The Top 25 Recruiting Trends, Problems, and Opportunities 

Even if you work in a corporate recruiting function with low resources or minimal expectations for change, every recruiter still has a professional obligation to maintain their awareness of the latest trends and predictions. I have grouped 25 predictions of the leading corporate recruiting trends for 2014 into four separate sections. Part 1 includes two sections that cover 14 new opportunities and continuing current trends. Part 2 (to be published next week) includes the final two sections, which cover 11 remaining trends that cover new challenges and areas that will continue to diminish in importance.

Section 1: The Hottest Recruiting Opportunities 

The eight top opportunities that will dominate strategic corporate recruiting during include:

1. The competition for top talent intensifies — you could call 2014 “the year that intense recruiting competition returned.” That is because after years of slack hiring, the competition for top performers and technical talent will increase over the next year in many industries to the point where current recruiting resources and tools will be stretched to the limit. Aggressiveness, the need for counteroffers, higher rejection rates, and a renewed focus on recruiting the currently employed will all return to prominence. As a result of this increased competition, executives will begin to put pressure on recruiting to produce new recruiting approaches that provide them with a competitive talent advantage.
2. A metric-driven employee referral program  becomes the dominant hiring source – as more firms adopt quality of hire metrics, it becomes even clearer that well-designed employer referral programs produce high performers, high retention rates, and if managed correctly, they are faster, just as diverse, and often cheaper than all other sources. Referrals are obviously not new but the results that they produce have been recently strengthened by the astonishing growth and usage of social media. The impact of social media has been so strong that that the referral hire target for top firms is now approaching a dominant 50 percent of all hires. The most effective programs will adopt specialized types of referrals including assigned referrals, proactive referrals, college referrals, and non-employee referrals. Overall the 2014 strategic referral goal should be to build a recruiting culture which makes every employee a 24/7 talent scout, and to channel these employee talent discoveries through a data-driven employee referral program. At the same time, many of the recently introduced vendor supplied external referral programs will begin their inevitable decline.
3. Predictive metrics and the use of big data move from interesting to essential – after years of struggling with “historical metrics” that have had only minimal impact, recruiting leaders are beginning to follow the lead of the rest of the business in adapting advanced metrics. This new focus will be on real-time metrics that let managers know what’s happening today, and predictive metrics, which alert everyone about upcoming recruiting problems and opportunities, so that they can act appropriately with time to spare. Although still in its infancy, a handful of vendors are beginning to show that you can actually identify hundreds of top performers who are not currently looking for a job (the so-called passives) using external “big data.” These advanced metric developments are on top of the established trend of shifting recruiting toward a data-supported decision model.
4. Employer branding returns as the only long-term recruiting strategy – after years of minimal funding and attention, strategic employer branding begins its return as the only long-term recruiting strategy. This shift is partially due to increased recruiting competition but it also comes about because social media now makes it so easy for others to virally spread either positive or negative comments covering working at your firm. The willingness of current and former employees to comment online about their work environment increases the impact of firms that reveal what employees and applicants say (i.e. Glassdoor, LinkedIn, and Universum).  Talent leaders are also gradually learning that providing a weak candidate experience can quickly damage that brand. There is now a growing division between the one percent top employer brand firms in each industry (e.g. Google, Facebook, Deloitte, P&G, and McKinsey) and the remaining 99 percent of firms that simply offer “paycheck jobs”. This dramatic and perhaps insurmountable difference in brand strength and employee treatment may permanently limit the capability of the remaining 99 percent to attract any more-than-average talent.
5. Recruiting finally adopts the practice of monetizing its business impacts – even though it has long been a standard business practice, recruiting is finally beginning to move away from its long-held attempt to “align with business goals” and instead focus on having a direct impact on business goals. Because revenue is one of the prime corporate goals, by quantifying the revenue impacts of great compared to average and weak hires, recruiting can now convincingly demonstrate its “highest of all talent function business impacts” to executives. Demonstrating the direct connection between recruiting results and improved business results will eventually supplant quality of hire as the most important recruiting measurement. By monetizing its revenue impacts, recruiting can make a continuous business case, which will provide it with the necessary funding to meet this latest hiring surge.
6. A focus on becoming a serial innovation firm increases the need for recruiting innovators – the wild economic success of serial innovation driven firms like Apple, Google, and Facebook have demonstrated to executives the high economic impact of hiring, retaining, and managing innovators. The renewed expectation for rapid corporate growth means that more innovators must be recruited. That simply can’t happen unless current recruiting systems are redesigned so that they can now effectively recruit and hire these hard-to-land innovators.
7. Boomerangs become a primary target once again — boomerang rehires have proven to be one of the highest quality of hire sources, and this new talent shortage will return them to prominence after years of inattention. As the competition for talent heats up, the best firms will re-energize alumni groups and they will use them as the mechanism for bringing back the very best former employees with a proven track record (among the many who were recently released). This increased emphasis will eventually lead to boomerang rehires reaching nearly 15 percent of all hires.
8. Accepting social media profiles in lieu of resumes opens the door to many passives – the unabated corporate goal of targeting and recruiting those top prospects who are not in job search mode”cannot be met if an up-to-date resume is required. That is because these individuals often resist applying for a job simply because they don’t have the time to update their resume. Although there are still legal and administrative hurdles, more and more firms are learning that accepting a social media profile alone (usually a LinkedIn profile) is more than adequate at least initially to begin the hiring process.

Section 2: Currently Impactful Trends That Will Continue to Remain Important

Six major corporate recruiting trends that have been prominent during the last year will continue to be significant corporate recruiting trends during the next year.

1. The mobile platform continues to be a critical tool – even though last year was “the year of the mobile platform,” the impact of this platform in recruiting will continue to expand and grow. The emergence of the technical capability that allows the direct “instant” application for jobs from mobile phones will soon become mainstream.  A multitude of startups will continue their development of a variety of recruiting-focused mobile phone apps.
2. A data-driven approach to operations continues to be the benchmark standard – even though most business functions have long ago shifted to data-driven decision making, the practice is strikingly unusual within recruiting. Google continues to separate itself from every other firm in its comprehensive data-driven approach to recruiting and its use of predictive metrics. Its recent data-driven research on the ineffectiveness of many traditional recruiting tools can only be classified as groundbreaking.
3. Live video interviewing steadily grows in acceptance – live video interviews has now proven its effectiveness, so its use will continue to expand until it becomes the standard practice, at least for initial interviews.
4. On-line candidate assessment continues toward the mainstream – as online technical knowledge and skill assessment options become cheaper and more effective, they will continue their growth until they become mainstream. Their impact is high because they reduce unnecessary interviews and they can dramatically improve the quality of hire.
5. Remote work continues to expand the talent pool – the growth of technology and the willingness of managers to accept remote work positions will continue to dramatically expand the number of available recruits for those remote work jobs. This shift to remote work will also force recruiting to increase its capability to find and land candidates around the globe.
6. Accelerated internal movement is still needed – continued uneven growth in business units will mean that there will be a much greater need for the rapid movement of current employees into new areas where they can have a higher impact. The most effective solutions have involved either using corporate recruiters to proactively move underused employees or encouraging employee referrals to quickly identify a wider range of talent for internal openings.

via Dr. John Sullivan 

“Gainful Employment”

On Friday, March 14, for the second time in less than three years, the U.S. Department of Education has proposed “Gainful Employment” regulations that could make it more difficult for some of our students to realize their educational goals.

The proposed Gainful Employment rule will affect federal financial aid and may limit choices as to the types of programs that could be offered at your school, affecting current and future students.

