Borracchia, Carolina

Its a Match!: How to Win the War for Talent / Carolina Borracchia;
prologue by Pablo Maison. 1st ed. Ciudad Autnoma de Buenos Aires:
Borracchia, Carolina, 2015. E-Book.
ISBN 9789873368370
1. Economa y Empresa. I. Maison, Pablo, prol. II. Ttulo. CDD 158.1
Cover and content design, Paloma Pollan.
Cover photo, Xavier Martn.
Writing advisor, Nicols Di Candia. www.nicolasdicandia.com.ar
English translation, Agustina Caballero
Carolina Borracchia, 2015 + carolina@comboagency.com
No part of this book may be reproduced
without express permission from the author.
All rights reserved.

To Sol Piana, from Unilever

for giving me my first
Employer Branding job opportunity
and being my client and
above all, my mentor.

Carolina Borracchia

Its a
Match!
HOW TO WIN
THE WAR
FOR TALENT

OPEN BOOK

Because I was born in the 80s, I think that writing in monologue

form is a thing of the past. So I would like to open the door to
you and make this a dialogue. I would like to challenge you, my
equal, to contradict me. Not with your pencil or on the margins,
nor shielded in printed paper, but in some virtual space where
the scales are less favorable to me and we can engage on a
passionate debate.
Therefore, from now on and as long as youre on that side,
Ill be here: @caroboraquia.

Its a Match! is Carolina, body and soul. I can still see her,
sitting as a student in our HR program at UTDT, in the first row,
getting engaged in the all topics proposed, with an almost
uncontrollable, overwhelming passion, contributing knowledge
from different fields and experiences. That very essence shines
through in Its a Match!: a solid approach to employment
and employer branding in this day and age, valuable and
provocative for individuals as well as for companies. I celebrate
this young, fresh and passionate voice joining us in the choir of
voices trying to change the world.
PAULA MOLINARI
CEO AT WHALECOM, HEAD OF HR PROGRAM
AT TORCUATO DI TELLA UNIVERSITY

Defiant, breaking paradigms, with its eye on the future which

equals the present, focusing on people, this book owes its
novelty to simplicity and its innovation to humanity. Carolina
invites us to revisit our mental models and face an ever-evolving
reality. We can forget about the words, but well never forget the
experiences: I welcome this provocative vision and hope that
many can find it enriching and apply its ideas.
ALEJANDRO MELAMED
AUTHOR OF HISTORIAS Y MITOS DE LA OFICINA, EMPRESAS (+)
HUMANAS, POR QU NO? AND EMPRESAS DEPREDADORAS.

In this book, Carolina warns employers and challenges them

to rethink their corporate branding strategy. New generations
demand more sincere and human relationships, in which
there is no room for arrogance or detachment. She applies
marketing concepts without resorting to dogmatisms or
clichs, and brings clarity to this fundamental need companies
have: talent attraction. Her deep yet concrete reasoning leads
to action and change.
FERNANDO ZERBONI
MARKETING PROFESSOR AND CONSULTANT IAE BUSINESS SCHOOL

The perfect mix between Marketing and Human Resources.

With an entertaining approach and focusing on people,
Carolina shows us how to strengthen and challenge our
employer brand.
RAFAEL BERGS
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER, ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT AND HR
MANAGER AT BANCO GALICIA

CONTENTS

06

OPEN BOOK

12

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS

16

PROLOGUE

24

25

KISS TYRANNIES GOOD BYE

26

I WILL NOT DISGUISE MY IGNORANCE

27

IN BETWEEN LOVE AND REJECTION

30

ITS A MATCH! WHY TINDER?

32

33

WOULD YOU GO TO FAR WITH WEAPONS FROM 1482?

34

FEAR DOESNT EMPOWER YOU: IT FREEZES YOU!

35

THE SPERMS ROAD TO THE EGG

38

WORDS FALLING ON DEAF EARS

40

HUMILTY? WHAT FOR?

41

SELECTION 2.0: THE TINDER PARADIGM

43

RELATIONSHIP BUILDING

44

EMPLOYEES ARE PEOPLE,

THE POWER OF ANTS

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

CANDIDATES ARE RSUMS

45

DIFFERENCES: A SUMMARY

46

47

GETTING TO KNOW PEOPLE

48

CERTAINTY VS UNCERTAINTY

50

ITS SEDUCTION!

52

CAREER VS IDENTITY

53

KEEPING DESIRE ALIVE

54

WE ARE COMPETING WITH HAPPINESS

55

EMPLOYER VALUE PROPOSITION.

56

EMPLOYER BRANDING: THE FOUR CS

58

59

A LESSON FROM FERRARI

60

EQUALS

62

GOOD AND BAD SOCIAL MEDIA USE

64

65

BANCO GALICIA: THE EXPERIENCE

66

UNILEVER: THE DIALOGUE

70

W E R E A L L C A N D I DAT E S

FROM LOSE-LOSE TO WIN-WIN

SUCCESS STORIES

LIFE IS NOW

11

In the first place, I have to acknowledge (as I always do) life

itself, for having given me so much. Starting by my parents,
ISABEL and MIGUEL BORRACCHIA who were the first to believe
in me and have encouraged and supported me in all my
endeavors since I was a little girl. And SANTIAGO PONFERRADA,
for being my unconditional partner and supporting me through
so many tough moments, such as my panic attacks and my
Generalized Anxiety Disorder, which is virtually unknown in
Argentina.
I am indebted to MARTN, SEBA, SOL, ELINA and DANIEL PIANA,
for their generosity towards me, because without their support
Im not sure I would have finished college and because COMBO
EMPLOYER BRANDING was born in their playroom.
Thanks to sisters MAGDALENA and JOSEFA and all my teachers
and educators at INSTITUTO MADRE DEL DIVINO PASTOR. For
showing me how to pray and teaching me a realistic catechism,
that tells us that being a Christian is not about being good, but
about not being indifferent, which is much harder work and
much more demanding.
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to: my partners at COMBO EMPLOYER BRANDING: JUAN

and CECILIA ASTORE for being
more like siblings than business partners and for trusting in
me always; and my team at COMBO EMPLOYER BRANDING, who
PABLO GONZLEZ, LUCIO SANTILLI

paid attention to this books every detail as if it were their own.

Especially PALOMA POLLAN, ALEXANDER WITTMAN and VIRGINIA
MUOZ.

Thanks to my former partners at AHA! LORENA GHIGLIONE

and FLORENCIA BO, for jumping into the adventure of starting
something new and generously sharing their knowledge with
me always.
Thanks to the company that taught me everything and that
Im so fond of: UNILEVER. To each and every one who stood
by COMBO EMPLOYER BRANDING as we grew in each new
challenge, but mainly to VERNICA CARABAJAL, who always
coaches us with patience and shares with us her enormous
knowledge on EMPLOYER BRANDING. Our discussions triggered
many of the ideas that inspired this book.

