"I was really impressed with the knowledge of our industry, and of our market, that was shown..." (Partner, Search firm)
The following article appeared on 1st December 2011
Why on earth do you need a non-executive director?
Following 26 years in the recruitment industry, I have been a non-executive director (NED) for a selection of recruitment businesses, and acted as one for many more. Some have asked me to publicise my relationship with them: others have asked the reverse. In every case they did not get in touch with me for that reason.
Some of them wanted a solution to get new starters up to speed quickly. Others saw the issue about being stuck in the wrong markets, and wanted to change. Some directors wanted to empower staff to manage so they could loosen the reins of the business. In each case, to help them achieve what they wanted required a holistic look at the business, not a ‘one off’ hit.
I have found that the businesses most often in need of this kind of support are somewhere between three and fifty people. Perhaps you recognise these scenarios:
The directors want to continue to grow the business, but aren’t sure how – because they have not worked in a larger business or because the market has changed;
The directors want to create a business which is less reliant on their own billings, but are unsure of how to bring new people on quickly and effectively;
The directors are keen to enter new markets, or move up the value-chain, but don’t have that experience;
The directors are concerned that performance is behind the curve but can’t identify what else people could be doing;
The directors are battered by the turndown and need to review and energise their plan, process and people.
One of the challenges about running your own business is that you can never get to the truth about what other people are doing out there: there’s always someone ‘spinning’ that information.
Another is that you may well have set up with or hired people from a similar background, so there is a danger of self-reinforcement, or ‘group think’. Recruitment leaders need to be challenged with a different perspective and alternatives they may not have considered.
Another is that you may feel you can’t afford to buy in the most senior expertise.
These are all challenges we can help you with. Amelius Consulting gives you access to decades of practical operations and senior strategic experience on a ‘pay as you go’ basis. Of course we agree a minimum level of contact to achieve effects. Importantly, we don’t just dispense advice; we help you make it happen.
This approach has led to clients doubling their turnover in one year, winning major contracts and awards, achieving successful start-ups and converting from contingent to retained business.
I’d welcome the opportunity to learn about your business and explore how this approach could work for you. Please email on Alison.humphries@ameliusconsulting.co.uk or call on 07941 060530.
Amelius Consulting Ltd is a business specialising in helping recruiters improve performance through bespoke consultancy, coaching and training. www.ameliusconsulting.co.uk or http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=9363383&trk=tab_pro
If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to Amelius@btinternet.com from the address to which this email was sent quoting ‘Unsubscribe’ in the subject field.
The most under-estimated recruitment skill?
If you could change one aspect of your recruitment activity and achieve these results in three months, would you be interested?
Interviews arranged between clients and candidates +30%
Success rate (interview: offer ratio) +33%
Number of temporary workers/contractors placed +18%
Retention rate on permanent placements at 6 months 98%
The answer may surprise you: better, behaviour centred interviewing.
A recent survey confirmed that experience is a much more important predictor of a candidate’s success in a role than qualifications or knowledge. Even in the scientific sector, 79% agree. But many recruiters have confused what candidates have done with how and how well they have done it.
The result is cursory candidate interviews which focus on leading and confirming questions, reason for leaving and position sought, plus the required checks. These interviews add nothing to a candidate’s CV, and so the recruiter becomes nothing more than a purveyor of CVs – like a job board.
Working closely with the consultants, we developed a range of questioning techniques that probe a candidate’s behaviours, accomplishments and values. Like many recruiters, it was not practical to interview most candidates face-to-face, so they had spent less and less time interviewing altogether. Instead we helped them structure questions for telephone and video interviews so that consultants were able to
Present candidates to clients with confidence and evidence
Offer specific, constructive feedback to candidates regarding expectations and interview technique
Add value by influencing the structure and outcome of client interviews
Win interviews for candidates who had previously been rejected due to over-reliance on CVs.
Initially, there was some resistance to spending more time interviewing. But the time reappeared when assignments were filled, fall-outs reduced and candidates managed.
We all know recruitment requires excellent sales skills, but showing real discernment between candidates and managing their expectations have never been more important.
