The most important stage in the hiring process?

Managing a successful hiring process and maintaining a great ‘candidate experience’ throughout can be a very difficult task.

Unexpected delays, difficult selection decisions and changing expectations from job seekers can create problems at every turn, and whilst an experienced hiring manager should be able to exercise some degree of control over all these aspects, all the hard work can quickly be put at jeopardy right at the very end of the process if the preferred applicant is left in limbo for too long.

Getting sign-off to make a formal offer sometimes takes time and may involve several people who have very busy schedules, but where this is likely to be the case, make this known (to the candidate during final interview or via their recruiter afterwards) and if nothing else, avoid giving unrealistic timescales of when you’re hoping to make a decision.

Here’s what can happen when such a delay occurs:

On the day the applicant has been told a decision will be made: they’ll be on edge all day waiting for the phone to ring and ready to accept. Many will be tired from lack of sleep the night before. They’ll inevitably take a little longer to get their work done, whilst struggling to focus. Most will have their partner/friends/family texting them by lunchtime “Any news???”. By mid-afternoon the seed of doubt might have entered their mind but they’ll remind themselves the day isn’t over and there’s still a couple of hours to go. No need to panic. By 17:30 if there’s still no news they’ll be wondering if maybe someone else has been offered, maybe they shouldn’t have said this or that at interview, maybe they should have studied harder at university?

By the end of day 2, if there’s still no news or satisfactory explanation for the delay, self-preservation will have kicked in. They’ll be considering why it’s not the end of the world anyway – there were some downsides to the position after all and, with hindsight, the commute wasn’t ideal and perhaps things aren’t really so bad in their current position on balance.

By day 3, they’ll be resigned to the fact that they haven’t got the role and they’ll be glad of it. They’ll be annoyed to be left in limbo for so long, disengaged from the business and disappointed that they hadn’t got on with the interviewer as well as they’d believed, or else surely they’d at least have been given some feedback out of courtesy?

And then the offer comes through.

Good luck!

5 tips for interview preparation

1.When preparing for an interview, put yourself in the shoes of the interviewer. Based on your CV what areas would you want to explore further and how might they assess whether you have the competencies required for this position? Come up with some questions and consider what examples you could give.

2. Research the interviewer. It is all very well (and necessary) to research the business you're hoping to join, but what about the interviewer themselves? Do you know their background? Use the tools available to everyone: company website, social media profiles or other contacts of yours who might know them - certainly your recruiter. Knowing more about them might help to identify shared experiences and areas to focus on (e.g. for accountants you might both have qualified in small practice).

3. Check where you're going. If you don't know the route, or are having to rely on public transport to get you there, make sure you're 100% confident you know where they are and how long it will take you to get there. You should ideally aim to arrive at reception around 5 minutes ahead of time (any more than 10 minutes early is just annoying).

4. Make sure you can get away from the office. If you have arranged an interview at lunchtime or after work, it's a good idea to make casual reference to a personal appointment you have to attend (e.g. lunch with a relative or dinner with a friend). This can be communicated informally to avoid suspicion, but will reduce the risk of you being asked to attend a meeting or to work late at short notice. 

5. Avoid rehearsing detailed answers. Preparation is essential to leaving a good impression with an interviewer, but over-preparing your answers to potential questions can be risky. You run the risk of hearing the questions you want to hear, rather than what is being asked, and you're likely to sound robotic in your rehearsed replies. 

Counter Offers - they're back!

With job market conditions rapidly catching up with pre-recession levels of demand, we’ve seen a steady increase in the number of counter offers being used as a means to try to retain staff who’ve secured an offer elsewhere and tendered their notice.

As demand for staff rises, availability drops, and with employers focused on making the most of the economic recovery, retaining experienced staff is high on the agenda.

Good news for employees, not so good news for recruiters who, having invested a significant amount of time managing the process to this stage, can then experience last minute drop-outs from jobseekers who are persuaded to stay. A quick search online will throw up dozens of blogs and articles about counter offers, usually written by recruiters, quoting unsubstantiated statistics on the number of people who end up leaving their employer six to nine months after accepting an offer (usually between 80-95% - take your pick or, better still, read Mitch Sullivan's investigative blog on this subject). The overriding message being: don’t do it, take MY job!

There may well be a high proportion of individuals in this situation who do ultimately decide to move on after promises have been broken further down the line, but even so, unless there is a history from the individuals’ specific employer/line manager, I’m not sure this is relevant enough information to be basing important career decisions on.