Unfortunately, this rule would only apply to certain institutions, while other schools, such as public and private non-profit colleges and universities, would not be held to the same standards.

Please visit www.SaveStudentChoice.com to learn more about the rule and locate your elected officials.  Your voice can make a difference in protecting student choice and creating a level playing field for all colleges and universities.

Thank you for your time and continued support.

(via Jonathan Morris) 

How to Ensure your Resume gets Read by a Human

HOW TO ENSURE YOUR RESUME GETS READ BY A HUMAN [INFOGRAPHIC]

This infographic by CyberCoders gives you the top tips to make sure your resume doesn’t get rejected by an ATS and actually read by a human.

Takeaways:

• 72% of the time an ATS (Applicant Tracking System) will see your resume before a human.
• Make sure you don’t use any fancy fonts!
• Tactfully sprinkle key words within the resume to make sure it makes it through the system.

RELATED: 7 Resume Mistakes You Probably Didn’t Realise

10 Reasons Your Top Talent Will Leave You

Have you ever noticed leaders spend a lot of time talking about talent, only to make the same mistakes over and over again? Few things in business are as costly and disruptive as unexpected talent departures. With all the emphasis on leadership development, I always find it interesting so many companies seem to struggle with being able to retain their top talent. In today’s column, I’ll share some research, observations, and insights on how to stop the talent door from revolving.

Ask any CEO if they have a process for retaining and developing talent and they’ll quickly answer in the affirmative. They immediately launch into a series of soundbites about the quality of their talent initiatives, the number of high-potentials in the nine box, blah, blah, blah. As with most things in the corporate world, there is too much process built upon theory and not nearly enough practice built on experience.

When examining the talent at any organization look at the culture, not the rhetoric – look at the results, not the commentary about potential. Despite some of the delusional perspective in the corner office, when we interview their employees, here’s what they tell us:  

• More than 30% believe they’ll be working someplace else inside of 12 months.
• More than 40% don’t respect the person they report to.
• More than 50% say they have different values than their employer.
• More than 60% don’t feel their career goals are aligned with the plans their employers have for them.
• More than 70% don’t feel appreciated or valued by their employer.

So, for all those employers who have everything under control, you better start re-evaluating. There is an old saying that goes; “Employees don’t quit working for companies, they quit working for their bosses.” Regardless of tenure, position, title, etc., employees who voluntarily leave, generally do so out of some type of perceived disconnect with leadership.

Here’s the thing – employees who are challenged, engaged, valued, and rewarded (emotionally, intellectually & financially) rarely leave, and more importantly, they perform at very high levels. However if you miss any of these critical areas, it’s only a matter of time until they head for the elevator. Following are 10 reasons your talent will leave you – smart leaders don’t make these mistakes:

1. You Failed To Unleash Their Passions: Smart companies align employee passions with corporate pursuits. Human nature makes it very difficult to walk away from areas of passion. Fail to understand this and you’ll unknowingly be encouraging employees to seek their passions elsewhere.

2. You Failed To Challenge Their Intellect: Smart people don’t like to live in a dimly lit world of boredom. If you don’t challenge people’s minds, they’ll leave you for someone/someplace that will.1. You Failed To Unleash Their Passions: Smart companies align employee passions with corporate pursuits. Human nature makes it very difficult to walk away from areas of passion. Fail to understand this and you’ll unknowingly be encouraging employees to seek their passions elsewhere.

3. You Failed To Engage Their Creativity: Great talent is wired to improve, enhance, and add value. They are built to change and innovate. They NEED to contribute by putting their fingerprints on design. Smart leaders don’t place people in boxes – they free them from boxes. What’s the use in having a racehorse if you don’t let them run?

4. You Failed To Develop Their Skills:Leadership isn’t a destination – it’s a continuum. No matter how smart or talented a person is, there’s always room for growth, development, and continued maturation. If you place restrictions on a person’s ability to grow, they’ll leave you for someone who won’t.

5. You Failed To Give Them A Voice: Talented people have good thoughts, ideas, insights, and observations. If you don’t listen to them, I can guarantee you someone else will.

6. You Failed To Care: Sure, people come to work for a paycheck, but that’s not the only reason. In fact, many studies show it’s not even the most important reason. If you fail to care about people at a human level, at an emotional level, they’ll eventually leave you regardless of how much you pay them.

7. You Failed to Lead: Businesses don’t fail, products don’t fail, projects don’t fail, and teams don’t fail – leaders fail. The best testament to the value of leadership is what happens in its absence – very little. If you fail to lead, your talent will seek leadership elsewhere.

8. You Failed To Recognize Their Contributions: The best leaders don’t take credit – they give it. Failing to recognize the contributions of others is not only arrogant and disingenuous, but it’s as also just as good as asking them to leave.

9. You Failed To Increase Their Responsibility: You cannot confine talent – try to do so and you’ll either devolve into mediocrity, or force your talent seek more fertile ground. People will gladly accept a huge workload as long as an increase in responsibility comes along with the performance and execution of said workload.

10. You Failed To Keep Your Commitments: Promises made are worthless, but promises kept are invaluable. If you break trust with those you lead you will pay a very steep price. Leaders not accountable to their people, will eventually be held accountable by their people.

If leaders spent less time trying to retain people, and more time trying to understand them, care for them, invest in them, and lead them well, the retention thing would take care of itself. Thoughts?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2012/12/13/10-reasons-your-top-talent-will-leave-you/

What's at stake for education in the fall elections?

With Election Day two months away, both of the major-party candidates for president have been largely silent about education policy. It's no surprise. President Obama and Governor Romney believe that their fortunes depend on whether people think the economy is getting better (or not), and how intrusive the government should be. Since most Americans have already made up their minds on those two things, the campaigns are targeting a sliver of swing voters in key states, trying to convince them that one of the candidates is likeable and the other is dangerous. Federal education policy is not a big enough wedge issue to move many swing voters this year. And yet this year's elections are crucial to much of what we do as educators. Billions of dollars will be spent in different ways for education based entirely on what happens in the November elections. What are the key races? Look very close to home. Nearly a million people (you read that correctly) will have their names on ballots this fall, and many of them care about education. They are our mayors, city councilors, school board members, and legislators of every type. We are a tremendously diverse democracy of more than 511,000 elected officials, representing voters in 3,033 counties, 14,561 school districts, and 35,949 cities and towns. Pause over those numbers for a moment and consider how education policy grows out of such varied places. The most recent (2009) numbers are impressive. State and local governments employ 6,260,224 in the education sector, including 86,417 professors and other instructors at public colleges and universities. By contrast, the federal Department of Education employs just 4,611 people nationwide, and less than six cents of every dollar spent on K-12 public education comes from the federal government. Six cents of every dollar. The rest comes from - and is largely controlled by - policymakers outside of Washington, D.C. In the K-12 world, there is a waning fiction that "No Child Left Behind"? (NCLB) dictated what teachers had to teach and hamstrung how they could do it. If that was true, it no longer is. Twenty-six of the 50 states have opted out of the formal NCLB targets since February 2012, and the remaining states will probably follow suit within a year. States - not the federal government - are taking the lead in deciding what grade-specific tests and targets are appropriate. Federal funds to higher education come in essentially three ways: loan subsidies and guarantees for tuition (mainly given to individual), aid to states that is then allocated to public colleges and universities (about $10 billion per year), and federal research support, primarily to large public and private universities (thank you, by the way). In two of these three categories - direct aid to states, and research dollars - federal money will be cut regardless who is elected in November. That is the reality that you should be preparing for. In Idaho, for example, Governor Butch Otter has already asked every state agency to brace for a 20 percent reduction of aid from Washington. Our long-term federal debt has become so burdensome that grants and aid will be cut, and it really does not matter which party controls Congress or the White House. Where does this leave you, and what can you do in the coming months? The numbers are fairly straight forward. Ninety-four percent of all money spent on K-12 education comes from state and local sources. More than 90 percent of all spending on public colleges and universities comes from state sources and endowments. The pull toward national standards imagined in NCLB has slackened, and federal money is getting harder to find. Since education policy is the work of state and local governments, then focus your energy there. If you have ever considered running for school board, then do it. If a local non-profit needs your help to redesign a curriculum, then pitch in. If you have never met your state representative, then make an appointment. If your mayor has never been in your lecture hall or your department, then send an invitation. There are more than 511,000 elected representatives in the United States. Are you one of them? Do you know someone who is? Democracy - like education itself - bubbles up through personal interactions at the individual level. Those are the kinds of relationships, and the kinds of elections, that need more of your attention between now and Election Day. Posted by David C. King