Amelius Consulting Ltd is a business specialising in practical advice, executive coaching and in-house training in the recruitment industry. Its directors, Alison Humphries (07941 060530) and Simon Harrington have both worked at director level in some of the most successful recruitment companies and built businesses from scratch. Contact alison.humphries@ameliusconsulting.co.uk to discuss how we can help you and your team achieve your goals. We look forward to meeting you.
Does your recruitment process need a health check?
It’s a cliché but true that employment law is a minefield and one area where there are plenty of potential traps is the recruitment process. This is particularly so in relation to pre-employment questions regarding health. The Equality Act expressly prohibits recruiters asking, at the pre-employment stage, about an applicant’s health, except in very limited circumstances.
If an employer breaches these requirements and asks an applicant questions regarding their health which are not permitted, then if the employer doesn’t offer that applicant a job and the applicant brings a disability discrimination claim, it will be much more difficult for the employer to defend that claim. The burden of proof will be on the employer to show that there has been no unlawful discrimination and if the employer isn’t able to do so, then it could end up having to pay out significant compensation.
Some pre-employment health questions are allowed, however. For example, an employer can ask questions which are necessary to establish if the applicant’s health means that reasonable adjustments need to be made to the interview process. Can the applicant gain access, for example, to an upstairs interview room where there isn’t a lift? The employer can also ask questions which are necessary to establish whether the applicant can carry out functions which are intrinsic to the job being applied for.
Employers are not barred from making job offers conditional on satisfactory health checks or on satisfactory completion of medical questionnaires, although here also they do need to be careful. If someone is not, in the end, employed and this is because of a reason related to a disability which they have, then that’s likely to amount to unlawful discrimination unless the employer can show a very good reason for not taking the person on. Simply because certain aspects of the job would have proved difficult for the applicant will be no defence if the employer could have made reasonable adjustments which would have removed those difficulties.
As we said at the beginning, it’s a minefield and it’s therefore a good idea for your recruitment process to be given a legal health check!
The information and opinions contained in this article are not intended to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. No responsibility for its accuracy or correctness is assumed by Berg Legal or any of its partners or employees. Professional legal advice should be obtained before taking, or refraining from taking, any action as a result of the contents of this article.
Nigel Crebbin is a Partner in the Employment Department of Berg Legal. To discuss these and other compliance issues contact Nigel on nigelc@berg.co.uk or tel:0161 833 9211
March 2011
This time last year we sent you the results of a survey into what recruitment directors were doing differently to cope with the effects of recession.
Amelius Consulting has updated the survey by speaking to directors of recruitment businesses which produced significant improvements in gross profit in 2010. We interviewed 60 directors and owner managers of businesses ranging from 3 to 150 employees, all of whom produced like-for-like growth of at least 15% in 2010. So we compared their GP per head for improvement, not just the top line.
Asked “What changes had the most impact on your recovery?” answers included
- Better upkeep and use of databases
- Closer attention to candidates
- Greater penetration of accounts and better care of existing clients
- More added value services
- Moving up the value chain in terms of placement fees
- Improved performance management, emphasising thorough follow up
- Enhanced training and development
It is interesting, and reassuring, that none of the respondents had reduced fees to win market share except in agreeing a few second tier arrangements. They had however provided more for their fee, or provided it more consistently, including psychometric tests, referencing and checking, induction assistance, video shortlists, structured market information, additional advertising and client training/seminars.
25% claimed to have moved to supplying more senior personnel than previously, with several identifying severe pricing pressure at the lower end of the market where clients tend to recruit tactically rather than strategically.
All but four of our respondents had maintained a specialist focus rather than diversifying into new/unknown markets. Those that had entered new markets had taken functional expertise into new sectors, in particular energy and FMCG.
None of the respondents claimed that reducing cost base had a positive effect on recovery. In fact, they had invested more in marketing, including traditional and digital media and maintaining a presence on social networking sites. Accreditations and memberships were also mentioned.
Training and development was another investment that 40 respondents (2/3) said had paid off. This did not mean more days of training, but a focus on implementation and results through performance management. Training content was also more targeted. Management development was cited as a particular priority by half of all respondents.
Bearing in mind that all these owners and directors achieved growth in 2010, perhaps we can all benefit from their experience.
