re: Why Carolina hired Muschamp instead of Herman and how the search failed.

Same to you.

And for those reading from the comfort of their Barcalounger at home... some of those reasons you should never accept a counter offer, assuming you are not a college football coach:

1. (as noted in this thread) The company was willfully paying you less than you were worth. Why work for a company like that?

2. If it takes pressure to get a raise, that pressure works both ways. If you have to struggle and fight for a raise, will you get an automatic raise or COL raise next time around? Or will you have to fight again? Often, counter offers are given in the guise of raises that come early.

3. You will have burned a bridge with a potential new employer. If you accept a counteroffer, and another job comes open in the future - or maybe if even YOU increase skills and improve your resume - job opportunities with that new company just shrunk significantly.

4. There are usually several job satisfaction motivators, not just money. If you stay and take more money... what else is changing? Will your managers become better guys? Will you have a shorter commute? Will the facility be safer? Do the opportunities for advancement go up? Will there be LESS job work and responsibilities? Probably not.

5. Employers most often make counteroffers in "panic mode" trying to make sure they don't have an immediate hole. Historically, most people who take counteroffers are not employed by the same company a year later. Often, a company will counteroffer just to buy time until they find your replacement, because you are no longer loyal in their eyes.

6. Don't prove that you are indecisive and wavering in your decision making process.

And so forth. If you really want to see what you are worth before testing the waters... put together a package. Explain how specifically you have made or saved the company money. Show how you are ready for new responsibilities and how you will earn an increase in pay. The number they come back with will tell you what kind of company they are and what kind of employee value you bring to the table.

Are there exceptions to every rule? Of course. But in general, the above concepts hold true. Time after time after time, for 98% of the companies out there.

quote:

---

s anyone else surprised and AU fan couldn't read 5 paragraphs?

---

You'd think they would understand the hiring/firing process with coaches a little better, given their recent history.

Took us a while to learn how to do it.

quote:

---

firing a tremendously successful coach

---

I think this is the thing that is most interesting to me. The rant has continuously talked about the failings of Richt for the past 5 years (at least) as have most ESPN analysts, pundits, etc. For all of the wins, there are not a lot of "notable" wins to point to in the last 5 years. Overall, the eye test shows that Richt had the program at best plateau-ing, and at worst with the needle pointing down. I think the timing here was great for all parties, lots of open jobs so Richt was able to go out as the top prospect for other openings and UGA got the hire they wanted with a guy who has learned "the process" and what it takes to win on the biggest stage in college football. Ultimately, as many have said, time will tell the tale, but regardless of the outcome I don't see how UGA can be faulted for pulling the trigger here.

And then there's Mizzou...

Who completely failed their coaching search to the point that they were FORCED to promote from within because they could NOT attract an outside candidate.

Engineer that geek.

quote:

---

well, I don't consider your opinion an informed one at all. in fact, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. you can't prove anything you said is a fact. you can't even prove USCe main target was Herman.

as far as your professional credentials are concerned I can tell you aren't worth a shite at your profession or you are a liar.

---

And you sir are just an angry old man.
And a retired salesman.

Beantown:

I doubt Tanner used a search firm. This was botched in every way and two people publicly refused the job and Rich Rod even boasted about it. Tanner strikes me as an old school coach who is going to do things his way, and probably doesn't think search firms are necessary. WM will prove to be a very bad hire.

Despite all the grief you got for posting your opinion, more posters should do what you did. Thanks.

quote:

---

I doubt Tanner used a search firm. This was botched in every way and two people publicly refused the job and Rich Rod even boasted about it. Tanner strikes me as an old school coach who is going to do things his way, and probably doesn't think search firms are necessary. WM will prove to be a very bad hire.

---

Spot on the last part.

If Tanner used a search firm, he either picked a really bad one, or else simply did not listen to advice. Because this was flat out mangled.

There are some interesting parallels to other SEC openings and their overall hiring/firing process. IMHO only one of them (GA) got it halfway right.

quote:

---

Good employees would not be retained under your rules.