For me, when a jobseeker decides to accept a counter offer, what this really tells me is that:

a) the other opportunity wasn’t good enough in the first place, or 

b) the candidate never really wanted to leave their employer, they just wanted better reward and commitment from them. Maybe they’ve discussed this with their manager and it’s fallen on deaf ears, or maybe they just feel this is the best way to force their hand?

I do however believe there is some truth in the often-stated claim that going through a counter offer process breaks a level of trust with an employer, especially if the employee had not raised any dissatisfaction previously. I also believe financial boosts alone are short term solutions that will often reoccur when the employees next salary review takes in to account the unplanned increase that’s already taken place.

From the employers perspective it’s also far from ideal. How will this affect the employees trust and buy-in to the business when it’s had to get to this stage? You can be sure at least one of their close colleagues will be aware of the situation and may now decide to go through a similar process themselves to increase their financial position.

In an ideal world, counter offers would never need to happen. Employers would regularly assess the ability, value and career aspirations of their staff and employees would have the confidence and opportunity to discuss any issues and frustrations openly. Jobseekers would only reach offer stage for positions they know they would be willing to leave their current employer for, and then, and only then, recruiters might then stop quoting those tired old statistics.

Use your Recruiter for interview preparation!

Guest Blog: Daniel Cumberworth @ Balance Recruitment
Daniel is a Senior Recruitment Consultant at Balance Recruitment, having joined the business in 2010. He recruits for permanent, contract and interim accountancy positions for Law Firms, primarily in London.


To many people, the term 'interview preparation' is nothing more than scanning over an employers website the night before to try and remember some key facts about the business.  

I'm not saying that's wrong, but to give you that extra edge in the interview process, why not work collaboratively with your recruiter to give you the best chance of securing the role?

Recruitment Consultants will have built up a business relationship with line managers and HR contacts over a period of time, and should therefore be best equipped to provide you with an insight into their personalities, and what to expect at interview.  Often line managers will use similar technical and scenario based questions in every interview, therefore getting this advice up front from your recruiter can really put you ahead of the pack.

In the days leading up to the interview, it's worth having a good think about your current role (i.e. key achievements, core responsibilities, difficulties overcome etc) and jot some ideas down on a piece of paper. Don't be afraid to pick up the phone and call your recruiter to discuss this, it's part of their job. 

Whether it's a case of not knowing what achievements will be relevant for this interview, or maybe there's a specific competency based interview question that you've struggled with in the past, run it past your recruiter.  They encounter these scenarios on a daily basis and should be able to assist.

The better prepared you are for the interview, the more confident you will feel. This will become clear in the interview and you will have a better chance securing your next career move.

Naturally, a good recruiter will volunteer this information and arrange a time to have this discussion, but if not, make sure to chase them up and make a note to use a different recruiter in future!

Interview myths - never talk negatively about your previous employer

It’s a commonly held belief that you should not talk negatively about previous employers/managers when interviewing.

Why?

If you’ve been working overtime to clear up the mess left behind by shoddy processes and a temperamental boss who doesn’t know what they’re doing, why should you fall in line and be expected to come up with some other reason for wanting to move on?

Maybe your boss has his or her favourites in the team, who they’d prefer to give the interesting work and promotions to, and this isn’t based on merit, but on who accompanies them to the pub most often to listen to their tales of business dominance.

So what should you do if you find yourself in this situation and you’re asked at interview why you’re looking for a move?

Tell the truth! 

It may be negative, and you would probably be wise not to go in to granular detail about all the goings-on, but if you can explain the key reason/s without getting personal and put any examples in to the context of how they have a negative impact on work performance or on your career development, then these are perfectly valid reasons and therefore a prospective employer should have no reason to cause alarm.

Exercising some discretion is of course advised, but it’s far better to be open and honest than to conjure up some alternative reason, which may come across as vague and lead them to assume (rightly) that there’s something you’re not telling them. 

Have you found yourself in this situation? How did you deal with it if so?

How to follow-up after an interview

Creating a good impression to a potential new employer can be a stressful process. We all know the importance of first impressions, but the do’s and don’ts of leaving a lasting impression are not quite so clear.

So when you’ve attended an interview and come away knowing that you will be devastated if you don’t secure the role, it’s natural to start worrying about whether there’s more you could have done during the meeting and if there’s something else you can do now to increase your chances.