Amelius Consulting Ltd is a business specialising in practical advice, executive coaching and inhouse training in the recruitment industry. Its directors, Alison Humphries (07941 060530) and Simon Harrington have both worked at director level in some of the most successful recruitment companies and built businesses from scratch. Contact alison.humphries@ameliusconsulting.co.uk to discuss how we can help you and your team achieve your goals. We look forward to meeting you.
If you wish to unsubscribe from future mailshots, please reply to this e-mail from the address to which it was sent, with the word ‘Unsubscribe’ in the subject field.
This article first appeared January 2011
Talking up the Competition
When I meet new clients I always ask them what makes them different. All too often they produce unsubstantiated claims about the shortcomings of their competitors rather than proof positive about their own expertise. Ironically, many business owners who boast of their high standards turn out to be unwittingly breaking the law.
Kevin Green, CEO of the REC, told me that when he was HRD at Royal Mail he had a similar experience. Having invited about a dozen major businesses to propose a recruitment management deal, his committee heard twelve attacks on the industry as a whole. The conclusion? The whole industry is rotten. Nobody won.
That story highlights that there is nothing to gain by bad-mouthing the competition. It diverts attention from your vision and values and suggests that your own business has nothing concrete to recommend it - no superior offering which meets the implied or expressed needs of your client . Attempting to win by criticising competitors can only make you appear desperate or untrustworthy. Worse, it makes clients and candidates cynical about all of us, and that leads to a race to the bottom.
Now, this is an overcrowded and competitive industry. If you suspect that your competitors are not fully compliant with the law, identify why it matters to a client or candidate and prepare evidence of your compliance. Seek accreditation from the appropriate bodies as proof of your standards, and if necessary advise clients of the complaints procedure operated by the REC and the Employment Agency Standards inspectorate.
If you suspect that your competitors have little relevant sector experience, emphasise your own pedigree and provide client references. Emphasise the importance of that expertise to your client and the risks of going ahead without it. But don’t say ‘I heard they’re not very good’ or ‘This sector is full of cowboys’: that is just a race to the bottom.
I had the pleasure of hearing from a client last month how much respect one of my competitors had for Amelius Consulting. The same client asked if we could work with that competitor to meet his needs because we were the only consultants he felt he could trust and that is what we are doing over the next six months.
Why not make 2011 the year you start talking up the competition and yourself? It will reflect well on all of us, but nobody more than you.
This article appeared October 2010
Are recruiters too reliant on CVs?
In my last e-mailer I explained what you could do about recruiters who send candidate CVs to hirers without seeking candidate permission (
www.ameliusconsulting.co.uk – blog page). Thanks for all the interested and supportive responses- 400 of them!
Building on that, I was working with clients last week – a well established specialist recruiter - while they marketed candidates and realised that I was hearing a particular phrase too much:
“Can I send you the CV?”
What worried me was the reliance of the recruiters on a CV to do the talking for them. Some businesses even measure ‘CV send-outs’ as a key performance indicator, encouraging staff to rely on CVs rather than add real value to the recruitment process by presenting the candidate properly and providing qualified information – the stuff you can’t get on a CV.
If forwarding CVs were all there is to being a good recruiter, then the industry would have been replaced by job boards long ago. Where is the ‘added value’ in getting the client to analyse a CV?
Let’s face it – most clients aren’t expert at reading CVs. They make a lot of assumptions, miss information and struggle to recognise vocabulary different from their own. Some key skills in recruitment are
· translating candidate experience, achievements and potential
· identifying how a candidate could add value to an employer
· testing and probing beyond the CV, e.g. for motivations, ambitions and soft skills.
In other words, a good recruiter should present a candidate, not rely on a CV to do it for him.
I know that some clients – or prospects- won’t give you the time of day to do this by telephone. It’s those same hirers who complain when you send CVs that look irrelevant, and complain when they have to pay two fees – because an ‘irrelevant’ CV sent by a recruiter six months ago (by one recruiter) turns out to be the candidate who was presented properly (by another) and has just been taken on.
At minimum, any candidate you are marketing should have been personally qualified through an interview and ideally a reference. Then you can present the candidate :
· Identify 2/3 key reasons why the hirer should be interested in the candidate (previous employers, rare skills)
· Highlight a significant, measurable accomplishment (e.g. completed a project below budget, won an award) which you have established
· Say why the candidate is interested in the employer
· Identify a package range
· Introduce a sense of urgency (“he’s got two interviews on Monday, so I’ll call you back this afternoon”)
This approach gives you something that the hirer can’t get from a CV. If you don’t have this minimum information perhaps you shouldn’t be marketing the candidate.