13

I am grateful to those who put their trust in COMBO EMPLOYER

BRANDING when we were just 23 years old: FABRICIO KAPLAN,
NICOLS BAREA VILAS, PABLO MAISON, FLORENCIA IGLESIAS, SOL
PIANA and MELINA CAO. And to those who keep challenging us
to think outside the box day after day: RAQUEL SUREZ, ERIKA
GIORGANA, INS OLANO, GLORIA VALDELAMAR, GEMMA GODOY,
BRBARA ROBLES, JOANA RUDIGER, LAURA ARCUSIN, EMILIANO
BLANCO, JOHANNA LOPEZ, LORENA MOREL, EUGENIA VIOLA,
LAURA MASSOLO, MARTHA PAOLA PENA,

and many more.

I am indebted to NICOLS DI CANDIA, writer and author of

and DOS BOCAS. Without him, this book would have
been something else entirely. The truth is we wrote it together, I
talked my head off and he wrote to exhaustion.

LAME

Finally, from the bottom of my heart, thanks to the teachers

who have educated me: PAULA MOLINARI (Universidad Torcuato
Di Tella) for her huge generosity and her patience when I
interrupt her; FER ZERBONI, JAVIER SILVA and PABLO ALEGRE
from IAE BUSINESS SCHOOL for believing in me; NORA MENZEL,
from LA PALMERA workshop, who always taught me and
respected my freedom; DANIEL WOLKOWICZ for correcting me
so many times as a grad student.
Thanks to entrepreneurs PABLO LORENZO from TEA
and ALEJANDRO NAVARRO from BUMERAN.COM
for sharing their ample, admirable experience and enduring my
many catharses.

CONNECTION

Gracias a la vida, que me ha dado tanto.

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS

15

P R O LO G U E , PA B LO M A I S O N

Felipe sits in front of a big TV playing GTA V on

his PlayStation.
Two other friends play with him. But theyre not
here, theyre online. One is five minutes away from
our home and the other one is in Spain. The three
are also on Skype, on the tablet, where they discuss
what to do together to win the game.
Theyre a team. A virtual one, but a team
nonetheless.
They laugh and get excited and argue as they
virtually steal cars. They have fun. Lots of fun.
Felipe is ten years old and hes my middle child.
It creeps me out. Not just because I cannot
fathom how he can have so much fun with friends
who are not physically here, but because they do
have fun... stealing cars! Its too much for my 70s
mindset 71 mindset, more precisely.
Many aspects of this trouble me: methodology,
because the way he interacts with his friends
dramatically opposes the way I used to interact with
mine; and values because I didnt steal cars when
I was their age. I would ride the bus for an hour, get
together and watch a movie or play a boardgame.
Probably TEG, our Argentinian version of Risk.
Felipe wanted a PlayStation console since he
was eight. I got it for him when he turned ten, just
because I didnt want to give in. For the next six
months, he begged for the GTA game and I said no
because I didnt want him to start stealing cars.

17

But then he was the only one among his six

closest friends who did not have the game. So I
gave in. I gave him permission to steal cars virtually
with his friends. And in fact, I had to do so on his
birthday, so his friends wouldnt get bored at the
slumber party.
Im no longer creeped out by him playing GTA, in
fact, Im almost sure neither him nor his friends will
grow up to steal cars for a living.
But I am certain that the feeling I get every day
watching Felipe or my two other children is very
similar to what I felt almost ten years ago, watching
the young people who wanted to start working at
Unilever, who came to question almost everything I
thought I knew about organizations in terms of the
employer-employee relationship.
Fortunately, Its a Match! goes beyond
characterizing or describing todays young or todays
employees. And thats whats interesting about its
proposition.
It does not explain what Felipe (current or future
employees) is like: it provides clever ideas to help
me (the organization) play a better role as a father
(employer) and avoid making unnecessary efforts to
try to change the unchangeable these generations
needs. Which are very different from mine.
Carolina focuses on the same thing I love to focus
on, hence why I love this work. It is something as
simple and abstract as the pursuit of happiness.
Young people pursue happiness from the very

18

beginning of their professional lives. And this

happiness is not affected by the same factors that
we used to take into account.
I dont need to describe them here. It is important
to mention, however, that Its a Match! puts
the individuals in a position of equality with the
company. How? Because it is not just companies
that choose people anymore, but that the choice
is mutual. And although this approach could mean
hard work, higher costs (in traditional terms) and
more difficulties, it is a beautiful challenge for those
of us who work to construct organizations human
capital.
They dont trust companies anymore. Its a fact.
Nowadays, young people dont believe in
companies just like they dont believe in most
institutions governments, labor unions, political
parties, etc. This is why, now more than ever,
we need to build the bond that appears when
companies and individuals get to know each other.
That bond is trust.
Its in Carolinas book: companies and candidates
do not really communicate. On this subject, I usually
say that one of the main problems we have, in
this attempt to build mutual trust, stems from us
overselling our companies as the ideal place to
work. In order to attract talent, we use discourse to
portray our organizations as immaculate, wonderful
places, which are far from being so and we know
it, it is just because all companies are run and

PROLOGUE

19

managed by humans, flawed through and through.

And the consequences of this overselling problem
do not come about in the medium term: people
fall out of love with companies much sooner now,
questioning, to the extreme, why they lied when they
introduced themselves.
The author is sensible enough to see beyond
this and state that overselling is probably not
just dishonest but also pointless, because young
people are not even willing to pay attention to what
companies are trying to sell as an ideal workplace.
Hence the importance of devising a strategic
employer brand: understanding the companys
strengths and weaknesses and translating them
into an honest, consistent employer brand. At this
point, as stated by Carolina in this book, our task
is to reach beyond the newly arrived employees to
those who have failed to enter the company. They
will probably have more power to build our employer
brand than our employees.
A number of companies have started designing
recruitment strategies aimed not only at new
employees, but also at providing some orientation
(or a skill, or a learning experience) for all
participants. This is one of the cornerstones to build
the aforementioned long-term bond.
There are two more concepts from the book
I would like to expound on before closing this

20

prologue. The first is the importance of social

media in todays world of work. The reason is too
obvious to explain here. Fundamentally, we need to
consider how soon we can adapt our companies to
successfully integrate social media to our day-today formal and informal communication processes,
and how we can use them to bridge the gap
between us and the people in the labor market. This
is not optional. If we fail to understand the potential
of social in the transformation of an organization
outside formal structures, well definitely overlook
the principal driving force for cultural change
existing today. If social networks were able to shake
social foundations during the Arab Spring, with the
indignados in Spain and with the questioning of
public spending for Brazil World Cup, think of the
power they can have on smaller groups of people.
How should we add social media to our formal
communication processes? That is the big question,
especially if you take into account that they are
young peoples real communication channel not
just a form of entertainment.
And finally, I would like to comment on whats
possibly the most important concept in the book:
the extensively treated and perhaps outmoded
concept of the Employee Value Proposition (EVP).
The EVP is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of
what companies mean to their employees.