Maybe I should have said this? Maybe I shouldn’t have said that? Perhaps I should connect with her on LinkedIn and stress again how keen I am? Or maybe send an email?

Now, when you’ve arranged the interview directly with the employer (with no third party/recruiter involved) this may well be wise. It should in fact have been actively encouraged by the employer. They need to know if the role appeals to you and whether you would like to progress to the next stage if invited.

However, if you’ve been introduced to the employer by a recruiter, they have intentionally appointed a third party to help with the process and will anticipate feedback to be collected and passed through via the appointed recruiter. Very rarely in this circumstance will it be encouraged or expected to make contact directly. Contrary to some advice I’ve read online!

This needn’t take away the level of influence you can still have on the process however. Firstly, be quick in debriefing your recruiter on how the interview went. The quicker you can provide feedback to them, the quicker they can pass this through to their client, which will be appreciated. It’s also important to be specific in what appealed to you about the opportunity and how and where you feel your experience/skills will be well utilised.

It may also be worthwhile putting together a carefully composed email to your recruiter as a follow-up, expressing your interest in the position. Discuss it with them and see if they feel it could help for them to forward the email on themselves. This won’t come across as pushy as sending it direct, but will still give you the opportunity to get your message through.

Reputation Management - Look After Your Temps!

Over recent years, I’ve had many conversations with hiring managers in which they’ve asked about the reputation their departments hold within the market as an employer. These questions will often come at a time when a firm is struggling to attract candidates for what should be a relatively straight forward vacancy to fill, and I’ve had a couple of these conversations just recently.

On both occasions the hiring managers were concerned that a negative message may have been filtering out to the market from temporary workers they’ve had working within their teams within the last year. This may or may not have been the case, but it highlights an extremely important consideration for managing your employer reputation: LOOK AFTER YOUR TEMPS!

Recent legislation (the Agency Worker Regulations) has ensured that temporary workers are assured of equal treatment to comparable permanent employees in terms of their pay, annual leave and access to employer facilities, but legislation can only go so far.

When it comes to how welcome they are made to feel, how much time is invested in getting to know them and to what extent they are made to feel part of a team, temporary workers will experience vastly different approaches from one employer to the next, and even between different departments within the same firm.

These temporary workers may only be with an employer for a matter of weeks, but during that time they will have formed an opinion on whether the department they’ve been working in is one they’d recommend or one they’d advise others to steer clear of. Naturally their views may not always be taken as gospel, but people talk, and ‘career temps’ will already know and come in to contact with a huge number of potential hires for your firm as they move from one assignment to the next.

So, if you use interim staff in your firm, consider how much time you invest in making them feel welcome, and consider how other team members will engage with them also – do they know why they’re joining? Might they feel threatened and unwilling to assist them as a result?

Treated well, a temporary worker can make a significant positive impact on your employer reputation.

Social Recruiting - let's get some perspective...

Although I like to think of myself as a modern day recruiter, and one who embraces the world of social media (both personally and professionally), I can’t help thinking that there is a huge amount of information and advice for recruiters online that will only help a very small proportion of the industry, and actually have a detrimental effect on the performance of others.

I hold a dual role at Balance Recruitment. I’m an owner/Director of the business and I am therefore jointly responsible for the promotion of our brand, our culture and for ensuring we achieve and maintain a positive reputation with all those we come in to contact with. I also carry out a full 360 recruiter role, representing a niche client base, sourcing candidates and managing all the really easy stuff (ahem) that goes in between.

Whilst wearing both hats, I feel it’s vital to keep abreast of new networks/tools/techniques to utilise the internet for the benefit of the business, but I also need to guard against investment of time in networks that just aren’t ever likely to yield returns. But this is where there’s a problem, because with each new social network online, there seems to be a blog somewhere telling recruiters that they should be using it or risk getting left behind.

So on the one hand, agency and search recruiters are working hard to stay ahead of the competition from in-house recruiters and RPO’s, whilst at the same time they’re being told that they should also be spending an untold amount of time on the development of peripheral social branding even just to keep up?

As I see it, too many recruitment or business focussed social media experts place the readers of their blogs in a position of being behind the curve, without considering how generic and non-targeted the advice they’re providing to a broad recruitment industry audience actually is. So whilst it may well be fair (I assume!) to admonish a specialist online marketing & design recruitment business for not having a Pinterest or Instagram presence, does this also mean an IT recruiter should be scouring the internet for stylish photos of server storage racks too?