“I did everything right – but someone else claimed the fee.”
Have you ever contacted a candidate about a vacancy, agreed on its suitability and then presented the CV to the client – only to find that the CV has already been submitted by another recruiter? And have you found that the other recruiter never discussed the vacancy with the candidate – but they can still claim a fee?
If the answer is yes, you are not alone. I recently followed a discussion on Linked In that has been running for three months and over 300 people have responded.
Professional recruiters know that speaking to candidates first is critical to their reputation, the perception of the industry and candidate confidentiality. But it is obvious from the comments that so-called professional recruiters don’t know something just as important – the law is on your side.
Yes – the law in the UK actually says you must get confirmation from a work-seeker that he or she is willing to work in the position before putting his or her details forward. It’s in the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses 2003.
So why hasn’t the practice of forwarding CVs without candidate permission simply died out?
1) Because most employment agency (permanent recruitment) and employment businesses (temporary recruitment) don’t acknowledge them. Go on – read your own Terms of Business. If your terms allow you to claim a fee for making an introduction because you were the first person to submit a CV, then you are probably part of the problem .
2) If your candidate is an ‘opted out’ limited company contractor then the regulations don’t apply – and that may work out better for many of you overall. You can’t have your proverbial cake and eat it.
3) Some employment businesses try to get round the requirement by asking the candidate for ‘blanket permission’ to forward their CV at the point of registration. A recent REC report identified this process as extremely risky, especially where the ‘type of work sought’ is so generic as to be meaningless (e.g. ‘office work’).
4) Hardly any employers (clients) I know are aware of the Conduct Regulations or this requirement. So they go on accepting terms of business which override the regulations and everyone ends up in a race to the bottom – or at least a race to send the CV in first.
You can make a difference.
First, make sure you understand the regulations yourself. Then check you are compliant – really.
Next, tell your clients about the requirement when you take on an assignment. Explain to them that any business which does not get candidate’s permission is contravening the regulations and that this can reflect badly on them as an employer, endanger candidate confidentiality and result in very poor service for both.
Third, advise your client to challenge all terms and conditions of business and insist that they will only deal with recruiters who comply. Clients can send an automated message back to any recruiters who submit unsolicited CVs or who try to avoid their obligations in their terms and conditions.
Finally, make sure you tell candidates about this at registration. Prepare the candidate for some of the bullying tactics that desperate recruiters will use. Make sure you log each time they give you permission to forward their CV.
This isn’t just theory. On behalf of my clients (recruitment businesses and agencies) I have been successful in persuading their clients to act on this and refuse to deal with non-compliant recruiters. They were committed to this because a) they cared about their employer brand and wanted to ensure their target employees were properly briefed and prepared, and b) they were sick of inviting candidates for interview only to be informed that they weren’t interested after all or had already moved on.
Seriously – let’s all be the difference here. Be part of the revolution – and help yourself along the way.
Alison Humphries is Director of Amelius Consulting Ltd, a business specialising in bespoke, in-house training and coaching for recruitment businesses. She is a fellow of the IRP, a member of the CIPD and chief examiner for the REC. She has worked in the industry for 25 years and is a well-known industry commentator and conference speaker.
The article below appeared on www.recruiter.co.uk on 10/05/2010
Personal Development in a grown-up industry
Most recruiters I know are fairly resilient types. With the first signs of recovery appearing in a flurry of activity, many can’t wait to get back to business as usual.
Before you get too busy to think, though, consider the effects of market changes on yourself – and your personal development.
Personal development (PD) overlaps with, but is not the same as professional development, which tends to be job-specific. In the UK we have traditionally expected our employers to take care of the latter, and ignored the former.
But one thing that thinking recruiters will have considered is taking more responsibility for their own development. Even strong billings in one market don’t guarantee security – it is your ability to learn and adapt.