PROLOGUE

21

Creating the EVP gains importance not only

during the talent attraction process, but also
and fundamentally when we plan our response
to the needs of our employees. The proposition
of value as an employer materializes when
companies profoundly and genuinely embark upon
understanding their employees needs (through
climate surveys, focus groups, open dialogues, etc.)
and the needs of future employees (for which all the
information that comes out of recruitment processes
is crucial).
Is that our challenge, then? Detecting and
understanding these needs? Not at all. Our real
challenge is to be able to question, as leaders
from another generation, with different values and
requirements, the status quo of our organizations. As
Carolina shows us through this book, the main goal
is to take off our own shoes, and put ourselves in
the shoes of those who think and feel very differently
from us.
That is, without a doubt, the only way to transform
organizations quicker and more effectively than our
competitors.

PABLO MAISON
HR VICE PRESIDENT, UNILEVER LATIN AMERICA

22

THE POWER OF ANTS

KISS TYRANNIES GOOD BYE

I adore being an 80s kid, These years are great

for us optimists, for those of us who believe in the
triumph of minorities. I was thirteen when I
read about the Internet for the first time, and I
immediately became obsessed with it. I asked my
mother to buy me as many books as she could, and
wrote my first paper about the future.
The future has always intrigued me. Later I
bumped into a quote by Gilles Lipovetzsky in a
magazine, which I put up on my bedroom wall: a
society made of more comfortable people does not
necessarily make up a society of happier people.
Happiness and the future still intrigue me. Twenty
years after that summer I still imagine the future,
but its the future of work I think of, which is what I
ended up dedicating a part of my life to. I am certain
that the world is inevitably becoming a fairer place.
Power is being increasingly threatened by a new
kind of justice, one that is above courts and judges.
It is overwhelming and unstoppable, like a boiling
anthill.
Billions of voices speak up through social media;
we speak up about whats unexpressed, exposing
injustice, making the invisible visible. The world
we live in is gradually becoming a world of equals.
For those who understand this, opportunities arise
everywhere. Those who still believe in the old
paradigm can neither adapt nor enjoy the ride. For

24

25

them, the world is made up of the bad news the

media gratuitously terrorizes us with. But there is a
different future, a much more optimistic future that
transforms everything - even the world of work.
I WILL NOT DISGUISE MY IGNORANCE

I get bored easily, and I am haunted by the idea of

wasting my readers time with
ideas they have already read about. So I will not
discuss the new generations: there is nothing I could
write that you havent already read, and I wont act
like I do. For reference on this topic, I recommend
you read Turbulencia Generacional (Generational
Turbulence) by Paula Molinari or El trabajo en la
posmodernidad (Work in the Postmodern Era) by
Pablo Maison. I wont discuss the war for talent in
depth; I think this book is a waste of time for anyone
who doesnt know what it is.

26

IN BETWEEN LOVE AND REJECTION

We are sorry to tell you that you are not the one we
are looking for, but we will hold on to your rsum for
future searches! This classic phrase means only one
thing to candidates: rejection. The end of the road.
Walking away empty-handed.
NOWADAYS REJECTION IS THE EXPERIENCE
PROVIDED BY EMPLOYER BRANDS.

We have all been rejected by an employer brand.

This is why the more interest a company shows in its
candidates, the more it risks losing its ability to attract
talent. Because, today, we go all in: you either get the
job or you get rejected. Employer brands only think
about attracting talent, about the war for talent,
about how to fill vacancies. All they ask themselves
is: Is this our guy? Yes or no? But, actually, there
is much more potential in relating with candidates
differently. We need to create win-win experiences in
order to resignify rejection.
However, there are infinite things in between
acceptance and rejection. The world is not always
black or white. Manners, experiences and situations
change. If a man on a date makes me feel beautiful
and intelligent, but for whatever reason we dont see
each other anymore, Ill still have something nice to
remember. The experience is not blunt rejection.
With how many people to we experience
attraction? Definitely, many more than we ever get to

THE POWER OF ANTS

27

fall in love with. And in most cases, you feel like

it wouldnt work out, for whichever reason. Think
about all those people: in spite of the apparent
attraction, you most probably would not choose
each other, for an obvious reason, or a shared
reason, anything from he/she is gay to he/she is
too uptight. I am painfully aware of how complex
falling in love is, and how unlikely it is for two people
to fall in love with each other. But youll only know
if you give it a try, if you get to know someone and
allow them to get to know you. And if it wont work,
you might as well find out sooner rather than later.
If you invest time on someone who is not right for
you, you are losing the chance to spend time with
the one who is right for you.
I believe that the love of our lives is a match: a
mutual choice. The problem with employer brands
is that they do not reveal that rejection works both
ways, that rejected candidates would not be able
to survive the companys culture or workload (just
to name some examples), because the people who
work in candidate selection are always in the search
for compatibility.
In the old paradigm, rejection is not mutual,
because candidates are not given the chance to
realize why the company es not right for them.
They dont usually give honest feedback to the
candidates they dont hire We chose someone
else is as close as they get to it. And not only do

companies keep that feedback from the candidates

they reject: they dont explain to chosen candidates
why they got the job either.
Hired employees suffer the same lack of
communication. They dont necessarily know how
the company regards them, and in many firms,
the most valued employees are not aware of their
worth.
Above all things, we need to end this kind of
unilateral communication. Companies are missing
out on some valuable feedback, which would allow
them to improve their recruitment processes, the
relationships between bosses and subordinates,
their value proposition towards employees and their
benefit programs.
In the old paradigms recruitment processes,
companies act unilaterally. They make decisions on
their own. The starting point is that every rsum
received equals a right swipe on Tinder, and if the
other person swipes right too, a match is created.
And then what? Then the candidate is invited to get
to know the company once theyre already a part
of it! Just think about it. Its insane! Its a waste of
too much time and money. Its a lose-lose situation,
because companies shouldnt want candidates who
dont choose them. We need to get to know each
other beforehand. We need to choose each other.

ITS ABOUT
CHOOSING EACH OTHER

28

THE POWER OF ANTS

29

IT S A MATCH! WHY TINDER?

It s to Match! is Tinders (the dating app)

catchphrase. You probably knew that already.
As I write this, Tinder has ten million active users
daily1 and over a billion profiles (almost one out
of six people in the world). Every day, 15 million of
matches are made2. But what is Tinder doing in this
book? Why is it so important? Because Tinder is a
perfect example of the new paradigm. It makes the
connection between people easier in as little time
as possible. It allows to you to quickly discard the
people you are not interested in (at first sight) and
clears the picture so you can dedicate more energy
to the ones you are interested in, and are also
interested in you.
Tinder does not replace human contact: it
increases the possibilities for it. It allows you
to filter people within different types. It gives
you opportunities. You can maintain several
conversations at the same time. It allows you to
contact people you wouldnt meet otherwise. And
it avoids rejection: the app only establishes contact
between two people who liked each other.
The way we meet either one-night stands or
the love of our lives has changed paradigmatically
thanks to Tinder. In the old paradigm, online dating
services epitomize the promise of introducing you to
the love of your life, making you invest lots of time

Wired: wired.com/2014/04/tinder-valuation

Forbes: goo.gl/r6AukI

30

to submit all kinds of information, guaranteeing a

kind of compatibility that can crumble to pieces as
soon as you make eye contact for the first time.
The Tinder paradigm is starting to revolutionize
human relationships. But beyond any app, the
mindset it embodies has not yet had an impact on
the way companies and candidates choose each
other. Its time to open up to this opportunity.

