Wednesday, November 10, 2010

I am networking with prominent franchise or license sales professionals with the goal of obtaining candidate referrals or recommendations. Capodice & Associates has been retained to conduct a priority executive search for an experienced Franchise Sales Executive. Qualified candidates will receive immediate and confidential consideration. The candidate profile is summarized as follows:

TITLE: Franchise Sales Executive

LOCATION: California

COMPENSATION: Base (+)Commission

SCOPE:
The Franchise Sales Executive reports to the CEO and is responsible to obtain the company’s Franchise Sales objectives. You will be responsible for achieving plan and ROI objectives.


SKILLS & EXPERIENCE:
Three to seven years of documented success in selling franchises in the retail/service segment to sophisticated individual or group investors. Other pertinent skills, traits and requirements include:

* Established performer utilizing a professional and consultative selling approach.
* Must have proven Franchise Sales record
* Must be experienced in “Start-up” franchise selling
* Ability to develop credibility among the franchise community
* Independent, confident and self-directed management style. “Stickler for follow thru”.
* Ability to get results in an entrepreneurial, flexible and multi-tasking environment.
* Solid computer expertise with ability to track and report on sales activity and results.
* Professional presence and demeanor. High ethical standards.
* Must be highly effective in telephone and face-to-face communications.
* Measurable accomplishment in selling in the Retail/Service industry.

Contact:
Qualified candidates may contact me at 941-906-1990 or email your resume (Word attachment) directly to patti@capodice.com I would greatly appreciate it if you could forward this profile to any colleagues who may be suitable for this opportunity. All qualified inquiries will receive prompt consideration. Resumes should be e-mailed (Word attachment) or faxed to 941-906-1991. If I can be of assistance to you or your organization, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you in advance for your referrals and recommendations.

Thursday, October 7, 2010



Measuring Talent - Sifting through the "Dead Wood"

Your new executive is on board; the internal memos are distributed and the press release hits the trade publications: They all sound so familiar...something like this: "Our search for a new leader to return our company to sustained success has been focused and thorough," said X. "A screening team of board members, consisting of myself, Y and Z, established a broad field of candidates and interviewed many individuals. We then recommended the strongest contenders to the board as finalists. Each was interviewed by the entire board, and Mr.Perfect was our top choice.

"Mr. Perfect came to our attention because of his/her strong execution skills, his/her proven ability to lead top performing teams and his/her track record in driving shareholder value. He/she demonstrated these skills by turning around A, which, while smaller than our company, is a complex organization with multiple business segments. As we got to know Mr. Perfect, we were impressed by his emphasis on developing internal talent while reaching outside for new skills, his understanding of the role of culture in a company's success and his personal integrity. Additionally, his/her straightforward style has won the respect of employees, customers and investors," Blah...Blah...Blah...

Impressive! What's more impressive is that Mr. Perfect recently resigned unexpectedly do to a compromising integrity issue, leaving the stock price depressed and employee moral in disarray. Oh and by the way, the company paid him $20,000,000+ to go away. So much for how impressed the hiring committee was with his "Personal Integrity". Oooops...that's gotta hurt!

Now...Lets get to work...

Hiring today...relies on networking, personal contacts, trade associations, job boards (best place to find your next "average" executive) and search firms. Candidates are identified based on their background and experience, interviewed by a search or executive committee, sent out to the "shrink" for the "five factor analysis" evaluation, references are checked and he/she is brought on to lead the company or discipline they represent.

The most progressive companies now recognize this as an ineffective hiring strategy and are now moving toward a more measurable approach.

This approach identifies:
- The strategies and objectives of the organization.

- Measures the existing internal talent against these strategies
utilizing multi dimensional assessment methods.

- Determines where the voids occur in achieving the objectives.

- Conducts a through internal and external candidate search.

- Matches the candidate's skills, behaviors, interests and
organizational competencies against the strategies,
objectives, skills, behaviors, interests and organizational
competencies of the candidates to select the individual who
can perform at the expected level.

- Utilizes proven on-boarding methods to acclimate the new
executive to the team and the team to the new executive.

- Uses the assessment data collected on an ongoing basis to
coach, develop, maximize team performance, and develop
long-term succession plans.

By using these multi dimensional assessment methods boards and executive teams are able to eliminate most if not all of the subjectivity in the interview process and successfully set the individual and company up for success.

For more information on significantly improving your executive hiring and selection process contact Peter Capodice at peter@capodice.com or 941-906-1990

Thursday, June 10, 2010


June 10, 2010

WHEN MENTORING GOES BAD...

Most young managers view having a mentor as their ticket to the big leagues-to greater visibility, exciting assignments and big promotions. Benefits flow to mentors as well, as they enjoy broader influence when their young protégés rise to stardom.

When mentoring goes well, it can be of great benefit to young managers. But when it goes wrong, it can have lasting negative effects for both mentors and their protégés. Stacey Delo talks with Dawn Chandler of Cal Poly's Orfalea College of Business in San Luis Obispo for some advise on how to keep mentoring relationships from going bad.