A few enlightened recruitment businesses are turning their attention to the battle-weary experienced staff. In some cases these recruiters have emerged stronger and more versatile from the recession, but many are badly bruised and will be looking for new opportunities – even career paths- as soon as the market offers them. “I don’t feel that there was any real loyalty to me from (my employer) during all that” said one.”We had to work twice as hard for half the pay and no-one invested in me before or during with any kind of training or development”.
That’s an extreme case, but recruitment leaders should beware of gung ho management now things are looking up. Egos, as well as bank balances, have taken a hit and experienced, knowledgeable staff need some love and attention. First, allow for some structured and honest reflection on how people feel. Some of your staff may feel hesitant about sharing their learning, and possible criticisms, so one way of doing this is through an anonymous staff survey which can then be discussed. One business that did this was surprised to find that it had staff who did not consider themselves ‘lucky to have a job’ and who felt that management’s response to the crisis was ‘just shouting “do more! Make more calls!” ‘
The most strategic business leaders are reviewing their use of a menu-driven approach to development that merely teaches recruitment ‘tricks’ (when the client says that, you say this). Instead they are looking to help staff develop into ‘grown-up’ business people- who can demonstrate concrete market knowledge, develop deep and lasting relationships and don’t give the appearance of always having their eye on the next fee.
Development centres are one way of identifying strengths and development needs. To be effective they need professional design, objective observers and trust from participants that it will not be used to weed people out. A lot of people don’t know what they don’t know, or have been judged purely on their history. Consider carefully the behaviours that will succeed in the future.
Secondments and special projects can be both stretching and eye-opening. One recruiter, seconded to a client, told me “I couldn’t believe how many of the recruiters came up with the same phrases, and how much they thought that hassling me would get results. It has changed the way I relate to HR”. Ensure that you have regular communication and reviews, as well as a plan to reboard the secondee. Special projects such as systems review or opening a new market, must be of genuine business value, and can seriously accelerate skills such as project planning, influencing and managing a budget.
If your staff already have good recruitment-specific skills you can afford to develop them in a more strategic (less tactical) way. Business knowledge, bid management, presentation and influencing skills can be developed beyond quotidian recruitment routines, and individual coaching can be invaluable.
For some, the best way to get perspective and fresh input to their own situation is to talk to people outside it – networking. Make sure you share goals with the membership of your group though, and there is some structure to the meetings, otherwise you may as well just hang around in a bar.
Finally, there is a reason why chartered associations have a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) requirement. It not only benefits the individual, but the perception of the profession as a whole. Study for qualifications, reading, courses all count as an investment in yourself and might even make you more interesting to talk to.
There is something to be said for learning for learning’s sake. It brings new energy, a sense of accomplishment and control over your destiny. So start thinking about your personal development, and building your own brand.
The article below appeared on 9th April 2010
Do your staff have a licence to recruit?
As business optimism grows, you may be taking on new staff at trainee level soon.
Before you do, think about how you are going to develop them. The market is still tight and putting new staff out 'on the road' too soon means many will crash and burn.
Good recruiters need both knowledge and skills-like good drivers. Here are three ways to get them 'road ready' - you decide!
Method 1: Send your new hire on a 2-3 day open course to cover the basics. Then let them get on with it.
This approach is a bit like reading the Haynes manual and the highway code. You'll learn something, but you won't be safe to drive.
A trainee recruiter with no previous experience will take in and retain a tiny percentage of what they learn on a course like this. Because the course is open to all comers, there is no real opportunity for skills practice and detailed feedback because the trainer and the other trainees can't tailor it effectively to what each trainee will encounter in their workplace.
In addition, a new trainee will be overwhelmed with masses of information.
The result? This trainee is going to make a lot of mistakes - damaging his/her confidence and your business's reputation. Making sales calls which demonstrate no understanding of the sector - or even of a business context - damages your business.
And having barely attained basic competence, for many the learning and development stops as the business waits to see results before investing in further training.
Method 2: Hand the trainee over to the care and nurture of one of your best billers (BB).
The rationale here is that whatever the BB is doing works, so it can be passed on and adopted by the trainee. There's also the useful bi-product of giving BB some visible extra responsibility.
Again, it's not that the trainee won't learn. The risk is that the techniques your BB is using are probably more suited to rally driving than passing a driving test. So the trainee picks up 'tips' and 'killer lines' without understanding the context and when it is appropriate to use them. So, without understanding the broader narrative, our trainee learns just to imitate the style of the BB, without the contacts, knowledge and relationships that make them work.