CANDIDATE

VS

COCREATOR

Only make contact to hire them.

Make contact to get to know them.

Establish a contract based on power.

Offer them a learn-learn relationship.

They invest time on you.

You both invest win-win time.

Just a potential employee.

An influencer for your employer brand.

Takes up space on your database.

Provides insights for innovation.

THE POWER OF ANTS

31

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

WOULD YOU GO TO WAR WITH WEAPONS FROM 1482?

I am the one writing this book, I am the one who

paints pictures, I am Ringos mother, I am an activist
for Generalized Anxiety Disorder awareness, I am
a lover of flowers, and many more things. I am
many and I am one. And no one in my generation
identifies as an engineer or wants to be treated like
a person cut away from the rest of their life. That is
in the past. There are no more consumers, clients,
candidates or graduates anymore. There are people:
Juans, Cecilias, Lucios, Maras...
This is why we cannot fathom dividing ourselves
in a rsum. We are not that chronological
compendium of set work experiences in a formula
invented in 1482. (Yes, I dont want to bore you,
but I guess you know that the rsum or curriculum
vitae was invented in another era. No wonder its in
Latin...)
A rsum can never summarize everything I am.
No one in my generation is capable of summarizing
themselves in one page. The rsum is a technical
description of yourself. It is a hard, dry, rigid
document. It lacks all the soft aspects. Nobody puts
emoticons in them, no one shows feelings, no one
mentions anything about the rest of their life.
A rsum is just a tool tailored for organizations
that -logically- still need to fit people into a single
matrix in order to compare and select. Dont get me
wrong: I am not questioning the rsum in itself. I

33

applaud it. Few things have been able to survive

from 1482 to this day. It has worked wonders
until now. It fits perfectly in the paradigm in which
companies omnipotently chose talent and rejected
everyone else. But it just so happens that those days
are gone now, and the highly publicized war for
talent needs new solutions for new problems. Will
we continue to select people using just a rsum,
then?
FEAR DOESNT EMPOWER YOU: IT FREEZES YOU!

In the war of the talent, companies are frozen by

fear. They think they lack the budget, but what I think
is that they lack the courage. The formulas they use
belong in the old paradigm, and they are not good
enough. They dont combine hard and soft elements.
We need to identify fear in order to get rid of it.
When someone has a panic attack, if they dont
identify it, they are unable to fight it. This is the
same idea. Companies have fears larger than their
budgets, and they are used to seeing things a
certain way. Thinking outside the box is crucial to
win the war for talent.
The problem is not understanding the new
generations, its using the information about them
as a starting point to take action. Its like when you
go to therapy for the first time and discover your
own story from a different perspective. It can be so
revealing.

34

Like in therapy, having our motivations clear,

knowing what makes us who we are, our fears and
our history, allows us to understand, but changing
and growing take much more than learning and
knowing: they take courage.
In broad terms, this is where all companies stand.
They feel they are at war, because they havent
been able to connect with new generations yet,
with people with different dynamics and thought
structures.
But when we stop playing the victim and start
taking control of our lives, thats when opportunities
arise. And in this case, for those who are not afraid
to try something new, the opportunity is huge.
There will be no surefire recipes in this book. I
dont believe in them. Those who understand the
change and learn to manage in the new world can
get the best people and the admiration of others.
They are the ones who win the war for talent.
THE SPERMS ROAD TO THE EGG

In the classic vision, companies seeking new

employees resort to one-to-many communication.
They put up an ad in the newspaper or on a job
website, and I have to take the time to find the ad in
the right medium and get in touch with them.
And so my rsum begins its road to unlikely
success. It must compete with tens, hundreds or
maybe thousands of other rsums, from which one

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

35

or two people will probably get the job. The rsum

takes the road of the sperm, in a blind race to the
egg.
The odds that my rsum will stand out are so
scarce that Im tempted to do whatever it takes to
boost its chance to succeed. I can, for example,
improve it, increase its impact, or adapt it to what
I think the company wants. This takes time and
energy, an investment that is almost never fruitful.
Some sites even charge for this service (!!!).
Another possibility is to make infinite copies
and send them to anyone who will receive them.
Someone has to hire me. The reasoning behind
this is that, sooner or later, if Im persistent enough,
my rsum will land on the hands of someone with
enough power to take my merits into account and
call me.
In order to prepare my rsum so it can catch
whoevers job it is to read them all, there are all
sorts of stratagems I can resort to. Some recruiters
expect to be engaged in a kind of deception game,
in which I dress it up so it can stand out among
the others... which are also dressed up. Even if
it makes it through all that, if I get chosen, then
I have to enter the selection process. A series of
obstacles set by the company have to be overcome,
which can include interviews with different people,
psychological tests or aptitude assessments. A lot
of these steps are standardized across companies,

36

so it is not uncommon for candidates to know

what to say and what not to say. I know that if this
is common knowledge, it is highly probable that
my rivals will know also it. And there is a good
chance that the winner will end up being the better
candidate, instead of the one who is better for the
job (!!!).
This is still in force. Although the market is very
fragmented, selection processes still pretend like
every vacancy is highly enviable and coveted by
the whole world. Everyone just assumes you are
extremely interested in their company, that you
should feel lucky theyre even giving you a chance.
Go to the Human Resources section in any
bookstore and youll find many books that look like
they belong in the self-help section. Their aim is to
give candidates inside advice on how to overcome
selection processes: how to answer typical interview
questions, what body language should be adopted
to seem authentic, and even why not to use Comic
Sans font on you rsum. Is this really getting to
know the candidates, or is it encouraging them to be
manipulative? Whats the point? Its like that saying,
the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Wouldnt
it be better to simulate some real work situations,
instead of pretending to be something youre not
just so theyll let you play?
Lots of companies make candidates feel small
and in no way different from the one next in line.