And it's all true. Except when it isn't. Except when mentoring goes bad.
And it does go bad-in all sorts of ways and sometimes spectacularly. At one end of the spectrum are relationships that fizzle out for benign reasons, such as the pressures of daily work and personal lives, conflicting goals or a lack of shared values. But relationships also fail for not-so-benign reasons: manipulation, deceit and harassment, to name a few. Either party can be the cause-and the career trajectories of both may never be the same afterwards.

To be clear, mentoring can be invaluable, not only to protégés and mentors, but also to organizations. It is important, however, to manage the relationships appropriately and be aware of early signs of potential problems.
Here is a look at some of the ways mentoring relationships go awry, followed by advice on how mentors, protégés and companies can spot warning signs sooner and create more positive experiences.

How Mentoring Relationships Go Wrong

OIL AND WATER: Most valuable experiences in mentoring feature trust, rapport and a general affinity between the two parties. Research has shown that the more the two have in common, especially in values and personalities, the more they will put into the relationship. Sometimes one sharp contrast can be the difference between harmony and friction. A mentor may have a habit of working long hours and weekends, for example, while the protégé prefers a 9-to-5 workday with weekends free. If neither side is willing to bend, the parties may find themselves unable to work together effectively.

NEGLECT OF PROTÉGÉS: It goes without saying (but we'll say it anyway) that for protégés to benefit, mentors must show an active interest and act in a positive way to advance their career and personal learning. Most mentors have every intention of doing that. Yet they sometimes end up neglecting their protégés.Such mentors may be preoccupied with challenges in their own careers, excessively busy from a heavy workload or insecure about their standing in the organization. They can be evasive when called upon for advice or support, or always put their own priorities first.It's all perfectly understandable, but that doesn't excuse the damage it does to a protégé's ego, or wasting a protégé's time. Such neglect can lead to protégés' feeling that their mentors don't value the relationship. At worst, they may withdraw from the relationship or even leave the department or organization. At the least, they will be so annoyed or disgusted or hurt that they won't be open to accepting any guidance that might occur.

MENTORS WHO MANIPULATE: Manipulation is most common when the mentor is the protégé's direct supervisor or a manager up the ladder in the same department. It's more damaging and less subtle than neglect, and it comes in three main forms: tyranny, inappropriate delegation and politicking.
Tyranny is essentially management by intimidation and has been a complaint heard repeatedly from protégés interviewed by Dr. Eby and her research colleagues over the years. It comes in many forms. A mentor, for instance, may threaten to demote a protégé unless the protégé pulls an all-nighter to fix a problem that the mentor caused. The protégé most likely will give in and work until the early morning hours, but will also so resent the mentor that the relationship will be irrevocably harmed.Inappropriate delegation is when a mentor manipulates a protégé to do work that the mentor should be doing. But it can also involve withholding assignments. A protégé who has long awaited a particularly challenging assignment may find at the 11th hour that the mentor has decided to take the assignment. Protégés in situations like these may find their career development stymied. Too often, they end up never taking on work that will develop the skills they need to gain more responsibility and receive attention from senior management.

Questions to Ask Yourself1. If you are mentoring someone, are you giving them enough of your time and interesting work? 2. Are the personality and work habits of your protégé similar to yours, and if not, are you able to make sure that doesn't get in the way of working together?3. Have you and your protégé clearly outlined his or her professional-development goals? 4. If you are being mentored, is the work interesting, and does your mentor give you credit for any projects you complete for him or her?5. Do you feel like part of a team, and are you treated in an open, respectful manner?

If you answered no to any of these questions, your mentoring partnership may be heading for, or already in, rough waters. Discuss potential conflicts with each other, and get help from human resources to arbitrate any disagreements.
Politicking involves more malicious acts, like sabotage and taking undue credit. Protégés reported many instances of sabotage, including one mentor's campaigning behind the protégé's back to damage her reputation. If a mentor has a high standing and does such a thing, it can cause irreparable damage to a protégé's reputation and promotion prospects. Some said their mentors criticized them behind their backs and blamed them for mistakes that the mentors themselves made. Equally damaging: mentors who steal their protégés' ideas.
PROTÉGÉS WHO MANIPULATE: Protégés have fewer means at their disposal, but they, too, can use manipulation to benefit themselves, and sometimes to harm a mentor's reputation and career. One mentor reported a protégé who would doctor numbers, tailor justifications and say that concepts still in development had already been implemented, all to look good in front of senior managers.
The danger to the mentor here is twofold. First, any bad-mouthing could eventually tarnish a mentor's reputation, even if the source is unreliable. And second, if the protégé's exaggeration and puffery are exposed, the mentor may be held just as accountable as the protégé, if not more so. Management may decide the mentor is responsible for allowing the abuses to occur.
SABOTAGE AGAINST MENTORS: When protégés try to damage their mentor's career, it's typically motivated by revenge, say, for failing to win a promotion. The reason may have been subpar performance. But rather than take personal responsibility, some protégés have been known to blame the mentor for not providing adequate support.
Other times, the sabotage can be unintentional. Mentors are putting themselves on the line by saying they believe in their protégé's ability and future at the company. Such endorsements can backfire. For example, if a mentor promotes a protégé of outstanding ability who then goes on to make a major mistake-perhaps due to a personal problem that the mentor couldn't have been aware of-the mentor's judgment will be called into question as well.
SUBMISSIVE PROTÉGÉS: Sometimes protégés rely on their mentor too much, stifling their independent thinking and growth. It can also lead to situations in which the mentor inadvertently becomes overly controlling. In either case, the protégé's learning is hindered.

