BY Annelize van Rensburg director of Signium Africa (previously Talent Africa), a leading South Africa-based executive search and talent management company servicing sub-Saharan Africa.

Who needs a top job as a senior manager or executive? Why bother? It’s only an annual salary of R1,5 million or more. If they want you, they’ll see your potential. Just rock up for the interview. You’ll be fine.This attitude alone is probably enough to wreck any chance of landing a top job, but just to be sure you can always adopt some of the self-destructive behaviours known to kill a candidate’s interview prospects.You can …

1. Turn up late. Blame the traffic or bad-mouth the location, especially if it’s at the hiring company’s head office.

2. Fail to prepare. Don’t even check the corporate website. Ensure the interview panel know you have done no ‘homework’ by confusing the recruiting company with a competitor or by asking questions that display ignorance of the company and its industry.

3. Dress to fail. Jeans, scruffy shoes and an open-neck shirt should do it, or perhaps high heels, a revealing top and a micro-mini.

4. Display self-interest. At the first possible moment ask about pay and perks.

Then ask about how much paid leave you can expect.Even senior people scupper their chances through crass errors like these. They are looking for seven-figure salaries and might be experienced personnel in their 40s or 50s, but still self-destruct.If you really want the job, you avoid obvious pitfalls.The biggest key is proper preparation.Research the recruiting company (inside out). Read its financial statements and annual reports. Make sure you know the names of the CEO, executive team and board members. Prep for the interview by driving the route to the venue ahead of time. This ensures you know the way, the traffic and the time commitment.Know your CV backwards.

Memorize key dates and bring along extra hard copies to ensure all panel members have your CV. Make sure all information is correct and up to date. Tell no lies!Always display passion and a positive attitude to life in general and your career in particular. Infuse the panel with your energy. Dead fish do not get top jobs.Share with the panel concrete, well-considered examples of strategic and operational achievements. Punt team efforts and give credit to peers and teams when reviewing career highlights. Be honest.Ask questions that display an interest in the recruiting company, its industry and the position you are targeting. Strategic issues and corporate culture are favoured topics.

Leave questions about pay and perks until later.Show loyalty to current employers or at the very least display restraint and discretion. Put the focus on new opportunities rather than past disappointments.Dress appropriately. To be safe, dress up, not down.Show respect. Switch off that cell phone. This interview is more important than your dinner plans.Always indicate that you take responsibility and make yourself accountable. It might be tempting to blame others when discussing career challenges, but leaders show resilience. They have ‘broad shoulders and turn problems into opportunities.Do all this and you have a shot at that dream job. 

www.signium.co.za

By Michelle Moss, director at Signium Africa (Previously Talent Africa) www.talent-africa.co.za

The corporate world embraces diversity and inclusion. Countless mission statements say so. Building a diverse organisation is supposedly a strategic imperative. But the question remains: Are businesses making it happen or missing the mark?

One test is talent acquisition. If diversity is so important, you would expect it to be reflected in the selection of senior executives and skilled professionals.In the real world, a mixed picture emerges.Awareness of the advantages of diversity and inclusion is certainly growing.

The ‘2017 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends’ report says 69% of executives say diversity and inclusion are important, up from 59% in the previous survey.Furthermore, the number of executives who cited inclusion as top priority rose 32%.Diversity strategy has the CEO’s attention.CEOs are the primary sponsors of diversity initiatives, according to 38% of executives canvassed in this international survey.Finding the right skills, irrespective of gender or race, is crucial. It ranks third among the major concerns of business leaders, says the Deloitte report. It is ‘very important’ or ‘important’ to 83% of executives.Increasing pressure to comply with organisational hiring policies and quotas also drives growing focus on diversity and inclusion.There is an implicit prohibition of ‘cloning’ (hiring someone just like you) as it perpetuates the status quo and is bad for the business.

Failure to move forward could even kill the business, yet the practice remains prevalent.‘Cloning’ may not involve the same race, gender and religion, but the same skills, management approach, interests, likes and dislikes as the hiring manager and team.The pretext is often that the selection gives the best ‘culture fit’ and therefore seems perfectly acceptable.However, ‘cloning’ is toxic as it fosters group-think. Consensus and like-mindedness strangle collaboration, creativity, innovation and risk-taking.Industries and technologies change. Customer’s needs change. Therefore, a team’s ability to generate new ideas and embrace change is critical.