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

37

They put on a steel face, an indifferent face. And

many lose their will to try along the way. Those
who get in might be satisfied, But those who dont
- the overwhelming majority - get the rejection
experience.
WORDS FALLING ON DEAF EARS

Companies and candidates have not reached real

communication yet.
On both sides, the expectations from the other
are very different.
Many companies present themselves as the best
at what they do. Theyre Messi. Theyre Clooney.
Companies trying to sell themselves often publicize
their multinational presence or their global turnover
level. They emphasize how well the company works,
what a privilege it would be to be a part of it, but that
information is usually more relevant for a stockholder
than for a candidate. Many companies try to sell
something that candidates are not interested in
buying.
Rather than seducing candidates, this generates
a conflict of scale. Because, to be honest, when
something is so huge and so successful, it also
becomes distant and suspicious. And we need to
build close bonds, through which we can admire and
discover each other. It s a Match! is about mutual

choices. When the base relationship is so uneven,

its hard to see the mutual element. Companies have
to quit their navel-gazing, take off their make-up and
go out to show themselves as naturally as possible,
just the way they are, and discover the people
behind the profiles.
For this reason, I believe all this is reflected on
Tinder. If you browse through Tinder profiles, youll
realize that the ones who have dated the most
are the ones who have developed an ability to
know what to look for in a profile so that they are
not disappointed at the date. It is very frustrating,
arriving at a date and finding that the actual person
is quite unfavorably different from the sexy photos
theyve uploaded. And that is why many users
add the line my photos are up-to-date on their
profiles: they convey transparency, because without
transparency there is no chance of getting a match
in real life.
HUMILTY? WHAT FOR?

In the old paradigm, companies are constantly

navel-gazing and communicating their hard data.
There is no soft communication; no information
about what candidates are interested in; what makes

Its about
rethinking
the candidate

38

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

39

the company attractive for people to want to work

there. The starting point for companies is that its
everyones dream to work there.
One of the trends men follow on Tinder is showing
off their chiseled bodies or their extreme sports
abilites. But women are most likely to be looking for
something else: someone to comfort them, to hold
them at the movies, to share an ice cream with. A
person.
Many companies are like body builders, expecting
everyone to be in awe of them. But a man who holds
your hand is much more seductive than the body
builder. However, companies dont see this.
What does holding your hand mean in this
case, though? It could be something as simple as,
for example, being able to wear sneakers to work.
That is going soft. Soft is related to whats close,
palpable, human. Sharing codes. Understanding the
other. Not focusing on large-scale.
Hard is irrelevant. But its not altogether
insignificant; just like physical attraction, it continues
to play a role. But the conquest takes place on the
soft side. Thats where theres a connection, where
there is a match.
Candidates are less likely to focus on their thirtyyear-long career in the company than on their
coming years and their day-to-day experience. They
think about enjoying life and what is happening
around us all the time. Soft seduces.

40

The war for talent has torn all surefire recipes to

pieces, and its that empty space that brings about
a new opportunity. The first step to win the war for
talent is understanding hard and soft elements:
understanding that looks and money do not
necessarily mean success.
SELECTION 2.0: THE TINDER PARADIGM

Something awesome happens when a company

realizes that it damages itself with the rejection
experience, not just because those who enter the
company are affected, but also because you can
lose many valuable people by not making them feel
welcome. Companies select people, but people also
select companies.
We want to be valued as people. Given the choice,
we will choose the company that does. Companies
who get it can build a relationship with those who
might be interested in working with them. They
want to be make themselves known, show off their
work environment and emphasize their employees
achievements.
Social media is ideal for this kind of promotion.
They can be used to gain presence and start
building the employer brand. We can offer different
opportunities, not necesasarily work-related, but
aimed at a mutual-benefit experience.
Consumer brands got it a while ago. Keep trying

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

41

(or, in HR language, Youll stay on our database for

future searches) is a harmful message. It carries with
it the frustration of not winning the prize, and besides,
it strikes as generic, form-letterish. The keep trying
message receiver is anonymous.
In the new paradigm, everyone wins something.
Not everyone can take home the big prize (getting
hired), but there are all sorts of benefits. Candidates
who dont get hired, but instead receive coaching, an
internship opportunity, a college program or career
advice, go home not just happy, but enhanced. They
are better than when they arrived.
RELATIONSHIP BUILDING

One of the benefits of Tinder is time saving. It allows,

in addition to its wide sampling, to connect with others
before meeting them in person. Relationships have
their own timing, but with a little practice, it gets much
easier to discard the people were not interested in.
Similarly, we can measure to what extent our own
characteristics are liked or not.

Therefore, even though we may not reach our

highest goal, no time is wasted. There is no rejection
experience in Tinder. When there is no match, its
painless. We are building relationships, or at least
getting some practise at it. We are growing as
candidates.
In the old paradigm, the best candidates selected.
In the new paradigm, the best candidates are created
(or co-created).
That is the key, I believe: creating learn-learn
experiences. Rejected candidates will value those who
made an effort to get to know them. They will get a
positive experience out of it, which results in favorable
word of mouth. They will acknowledge those who
treated them as people and provided tools for them to
improve their lives.
This kind of experience brings about enthusiasm
and commotion. Not only does the company gain a
better reputation - it also gets better candidates for
future searches. And it soon achieves one of the major
goals: creating desire. With desire, better candidates
can be caught.

The new
paradigm
knows
no losers

42

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

43

EMPLOYEES ARE PEOPLE,

CANDIDATES ARE RSUMS

Its a Match! happens much more strongly inside

companies than outside.
It is amazing how they have improved the way
they treat their employees. Benefit programs are a
great example. Most companies already understand
that it is crucial to balance work with the rest of your
life, and they offer you various ways to do it. One
example is encouraging the home office experience,
not as a favor to the employer but as mutual benefit,
as win-win. There is a lot of matching going on
inside companies, from choosing a more flexible
dress code to all sorts of interesting and diverse
practise.
The point is to make employees feel like people.
That is mutual benefit.
However, although on the inside companies show
that their employees are more than just their rsum,
on the outside, blind hard data still rules.

SELF-CENTERED COMPANIES HAVE TO STOP NAVEL GAZING

In the old paradigm, companies adopt a hard position.

In the new paradigm, companies are also soft.
WE DONT LOOK FOR PROFILES, WE DISCOVER PEOPLE

In the old paradigm, candidates are willing to be separated

from themselves in their rsums.
In the new paradigm, candidates want to be valued as more
than their rsum, as whole people, whose job is just one part
of their lives.
WERE ALL WINNERS

In the old paradigm, everyone competes for the grand prize

(the new car, the trip abroad) and keep on trying is the key
message. In the new paradigm, everybody wins a positive
experience.
TRANSPARENCY DISTRIBUTES POWER

In the old paradigm, candidates didnt know who they were up

against, how the process was organized, or even the name of
the company.
In the new paradigm, suitable information helps the decisionmaking process for both parties.
PROFITING FROM COMMUNICATION

DIFFERENCES: A SUMMARY
ITS NOT ABOUT SELECTION, ITS ABOUT CHOOSING EACH OTHER

In the old paradigm, talents competed for the post.

In the new paradigm, companies also compete for candidates.

44

In the old paradigm, developing communication challenges

normal processes.
In the new paradigm, developing communication is a huge
opportunity.

W H AT C H A N G E D ?