---

I'm pretty sure that I noted there are always exceptions.

quote:

---

Good companies don't make counter offers in panic mode. They make them in good faith.

---

That has not been my experience, neither as an employee, a recruiter, or observer for someone else in the companies I have worked for. Counter offers are most often made out of desperation or strategically to buy time. Facty.

quote:

---

As for good companies willing to pay less than you are worth, that isn't reality. Companies pay for a job and the candidate can make it worth more or less, but salary compression for existing employees is common as the market changes. Few companies make market adjustments. So, the company makes a counter-offer based on the intersection of predicted worth and ability to keep the candidate. If the employee hasn't asked for a raise, which most do not, then the employee is in fact disloyal.

---

You have placed your logic into a catch-22 situation. If they are willing to make counter offers based on their new-found knowledge of the market system for employee pay, then they are idiots and the management is too stupid to work for. EVERY COMPANY should be absolutely aware of the dangers of not compensating their employees properly, and plan for attrition, defection to competitors, and flat out unhappy employees - and be aggressive to solve these problems before they actually become bigger problems. Period. This is the way you conduct business, and businesses who do not do these these get educated eventually. The hard way.

quote:

---

The bottom line is that good management contains the element of being in touch with employees and offering the work environment and compensation program that is reasonable, fair, and contributes to morale. Good employees are offered elsewhere because they are good employees. Good companies do what they can to keep them, including making counter offers if they fit in the structure of that company and the company wants to retain them. Most good employees don't leave good companies without external reasons that render a counter offer ineffective. Good companies only counter offer to incentivize a good employee remaining with the company because the relationship has worked for both parties.

---

Strong points, but I think you do more to support my arguments than refute them. I think your last sentence MAY be possible but again, as noted above, it rarely works that way in real life.

Historically, the majority of people who accept counter offers are gone within a year. Again, just the facts of the matter. Your situation may be different. Your company may be different. But in general, this is very true.

Now finally... there is no doubt that the game is changing. Employees are more mobile than ever before. Younger employees are far more likely to job shop around and make changes without considering factors beyond pure pay rate. This also applies by sector - counter offers and chopped up resumes are both generally accepted and expected in tech sectors, for example. Digging deep into a programmers background will almost reveal this type of stuff. So yes, absolutely there are exceptions.

UNLESS The company is experiencing tremendous growth.

That's where I fit in but my industry is cyclical.

I'd like to leave it at that.

quote:

---

I should start by saying that I have a background as an executive recruiter and search consultant. I am also passionate about SEC football. This is what I think happened: I'm fairly certain that Ray Tanner used a search firm for this coaching opening. If he didn't he definitely should have and his results might have been different. If he did use a search firm - they absolutely dropped the ball when it came to Herman. The most important skill a search consultant has is the ability to ask questions to determine a possible candidate's motivations for making a move. Why are they looking elsewhere at other opportunities? What is wrong with their current position? Are they only motivated by money? It's only by asking these questions that you can QUALIFY a candidate. What does that mean? Nick Saban is obviously qualified to coach college football but he's definitely not a qualified candidate for the CAROLINA opening. Why? Simply because he's not motivated to actually make a move to USCe. He doesn't want to. Herman is also a qualified college coach, however, he was not qualified as a candidate for Carolina. He was literally not qualified by the search consultant. The search consultant didn't do their job by asking the right questions. If he/she would have determined the truth initially they wouldn't have wasted time with Herman. Herman was job shopping- not because he necessarily wanted to move to Carolina but because he may have wanted some leverage to negotiate his new contract at Houston. My bet is that his agent knows how these things work. USCe was used to increase his value as a coach in the open talent market and they got played as a result. As a recruiter we were taught to uncover the TRUE motivating factors for a move and then we were taught to cover counter-offers early and often. This was not done. Therefore, thanks to USCe (and their search firm) Mr. Herman got a great raise at Houston and Carolina scrambled in the end to land Mr. Boom. This is all simply my informed opinion.

---