Do you want to be in contact with a recruiter? Do not use Facebook!

We can exchange and receive information in real-time; this dynamic and multiple sources’ network boosts innovation, knowledge sharing and relationships’ building.

The organisations have to embrace this revolution and their efforts are focused on (virtual) collaboration and cooperation. The results of this revolution brought also the organisations to be more open:  they have opened their doors to the external world. For example, the recruiting function has been affected by this cultural change; think about LinkedIn, the meetups and Glassdoor. You can search about the company using different media and get to know better the company culture. If you want to reach out a recruiter, it is super easy.


So, why are you using Facebook? Why would you contact a recruiter via Facebook? Why would you move a contact from the professional level to the personal one? A recruiter might decide to do not answer a message. Additionally, your message might not show up because it has gone to the “spam folder”. So, I would not do it…and if you ask, the recruiters should not use Facebook to find candidates for the same reasons.

This is not another post about time management!

Our behaviour at work is the result of the perceptions of the reality around us. For example,  the perceptions related to a particular work environment are different amongst the employees of the same organization. There are employees who find the work environment very enjoyable and other ones who hate it.

One important perception is the one related to “time”. Let’s start with a simple example. We usually feel that the time is flying while we’re doing something that we like. On the contrary, we have a completely different experience when we are part of something (task, project, activity) that does not stimulate us and/or does not boost our creativity. As a consequence,  it is difficult for a manager to interpret the individuals’ perception of time. Why? We interpret our roles/task/activities in a complete different ways.


However, the managerial role is not tricky as for what I am going to describe now. Specifically, what is the perception of time with respect to success or failure?

Well, the whole thing becomes even more complicated and less generalizable than what said about the interesting (or not) tasks . The reaction towards the time spent to a complete an activity can be positive if you have completed something quickly; however, it can be perceived also positive if you have finally completed a task after a lot of time; why? you feel relieved.


Moreover, how much time we dedicate to the celebration of success or thinking about failures? Again, another perception and interpretation which depends on personality, attitude and also the work environment.

Yes. lt is very complicated. There are cases, such as in sales departments, where the achievements ( for example new deals) are celebrated. But, as the group celebrates, what is the achiever thinking? Is that celebration perceived as enough? Or is it needed more time for an individual (personal) self-reflection?  

Yes. It is complicated.  Your perception of the time is simply a fundamental dimension of your relationship with your job.


The reason why we still use job boards!

Technology development leads us to think that products or services that we are currently using are completely brand new. In other words, we think that we are using products and services that are a complete revolution in comparison to what we were using years ago. It is definitely true that technology has innovated many things (i.e. SMS vs WhatsApp); but if you think twice about it, the technology has improved services more than revolutionize that.  In other words, it is not change the “what” but only the “how”.

Additionally, it is very important to underline that the only technologies that have been completely adopted are the ones that were already present (but in a different form) in our way of doing things.  Let me give you just a few examples:

– Tablets are the PC evolution

– WhatsApp is the SMS evolution

– Netflix is the old VCR

Let’s say, the biggest technological innovation has been Internet; obviously, I am not considering the science research side.

Diapositiva1There is a similar idea (or misconception) in my world: recruiting.  As said in various posts, Linkedin has brought manychanges (  But, more than something different on the “what”, Linkedin has changed the relation between companies and candidates, so the “how”. For example, the resume is still the way through candidates apply for a job; Linkedin has (for the moment) only facilitated the visibility and reduced distance between companies and candidates.  For this reason, also the job boards remain very strong as system of application. Why? because they are a common and recognized way for looking for jobs and for this reason companies still use that.  Various sites have disappeared or lost market share because they failed to catch up on innovation; Linkedin has clearly made its job board very useful and easy, but it is not THE Job Board (look for example at Glassdoor and Indeed). When there will be a “routine” shift, job boards might disappear…. but it is not the case, yet.



Culture of curiosity is what your organization needs!