JEALOUS PROTÉGÉS: Consider this scenario: Two employees have been with a company a long time, and at times have competed for the same assignments. Then one of them is promoted and becomes responsible for the development of his or her former peer. When that happens, it isn't hard to see why it would be difficult to create a mentoring relationship: The jealousy the rival-turned-protégé feels toward the new boss blocks any desire or ability to learn.Making Sure the Relationship Is PositiveTo make these kinds of problems much less likely, or nip them in the bud before they become serious, here are some suggestions.
GIVE IT STRUCTURE: Whether a company has formal or informal mentoring, or both, the organization needs to provide support for mentors and protégés. Human-resources representatives should be available to provide training and help sort out any concerns that arise. HR can also help with setting goals for the relationship.

HAVE A BACKUP: It may be best for protégés to have more than one mentor at a time, and vice versa. If a mentor tries to sabotage a protégé's career, the protégé can turn to another mentor for backing. And if a protégé tries to undermine a mentor, the mentor can seek support from other protégés.
RECRUIT CAREFULLY: People who volunteer are more likely to put in the time and effort necessary to fulfill their partners' expectations. Companies should also try to match mentors and protégés who have things in common, as those relationships are more likely to
succeed.

TRAINING AND ORIENTATION: Certain principles need to be communicated beforehand, whether in a formal or informal program. For example, expectations: how often to meet, what the protégé is looking for and what the mentor has to offer.Make sure protégés understand they should be receptive to feedback, eager to learn and amiable. They also should strive to learn even outside their mentoring relationships. The more value they can bring to the relationship, the more likely the mentors will be to help them.

Both parties should be aware that their relationship will depend on trust, and that they may need to explain their actions sometimes to reduce misunderstandings. For example, if a mentor declines a requested meeting, some explanation is warrented. Otherwise, the protégé may wrongly assume the mentor is losing interest.Both should be alerted to patterns of behavior that are likely to cause trouble. This may help them repair-or end-potentially dysfunctional relationships before they escalate into harmful ones. Both should also be taught conflict-management skills.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Before the mentoring begins, both parties need to understand what will be required to make the collaboration worthwhile. Then they should either commit wholeheartedly or opt out.

GIVE FEEDBACK: Mentors can share appraisals with the protégés' supervisors, who have a vested interest in the protégés' development. If problems arise, someone from HR or another supervisor should be in the loop to give objective advice or mediate.

PREPARE FOR THE END: Everyone should be clear on the fact that mentoring eventually ends, when the protégé has learned all that he or she can, or when the mentor no longer provides guidance or satisfaction. Talking about this in advance helps to avoid misunderstandings or hurt feelings when the time comes.

Call Capodice & Associates
Predictive Performance
We Can Help!
About Capodice & AssociatesFrom a dynamic blend of professional search talent, to the most comprehensive assessment tools on the market, Capodice & Associates gives you peace of mind knowing your next hire will be a long-term success
**********************
Areas Of Practice
Restaurant
Hospitality
Franchise
Real Estate
Development

**********************
Job Opportunities
Director of International Marketing

Director of Consumer Insights

Regional Marketing Manager

COO
**********************
Contact UsCapodice & AssociatesMidtown Plaza1243 S. Tamiami TrailSarasota, Florida 34239941-906-1990 Phone941-906-1991 Fax
EMAIL US
Forward email

Friday, March 26, 2010

Hiring Incentives To Restore Employment Act Signed Into Law



SUMMARY: The Hiring Incentives To Restore Employment (HIRE) Act was signed into law by President Obama on March 18, 2010. The Act primarily provides employers with incentives to hire and retain new employees. to encourage employers to hire new employees, the Act exempts a qualified employer from paying the employer's share of the social security employment taxes (6.2 percent of the first $106,800 of wages) for wages paid in 2010 for any new employee hired after February 3, 2010, and before January 1, 2011, if the new employee (1) was previously unemployed and (2) does not replace another employee of the employer. To encourage employers to retain these newly hired employees, the Act provides employers with a $1,000 income tax credit for every new employee they employ continuously for 52 weeks. Any qualified employer is entitled to claim the tax incentives.
Peter CapodiceCapodice & Associates

Tuesday, February 9, 2010



CASE STUDY #1

CLIENT: An international financial group implemented a Birkman job profile to pre- screen applicants for a Customer Service role.

SITUATION: 60 Employees performing at a “less than optimal” level,
high turnover and lack of engagement


OBJECTIVES: (1) Reduce Turnover
(2) Increase staff engagement

RESULTS:
· Turnover decreased from 21 in 2008 to 3 in 2009
· Staff engagement (measured through internal survey) increased
· From 38% in 2008 to 88% for 2009
· Unplanned departures reduced to 4.3% from 8.4%
· 7% Revenue growth