Ranking Web of World Universities

Since 2004, the Ranking Web (or Webometrics Ranking) is published twice a year (data is collected during the first weeks of January and July for being public at the end of both months), covering about 20,000 Higher Education Institutions worldwide.

Click link below for more info:

www.webometrics.info/about_rank.html

Three Key Lessons from Going Green on Campus

The path to a cleaner, healthier campus begins in the classroom, office and dorm room. Across Harvard's 12-plus schools and administrative units we are building a culture of sustainability in partnership with our students, staff and faculty. We hope the innovative and creative approaches, programs and projects put into place by our community will serve as a replicable model for change at other large, complex institutions including universities, businesses and government. We also hope to inspire our students, future global contributors and leaders to incorporate sustainability into their lives and professional endeavors.

We have found that a commitment to creating a sustainable community directly ties into our academic and research mission and it also helps our bottom line. Energy efficiency measures and green building techniques are saving us millions in utility costs per year, often with a relatively short payback. Beyond fiscal savings there are other significant benefits such as improved operations efficiencies, improved productivity, health benefits and a more engaged, collaborative community. We also work to constantly evolve our efforts based on feedback from the community and the experience of our peer academic institutions and increasingly other sectors.

Said Harvard University President Drew Faust, "As a university we have a special responsibility to address complex global problems, like climate change and environmental sustainability, both with academics and research but also by turning the findings of that research into action."

As part of this effort we struggle with the same questions many others do. How do we keep people engaged? How do we ensure we're on the cutting edge? Several key lessons have emerged that we keep in mind and I'd like to share with others working on sustainability initiatives (and hear your ideas too):
Strong Leadership That Sets Clear, Aggressive Goals. Harvard's goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30% by 2016, including growth unified our schools and units, requiring them to focus on very specific energy reduction targets. This goal was adopted by our senior leadership--President Faust and all of our deans, which has aligned the university in pursuit of this goal. In addition, our comprehensive Green Building Standards set clear energy reduction, resource conservation and LEED targets for all construction and renovation projects. As a result, Harvard saves over $9 million annually just from the over 800 energy conservation measures that have already been implemented in order to reduce emissions and save energy.
Engage the Entire Community. The Harvard Office for Sustainability acts as a centralized catalyst for change, facilitating opportunities for students, faculty and staff to come together to learn from each other and share best practices that makes us all stronger. The office led a strategic planning process for Harvard's GHG reduction goal that engaged over 200 faculty, students and staff from every level of our organization. Every major policy change or initiative is reviewed and approved by representatives from all our schools and units, giving everyone a say in the ultimate outcome. Likewise, our Green Building Standards require that occupants be engaged earlier in project development so that future design considerations and decisions include their concerns, feedback and ideas. We also create training and provide information about sustainable building operations for occupants upon move-in. And Harvard's annual Green Carpet Awards ceremony was created in 2009 as an opportunity for our entire community to nominate, recognize and celebrate our "green heroes"--the students, staff and faculty who play an exemplary role in helping Harvard achieve its sustainability goals.
Tools and Resources That Spark Action. Harvard has focused on developing tools and resources to empower our community to take action. A four-tiered Green Office Program encourages employees to conserve resources by providing them with tips and guidelines in nine topic or impact locations. This program also ties to our Green Teams--individuals who adopt green practices in their departments and units. A Life Cycle Costing calculator was created with input from administrators and facilities across the university to allow schools and project managers to prioritize building projects that are economically viable and environmentally beneficial. Our website -- www.green.harvard.edu -- is a university-wide resource providing stories and profiles of best practices, including LEED case studies, so the community can learn from each other.
At the end of the day the foundation for all of our work is our people -- from President Faust and the deans, to the facility directors, building managers and project managers at all of our schools and on to the faculty, students, and staff who work, live and learn in our greener, healthier buildings. Without action and involvement from everyone in our community our progress would not be possible. And that is perhaps the most important lesson for us all to remember -- you are only as strong as your people and your success depends on the level to which you empower and engage your entire community.
by Heather Henriksen, Director, Harvard Office for Sustainability

Prediction for 2012: Continued U.S. Decline in Education

About this time a year ago, Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, lamented the nation’s lackluster performance results in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) study. Every three years, PISA measures reading, math, and scientific literacy among 15-year-old students around the world. According to Duncan, PISA “is fast becoming the measuring rod by which countries track trends in national performance and assess college and career-readiness of students as they near the end of their compulsory education and prepare to participate in the global economy.”

Duncan eagerly awaited the results, but was sorely disappointed when they came in. It turns out that the U.S. is not among any of the top performing countries in any subject areas tested by PISA. U.S. students lag behind kids in Canada, Finland, South Korea, Estonia, Japan, Australia, Singapore, the Netherlands, Norway, Belgium, and other countries. In reading, a category where U.S. students performed their best, they are tied with Poland (insert Polish joke here). The U.S. reading scores are closer to those of Latvia and Slovenia than neighboring Canada, where their students are better readers and more adept in math and science. That data is quite revealing: Students in the U.S. are less capable in accessing and retrieving data than those in some developing countries, and U.S. students struggle in interpreting and integrating information.

Some commentators immediately suggested that socio-economics pulled down the U.S. scores. In other words, poor kids from under-performing schools created an imbalance, which hurt the overall U.S. outcome. Some of this is racialized (i.e. pundits claim “poor black kids can’t read well and under-perform in math and science”). In part, that’s true, though clearly such generalities are over-inclusive and ignore what contributes to low student performance. Social promotion, including graduating students from high school without a 6th grade reading capacity, moving students along because they’re too old to be in elementary or middle school, high rates of mobility, and low verbal capacity upon entering first grade, are among the pitfalls and challenges in public education that undermine student success as well as the academic health of school districts. Typically there’s the debate as to who’s at fault—parents or teachers. Blame can be leveled at both groups, but let’s not overlook politicians who want to cut funding for education.

That said, pundits who blame poor, black public-school kids for these results miss the mark. Results from a different study conducted by an independent research firm debunk the notion that it’s the U.S. poor (alone) who drag down education. The 2009 Raytheon study sheds some insight on student behavior. For example, “seventy‐two percent of U.S. middle school students spend more than three hours each day outside of school in front of a TV, mobile phone or computer screen rather than doing homework or other academic‐related activities.” The study noted, “by contrast, just 10 percent of students spend the same amount of time on their homework each day, and 67 percent spend less than one hour on their math homework.”

Indeed, nearly 30 percent of the students surveyed could not name a career that requires math skills. This was not an inner-city survey. This is the state of “middle” America.