45

WERE ALL
C A N D I DAT E S

GETTING TO KNOW PEOPLE

Employer Branding is more than a mere child of

branding. Those who understand branding logic dont
necessarily understand employer branding logic. Its a
different species, because the variables are different.
One of the keys is not to see money as the reward.
Talent is what we are after, and our currency is merit.
Two features make talent unique:

IT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE

There are no machines nor units that can measure talent. It is

discovered, developed, and often theres only the potential for
it. It takes talent to find talent.
IT IS DEFINED BY EACH COMPANY

We all see talent differently. The claim on objectivity is thrown out

the window, which has to be seen as an opportunity too. Both
companies and talent have to find each other.

Two courses of action should coexist: going out to

scout talent and getting talent to come to you. For
that you need to create desire, and thats where
employer branding enters the court. The employer
brand positions itself so that the talents it needs will
want to be hired.
For that, you need to go to them and speak to them
in their own language. If you want talent, you have to
build bonds and start looking for people.
Employer brand presence on social networks such

47

as Facebook, Twitter or Instagram is a must. This

doesnt mean job search websites or LinkedIn are
less important, but if we dont strive to get to know
the people behind the candidates, we will stay stuck
in the old paradigm.
CERTAINTY VS. UNCERTAINTY

Candidates see employer brands as potential

sources for work. Yet their attitude is not submissive
like their predecessors. They put employer brands
to the test. Do I want to work there? They need a
good reason to stop and think whether they want
to make the effort of trying to get hired by our
companies.
We have to take into account that careers are
a personal path now. Building a career in one
company is not so meaningful anymore. The
tendency is towards living a more modular life. In
addition to Do I want to work there? people are
asking Is it good for me at this point in my life?.
This tendency happens outside the world of
work too. Lots of aspects of society work modularly
now. In the past, everything was for life: consumer
products were durable; marriages were irrevocable.
THE TOUGHEST RIVAL AN EMPLOYER BRAND FACES IS
NOT ANOTHER EMPLOYER BRAND, ITS LIFE ITSELF.

Nowadays, it is perfectly normal for someone to

skip a job interview at the chance of going away on

48

holidays with friends. They choose a guaranteed

good experience over an uncertain job offer. In the old
paradigm, this was unthinkable.
This shows that opportunities should be seen
precisely as what they are: opportunities. Not mere
vacancies. The goal is to find the best talent out
there who is looking for these opportunities, and
to establish good communication, with no false
promises and with no illusory rewards.
You probably agree with me in that selection
processes have a lot to improve. But this book is
not against selection processes: it is against how
disparately they can be approached. We have to be
prudent and realistic about what we have to offer,
because on the other side there is, above all, a person
with a cerebellar tonsil, i.e. feelings.
Hence the importance of creating win-win
experiences, of making all candidates take something
from the experience, allowing them to go home
having improved something about themselves...
because we all know that winning the big prize getting hired - is highly unlikely. We must always
bear in mind that theres a person on the other
side, with thoughts and feelings, and candidates
have to feel valued, because they are valued. Each
case is different, and so is the way we manifest that
appreciation.
The whole idea is to get companies and
candidates to come to an agreement: a match.

W E R E A L L C A N D I D AT E S

49

Its good for you and its good for me. When this
happens, the search becomes easier and harder at
the same time. It is easier because more candidates
fit the desired profile, and there is less screening to
do. It is harder because now we are left with a larger
number of suitable candidates, and we will need
to figure out how to choose correctly from such
abundance. And thats the best of challenges.
ITS SEDUCTION!

Many selection processes are like that Friends

episode in which Ross has to make up his mind
between two women, so, in his scientific mind, he
tries to quantify them, making a list of pros and cons
about each one. All goes well until Rachel, the chosen
one, finds out about the list and realizes she has been
treated as a series of features. Ross forgot the most
important thing: Rachel is a person.
Yes, its a seduction game. You have to go out and
meet people, and find the right candidate. Then you
have to arrange a meeting in which the two of you win
and establish a relationship in which you both feel its
a privilege to have the other.
Appearance plays a big role in the game of seduction.
If I try to attract someone, Ill want to look my best.
I wont be giving away the fact that I snore. I think
everyone gets that, and were all trying to figure out
what everyone else is hiding under their made-up
looks.

50

Therefore, not showing a deceitful appearance is of

utmost importance. If someone will take the time
to get to know our employer brand, and they are
interested, we dont want them to find out we were
different later. If we are not what they look for, or they
are not what we look for, we should find out now and
not later.
Similarly, the paternalistic attitude adopted by
many companies puts a damper on any attempt at
seduction. Though it may be well-intentioned and
it may have worked in the past, now it is perceived
as patronizing: treating others as inferiors instead of
equals.
We have to understand that the search is always
mutual. The correct attitude is They are interviewing
me and I am interviewing them.
NO MORE SUBMISSIVE CANDIDATES
COMPANIES THAT DONT ACCEPT THIS LOSE THE BEST
TALENTS THE NEW GENERATIONS HAVE TO OFFER.
CAREER VS IDENTITY

For people, developing a career is part of how they

build their identity. However, identity is constructed
all the time, and in all the environments. Nobody
identifies as a lawyer anymore. Degrees are not so
important, its what they mean to us in our lives that
matters.
As employer brands, we need to be aware that

W E R E A L L C A N D I D AT E S

51

we will become, at most, a part of the lives of our

employers. Work is not everything and thats a
good thing. What we do outside the office makes
us more valuable at work. In addition to making us
relax and clear our heads, it makes us see the world
differently.
Workplaces have adapted to this view by making
their hours and dress codes more flexible. Our
generations think of wearing a suit as playing dressup. We never understood what the tie es for. Well
wear it, but well take it off as soon as we have the
chance.
It isnt a whim. This kind outfits try to make us
into something we are not: standard, of the same
kind, all nice and neat. It looks military; it smells
of mothballs. On the other hand, when we are
comfortable we have no problem with integrating our
jobs to our lives, working online from home or doing
crazy hours.

on the job, this is not always possible, but when it is,

rewarding it is very important.
This all shows that people must be encouraged to
develop their identity, in a way that is independent
from work or co-dependent with it. Thats something
an employer brand should be proud of.

KEEPING DESIRE ALIVE

Because an opportunity, or a vacancy, will trigger

a competition with only one winner, we must keep
desire alive in everyone. The goal is to keep the best
candidates close to us and willing to work in our
company.
However, work must not be thought of in isolation.
What this generation or what everybody really wants
is to be happy.
AS EMPLOYER BRANDS, WE SHOULD WANT TO
ATTRACT PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE HAPPY.
WE ARE COMPETING WITH HAPPINESS.

Bearing in mind that not all employees

work the same way grants employer brands
unparalleled value. We dont expect to be given
less responsibilities. We want to be proud of our
work. And for that to happen, we need to be given
the chance for our work to be different from what
someone else would do in our position. Depending

52

In the old paradigm, each worker was compensated

with money. Yet money is only one of the elements
that help us reach happiness. If the way you make
money makes you less happy, that damages the
employer brands value. Those who can will quit, and
the company will be left with the ones who cannot
quit, which never does anyone any good.