Sure, some of the social networks are clearly beneficial to recruiters, whilst others may have great success for specific sectors and career disciplines (online, creative and marketing usually), but there are plenty for which, I suspect, the majority of recruiters will never really see enough return from the investment of time they put in.

The dangers of one stage interview processes

For recruiters, recruitment processes with just one stage of interviewing can be very appealing. Less time spent arranging interviews, and generally a quick process to manage with fewer decision makers for the applicant to please/upset. In most cases however, this is a false economy.

It may be convenient for an employer to reduce the time spent interviewing during busy periods or for urgent hiring requirements, and in some instances, such as when it’s for an interim assignment it’s also convenient and anticipated by the potential employee. But in other cases, these one stage processes often do not provide the opportunity for potential candidates to build up enough of a connection to the employer or hiring manager.

Recent recruitment industry surveys in the UK have shown that whilst demand for staff is on the increase, the availability of candidates is decreasing, which inevitably means that jobseekers who are actively interviewing will have more options to consider. Whilst on the one hand it’s important to move quickly in order to secure high calibre candidates, if the focus is all on speed of hire, the candidate engagement process will be compromised, which could lead to offers being rejected as candidates join competitor businesses.

For the instances when time is at a premium, adding in a 15 minute telephone interview to the recruitment process can make all the difference, even if only for the preferred applicant. It adds another layer of selection in to the process, giving the candidate confidence that they’re being selected on merit, not just availability, and crucially it allows them time to reflect on the opportunity after their first meeting, so they can follow up with any questions or raise any potential concerns they might have. The chances of them accepting any offer would undoubtedly increase and potentially save the employer having to go back to the drawing board.

Do you agree, or you do feel one interview should be sufficient to identify and attract the right candidate to your business? Please add your thoughts below. 

Financial Recruitment Continues to Make Gains (Guest Blog)

A guest blog from James McCaffrey - with a number of years of accounting experience, James now focusses on recruitment and the financial jobs market, writing for Total Jobs.

As recently documented in the latest edition of Balance Recruitment’s Quarterly Update, financial recruitment is continuing to make gains. The latest update also pointed out that there had been an increase in the number of vacancies in the financial sector, coinciding with a demand for more staff – especially those with backgrounds as Analysts or within Billing, Revenue, and financial reporting.

In a recent Google Hangout for Total Jobs, Tom Newcombe, a leading journalist for HR magazine also agreed that growth was taking place in the financial sector, pointing to figures from PWC which highlighted that by 2020, there could be an additional 200,000 financial jobs vacancies which could contribute to a 3% growth in GDP- but only if the financial sector can improve regulation.

These figures hold relevance for the wider financial industry too, as the recession has forced businesses to increase their focus on due diligence, accuracy and transparency- and in recognising the importance of sufficient monitoring; the financial sector, and indeed the financial departments across all industries have made a demonstrable commitment to tidying up processes across the board. It’s this commitment that is reflected not only in the increased number of vacancies, but also in the roles that are currently high in demand. In the same session, Jane Clarke, Head of Campus Recruitment at Barclays Bank, also noted that over the next year, the biggest intake of new graduates would be in the fields of compliance and legal capabilities, roles centred on analysis, monitoring and managing processes efficiently.

There have long been calls for more transparency in business, especially when it comes to balancing the books and reporting on performance – now that more businesses are making a commitment to delivering on transparency, they are starting to recognise the vital importance of hiring teams of skilled people who can deliver the processes, monitoring and accurate reporting that will go into making sure that finances are in order and that balance sheets add up.

When businesses can present themselves to the public, stakeholders and potential investors, as well as potential staff that they are committed to honesty and thorough processes, it helps to boost the reputation of company, making it more attractive for business opportunities and skilled jobseekers – the figures reflect the truism that investing more in staff makes sense for all areas of business. Jane also pointed out that graduates who had been studying during the worst phases of the recession were keen to ensure that they found work in companies that were seen to have honest practices – in as much as companies of all sizes have re-evaluated their recruiting criteria since the worst days of the crisis, jobseekers are also showing a desire to work for a company which has a will to organise its finances and processes too. 