Method 3: Develop a realistic plan that links learning to activities, targets and accomplishments.
Define a development path for the first 3-6 months, and tie in the tasks you want a trainee to be able to do. For example, for many contingency recruiters, you can start by showing them how to update candidates' records - developing confidence, questioning skills and understanding of roles. When you are both confident that this is being done well, they can move on to checking references, qualifying leads from candidates and so on. At each stage you introduce new concepts with some training, and identify clearly what 'good' looks like for that task.
This approach protects your business and helps the trainee develop while making a meaningful contribution to the team.
It's like learning gear changes before setting off onto a main road, or reversing round a corner.
And you don't have to be a huge business for this approach to work. It does take some planning, and a clear idea of what 'good' looks like for you. I've seen it working in dozens of businesses, who are developing knowledgeable, skilled consultants who repay the investment.
The article below appeared on www.recruiter.co.uk in February 2010
What really helped recruitment leaders survive and thrive in the recession?
With some glimmers of economic sunshine now being reported, many recruiters will be expecting a reversal of fortune in comparison with 2009. With its high staff turnover and constant new entrants, the recruitment industry as a whole has been poorly positioned to deal with a recessionary market after so many years of continued growth. So it makes sense to take stock now of what actually worked for some leaders in recruitment in a year which saw 20% wiped off the value of the sector.
Amelius Consulting interviewed sixty five directors and senior managers of recruitment agencies and businesses across England and Wales. The research covered a wide variety of sectors and took place between November 2009 and January 2010. We asked them what have been the most significant changes they had made since the start of the recession. Initial answers included;
· Change of business strategy
· Improved client care
· Headcount reduction
· Automating processes
· More and better business development activity
· More hands-on management
· Entering the 2nd tier market.
Interviews focussed on what changes had been made to personal practices, rather than external effects such as headcount reduction. In other words, how did these people manage differently in order to survive – and thrive?
1. Business Development
Eighty percent of respondents identified that their initial response had been to focus exclusively on clients. Only later in the year did they revise this approach, with many recognising the importance of candidate care to long term reputation, as well as a source of information and future business. Unsurprisingly, this trend was most pronounced in the professional and managerial sectors. Most invested time with ‘high-potential’ candidates even if they had no relevant opportunities.
The trend towards increased specialisation in recruitment appears to have hardened by the recession rather than otherwise. While just under 40% report trying to enter new markets such as energy, or expanding overseas to less fragile economies, a full 76% report that a stronger and deeper focus on existing specialisms (sectors and functions) was key to success. The availability of ‘insider information’, for example through networking sites such as LinkedIn, was a significant enabling factor: the extreme fragmentation of the recruitment market making a ‘niche’ focus not only desirable but essential to credibility.
Related to this, 32% had set goals for greater penetration of existing accounts. It would seem that their competitors had the same idea: only four respondents could identify significant revenue gain from these accounts, although all saw the activity as valuable in defending market share.
2. Cost v. Investment
Although our entire sample group reported a significant review of spending, this was largely confined to postponing capital projects such as office moves and new systems. Interestingly, two key spending areas which have traditionally been cut back in recession were retained by most of our group: marketing communications and staff development. However 62% of our sample group conducted root and branch reviews of effectiveness in these areas. Examples include shifting marketing spend to highly targeted digital solutions, deep-cleaning mailing lists and diverting hospitality spend from potential to existing clients (a ‘thank you’ rather than a ‘please’).
In staff development, managers report introducing systematic evaluation of training and in particular emphasising measurable outcomes. Just over one third of respondents had decided to invest strategically in bespoke training and coaching rather than spending tactically on public courses and these were pleased with the results.
3. Automating and Outsourcing Processes
Only one respondent had proceeded with a major capital outlay on back-office systems. However recruitment leaders had certainly used the economic conditions to renegotiate terms with suppliers, thereby off-setting some of the price pressure from clients. Recruiters, it seems are predisposed to Do It Yourself – only two reported outsourcing major functions as a useful strategy during this period. This may reflect a soft market giving people more time to undertake administrative tasks.
