Why is recruitment getting such a bad rep?
This question reminds me of my recruitment training by a well-known occupational psychologist who coached me to ask what questions rather than why questions when interviewing. The theory being that when you ask someone why they did something, and they tell you, there’s often nowhere to go, other than to question their judgement. Better to ask, “what prompted you to take that action?” or “what led to that decision?” in order to keep the conversation going.
Whatever works best in an interview probably works well in general conversation, although for this piece I wanted to open up the debate around the “why’s” which all seem to lead back to a mismatch between what’s required and what’s on offer. And of course, there are the variations and decisions around each.
Potential employers and job seekers don’t seem to be able to describe their needs and talents with any accuracy. Many don’t even know. Basic details seem to get “lost in translation” and seemingly average challenges become “amazing opportunities to break the mould.” Almost overnight low energy candidates become “dynamic” or “trailblazing.”
There are also some slightly odd jobseeker habits emerging designed to out-smart the key-word pundits that lurk in the shadows of CV sifting. Your CV needs to tell your story in your way! I’m always on the lookout for a seamless flow of what you’ve achieved in a role and how you did that. Metrics will help you to size the challenge and remember if your latest achievements aren’t your greatest achievements then add some context.
Who wouldn’t use the spellchecker facility on their laptop or the automated suggestion of what might come next, although please use words you know and like. AI may well have a place in this scenario, just as recruiters have been using key word search technologies since the eighties. Far too big a subject to tackle here today because the point I want to make is that if your CV isn’t you, then how can you live up to it at interview?
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about indecision and a distinct lack of judgement displayed by many managers throughout the recruitment process. And this spills over into the Resourcing or Recruitment functions. While I recognise that recruiters are essentially advisors, it seems that irrespective of whether they fulfill an in-house or third-party role, there’s a distinct lack of determination to “rock the boat” and make change happen. I get that I’m often far to outspoken for my own good, yet jobseekers and candidates deserve to be treated well. We need to get recruitment back on track and less of a chore for all concerned.
We’ve left the dark ages of “labour wanted” behind and the discriminatory exclusions which frequently accompanied such adverts are unacceptable, as well as illegal. But what insights some organisations to treat people engaged in their processes so badly? What gives them the right to ignore job seekers’ calls – whether that’s about their request for more information, a post-interview decision or feedback on their performance?
Buying something online (however small or insignificant) usually means an invitation to allocate scores or comment on the experience, although candidates are expected to be happy by default. They’re persuaded that their application or their interview was in some way substandard because they haven’t heard otherwise. When did, “don’t call us, we’ll call you” win customer service awards?
While I’m not a fan of “seeing who’s out there,” if that’s the best that you can do, then please be honest with your audience and the people who are trying to help you. I tend to prefer inviting a third-party researcher to map the market or as a minimum make potential candidates aware you’re undecided on your needs before inviting them to throw their hat into the ring! That way, jobseekers can gauge whether they want to be included and make the time investment.
There have been a few disappointing stories circulating around my network (and on Linked In) recently highlighting the mismatch between job advert, job description, interview questions and outcomes, not to mention feedback (in the less likely event that it’s available and makes sense).
In an attempt to get us all back on track and begin to regain trust in recruitment I’ve produced the following critical questions. There are so many more I’d be asking although answers to these (as a minimum) should prevent premature job marketing and an ill-conceived campaign.
How important is the job to the organisation?
Describe the organisation and how the job fits
Have you analysed the job accurately?
Is anyone doing that job right now?
Who’s likely to succeed in the job?
What skills and knowledge are needed to do the job?
Are you prepared to pay market rates?
What is your timescale for this campaign?
Based on the job you’ve described – what’s the process?
What interview questions will you ask?
What answers will you expect?
Who will make the final recruitment decision/provide feedback?
By addressing these points, it should follow that the JD, the process, the advert and the interview questions will all be in harmony. Next time, I’ll provide some examples of how to make that a reality.
Candidates and any third parties assisting you should all have the same basic information to work with. And please remember that if you communicate a process you should follow that process, even if the process is a quick 20 minute exchange or a more in-depth assessment.
Recruitment is a wide-ranging topic although it’s a personal passion, so why not give me a call and let’s chat?