Personal Profiles on a CV - do it right or don't do it at all

I referred to Personal Profiles on a blog late last year giving advice on writing an effective CV, and said I’d come back to the subject in a separate blog soon. I may be stretching the definition of “soon” leaving it 10 months, but here goes…

The first question to consider about Personal Profiles on a CV is whether it’s worth having one at all, and that’s a debate on which I could argue for either side. Having been a recruiter for well over 10 years now, I wouldn’t like to guess how many CV’s I’ve reviewed in my time, but let’s just say it’s a lot. From those, I would argue that the majority of the CV’s which have Personal Profiles would stand no less chance of progressing with an application if the Personal Profile were removed.

There are two main approaches people take with these profiles:

1.       Opinion based about the personal qualities the individual believes they hold, which they wish to share

2.       Factual about the experience and informative about the specific career focus of the individual

The problem with the first approach is that the reader/hirer is often offered no real evidence to back up the claims made in these profiles, and can therefore only be satisfied that this is just how the individual would like to appear. Claims to be hardworking and proactive are worthless if examples are not provided, and it’s far better to include this information where it might be expected elsewhere on the CV – when detailing your experience/achievements within your employment history.

The other common problem with this approach is that the same qualities/attributes are nearly always used.

“I enjoy working in a team but work equally well on my own”

If this is a phrase you recognise from your own CV, don’t worry you’re not alone (trust me!), but it may be worth taking it off for something a little more original.

It’s my opinion therefore that the first approach is worth avoiding altogether. The second approach can be useful to give the recruiter/hiring manager a brief summary of the individual’s experience and career focus, and displays that the potential employee can communicate pertinent information in a concise manner. An example would be as follows:

·         I am a 2012 CIMA Qualified Management Accountant with experience gained within the Legal sector, including financial analysis, budget preparation and supervision of an Assistant Accountant. I am now seeking a more commercial role in a larger international firm where I can improve my business partnering skills.

The third approach (not having one at all) is also an option, as long as it’s very clear from the rest of your CV what experience you hold and that the career path you are following is evident.

Do you agree or have a different viewpoint you’d like to share? Please be bold and add your thoughts/comments below!

Interviewing and attracting passive talent...

This is a subject I’ve been meaning to write about for a while, but I’ve been prompted in to action after seeing the following Tweet last week:

If you're asking passive talent "So tell me why you want to work here..." You're Doing It Wrong. #facepalm #talent42
— Amybeth Hale (@researchgoddess) June 27, 2013

‘Passive talent’ is a phrase I’m sure anyone involved in recruitment & hiring will be very familiar with, but for the benefit of those new to hiring, it’s a catch-all phrase to describe high calibre potential employees who are not actively looking for a career move, but who might move if the right opportunity were to find them.

It’s widely accepted that around 80% of the workforce in the UK (or 79% worldwide according to those in the know at LinkedIn) fall in to the category of being ‘passive’, whilst the remainder are those who are proactively searching for a move.

When searching for the best available talent for a vacancy, it therefore makes sense to be fishing from both ponds, rather than just posting an advert online and hoping that the best candidate will fall within the 20%. Another widely held view is that the 80% contains a higher proportion of quality candidates – those who are most effective in their given role, and are therefore well rewarded and happier in their existing employment.

All common sense so far, but when it comes to actually engaging with ‘passive talent’ many employers fail to adapt their communications and interview questions accordingly to reflect the fact that they are the pursuers and not vice versa - as highlighted so well in the Tweet above. Incidentally, accordingly to her Twitter bio, Amybeth is a 'Senior Talent Sourcer' for Microsoft in the US - a business and brand which I'm sure doesn't exactly struggle to attract potential hires.

These candidates do not expect to answer why they want to work for your organisation or why they want to leave their current employer (certainly at first stage interview). They might not want to do either…  yet!

They must have some level of interest to have made it through to interview, but there is still work to be done to move them from being merely interested on an exploratory level to being prepared to leave a job they were otherwise happy in to join your firm.

If the individual has been introduced via a recruiter/head-hunter you have an advantage. The recruiter should be able to provide more information on what makes the applicant tick – what would appeal to them, and what their current position might lack.

Things to consider:

·   

    Standard interview questions: do these need adapting? Instead of ‘Why do you want to work for us?’, how about: ‘What would you be looking for from an organisation if you were to move from your current employer?’

·   The interview process: does the direct line manager typically get involved at first stage interview? If not, this needs to change. The candidate will want to see who they would be working for if they’re to take the process any further. Could you also bring in someone who would work in the team alongside the individual, who can champion the business to them on  a peer-to-peer level?

·   Selling the opportunity: have the interviewers been briefed on how to sell the company and the opportunity they can offer? Do they all know there is more of a need to do so?