Here, experience shows it is easier to teach a multi-skilled team how to resolve conflict among themselves than it is to teach a homogenous group how to generate alternative solutions.We can espouse diversity in theory, but nullify it in practice simply by sticking with time-honoured recruitment practice that might be skewed toward recruitment in our own image.

This explains growing doubts about traditional interviewing.It seems our brains are hot-wired to make rapid assumptions (an asset when ancient man had to instantly assess danger). Research shows we take just 15 seconds in a rush to judgment. Essentially, we look for things that make us comfortable.Quickie judgments like this can flaw traditional interviews.Obtaining a diverse skills set may be vital. But how, if old-style interviews might not be up to the job?A mix of tools is increasingly adopted, including psychometric tests (often questionnaire-based), simulation exercises (to replicate challenging scenarios and scrutinise behaviour) and semi-structured or competency-based interviews.Is there any evidence South African business is racing to adopt these more objective assessment tools in its quest for greater representivity?Yes and no.Some employers are moving in this direction.

Others rely greatly (sometimes solely) on traditional interviews. Often, objective assessment techniques identify a high potential candidate who challenges traditional thinking, identifies novel opportunities and embraces risk, but is passed over by a hiring team who favour slow, cautious and conservative thinking.Again, the culture-fit rationale is trotted out.It seems everyone wants diversity, but ‘cloning’ is comfortable, ‘cloning’ is acceptable … but for how long?

Your company is embroiled in a reputational crisis of such magnitude it could bring down the business and with it your previously stellar career as a senior executive… what do you do to protect your own good name?

It’s no idle question. Some huge organisations – from BP to Ford to Volkswagen to KPMG – have recently been in the reputational crosshairs and in the era of non-stop communication, whistle-blower hotlines and tighter regulation more will follow.US estimates indicate 19 out of 20 US companies are unprepared or under-prepared for the management of reputational crisis.

Even the PR kingpins at Bell Pottinger appeared totally taken aback when scandal erupted on their own doorstep.We can therefore assume most local firms are at least under-prepared and so are their top executives.However, some lessons have been learned over the years and broad guidelines put in place; though they generally relate to corporate rather than individual executive responses.In many instances, however, advice to corporates can be reworked into advice for individuals.Among tips for corporates is to anticipate crises, conduct an audit of ‘vulnerabilities’, have a plan in place ahead of time along with agreed procedures, nominate approved spokes-people, brief them on what may or may not be said, and try to appear helpful and ready to communicate rather than go to ground.Individuals can follow a similar strategy.Personal vulnerabilities are shaped by executive roles and divisional responsibilities.

So, if you are CFO, make sure you are exceptionally well informed on hot financial media issues (e.g. transfer pricing or base erosion profit shifting across borders).If your division engages in activities that might cause pollution, make sure you are on top of all environmental developments, while insisting on rigorous controls.Prudent personal preparation includes reinforcement of your own reputation for ethical dealing.Don’t simply talk the talk. Walk the walk. Make good ethical practice an integral part of your approach to your work and personal conduct.Involve yourself with initiatives undertaken buy professional and industry bodies to strengthen ethical standards. Include in your personal network any industry figures, academics or professionals known as good governance champions.

Tap these ethical gurus for updates on latest practice.Speak on ethical issues on industry occasions, though this just might boomerang if your company is caught red handed.Remember, if you are on the Exco, you are accountable. Senior executives are frontline PR people, like it or not.If you are confronted by difficult questions (from media or staff) don’t become defensive.

‘No comment’ is code for ‘We’ve something to hide’.You could perhaps say the issue is under review and nothing can be said until enquiries are complete.Maintain communication with staff, suppliers and associates, even if you can only generalise and request patience.

Refusing to take calls does not help.When communicating – even privately or via social media – never impugn your own organisation.You can say you share public concern and indicate sympathy for those affected by the alleged lapse in standards, but joining the chorus of criticism strikes the wrong note and positions the executive as a turncoat.As the crisis unfolds, the executive has to face a critical question: Do I resign or stay? The answer depends on the nature of the scandal, the degree of perceived involvement, the reactions of corporate and industry peers, and perhaps professional and legal advice.If an individual is well known as a fair, honest and ethical professional, damage limitation is possible, though even totally innocent parties can be tainted by association to some degree.Individuals may face extra scrutiny from their peers, investors and prospective employers.