The US is in an academic crisis, but parents and their children don’t seem to know this. US students had more self-confidence in their knowledge and academic skills than nearly all other students in all the other countries included in the PISA study (about 64 nations and territories). The inflated notion of self is despite the fact that more U.S. students performed at a level “considered to be below the baseline level of reading proficiency needed to participate effectively and productively in life” than at the highest level. Urgent change is needed, but the problems will likely persist.

Indeed, what we witness in high-school performance now seeps into collegiate and graduate school aptitude and attitude. For example, universities seem as ill-equipped to address these issues as K-12 schools. Here, I’m not speaking of providing academic support centers. The students at the very bottom of the class likely realize their struggles with reading and math proficiency. It’s the middle group that poses the biggest challenge, particularly as they have been nurtured to believe that they are the best and the brightest.

This toxic mixture of overconfidence and under-performance has contributed to “limited learning” at college, according to Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa. In their book, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, the authors found that “in the first two years of school, 45 percent of college students had no significant improvement in critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing.”

On examination, it becomes clear that American students don’t buckle up when coming to college; instead, poor study habits follow—or perhaps worsen post-high school. In the Arum and Roksa study of more than 2,300 students, they found that U.S. students study about 12 hours per week, which is less than half of the hours college students devoted to studying in 1961. Graduate and professional schools are headed in the same direction, trading high academic standards and sometimes uncomfortable truths for appeasing students who pay high tuition.



This entry was posted in Higher Education, teaching, Uncategorized.

An SEO Playbook for 2012

http://searchengineland.com/an-seo-playbook-for-2012-103906

Search Engine Optimization is growing up. I am not ready to say the Wild West SEO days are completely eradicated, but in 2011 good search engine optimization is less about trickery and more about engaging content and audience development than ever before.

Over the years, quality optimizers have become more prone to avoid technical tricks like using CSS image replacement to inject keyword text or controlling the flow of PageRank by hiding links from search engines.

Search engines keep getting better at crawling and indexing. If you are unwilling to burn your website or risk your career, you follow the search engines’ terms of service.

During 2011 the conservative attitude toward code crossed chasm to apply to content. For years, websites churned-out poorly written, generic articles in the name of long-tail keyword optimization. It worked so well some people turned crappy content into startups.

Now, thanks to Panda, Google’s site-wide penalty for having too much low quality content, people are asking why anyone would put pages on a website that no one wants to read, share or link to? Without taking potshots at the past, most of those articles look juvenile and antiquated.

Made in Japan went from signifying cheap to marvelous. Made for the Web is growing-up too. It is this evolution which guides my SEO highlights for 2012. I separate things to keep in mind by code, design and content.

Code – Keep It Simple
While Google likes to tell us they are very good at crawling and understanding imperfect code, I prefer to assume search engines are dumb and help them every way I can. Simple code is honest code. It’s also easy to parse and analyze. Just because you can AJAX-up a page with accordions and fly-outs does not mean you should. The more code on a page, the more things that can go wrong from spider access to browser compatibility.

Follow standards and get as close to validated markup as reasonably possible. Make it easy for search engines to spider your site. Validating HTML and CSS does not automagically raise your rankings, but it will prevent crawl errors.

At the same time, don’t insist on validation since some perfectly good code will never validate. Follow search engine recommendations to Make AJAX, XML and Other Code Crawl able.

Make your CSS class and ID names obvious, especially for section div tags. Again, Google tells us they have gotten good at identifying headers, sidebars and footers. Part of that is almost assuredly knowing the most common div names.

Make it easy on Google and Bing by naming your header div header.
Name the CSS ID of your right sidebar div right-sidebar.
Why would you name a CSS Class xbr_001 when you can name it navigation? At the very least, it will make life a lot easier on your SEO team. They have enough work without the need to translate ambiguous naming structures.

Reserve h# tags for outlining principal content. I am amazed at the number of big brand websites that still use h# tags for font design. Tell your designers that h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 and h6 are off-limits and reserved for content writers and editors.

The only exception to this should be if your content management system uses h1 tags to create a proper headline. Embargo h# tags out of your headers, navigation, sidebars and footers too. They don’t belong there.

Web Design – Less Navigation Is More
Look at the Zen like efficiency of any Apple product. Steve Jobs was ruthless about eliminating the unnecessary and achieving clean Bauhaus efficiency.

By contrast, too many websites, especially enterprise sites, try to be all things to all people. Their administrators or managers fear they might miss out on a conversion for lack of a link.

Websites should have clean vertical internal linking. Every page should not link to every page. You do not need a site-wide menu three levels deep. As long as people feel that they are progressing toward their goal or the useful information they seek, they will click on two, three or four links to get there.

Look at your website analytics. Which pages receive the fewest visits? Are any in your navigation? If no one uses a link, why does it to be there?

A website’s most widely visited pages tend to be close to the homepage. Review your categories and sub-categories. Can you eliminate whole categories by merging or reassigning content? For example, does the management team need its own category or can you move it into the About section?

This is not just about eliminating distraction. It is a way to increase the internal flow of authority (PageRank, link juice, etc.) to SEO hub pages.

Content – Engagement & Agility
Emphasize Community and Conversation. If your business depends on the Internet and you have the budget to hire one more person, consider employing a community evangelist. High rankings require authority. Authority comes from off-site links and, to an extent, brand mentions.

Earning enough links to make a dent in your SEO requires a continuous stream of link worthy content combined with forging and fostering relationships with people who create links or influence lots of others through online conversation. This requires a large commitment of time to work with writers and designers and to network. Even when decentralized, this rarely works without a strong empowered leader.

Get out of the sales funnel. The people you want to buy your products or services are not going to blog about your company or mention it on Twitter. More likely, they are peers.

A good exercise to undertake is ask each employee, if they could pick one professional conference to attend, what would it be? Then look for the session speakers on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook. Find which ones are active online and gauge their influence. Are people in your company qualified to write authoritatively about these topics or speak at conferences?

This is how to find content topics for the post-Panda Web, things people want to converse about and link to. For example, if you have a cutting-edge API team, an API development blog could be the key to higher domain authority.

Understand Social Technographics. It will help you to find influencers and create content that people will want to link to and talk about.

Embrace Agility

Realign your content generation and approval process so you can create near-daily web content and, if necessary, respond publically to something within an hour.

With Query Deserves Freshness, trending topics, news search and simply because of how social media conversations come and go, agility is important for getting noticed and getting links.

Update Your Content

If your website has older articles that read like Wikipedia or a hardcover World Book Encyclopedia, swap out old content for new. In the future, Panda will not get leaner, it will get meaner. If you have reason to worry, start fixing it now. Do not wait and hope Panda will not see your low quality content. I want to be very clear here:

If you have decent quality content that provides real value, keep it whether it is SEO optimized or not. Yes, get to work optimizing older content doing things like selecting hub pages, optimizing text and cross-linking. But do not delete your old content.
If you have content that seems overtly advertorial, is cheesy or reads robotic because it is so stuffed with keywords, begin the process of writing one-for-one replacements and update your old content over time. For the old-time SEOs out there, this brings new meaning to a page a day.
If you have been hit by Panda already, I suggest removing your poor quality content, set-up 301 redirects to salvage the link authority, then begin rebuilding with high quality, link worthy content. Panda is a site-wide penalty. It is not going to go away until the offending content is removed or replaced.
Those are my 2012 SEO playbook highlights. In the past, content creation and link building were too separated. We had writers covering every long-tail key phrase possible while, in another room, link ninjas emailed and telephoned soliciting for individual links.

That model is becoming less and less sustainable. The Web is too big. Too many people contribute content. Social media offers an entirely new world of context. Today, SEO means finding an audience you can connect with, become a part of the community, give them insanely awesome content and reciprocate. This is the new SEO arms race.

