more than275,000 members in over 160 countries, the Society is theleading provider of resources to serve the needs of HRprofessionals and advance the professional practice of humanresource management. SHRM has more than 575 affiliated chapterswithin the United States and subsidiary offices in China, Indiaand United Arab Emirates. Visit us at shrm.org.
Economic Conditions—California Global Competition and Hiring Strategies ©SHRM 2014
23
About SHRM