The piano is part of an artwork project called Play Me, I'm Yours by a UK artist called Luke Jerram. Pianos have been dotted around the City free for anyone to use, and there are various planned events/singalongs. For more info see here: http://streetpianos.com/london2012/events/
This blog is generally focussed on my experiences and thoughts from working in the world of recruitment, although I may well stray off topic once in a while. My aim is for the blog to be of interest and of use (sometimes!) to those who are searching for work, hiring managers, human resources professionals and for anyone else involved in recruiting. Please feel free to add your comments and share. For more information on Balance, click on the Balance logo to the right.
Monday, 2 July 2012
Play Me, I'm Yours
Ok, so this isn't recruitment related, but just thought I'd share a photo I took this morning of this talented amateur pianist who took time out to entertain the joggers and commuters along the Southbank on an otherwise grey Monday morning.
Tuesday, 26 June 2012
When applying for vacancies - be specific
One of the most common complaints of jobseekers is that they
don’t get feedback from job applications. Whilst for recruiters, one of their
biggest complaints is the volume of irrelevant applications they receive from
job adverts.
The two go hand in hand. The more applications recruiters have
to sift through, the less time they can devote to replying to all the unsuccessful
or irrelevant applicants. Meanwhile a jobseeker, disheartened by a lack of
response, may step up the number of applications they send out, in the hope it
will increase their chances of progression to interview.
The danger of deploying a scatter-gun approach to job
applications is that it can undermine your prospect of securing the positions
you’re actually most interested in. A recruiter, through memory or application
tracking software, will generally be aware of multiple applications made by the
same individual, and if these are for roles covering different responsibilities
across a range of salaries there will, at best, be confusion over where your
strengths lie, or at worst they’ll assume you consider yourself a ‘jack of all
trades and master of none’. Recruiters rarely get instructed to find these!
A better approach would be to only apply for those roles you’re
most interested and suitable for based on the requirements detailed in the job advert. If you’re not then hearing back from the recruiter who is advertising these roles, give them a call to have a chat about your job
search and see if they can assist.
Thursday, 14 June 2012
Friday, 8 June 2012
Salary Surveys: pay close attention!
It’s the time of year again when HR departments are busily
analysing market salary data and employees are discovering whether they will be
happy or frustrated when learning of their annual pay reviews.
For employers it’s crucial that they have an informed
understanding of what constitutes ‘market rate’ salaries for all the various
positions they employ within their business. Equally it’s just as important
that individuals know their market value relevant to their responsibilities,
qualifications and experience.
That’s not to say that salary surveys provide an individual
with proof that they are ‘worth’ a certain salary. But they do give guidance on
what a future employer might expect them to be earning, which can be of huge
importance. Rightly or wrongly (in my view: wrongly!), a fair proportion of
prospective employers will consider an individual’s current salary when
considering what they feel is a fair offer to attract someone. If they’re
already well below market rate, they might be happy to take any payrise even though it is still
below the market average.
Therefore, if you find yourself being paid a salary lower
than your peers, you may well find that this sticks with you for the duration
of your career (unless you do something to address it), which can amount to a
considerable sum – more than you might be consciously willing to forego in
favour of good team morale, convenient location and stability.
Of course, I wouldn’t advocate marching in to your line
manager and demanding a pay rise but, if you haven’t already, it may be
sensible to raise this as a topic for conversation during appraisals/reviews at
an appropriate time. If you come to the realisation (or are informed) that your
current employer knowingly pays at the lower end of the market, you should
really consider the potential long term difference in earnings rather than just
the next 12 months and based on this decide whether it’s an amount you’re happy
to sacrifice or whether you might want to start looking to increase your salary
elsewhere.
I’m currently conducting a salary survey in association with
the Institute of Legal Finance & Management (http://www.ilfm.org.uk/) for the niche area
I recruit for – accounting staff working for law firms. If you’re working
within this area, please click the link and participate!
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Are you missing out on talent as a result of the recession?
The recession has affected recruitment in many different
ways. It has also had a huge impact on the career decisions made by individuals
over the last few years, and if you don’t take this in to consideration when
reviewing job applications, you could be missing out on genuine talent.
We’ve noted a few occasions recently where high calibre
applicants have been overlooked for reasons that say more about market conditions
lately than the individuals themselves, and this is where opportunities are
missed.
With widespread redundancies, recruitment freezes and
budget constraints on hiring over the last few years, it has been a very
difficult period for many who’ve been directly affected by cut backs. Even for those who’ve remained safe in their
employment, it’s not been a particularly opportune time to make significant
career advancements.
Those unfortunate enough to be made redundant during this
period have generally not had the luxury to patiently pick and choose their
next move, as they have been up against a lot of competition for very few
vacancies. Meanwhile bills still have to be paid. The result is that some career
decisions and moves have been made which in a better economic climate might not
have happened.
There has also been notable trend over this period for
employers to hire staff on fixed term contracts rather than making permanent
appointments. Those already on long term temporary or rolling contract
agreements have had little chance of becoming permanent, and many have been let
go as a first measure of cutbacks. Maintaining career stability has simply not
been possible for those in this circumstance.
We’re therefore now reaching a point where these factors
need to be taken in to serious consideration when reviewing job applications.