Opinions expressed in the article are those of the guest author and not necessarily Search Engine Land.

Related Entries
SEOnomics: A New Way Of Thinking About SEO For Business
Employing Microformats & Structured Data For Enhanced Search Engine Visibility
From Garbage To Gourmet: Fixing SEO Content Strategies
Schema.org: Google, Bing & Yahoo Unite To Make Search Listings Richer Through Structured Data

Private equity still strong, despite market challenges

Despite widespread pessimism over the global economic outlook, almost a quarter of private equity investors believe private equity has become more attractive in light of recent volatility in financial markets.

A further 64 per cent of investors do not view private equity any differently as a result of the current financial climate and 14 per cent find it less attractive, Preqin research has found.

Many investors feel that private equity has become increasingly attractive as public markets have become more volatile, with some identifying opportunities in times of economic distress and others planning to look to emerging markets for new investments.

More than three-quarters, 76 per cent, of a sample of 300 investors interviewed in October and November 2011 plan to make new fund commitments over the coming 12 months, while 92 per cent expect to maintain or increase their allocations over the longer term, further illustrating their confidence in the asset class. Just 8% intend to decrease their exposure to private equity over the next three to five years.

Emma Dineen, manager – private equity investor data, said, “The global financial crisis undoubtedly prompted many LPs to re-evaluate their private equity strategies. Many have become more cautious and selective when choosing fund managers to invest with. However, despite recent volatility in the wider financial markets, investors generally remain positive about the private equity asset class, and many believe that there are good investment opportunities ahead.

“While investor appetite is there, the crowded fundraising market means that investors are well positioned to be selective about the funds they choose to commit to, so the challenge remains for fund managers to market their funds in the best possible way and to ensure that they target the right investors if they are to enjoy success in this competitive market,” she added.
http://www.altassets.net/knowledge-bank/leading-edge/private-equity-still-strong-despite-market-challenges.html

Slow (to No) Hiring Activity Expected for October 2011

Slow (to No) Hiring Activity Expected for October 2011

10/6/2011 By Theresa Minton-Eversole

Though this is the time of year that U.S. employers begin shoring up their staffs for the holiday shopping season, job growth is not expected to rebound much in October 2011, according to the Society for Human Resource Management’s (SHRM) Leading Indicators of National Employment (LINE) survey for October 2011.

Hiring expectations are anemic in October 2011, with the rate of job creation expected to be virtually unchanged from that of October 2010 in manufacturing. Job creation is expected to fall moderately in services in October 2011, compared with October 2010.

“HR professionals are reporting that hiring is basically at a standstill for October [2011],” said Jennifer Schramm, GPHR, SHRM’s manager of workplace trends and forecasting. “Manufacturing firms are adding jobs at the same rate as at this time last year, while private service-sector firms are reporting a small downturn in hiring compared to October [2010].”

The LINE report examines four key areas: employers’ hiring expectations, job vacancies, difficulty in recruiting top-level talent and new-hire compensation. It is based on a monthly survey of private-sector human resource professionals at more than 500 manufacturing and 500 service-sector companies. Employment Expectations Manufacturing Service.

In October 2011, hiring activity will rise slightly in manufacturing and will drop moderately in services compared with October 2010.

+1.1

-10.4

Recruiting Difficulty

In September 2011, the index for recruiting difficulty rose slightly in both sectors compared with September 2010.

+4.9

+4.6

New-Hire Compensation
The rate of increase for new-hire compensation in September 2011 rose in both sectors compared with September 2010.

+6.7

+2.9

Source: SHRM Leading Indicators of National Employment (LINE), www.shrm.org/line

Employment Expectations

The manufacturing hiring index will rise in October 2011 on a year-over-year basis by a net of just 1.1 points (a net of 30.4 percent of companies will hire in October 2011, compared with a net of 29.3 percent that added jobs in October 2010). Service-sector hiring, however, will decrease in October 2011 by a net of 10.4 points (a net of 29.0 percent will add jobs, compared with a net of 39.4 percent that added jobs in October 2010), according to LINE data.

The LINE results for October 2011 reflect a trend of subpar growth in job creation, in accord with recent federal data. Nonfarm payrolls were unchanged in August 2011, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and the manufacturing sector, which has been one of the economy’s strongest performers for job growth, lost a net of 3,000 jobs during the month.

Exempt, Nonexempt Position Vacancies

LINE data cover exempt vacancies, which are primarily salaried positions, and nonexempt vacancies, which are mostly hourly employees. Changes in the number of job vacancies can be one of the earliest indicators of a shift in the balance between labor supply and demand.

In the manufacturing sector, a net total of 10.4 percent of respondents reported increases in exempt vacancies in September 2011, which represents a 3.0-point decrease from September 2010. A net total of 11.2 percent of manufacturing respondents reported that nonexempt vacancies increased in September 2011, representing a net 0.1-point decrease from September 2010. There were 257,000 job openings in manufacturing in July 2011, up slightly from June 2011, according to the BLS.

Service-sector job creation is expected to be even less impressive. In its annual holiday hiring forecast, global outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc., predicted in September 2011 that seasonal job gains in the retail sector would be about the same or possibly lower than in September 2010.

“The retail environment has improved significantly since 2008, when the recession was at its worst,” said John A. Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas. “However, retailers are seeing several signs that consumer spending is dipping just as they are beginning to make decisions about how many workers to add for the upcoming holidays. It would be surprising if holiday hiring exceeded last year’s level.”

Even if retailers foresee strong sales, it might not result in increased hiring, according to Challenger. A survey of major U.S. retailers by management consultants at the Hay Group found that 68 percent expect sales to be higher than in 2010. Yet the same percentage plans to hire the same number of seasonal workers as were hired in 2010. About one-fourth of respondents said they plan to reduce the number of seasonal hires.

The dismal forecast is reflected in the most recent LINE data, too. In the service sector, a net total of 7.4 percent of respondents reported increases in exempt vacancies in September 2011—a 2.5-point increase from September 2010. For nonexempt service positions, a net total of 18.0 percent of respondents reported increased vacancies in September 2011, marking a 3.5-point increase from September 2010.

Recruiting Difficulty

“Even with subdued hiring rates and elevated unemployment, once again we are seeing the recruiting difficulty index rise in both sectors,” said Schramm. “This suggests that employers are having difficulty connecting with job seekers who possess the skills they are looking for.”

For example, a net of 9.7 percent of manufacturing respondents had more difficulty with recruiting in September 2011—a net increase of 4.9 points from September 2010 and the highest net of recruiting difficulty for the month of September in four years.

A net of 11.6 percent of service-sector HR professionals had more difficulty recruiting in September 2011—an increase of 4.6 points from September 2010 and also the highest net in four years. The recruiting difficulty data suggest that the labor market is suffering from structural issues along with decreased demand.

Considering that millions of people are seeking work and cannot obtain employment in their industries, the rise in recruiting difficulty might be attributed to new or enhanced skill requirements for new high-level jobs, noted Schramm. “With the exception of March 2011, recruiting difficulty has risen on an annual basis in both sectors for every month since December 2009,” she noted.

New-Hire Compensation

During the recession, a high rate of unemployment and a large pool of job seekers in the market gave many companies the option of holding down the wages and benefits they offered new hires in the effort to control costs. New-hire compensation is now beginning to rise, albeit only slightly.

In the manufacturing sector, a net total of 8.7 percent of respondents reported increasing new-hire compensation in September 2011—an increase of 6.7 points from September 2010. In the service sector, a net total of 7.9 percent of companies increased new-hire compensation in September 2011, representing a 2.9-point increase from a year ago. With the exception of September 2010, the rate of new-hire compensation has risen in small increments on an annual basis in both sectors for every month since February 2010.