A well-prepared executive with a sound personal reputation should be able to withstand the scrutiny, though living with the aftermath of scandal can make huge demands on those concerned.Executives who cope best are those who know their consciences are clear and did everything possible to uphold ethical standards.

By Gusti Coetzer, director at Signium Africa (previously Talent Africa)

Future-spotting is a key strategic challenge for senior management. For those taking a forward-view, a new priority has emerged … how to react to the rise of the robots.Science fiction is fast becoming reality in manufacturing and service industries in the developed world. Businesses in Africa will have to follow suit if they hope to become competitive.

A 2016 study by the International Federation of Robotics says the number of robots sold globally with double to 400 000 units by 2018, with 70% of the demand coming from China, Japan, USA, South Korea and Germany.World Bank research says Africa has two industrial robots per 100 000 manufacturing workers and massively lags the developed world, but cannot ignore the trend.Jobs are a major focus point.

A widely quoted 2016 study by Daron Acemoglu (MIT) and Pascal Restrepo (Boston University) suggested bots would merely trigger the creation of new, better jobs.This year, they finished the first quantitative survey of job losses using real-world data. This less positive study shows bots cost 670 000 US manufacturing jobs between 1990 and 2007. In one local economy the academics scrutinised, each bot cut 6.2 jobs per 1000 workers.Acemoglu and Restrepo say US bot sales are expected to quadruple, so job losses could mount.Yet many companies that invest in robotics say they are hiring more as higher productivity drives company growth. People move to tasks with high value creation. Job losses at less automated competitors are hard to assess, however.Should executives worry? As blue-collar jobs decline, will executive numbers be decimated by machines gunning for top jobs?

Not likely …Any review of the literature confirms that humans always outscore machines when it comes to thinking, planning and decision-making. We can think ahead.

They can’t, however today artificial intelligence needs to be taken into account. It is arguably a “which came first, the chicken or the egg”?One commentator noted: “We can map out a series of steps that can lead us to a certain goal. This is what robots cannot do. They lack the ability to plan ahead of time.”Machines are faster, more precise, more consistent and more productive. Pressure on repetitive manufacturing jobs is already evident. But service sectors are not immune.One robotics application now flips burgers to consistent quality levels, with big implications for college dropouts who assume they can always get a job flipping burgers.The lesson is simple.

A good education and skills are essential for humans.In a paper to the International Management Conference in Bucharest, D.M. Florian noted: “Studies suggest robots are increasing our wages, not stealing our jobs, though there has been a decrease in the number of positions at some companies. However, the need for more qualified positions has gone up…“Technology has been proved to make humans smarter… A machine has no ability to assess situations and cannot look at a set of transactions and provide an overall picture of what they could mean.”Florian concluded: “Robots will only be able to support the problem-solving structure. They cannot replace it.”Many experts say man-versus-machine simplification is off the mark.

Man with machine is more probable. Growing sales of collaborative robots or cobots are reported worldwide.Here, one area of development is wearable robotics or exoskeletons that augment human capabilities with technology. ABI Research says about 40 R&D groups currently work in the field – the basis for a “$2-billion global market by 2025”.Military and healthcare applications are focus areas. So are industrial uses. Many firms are in the market for “motorised muscles” for heavy lifting or for sensor-actuated exoskeleton suits that “protect and serve” humans during dangerous work.In all cases, a trained and skilled person is needed to operate the wearables, hinting at a future in which humans work with cobots in many areas.Unskilled employment may therefore fall. You need skills to get the best out of cobots or “smart overalls” representing a big capex investment.The highly trained, well-educated cobot co-worker will become a major contributor to productivity and profit.

Executives will still find ‘man’ management is a key part of their task, but a new managerial style may be needed in this high-skill, high-knowledge environment.A very human, empathetic approach will be more appropriate than ‘command and control’. Ironically, the cobots could bring out our human side.

Website: www.signium.com