In summary, I’m not suggesting you should have to jump through hoops to entice someone to your organisation, but by recognising an individual is already content in their current position and making a few tweaks accordingly to the interview process, you are more likely to secure the best available talent for your business when the opportunity arises.

Do you have any tips/advice for employers looking to attract passive talent? Or any related experience you’d like to share. If so, please add to the comments below…

#AskBalance - Career Advice for accountancy and finance

Back in April, we started a new 'ask the expert'-style feature at Balance Recruitment - #AskBalance

First up as our resident expert was Tony Vickers. Tony heads up our accounting division recruiting in to Commerce & Industry. He has this year been crowned 'Best Permanent Consultant' at the Global Recruiters Awards, and 'Recruiter of the Year' in the Recruiter Awards for Excellence.

See below one of the questions answered by Tony, and click here to see the full feature. 


I'm a qualified accountant looking for my first role in industry.  What are my options?

Completing your accountancy training in practice is a solid grounding for a move into industry.  Whether you qualify as an ACCA or ACA or in a small, mid tier or top 4 practice; there are plenty of options for you.  The most common move for someone at a newly qualified level would be to take a role either in internal audit, group finance or financial accounting.  It is less common for newly qualified accountants to take a first step into a commercial/analytical role which tend come once you have cut your teeth in industry in a more traditional accounting role.  Generally those FTSE 250 businesses tend to favor people with a ‘top 4’ background however this is not always the case with those training in a smaller firm tending to gain a greater breadth of experience which is valued.

Salary Expectations - how do you know what to aim for?

Having recently compiled data from across the UK for a salary survey we conducted in our Legal Accounts division (results to be published on our website in July if you’re interested!), it got me thinking about how it will affect people’s expectations of their worth. And by “worth”, I’m talking specifically about the basic salary they are paid by their employer to do the job they do.

A common mistake I see people making is relying purely on one source of information and believing that to be sufficient evidence. I do hope that our salary survey will prove to be a useful, accurate measure for employers and employees alike, but it should only be viewed as guidance. For example: the level of responsibility and day to day duties of a Management Accountant can differ widely from one firm to another, so going by a job title on a salary survey alone is not sufficient.

Another source of information that often misleads us is job vacancies. An individual might read through a job advert, mentally tick off all the duties and reach the conclusion they should therefore expect to be paid the top end of the salary bracket. Securing interviews for these positions will provide even stronger evidence that this is achievable. Of course, on some occasions this will indeed be the case, but if you’re only reaching interview stages and not securing offers, it may suggest otherwise.  

As a recruiter working in a very niche market for many years, I like to think I have a pretty accurate view of what is an achievable salary expectation from those I meet with, and when conducting interviews with jobseekers, it’s an important part of the registration process to ensure that expectations are realistic, which from time to time does involve bursting a few balloons.

Naturally, I don’t expect everyone to take my views as gospel (I’d like it, but I don’t expect it), but you can generally rely on experienced recruiters to have a good understanding of what would constitute a reasonable expectation. It’s sensible to look out for relevant salary surveys and vacancy adverts to see what might be achievable, but be wary of placing too high an emphasis on them as you might find you’re pricing yourself out of being considered for good opportunities.

Managing salary expectations in the hiring process

In the increasingly competitive “war for talent” we are experiencing in the world of recruitment these days, you’d be forgiven for being a little surprised to hear that there are employers who will go through a lengthy application and interview process and then knowingly offer their preferred candidate a salary lower than the figure they’re looking for.

Certainly it comes as a surprise to the candidate, and not a nice one. We’ve experienced it on a couple of occasions recently despite making the individual’s salary expectations explicitly clear from the outset when making the initial introduction.

It’s understandable that the employer ultimately makes the decision on how much they feel each individual is “worth” in relation to an opportunity within their business, but if there is a difference between the salary expectation of the candidate and the employers’ valuation of their skills and experience, this really should be addressed as early as possible in the hiring process to save wasted time and to improve the chances of securing the desired individual.

If it’s not dealt with until the point of offer, the underlying message sent to the jobseeker is: “we think you’re good, but not as good as you think you are” and all the faith and buy-in that has been built up during the interview process is immediately put at risk. The jobseeker, believing they’d gone through this process with their minimum expectations established, may feel undervalued and misled. There’s a high chance they’ll decline the offer and walk away from the process with a very low impression of the firm employer brand.