“Skills shortages may be why we are seeing some increases in the new-hire compensation indices,” said Schramm. “For the 12th consecutive month, the rate of increase for wages and benefits rose on an annual basis in both sectors. This does not mean that everyone is seeing their wages increase; overall most employers are keeping new-hire compensation flat. But the percentage reporting increases continues to rise incrementally, indicating that the need to find talent is pushing some employers to boost their starting wages and compensation.”

Theresa Minton-Eversole is an online editor/manager for SHRM.

For-Profit College Lobbying Group Sues Obama Administration Over Regulations

More than a month after the Obama administration issued weaker-than-expected regulations aimed at reining in abuses at some for-profit colleges, a trade association for the industry filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to strike down the new rules governing excessive student debt.

The lawsuit is a perplexing move for the for-profit college industry, which aggressively fought the Obama administration’s crackdown for more than a year, and ultimately succeeded in getting final regulations last month that were universally regarded as being substantially weakened from those proposed a year earlier.

The market has signaled that investors approved of the measures: Since the Obama administration issued the “gainful employment” regulations in early June, the stocks at many publicly traded for-profit college companies have soared. Executives at for-profit college corporations, including University of Phoenix founder John G. Sperling, have cashed in on the rise by selling millions of dollars worth of stocks since the rules were issued.

Yet despite the apparent victory by the industry’s multi-million dollar lobbying and campaign finance efforts over the past year, the lawsuit from the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities calls out the Obama administration’s Department of Education for writing “fatally flawed” regulations that will result in “massive disincentives on private sector schools that currently seek to educate low-income, minority, and other traditionally underserved student populations.”

A spokesman for the association said he was unable to comment on why the lawsuit was filed despite the positive reception of the regulations from the stock market.

Department of Education spokesman Justin Hamilton said in a statement, “Our regulations offer students and taxpayers the protection they deserve. These student safeguards rest on a sound legal foundation.”

Critics of the industry said they were surprised that the trade group would come out swinging after the markets signaled a total victory.


"I’m kind of taken aback by this total rejectionist position," said Barmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, who has followed regulations on for-profit higher education for years. “They’ve decided that total war is the way to go.”

The lawsuit argues the administration does not have the authority to move forward with the “gainful employment” regulations, which test programs at for-profit colleges and other vocational schools based on the percentage of students who are able to repay student loans and the amount of overall student loan debt compared to students’ income.

“This lawsuit is necessary in order to protect 3.8 million students who attend private sector colleges and universities today and those who will attend our schools in the future,” Brian Moran, the group’s interim president and chief executive, said in a statement.

Supporters of stricter accountability for for-profit colleges -- which have taken in a disproportionate amount of federal student aid dollars over the past decade and contribute to nearly half of all federal student loan defaults -- see the issue of protecting students in a different light.

The “gainful employment” measures were conceived by the administration as both an accountability test for the federal student loan program and as a consumer protection measure for students who are often reeled in by aggressive recruiting tactics. Under the administration’s original proposal last summer, programs could immediately lose access to lucrative federal student aid dollars that fuel the bulk of profits if too many students had unsustainable debts.

After a relentless lobbying and public relations campaign by the industry, programs were given an additional three years to come into compliance with the rules. Instead of potentially losing access to federal student loan and Pell grant dollars after failing debt tests for one year, programs must now fail tests three out of four years in order to be deemed ineligible.

The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities has filed litigation against most of the major regulations imposed on their industry since the beginning of the Obama administration. A federal judge ruled earlier this month on a lawsuit by the group that disputed additional regulations on the for-profit higher education industry: rules meant to hold schools accountable for recruiters who make misleading statements to prospective students, and rules meant to crack down on bonuses and raises given to recruiters based on the number of students enrolled.

The judge ruled in favor of the Department of Education on those rules, but found fault with an administration rule that required schools to get separate state authorizations for students attending online.

The industry group has appealed the judge’s decision on the misrepresentation and student recruitment rules
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/20/for-profit-college-lobbyi_n_905176.html

For-profit colleges respond to increased scrutiny

ST. LOUIS (AP) — They gather in a generic suburban office park, working-class students chasing a fast track to success: a college degree.
But the message at the University of Phoenix orientation is not quite what these secretaries, mental health aides, working moms and single dads expect.
"We want you to decide if this is right for you," says Sam Fitzgerald, director of academic affairs at the school's four St. Louis campuses. "We're here to help you figure it out."
That candor would have been anathema not too long ago in the lucrative world of for-profit colleges, where recruiters received hefty bonuses and often oversold career prospects.
Yet these are new times for the industry that now accommodates one in every eight American college students, either in class or online. Lawmakers in Congress are probing its excesses, from high loan default rates to reports of exploitative sales pitches to wounded veterans.
The Obama administration in June unveiled new rules that could cut off government aid for programs where too few students repay their loans or acquire decent-paying jobs. Disenchantment — and lawsuits — continue among both former students and skittish investors.
"They have a huge bulls-eye on them," said Kevin Kinser, an associate professor at the State University of New York at Albany who studies the industry. "They can't risk business as usual anymore."
The for-profit industry, which prefers the term "career colleges" or "proprietary" schools, grew rapidly over the last decade amid renewed calls to increase the nation's college graduation rate and a need to help laid-off workers find new careers. The private sector's slice of federal aid money grew from $4.6 billion to more than $26 billion between 2000 and 2010.
Now, the industry will see if it can still make healthy profits from its challenging demographic __ low income workers, older students and those with spotty academic backgrounds— while being much more accountable for its results.
The changes are most apparent at the University of Phoenix and its corporate parent, Apollo Group Inc., which, with nearly 400,000 students, ranks atop the industry.
The school has created its own social network, PhoenixConnect, to better link its far-flung students as well as 600,000 alumni who could help those students and graduates find jobs. It boasts of new alumni association chapters, hundreds of student clubs and mentorship programs.
The three-week orientation program is now required of all prospective students with fewer than 24 college credits. The program is free, but those who don't pass can't continue. The company scrapped its financial incentive program for enrollment counselors and there's less reliance on outside sales companies to generate leads, and more emphasis on finding corporate partners willing to help pay for their employees' education.
The results have been dramatic. New student enrollment has declined by nearly half, and the company reported $159 million less in net revenue after the first three quarters of fiscal year 2011 compared to the previous year.
Officials expect further enrollment declines and more short-term financial pain but insist the approach will pay off with fewer dropouts, higher graduation rates and lower federal loan default rates.
"We have made a conscious decision to make sure the students coming through the door are more likely to be successful," said Mark Brenner, senior vice president for external affairs.
Change is also afoot at Kaplan University, which is owned by The Washington Post Co. and serves about 62,000 students. Another 50,000 students study at Kaplan Higher Education career colleges, which focus more on specific trades.
Stung by a series of whistleblower lawsuits by former employees and a Florida attorney general's investigation, Kaplan created a program that allows new students to attend classes for four or five weeks at no cost before deciding whether to continue. Kaplan also stopped paying incentives to recruiters.
The company reported a 48 percent decline in new enrollments as of April and an attrition rate of 25 percent. Of the latter group, 60 percent are dismissed by Kaplan for lack of academic progress.
The for-profit industry's staunchest defenders include Donald Graham, chief executive officer of The Washington Post Co.
"If we are to be guided only by those factors — student graduation rates and how much debt they incur — we would probably close down all, or almost all, of the institutions of higher education — whomever they may be run by — that serve poor students," Graham said at the company's annual meeting in May.
A committee led by Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has held multiple hearings on for-profit colleges over the past year — most recently in early July, after the Obama administration issued its new "gainful employment" rules. Those rules require schools to meet at least one of three conditions to continue receiving Pell Grants and other federal paid-tuition: a loan repayment rate by former students of least 35 percent; annual loan payments of no more than 30 percent of an average student's discretionary income; or annual loan payments that don't exceed 12 percent of a typical graduate's salary.
Regulators say those conditions are needed to ensure that for-profit graduates won't face crippling debts, which combined with low-paying jobs could lead to more loan defaults.
The Senate committee found an average dropout rate of 57 percent within two years of enrollment at 16 unnamed for-profit schools. More than 95 percent of students at two-year proprietary schools, and 93 percent at four-year schools, took out student loans in 2007, the committee found. That compares to fewer than 17 percent of community college students and 44.3 percent of students at four-year public schools. Students at for-profit schools also account for nearly half of all student loan defaults, the committee found.
"Some for-profit schools are efficient government subsidy collectors first and educational institutions second," the committee concluded in its report.
In contrast to most nonprofit colleges, proprietary colleges have emphasized expanding their student rolls, regardless of the academic prospects of those enrolled.
"State institutions might like to grow, but they can't afford to. Elite schools define themselves by the fact they don't grow," said industry analyst Trace Urdan, the managing director of Signal Hill Capital Group. "This is a place where growth is the essence of the institution."
Harkin, the industry's most vocal critic, recently compared the high default rates to the subprime mortgage loan meltdown. He remains skeptical that the sector has mended its ways.
"For-profit education must work for students, not shareholders," he said.
Eric Schmitt, 36, earned an associate's degree from Kaplan University's campus in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and then a bachelor's degree from its online school three years ago The aspiring paralegal said he has been unable to find a job in the field. He owes nearly $45,000 in student loans and is working a temporary warehouse job to help support his wife and two children.
Schmitt, who testified before Harkin's committee in June, called the Kaplan Commitment and other industry initiatives "a step in the right direction" but said the gap between education costs and real job prospects could mean "you're going to keep seeing students thrown under the bus."
In a statement issued by Kaplan after Schmitt's testimony, the company said he turned down a paralegal job it helped him line up.
The conversations in Washington and Wall Street mean little to Carl Tabb, a 36-year-old father of 10 who hopes to earn a bachelor's degree in information technology from the University of Phoenix while continuing to work full-time for the Missouri Department of Mental Health and moonlighting repairing home computers.
"I really was not the best student when I was in school," he said. "I always thought I wouldn't make it to college."
Fitzgerald, a former Price Waterhouse consultant, said nontraditional students such as Tabb deserve just a chance to earn a degree and a shot at better future.
"Yeah, we're a for-profit. But that doesn't mean we're in it for the wrong reasons," she said. "We want to set up our students for success."
___
Alan Scher Zagier can be reached on Twitter at http://twitter.com/azagier