W E R E A L L C A N D I D AT E S

53

We have to show ourselves as the place where

happiness is possible, an environment that is
compatible with life, where workers are happy. And
however hard we may try, if we show ourselves as
something we are not, we will soon be unmasked.
Keeping desire alive implies much more than
depicting the company as an enviable place to work.
It also has to be an accessible place, somewhere
the candidate can reach, where people can be seen
working and being happy... Which leads us to the
EVP.

EMPLOYER VALUE PROPOSITION.

Many companies offer benefits for their

employees: free coffee, parking space, massages,
medical insurance, recreation areas...
Thats all very nice, but the Employer Value
Proposition involves much more. It should be

SE TRATA
DE SOSTENER
EL DESEO

54

approached as a strategy to show people their

value. It should prevent benefits from being
perceived as patronizing, heavenly gifts given to
those with the privilege of working there, at the
mercy of someone much more powerful.
No. The point is we should allow people to be
themselves, to thrive as best they can at work,
and to have the opportunity to be happy. Happy
people are more productive. If workers are happy,
the feeling is transmitted to people aspiring to work
there.
A companys value is its ability to be favorable for
peoples lives. If people see that in a company, they
will want to be a part of it.
EMPLOYER BRANDING: THE FOUR CS

These are the four main concepts in an easy-toremember rule.

Co-creation. New generations dont

bow down to authorities just because they are

authorities. Respect is earned, based on knowledge

W E R E A L L C A N D I D AT E S

55

and talent. Vertical, patronizing messages are

not well received, and they single you out as the
company that doesnt get it yet. No one wants to
work with someone who doesnt get it.

Collaboration.

People need to see

where they stand. The hierarchies that helped past
generations can still exist, as long as they are not
arbitrary structures. People from this generation
rebel against such imposed relationships if they
have nothing to do with the companys needs. This
includes anything from the unnecessary information
required from applicants to a companys internal
protocols.

consumers. In order to find them, you have to know

their tastes, their expectations and their habits. And
you have to be willing and able to give them what
they want. This way, you avoid wasting time and
filling them with false hope.

Consideration. Work is not

everything. Life interferes with work; work interferes

with life. We must know and accept this. Theres
no place like Facebook to understand it, where job
offers compete with our cousins babies, Einstein
quotes and sports comments. We need to trust that
people know how to give each aspect of life its own
space.

Comprehension. The main issue

is treating people as people. The individuals who

want to start working in a given company are no
different from consumers. Most of the time, they are

56

W E R E A L L C A N D I D AT E S

57

FROM LOSE-LOSE
TO WIN-WIN

The old paradigm teaches us to see employer

brands as win-lose. There is one winner and a whole
lot of losers. I think it is crucial that we change this
view for one that allows everyone to be a winner.
Lets dig deeper into this.
A LESSON FROM FERRARI

I like to think of Ferrari as an example of a good

employer brand. This companys product is virtually
inaccessible. They dont hide the fact that very few
people can own one. If someone with an average
income, who cant afford to spend hundreds of
thousands of dollars on a car, decides to see how
much it costs, theyll find that theres no way they
can pay for it. Theyll probably never think about it
again.
Yet Ferrari has managed to make its brand
experience 100% aspirational. It offers various ways
to participate in the brand experience without having
to buy one of the cars: many of its accessories can
be bought by massive markets. We can literally wear
Ferrari. We can also cheer for Ferrari at the F1 races.
What Im trying to say is that being part of Ferrari
is very easy. The brand stays exclusive, but its also
popular. Lots of people would like, at least in their
dreams, to own a Ferrari. The brand has achieved
the win-win experience.
In a candidate search, only one person will keep
the vacancy. If were not careful, we risk causing
frustration and resentment.

59

Furthermore, the closer you get to winning, the

more frustrated you become. If we take the trouble
to save up to $99,000 and are not allowed to buy a
Ferrari because it costs $100,000, it will be a huge
letdown.
In selection processes, the aspiring buyers with
$99,000 are those candidates who are very close
to being chosen, the ones who felt hopeful through
the whole process because they knew they could
make it, but only make it as far as the door. And if, in
addition, the experience was not stimulating enough,
companies are losing someones trust; someone
who they took the trouble of getting to know, and
who could most probably get hired in some future
search.
If we find a way to make those candidates feel
better, providing them something they can use in
their lives, something better than a vague promise,
then the process will not have been in vain. What
can be offered varies for each company, but
what we must keep in mind is that we must treat
candidates as equals and not patronize them in any
way.

EQUALS.

Candidate experiences dont just include the time

they spend in contact with the company, as in
selection processes. They include everything from

60

the relationship with the consumer brand (if any),

possible social interactions with employees, and
social media exposure.
Its always better to be upfront, not to hide any
motives or facts. Of course everyone will look their
best, but that doesnt mean anyone will lie. When
opening a candidate search, only the necessary data
has to be requested, and those interested in our
company will not be made to work extra.
When the database system is hard to adapt to
and candidates waste their time trying to upload
or update their rsum, the message they receive
is we dont value your time. This influences the
value proposition for the employee, and its a hard
problem to forget, which, if overcome, continues to
handicap the next steps in the process.
A similar principle guides new generations in their
esteem for transparency in such processes. In the
new paradigm we dont play treasure hunt. When
the map clearly tells us the steps that need to be
followed, we can know where we stand and judge
whether the road and the prize are worth it. If its
not worth it, then we can call the whole thing off,
and thats that. On the other hand, if we always feel
were close to the goal and we never get there, well
start to feel that companies are playing us.
That is the difference between company-centric
and candidate-centric approaches: the shift from
navel-gazing, waiting to see who takes the trouble to

FROM LOSE-LOSE TO WIN-WIN

61

fit in, to actively seeking out people and generating

mutual attraction.

COMPANY
CENTRIC

CANDIDATE
CENTRIC

VS

they were given nothing in exchange for it, not even

a name. Its not like they can send a rsum that
defines them as Interesting student from acclaimed
university with an orientation towards exact sciences
and a promising future. Its only reasonable: just like
they wouldnt hire an enigma, I woulnt choose to
work in one. It is a lose-lose situation: nobody gets
anything from it and everyones time is wasted.
GOOD AND BAD SOCIAL MEDIA USE

HR centrado en la compaa.

HR centrado en el candidato.

Las vacantes como garanta.

Marca Empleadora como garanta.

Selecciono candidatos.

Elijo y soy elegido.

KPI es superar cantidad de CVs.

Mi KPI es CVs dentro de perfil.

Busco un perfil.

Construir relaciones emocionales.

One shot.

24/7.