I have often wrote about how organization’s culture affects behaviors, both positively and negatively; specifically environments and situations guide our choices that are processed by our cognitive system.
Therefore, organizations should create a kind of experience that activates specific energy, the energy of curiosity. What do I mean?  Do you know the feeling of insecurity due to lack of knowledge and discovery’s will typical of a trip? During a trip what usually happens is that you devote cognitive energies to enable and satisfy your curiosity. So, developing a culture of  curiosity should be a priority of organizations that need to stimulate discovery for new, meeting people and in general get in contact with whole environment. That energy surely increases creativity, collaboration and entrepreneurship.

Diapositiva1As just mentioned, situations of aggregation should be guaranteed; this is even more true in todays organizations  that are increasingly interconnected, even at a distance. On the latter point, there are those who might think that  being remote workers decreases chances of collaboration; this is partly true as there are clear lacks of non-verbal messages; for this reason going to stimulate exchanges and proximity, even at a distance, should be a function of human resource management guaranteeing culture of curiosity. In other words, you should promote this path of daily travel within organization. It will look like one of the more simple things to do, but I do not think that happens in all work environments that mainly try to develop interdependence and exchanges only on work related subject with limited space for curiosity.

When over-communication is really effective communication

One of the most debated topics in the history of managerial and organizational literature is definitely what allows communication to be effective. One aspect that is often discussed is over communication, as core element for being effective with your information exchanges. Specifically it is process of increasing continuous flow of interactions aiming to lead to a clear and effective communication; in my opinion, only true in certain cases .
Giving rules of good communication within organizations surely weakens what is actually set of organizational studies that specifies how organizations are made ​​up of people and built around specificities . To this peculiarity it is important to take in account specialties of business environment , industry and those which are different ways of behaving and undisclosed routines. Shortly, as has been reported more than once in this blog, when it comes to organizational models, you have to take everything with attention.
Diapositiva1Coming back to over communication , definitely it can be useful when the team are located at a distance, and then over communication is good mediator to solve that issue. Secondly, it could be useful in cases where a person has to earn trust of interlocutor , so trying to alimentatate constant relationship. Let’s say that these are cases when over communication can work, but as mentioned before it is not always so successful. Think for example when you have your boss or colleague who are closer (I mean also as office) and then you write them many emails; do you think that it will bring you positive results in terms of communication exchange? Surely this does not help more than face to face communication that clearly is more effective;  bombardment of emails does not help, rather than being more irritating . Also if you go to push people with same method of communication over and over without going to periodically change template or action or alternating part of it , over communication will not have any result. In essence, rather than over communication believe that effective communication is definitely due to creativity and always adapting to interlocutor. Using strategy of “more” for everyone, does not always lead to the same result or good result.

Virtual teams: not only a technological matter

Diapositiva1For my master thesis (Master in Work and Organizational Psychology at Maastricht Universiteit) I studied attitudes and cognitive aspects that have an impact on virtual teams’ collaboration with respect to efficacy and effectiveness. Study’s sample was composed by  two virtual teams set in two different countries: Italy and Mozambique.

During a virtual team collaboration simulation, I considered many cognitive aspects that have to be addressed for distance-teamwork-collaboration. According to Wilson and Whitelock (1998) reliability and stability of the used device enables communication among team members. In other words, selected technology need to be adaptable and tailored for the specific collaboration’s aim. For example selected media has to connect people through e-mails and chats,  if virtual team wants to use synchronous and asynchronous communication.

A part from that, online collaboration is not only a technological matter. Trust among team members (Kimble, 2011), shared backgrounds (Tolmie & Boyle, 2000) perception of usefulness of participation (Bliuc, Ellis, Goodyear,& Piggott, 2011) and perceived interdependence (Nam & Zellner, 2011) are examples of cognitive constructs related to virtual team collaboration. It is important to create a culture of team work and being sure that people feel that they are joining a useful activity. In the opposite case there will be no collaboration. Tolmie & Boyle (2000) underlined the importance of having a shared background. More than having it, I guess that it is more important to have a drive in sharing background than an already shared.