Questions on Legislator on Board of For-Profit University

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/07/18/qt

Connecticut State Representative Selim Noujaim, a Republican, was a key player in amending a bill in June so that some state scholarship funds that would have been restricted to students at public and private nonprofit institutions would also be available to those at for-profit institutions. The Hartford Courant reported that Noujaim is a trustee of Post University, for which the for-profit institution pays him $4,500 a year. Connecticut law bars public officials from taking any action that creates a "direct monetary gain" to a business with which the official is associated. Noujaim said he would have recused himself if the bill helped only Post, but said that there was no need to do so since it helped other for-profit institutions. He also said he was not involved in Post for the money, telling the Courant that "I'm in it for the kids."

Swedish Schools Are Benefiting From For-Profit Schools

The folks at Cato Institute have re-published a column written by one of their scholars on the benefits his country are seeing from for-profit schools

From a new piece at the Cato Institute’s website, Cato.org:

The central problem facing education systems around the world has not been a lack of excellent schools; it has been our inability to routinely replicate them. If you build a smarter cell phone or design a safer car, your sales increase, your company grows, and you spawn countless imitators. But education is different. If you find a better way to teach children, your innovations seldom reach beyond a single neighborhood.

These words were written by Andrew Coulson, the director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom in Washington D.C. Coulson also authored the book Market Education: The Unknown History. His article on the for-profit school industry in Sweden originally appeared the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet. Coulson recounts how over the past two decades, Sweden and the United States have tried to address that problem in very different ways. Those very different ways have yielded, not surprisingly, very different results. In the United States, philanthropists have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to replicate what they consider to be the best charter schools. Sweden’s free schools system, by contrast, has allowed both for-profit and non-profit private schools to compete for the privilege of serving students.

To find out how well the U.S. approach is working, I recently studied the academic performance of California’s charter school networks (groups of two or more schools with the same management or teaching methods). I discovered that there is essentially no correlation between the performance of these networks and the amount of philanthropic funding they have received. That means philanthropists are indiscriminately replicating the bad and the mediocre networks as well as the good ones. On average, charter schools perform at about the same level as traditional government schools.

The Swedish private school experience is not uniform. While for-profit schools are growing substantially over time, bringing their higher quality services to more and more families every year, non-profit schools have experienced relatively little growth.

New Oriental's fiscal 4Q profit more than doubles

By The Associated Press
updated 7/18/2011 6:37:54 PM ET
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43801651/ns/business-personal_finance

New Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc. said Monday that its fiscal fourth-quarter profit more than doubled as it signed up more students for its language training and test prep courses.

The company, which is based in Beijing and provides private educational services, reported net income climbed to $14.3 million, or 37 cents per American depositary share, in the three months ended May 31.
That compares with net income of $5.8 million, or 15 cents per American depositary share, in the same period last year.
Excluding the impact of a $1.5 million loss related to the disposal of two subsidiaries during the quarter, New Oriental would have earned 49 cents per American depositary share, the company said.
Analysts were anticipating earnings of 26 cents per American depositary share, according to FactSet.
Quarterly revenue surged 59 percent to $137.4 million, up from $86.6 million in the prior-year quarter. Analysts were anticipating revenue of $119.7 million.
The company said enrollment during the fourth quarter grew 11.9 percent from a year earlier to 489,100.
For the full fiscal year, the company earned $101.8 million, or $2.61 per American depositary share, compared with net income of $77.9 million, or $2.01 per American depositary share, in fiscal 2010.
Revenue grew 44 percent to $557.9 million, up from $386.3 million in the prior fiscal year.
New Oriental said it expects that fiscal first-quarter revenue will range from $255.8 million to $265.4 million, representing year-over-year growth in the range of 33 percent to 38 percent. Analysts expect revenue of $255.4 million.
Advertise | AdChoices

Meanwhile, the company said that, starting Aug. 18, it will adjust the ratio of its American depositary shares representing common shares from one ADS to four common shares, to one ADS for one common share.
New Oriental ADS holders as of the close of business on Aug. 17 will receive three additional ADSs for each ADS then held, the company said.
The effect of this ratio change on the ADS price is expected to take place on Aug. 19.
The ratio change will have the same effect as a four-for-one stock split, the company said.
Shares rose 74 cents to $120.60 in aftermarket trading after ending the regular session down $3.16, or 2.6 percent, to $119.86.

Hire Hopes

Hire Hopes
Jun 14th 2011, 16:13 by The Economist

Which countries are most optimistic about hiring?