Managed properly this can be avoided:

• If a candidate’s salary expectation is above the level the employer is prepared to go, they shouldn’t be entering the interview process, unless it’s made clear to them that they are asking for a salary above budget and would need to lower their expectation. They may choose to walk away, but better that happen  earlier rather than later in the process.

• If the candidate is within budget range but they are pricing themselves out of the running by asking for a higher salary level than other comparable applicants in process, this should be addressed. They may not be aware they are asking for a salary level above market rate and may just need their expectations managed before reaching the end of the process.

These conversations can easily be held by recruiters who ultimately want to assist all parties in reaching a successful conclusion to the process. They should also be able to help in identifying early on if a difference in salary expectation is likely to be a deal-breaker or something that can be managed.

“Oh and one more thing; we need CV’s by 16:00 today”

Some blogs just write themselves...

Ask Balance

Do you have any questions you'd like answered in relation to recruitment, interviews or a career in accountancy?

We've launched an 'Ask Balance' feature over on the Balance Recruitment website this week, and my colleague Tony Vickers is first up in the chair. Tony has been recruiting for finance and accountancy staff in London for over 10 years, working with some of the worlds best known brands across a variety of sectors. 

He has been shortlisted for the 'Agency Recruiter of the Year' Award at this years Recruiter Awards for Excellence, and is eager to take your questions. 

Get involved here: #AskBalance

Job Boards and the battle for quantity over quality...

With the threat of social media networks moving in on their territory, job boards have had to work a little harder recently to convince their clients (e.g. recruiters and direct employers) that their services are still as valuable as ever and that their well established business models can withstand the threat posed by LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook.

This is most notably evident through the significant increase on advertising spend to increase the number of job seekers registering on their sites. The campaigns seem to be working, with a number of job boards boasting record traffic statistics.

So what does this mean for the clients who advertise vacancies on their sites? Does it improve their chances of finding the best candidates? Possibly. Does it mean they will receive more applications? Certainly. Does it mean they’ll spend more time filtering out irrelevant applicants? Definitely. Quantity is assured, quality isn’t.

One job board even seems to actively promote the ‘spray and pray’ method of searching for work in their TV campaign, implying that a wholesale change in career profession is achieved as simply as sending your CV off for something that catches your interest!

Ask any recruiter what they dislike about using job boards and they’ll all tell you the same thing; too many irrelevant applications. Job board users can send their CV’s to countless vacancies in no time, regardless if they do not have the experience requested in the vacancy advert.  Very few recruiters will tell you they just want even more applications.

There is also a logical argument to say that this focus on volume has a negative impact on the job seekers who use the job boards in the manner intended. Relevant applicants will inevitably get overlooked from time to time when their CV’s are buried in amongst hundreds of irrelevant applications.

So what do I think job boards could do to improve their services? Here are a few suggestions:

·         If a job seeker is applying for a very wide range of different role types, at salary levels that indicate a reasonable level of previous experience might required, send a ‘yellow card’ email, asking them to be more realistic with their applications, or face restrictions on the number of applications they can make.

·         Limit the number of applications job seekers can make daily. This might be a bit extreme, but it would encourage job seekers to spend more time reading through adverts to see if they have a realistic chance of being considered.

·         Universal use of filtering questions. Some job boards have this feature, but couldn’t they all allow the advertisers to pose some yes/no experience questions that filter out unsuccessful applicants?

·         Require more information to be entered manually by the job seeker for each application (to reduce spamming). Adding a layer of process in to the application process will take more effort on the job seekers part. Perhaps allow the vacancy advertiser the option to add a specific question field, relating to the advert (e.g. ‘please describe your involvement in a systems upgrade project’).

So when I receive a promotional email from a job board telling me that their new TV advertising campaign is about to start, I now find my finger pressing the delete button before I’ve reached the end of the first sentence.

What do you think of the above suggestions? Would they improve service for you as a recruiter/hiring manager? Or would they be too restrictive as a job seeker? Or have you got any better suggestions? Please comment below…

LinkedIn's Endorsements feature - users will decide its fate...

I’ve read a number of articles/blogs recently discussing the pros and cons of the Endorsements feature on Linkedin, so I thought I’d throw my opinion in to the ring.

The theory behind its introduction makes sense to me. It’s a quick and easy way to publicly verify the skills and expertise of a contact you’ve worked with or done business with. Not as personal and informative as a written recommendation, but still a testimonial of sorts and one we’re all grateful to receive when it’s from someone we know.