Some factors which may have raised concerns back in 2007 may now be more
understandable today. Moves that might not have made sense pre-recession, should
now be viewed in a different light, and individuals who may appear to have a
patchy or “jumpy” CV over the last few years, aren’t necessarily unreliable or
flighty – they may have just had to secure interim positions quickly due to
financial commitments and a shortage of permanent opportunities available.
Are these factors taken in to consideration when you’re
reviewing job applications? Or have you been affected personally by the
recession and feel your career prospects have taken a knock as a result? Please
add any relevant comments below.
Monday, 26 March 2012
Career progression or just more money?
When discussing a jobseekers motivations for looking for a move, two of the most common reasons I hear are career progression and for a payrise. The two are closely linked, with the first generally taking care of the latter, but too often they are confused as one and the same thing.
In many circumstances it seems that a jobseekers idea of career progression correlates to earnings and earnings alone. Understandable that this is seen as a positive move, but if you’re really looking for career progression, the salary of your next position shouldn’t really come in to the equation. Naturally, very few of us are prepared to take a drop in salary, but when considering your career earning potential, the salary you earn over the next 12 months will have little to no bearing on what you might be earning in a few years time. It’s the work itself that will make the difference.
If you want to significantly increase your earning potential, be patient and don’t focus on what your monthly income will be over the coming year. Think about what your earnings will be over the next 5-10 years. A position paying £3k more than another has the short term appeal of the higher salary, but as a stepping stone will the position itself help you climb to the next step up in your career faster than the other? Of course it could, and if so – result! If not however, the role with the lower salary but better development could be the sensible option.
Consider a Sliding Doors situation. On one universe you take the role paying £3k more and 5 years down the line you’re doing the same job as you are now and are again looking for a step up in your career. Meanwhile in the parallel universe the other you, who took the lower paying role, has already gained 5 years experience in a more senior position, developing their skills and experience accordingly. Chances are they’ll have already overtaken your earnings and now they also start looking for a new job, but in this scenario they’re looking for a job two steps higher up the ladder than you are. If they stay on their toes they’ll remain the higher earner right through till retirement and their overall career earnings will dwarf yours.
Of course, it’s not always as clear cut as in this example, and it’s not every day we find ourselves with two job offers on the table. However, the same logic should be applied if after resigning your current employer tries to persuade you to stay by matching the salary on offer elsewhere. A short-term win perhaps, but how will staying affect the long-term path of your career?
Labels:
careers,
jobs,
payrise,
recruitment,
recruitment blog,
salary
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
CV's can't talk back - so why not discuss any question marks with the consultants who sent them?
When using recruiters, if you are prepared to instruct them to assist with a role and represent your firm to market, you should have faith in their ability to find suitable talent and to identify the closest match to your requirements, regardless of whether on a retained or contingency basis.
I’m not suggesting that recruiters never get it wrong (and why continue to use those who often do?), but the best hiring managers and HR Coordinators will take time to seek advice from them on why you should meet with those they’ve recommended, and to challenge any concerns they might have when reviewing a CV.
The best talent won’t necessarily have the best looking CV, so relying on the document alone is ignoring the experience and judgement of a recruiter who will have rejected countless of other applicants they’ve met in person, ahead of the shortlist they have ultimately sent through. If your faith in a recruiter’s recommendations results in interviewing irrelevant candidates, you will at least have identified that this is a recruiter you shouldn’t be working with in future.
The problem may be that too many recruiters have been instructed or that those who have are sending far too many CV’s, so some ruthless filtering has to be applied to narrow down the shortlist, but that’s a blog for another day.
I’ve recently been asked by a new client to assist with filling a vacancy that has already been on the market for a close to two months. My first thought has to be to consider whether this is going to be a wise investment of my time? If it’s taken so long already and nobody has been found, is there actually anybody out there who can do this job, or is the client being unrealistic in their expectations?
Having completed my due diligence with the HR Coordinator on the position, it was clearly a good opportunity, paying market rate salary and with reasonable expectations on the experience required. I asked why it had proved to be so difficult to fill, and was told the line manager had rejected CV’s due them lacking relevant industry experience, or for having too unstable a career history.
Perfect, I thought! I know an excellent candidate who has 6 years legal sector experience with the same firm who would love this job and would be able to hit the ground running. Unfortunately however, his CV was also rejected at introduction stage by the line manager. There was no discussion about the candidate before the rejection, and no opportunity to talk through the reasons why with the line manager whose decision wasn’t challenged by the HR Coordinator, just a straight ‘no’ based on the CV alone.
If I wanted to, I could pose several questions about an individual’s experience, ambitions and drive from reviewing a CV, but unfortunately paper doesn’t talk and without meeting or speaking to that individual those questions remain unanswered. I can make assumptions of course, but is this really a good way to judge someone’s worth? I think not. Had a recruiter who’d met the individual sent their CV to me, the very least I would do is speak to them to find out a little more.
It transpires that nearly every CV submitted had been rejected at introduction stage for a whole host of different reasons by the line manager who had no direct contact with recruiters and didn’t wish to hear explanations/responses to his concerns.
The consequence: a vacancy which takes months to fill despite high calibre talent being available and a series of recruiters feeling their time and effort has been wasted and would be better spent in future focussing on competitor businesses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