THE outlook for employment in the third quarter of this year is positive in 35 of the 39 countries and territories covered by Manpower, an employment-services firm. The net balance of employers expecting to increase the size of their workforces in the next three months is highest in India and Brazil, at 47 and 37 percentage points respectively. In Italy and Spain employers have been mostly negative about job prospects since early 2008, and their outlook is getting gloomier. By contrast, German and Canadian companies have seen a quick recovery, and report their most positive hiring intentions since the downturn. Even with the opening of its borders to the European Union’s eastern workers in May, Germany's unemployment has been falling sharply. The central bank recently referred to its “extremely favourable labour market developments”.

shaun39 wrote:
What a depressing outlook - especially for Spain, with unemployment already touching on 21%.

Spain has open access to the whole of the EU market, has excellent assets and a well educated/ skilled workforce.

Why can't businesses employ Spain's labor and capital assets? Why do Spaniards not seek employment in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria or Sweden?

Depressed domestic demand doesn't explain the magnitude of Spanish unemployment.

While a combination factors are clearly in play, something is obviously in direct competition with employment: generous welfare payments, subsidized but badly located housing (whether through government or with parents, etc) and black market activity.

Possible solutions: cut benefits to a level significantly below an average starting salary. End all subsidies tied to specific accommodation. Cut all benefit payments to anybody living with (non-disabled) parents.

Do the above: people will move to parts of the EU with better employment prospects; people will leave their parents' homes to seek employment in parts of Spain with better employment prospects; people will accept lower paying jobs as an alternative to idleness.

Spain could go even further: it could replace all benefits (other than health, pensions and disability) with a right to 40 hours of work a week (at 4 euros/ hour).

Other required measures: deregulate employment contracts; cut corporate taxes and local business taxes; get tough on organized crime (it would help if consumption and supply of drugs were entirely legalized; the income tax system were simplified; and there were better use of modern information systems for tracking personal and business transactions).

The deficit would disappear; unemployment would collapse; exports would soar; standards of living would fall (in the short term); business investment would recover; productivity would resume an upwards trend (after the initial hit from incorporating less skilled workers); standards of living would resume an upwards trajectory.

Recommend (20)PermalinkReport abuse
Samkaie wrote: Jun 14th 2011 6:32 GMT
@Calm Incence,

Just out of curiosity,what was your major? And where are you from?
I hope you wouldn't find this personal.

Recommend (17)PermalinkReport abuse
Ed (Brazil) wrote: Jun 14th 2011 7:49 GMT
All countries in this chart can survave going bellow zero for some time, except one: China.

They don't let us, nor their people, to see it on TV, but protests are there... China is a gun powder barrel whose owner has to keep on moving away from the fire that get closer everyday.

Italy and Spain, don't you think the only way you will go back in black is to stop the easy short term solutions and leave the Euro ?

"The Economist", where is Brazil ? I bet Brazil is between Canada gemany and China. If its above, its a buble...

Britain, you are Japan tomorrow. Actuallly, old, earthquake tsunami hit Japan generated much more jobs than you !

India, you are the only hope the World has for the decade that is beggining. Chinese don't play fair with their currency, so the world will face them sometime in the near future. But in order to do that, the world needs to find a replacement. You are the one. Hope you accept the invitation. Otherwise, we might get ready for a period of constant financial turmoil...

"The age of leverage". It will end with unimaginable defaults (not now), some ex-rich countries (Argentina is the worst of examples - in 1900 they had the world's 5th GDP per person). US is no longer the Rome of economics, and the question is, will it be able to sustain its position as the Rome of military ?

Recommend (33)PermalinkReport abuse
Escha wrote: Jun 14th 2011 8:07 GMT
Apart from Brazil's data another important information is missing: The evolution of the workforce is quite different: shrinking populations in Japan and Germany make it increasingly difficult to hire enough skilled workers, i.e. engineers. However, immigration - as suggested by shaun39 - is not an easy solution, not least because of language difficulties. Have you ever tried to learn German (not to mention Japanese) to a level required by employers? In contrast growing populations in India, China and the US require much greater job growth.

Recommend (15)PermalinkReport abuse
vmoriz wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:00 GMT
@shaun39 I liked your macro review, and liked the proposals you made. I'm open to move to countries like Germany, Sweden or Austria. The question is, apart from all the good forecasts those countries report about labour market, are there companies really interested in hiring spaniards? At least from my experience it is not so easy, with the skills and seniority I'm looking for.

Feel free to connect via linkedIn:

http://linkd.in/connect2vfernandez

Recommend (17)PermalinkReport abuse
russelbertrand wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:00 GMT
Escha wrote "In contrast growing populations in India, China and the US require much greater job growth."

US is shrinking not growing i.e. baby boomers and greatest generation. Also, China has to many old people and to few young workers problem caused by mandatory 1 child laws. Which it seems most US families now practice.

Recommend (15)PermalinkReport abuse
An Drew wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:12 GMT
Britain's Confidence Fairy seems to be doing pretty well.

Recommend (16)PermalinkReport abuse
Murilo Assis wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:19 GMT
In Brazil there is a sharp shortage of engineers, technicians, researchers in the following areas: bulding, petrochemical, IT.

I strongly suggest those people that are unenployed in Europe/USA to have closer look in Brazil.

I am brazilian and according to some news I have lately read in newspapers and TV, some projects have been delayed due to lack of people with skills on the a.m. fields.

Due to Olimpic Games, World Cup, Pre-salt layer, the booming areas are as follow: Petrol (pre-salt layer), Buldings (house, dam, airports, ports, ethanol mills, agricultural research, transport and so on...)

For further information Google companies like: PETROBRÁS, EMBRAER, Norberto Odebrecht, EMBRAPA, CAMARGO CORREA, COSAN, COPERSUCAR (all World Class companies).

Needless to say it is necessary you guys know to communicate in portuguese or at least spanish as second language.

Good Luck you!

Murilo Assis

Recommend (14)PermalinkReport abuse
Steve Thompson wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:23 GMT
It's interesting to see that the prospects in for employment in the United States are on a very modest uptrend. That said, it is also interesting to note that the wages paid for many jobs in America have not grown in real terms for decades. Here's an article that shows how little incomes have risen in real terms in America over the past 30 years:

http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2011/02/working-in-america-once-aga...

Recommend (13)PermalinkReport abuse
Cloudwarrior wrote: Jun 14th 2011 10:25 GMT
I sure wish people would learn the difference between an ageing population and a shrinking population.

@(Ed) Brazil
"Britain, you are Japan tomorrow. Actually, old"

Two totally different countries other than the fact they are island kingdoms. Yes, Japan's population is going to start shrinking - it hasn't yet though but almost any day now. It's population is estimated to shrink by over 30 million in the next 40 years - not just through a low birthrate but pretty much zero immigration. It is ageing at a rapid rate.

Britain on the other hand, whilst ageing is expected to have an extra 10 million people in the same time.

Ageing yes, shrinking no! A very shallow comparison.

@russelbertrand
"US is shrinking not growing i.e. baby boomers and greatest generation. Also, China has to many old people and to few young workers problem caused by mandatory 1 child laws. Which it seems most US families now practice."

Again, the US population is NOT shrinking. Whilst it is getting older, it is not ageing at anywhere near the pace of other countries, especially places like Japan, South Korea and China.

It's population is expected to grow by about a third in the next 40 years to over 440 million. Hardly shrinking now. Please find me a rich, developed country that is expected to grow by nearly 30%.

As for China, that is a very shallow analysis of the country's population. At this stage, China does not have too many old people, though it is lacking in younger people.

But for at least the next five years, China will enjoy the economic dividend of having it's largest working age cohort ever. However, from about 2015 even this cohort will start to rapidly shrink and THEN China will have the burden of having too many old people. (for those that disagree on my claim, please don't attack the sentiment but attack the facts - they are there provided by the Chinese government for all to see).