One of the major problems is how the feature is promoted on the site. Linkedin have made it too quick and easy to endorse multiple contacts with one mouse click when prompted.  This significantly dilutes the credibility of the function and actively encourages users to endorse their connections for skills and expertise they may not possess.

Another big argument from the doubters is that they’re receiving endorsements from people they’ve never even met or had business dealings with. In the article:  Why I Think LinkedIn Endorsements Will Be Dead By The End Of The Year the author states that he’s had five endorsements that very day from complete strangers, and as a result feels the feature is doomed to fail.

This is where there seems to be some misguided criticism of the feature in my opinion. Only first tier connections can endorse you, so if you don’t want to give strangers the ability to endorse you, don’t connect with them in the first place. Linkedin can’t be held accountable for being unable to distinguish between your real life connections and the open networkers you connect with on the site to build a bigger network. *I’ve literally just had a notification of an endorsement come through as I typed this (I promise!), and guess what – it’s from a stranger with ‘LION’ in their surname. I assume they’re just hoping for a reciprocal endorsement back, but it’s not going to happen.

So how can it be improved? It’s quite simple – by improving it ourselves. If everyone takes the initiative and some time out to endorse their real life contacts for the specific skills you know they possess, a much more accurate picture of an individuals expertise will eventually be reflected in the data.

The same goes for any site you use with user generated reviews and endorsements. Do you read the reviews on Amazon, ebay and TripAdvisor before making purchases/reservations for example? If you use it, get involved too. Contribute your reviews and experiences also and make it even better for everyone. The same applies to Linkedin Recommendations and Endorsements.

Procurement Guest Blog: Apples with Apples

A guest blog today from my colleague Craig Williams. Craig is a Senior Consultant within Balance Recruitment, joining us last year to set up our Procurement Division. He’s had a very hectic and successful start to life at Balance, which is covered here in his first guest blog:

Apples with Apples

Having returned from a sabbatical overseas last year – which saw me taking a cargo ship from London to Buenos Aires and from there, travelling through South America and then over to SE Asia (this time flying!) I returned to London ready to re-enter the niche recruitment sector of Procurement & Supply Chain and joined Balance to set up the division, complimenting their existing presence within accountancy & finance.

A year down the line and these are my thoughts so far…

Having once been told that Procurement, from a recruitment point of view, is relatively straight-forward and having spent a number of years recruiting for senior accounting positions in London, I was looking forward to the challenge of exploring this new and important business area, a business function rapidly coming to the fore due to the straitened times we are currently experiencing throughout the globe.

I had the benefit of already knowing a fairly large network of well regarded procurement professionals personally and through my connections in finance, all of whom were more than happy to talk through what they do – the knowledge share would cost me a glass of wine or two, though being a fan of good wine I felt that was a good exchange! One friend, when summarising what Procurement professionals actually do, rather succinctly commented that ‘…in a nutshell we compare apples with apples and we buy stuff…’.

Having dealt with finance for so long, a market well furnished with specialist recruitment consultants, I was pleasantly surprised to find that procurement professionals were much more open to spending time with me discussing their profession – being recognised as a potential supplier to an organisation certainly helped open doors during my initial few months and I quickly found myself working on several mandates for a well-known technology business. I was quickly able to fill three out of five of the roles given to me - a great boost to my confidence whilst developing my understanding of this new sector.

However, many of the roles I have subsequently been working on have been challenging and far from straight-forward! A high profile IT Category Manager position I was instructed on late last year required an extremely rare beast, though through persistent searching and networking with existing contacts, I was able to track down the elusive individual my client was hoping to find, and placed them in to an interesting ongoing interim assignment. There’s no better way to build strong relationships with clients than by placing these difficult to fill roles that other recruiters have long given up on.

Before long I was running several mandates, working with new and existing Balance Recruitment clients; for example an Interim HR/Professional Services Category Managers for a global media business – the remit being to shape their global contingent workforce, a great opportunity for the right person who would essentially be in the spotlight – not just here in London but also within their New York headquarters. I’ve also had the opportunity to partner with Global law firms, large engineering businesses and transport organisations all bringing fresh challenges and increasing my knowledge of the Procurement profession day by day. During each piece of recruitment I’ve met with some amazing practitioners along the way, building a large network of professionals across a variety of industries.

So it’s “so far so good” and I’m thoroughly enjoying my role establishing Balance as high quality recruiter for Procurement staff.

Apple anyone?