Candidates also find it useful to know who they

are competing with. Its always preferable to be
over-informed rather than under. We know how to
deal with the excess information. We are used to
receiving multiple stimuli. Its the lack of information
that results confusing.
Blind recruitment ads are another type of treasure
hunt. Many ads still use phrases like Prominent
business requires... and proceed to describe
the job. Readers are puzzled, though not by the
companys identity (you can often deduce it), but by
the reason why they would hide it. Candidates are
supposed to give information about themselves, but

62

Going on Facebook or Twitter is getting involved

in peoples lives. Knowing how to approach these
networks is important. Facebook and Linkedin do
not use the same language, and although the same
people may be on both, their expectations are
different in each network. You dont wear a suit to
Facebook. People go on it wearing slippers.
Good social media use emerges from mutual benefit.
Social networks are fertile soil that is not yet being
exploited to its fullest capacity. Measurement tools
help us do what was almost imposible in the past:
quantify. Talent is non-quantifiable, but social media
activity is; we can measure each posts engagement,
and adjust our strategy accordingly.
Knowing how to profit from the capabilities offered
by social media and using them efficiently according
to our strategy will give us a huge leg up in the war
for talent.

FROM LOSE-LOSE TO WIN-WIN

63

64

SUCESS
STORIES

BANCO GALICIA: THE EXPERIENCE

We knew what our client wanted when at Combo

Employer Branding we designed the Galicia
Experience 2015 internship program: young
people studying business, economics or finance,
well presented and willing to be of service. That
was clear, its what any bank looks for in this kind
of programs. But how could we make this one
different?
We decided to put ourselves in the shoes of a
young person who wants to get into an internship.
They are in school and want to live their first work
experience. We observed that their searches were
always conditioned by the length of the data entry
step, which always requested an irrelevant rsum,
which would not have any relevant information other
than the career they were following.
We came to this insight: applicants are tired of
wasting time loading their rsums when they will
most probably be rejected.
We thought it might be a good idea to attract
the appropriate profile to avoid requesting their
rsum. Whats the point of asking for it in an
internship program thats targeted for people with no
experience?
We put up a social media integrated platform,
knowing that was where we would find the
people we were looking for, in addition to using
audience segmentation to reach our target. It was

65

100% mobile integrated. And there, in their own

environment, no weird stuff, they could enter their
data to apply. It was designed so that it would not
take more than two minutes to finish.
In other words, we based our campaign on
the Candidate Centric approach: we focused on
what candidates would obtain instead on what
the company had to offer Thus, we were able to
overcome the number of applicants with the right
profile from previous years. And, more importantly,
the internship participants went home with new
training, work experience, and a longer, more careerspecific rsum.
We were able to achieve this because we cocreated together with the candidates. We focused
on what the two parties needed, instead of being
tied to external structures that did not necessarily
meet our requirements.
So everybody won: it was a win-win experience3.
UNILEVER: THE DIALOGUE.

Unilever is among the companies where the value

of employer brand co-creation is most clearly
understood. Working with them for so many years,
we were able to develop various initiatives based
on communication between the brand and the
candidates, with intensive social media use.
This comes as no surprise, because few
companies invest as much time and commitment in

3
66

understanding insights that are barely just appearing

in candidates. It has allowed them to be the first to
detect tendencies in their early stages, and to act
based on those changes.
New generations understand the concept of
success very differently, in a way that is much
more related to self-fulfilment than to vertical
growth, argues Vernica Carabajal, head of the
Talent department for Unilever Southern Cone.
Its complex, because self-fulfilment is unique and
individual for every candidate. The challenge is to
be able to communicate the employer brand both
in the massive format we are aiming at and in a
personal, customized way at the same time, in order
to engage in an intimate, individual dialogue (never a
monologue) with every candidate, fan or consumer.
The brand also enables conversations about
the benefits of working at Unilever. On different
instances, we avoid telling candidates what Unilever
gives to them. We want to know what they have
in mind instead. Questions such as If you had to
propose a benefit for this companys employees,
what would it be? generate illuminating answers.
The dialogues are designed to fit the companys
message regarding innovation and sustainability,
thus contributing to brand awareness; always
stimulating participation and never preaching.
People are not told what to think: interaction is
encouraged. Everyone has something to learn from

Pueden encontrar ms informacin sobre este caso en www.comboagency.com

SUCCESS STORIES

67

everyone else.
Vernica Carabajal insists that being consistent
throughout the whole process is key. Theres no
point in using a given format in campaigns which if it
is not upheld in interview or assessment processes,
not to mention if it is not reflected in day to day
life at the office. That is why we add a very strong
brutal honesty element to our processes. Young
people tend to idealize organizations, or to neglect
the information that doesnt fit their need to find an
ideal place to work. We are good at destroying these
precocious idylls. Our aim is to be clear and upfront,
even if it means ending the candidates infatuation
phase with the company, which always turns out to
be an illusion.
4
I have no doub that Unilever is one of the best
companies to work in, she continues. And if it were
not so, I would not keep on renewing my energy and
my passion for this place after 17 years. But that
doesnt mean that it cant improve, or that it isnt
full of contradictions and difficulties just like any
other company. It is precisely to keep on improving
ourselves as an organization every day that we
recruit passionate people through our campaigns.
An example is the #MyResumeInOneTweet contest4.
- idea development by Santiago Ponferrada
- launched in 2014, in which we challenged

candidates to cleverly summarize their rsums,

reducing them to a powerful tweet. The best tweets
won an interview with an area of their choosing.
Again, this initiative required only a few minutes on
behalf of the candidates, and it allowed us to get to
know them better. We could take note of how they
saw themselves and what thought think would be
attractive for the company.
#MYRESUMEINONETWEET +300yrs
Focusing
on interaction helps employer brands and
experience in toy manufacturing,
logistics & distribution in the world.
candidates
to get to know each other. We dont
Personal attention 4 kids. North Pole.
assume we know them, and dont expect them to
know us either. Through permanent dialogue, we
build a relationship, a brand, a bond. In other words,
we co-create.

#MYRESUMEINONETWEET Nerd. I love

reading, writing & playing saxophone.
I h a t e i n j u s t i c e . Ve g e t a r i a n . I d r e a m o f
h a v i n g a p o n y.

Unilever Careers SC
@UnileverTalent

[#Contest: #MyResumeInOneTweet] Summarize your #resume

in one tweet and win an interview at #Unilever!

4
68

Pueden encontrar ms informacin sobre este caso en www.comboagency.com

Pueden encontrar ms informacin sobre este caso en www.comboagency.com

SUCCESS STORIES

69

LIFE IS NOW

New generations want to be happy today. We

dont necesarily know how, but we are certain that
happiness cant start at retirement. Life is now.
Weve seen too many people wait their whole lives
for a future that never came. For us, work is a part
of life; we want to work, have a career, have money,
a family and properties. But we want it our own way.
And yes, we are very stubborn. And there are a lot of
us.
As we grow and new generations come around,
we shape the world we live in. Past structures have
to change to adapt to our expectations. We do not
use violence. We do not start armed revolutions. We
use the same market rules in our favor, to get what
we want.
We are certain that our way is much better, and
that those who dont see it are missing out on
something very valuable. Those who do see it, and
get to comprehend, co-create, collaborate and
consider with us, are taking advantage of a gigantic
opportunity.

71