Many more (70%) automated a few simple processes to cope with the volume of CVs arriving but none identified this as a key survival tactic.
4. Management
Some of our leaders were driven by circumstances to undertake more operational work themselves, for example by renewing client relationships and filling vacancies (19); a larger group (47) decided to support staff by attending meetings and presentations. Of these, many of the latter found that what they saw was disappointing, even alarming:
“He didn’t know how to manage the meeting at all” (Executive Search partner)
“I just sat there and wondered if she was ever going to ask a question” (Manager, technical recruitment)
“He was my second best biller, but when it came to it he couldn’t demonstrate any real expertise” (Director, IT contracting).
In twenty four of these cases, the leisure to observe teams at work led to their most significant realisations: that what they thought recruiters were doing was far from the reality, and that good billing over the boom years was no guarantee of expertise or adaptability.
“I intend to keep a much closer eye on how they do things when the market improves,” said one manager. “I hope I can stick to it.”
The article below first appeared in Recruiter Magazine in September 2009
How to be...business-ready
Charles Darwin wrote “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the most responsive to change.”
With signs of recovery appearing in France and Germany, talk in some recruitment circles here in the UK is of ‘getting ready for the upturn’. For some, this means ‘hanging on stoically until things get better’. But there are practical steps that some recruitment businesses are taking now to strengthen their position and hasten that business improvement for themselves.
1. Invest in your data. Cleaning and updating your candidate (as well as client) details is far more than an administrative chore. Consultants should be speaking to candidates – especially those in management positions – as an important means of updating their market knowledge and building future networks. Candidates do remember which recruiters are courteous, responsive and realistic, even if they weren’t able to find a suitable role. In conversation with clients, ensure that you are able to offer them something (or someone) relevant and valuable on the call. Surveys, market updates and invitations to relevant events all help here. Be sure to complete client records such as systems used, specialist skills required, so that you know where to target future sales activity.
2. Look out for coat-tails. Make a point of identifying candidates who are upwardly mobile. Many recruiters have thousands of CVs sitting in inboxes generating no value. Sift through these for applicants with strong work histories in blue-chip employers, and for contractors and temporary workers who have worked recently in target accounts, as well as those with rare and specialist skills. Identify at least thirty of these and schedule time to make contact. Tell them their CVs stood out and why. These are the movers and shakers of tomorrow and can be proactively marketed. Remember too that good networking is a long term investment.
3. Plan a marketing campaign. Be honest. Have your client communications been a little haphazard in the past? Use this time to identify how to target your market at an appropriate level and the mechanisms for doing so regularly. What are the key messages you want to convey about your business? Make sure they are consistent in both the look and content of your marketing, electronic or otherwise. When are the key calendar dates for your sector(s) which affect work mobility and labour demand? Schedule and budget now for these.
4. Get bang up to date. Nothing diminishes your credibility like a website which hasn’t been updated for months, or a brochure with old contact details. Clear down old vacancies from your website or window. Look at forms, contracts and marketing material and remove anything “dated” (figuratively speaking) from circulation. Check your corporate e-mail sign-off for tell-tale dates and wording, and make sure your policies and procedures are compliant with current legislation as well as reflective of employer concerns such as diversity monitoring.
5. Keep watching and learning. If you have been forced to lay staff off, then you owe it to the survivors to ensure they have the tools and skills to make it. Don’t assume that recruiters who have produced results in the past have all the skills they need for the future. Instead, observe them at work to identify what could be changed or improved, and constantly review your market.
Because the ability to adapt is key when one thing is certain: the only constant is change.
The article below first appeared in Recruiter magazine in June 2009
How to give your candidates a competitive advantage
In the current market, it’s not enough to send a candidate preparing for interview a link to the client’s website and a job description. In a market where several candidates may be capable of doing the job, many recruiters are finding that employers are interviewing large numbers of candidates for each role. They are also asking them to jump through more hoops: more than six interviews are not uncommon for senior candidates.
In part, this reflects a lack of planning and organisation. It is also an illustration of how cautious many employers have become about making the wrong hiring decision. It puts more pressure on a candidate to perform well consistently and the very best recruiters are adept at helping them.
1) They advise interviewees about the interviewer’s role, responsibilities and background so this can be used to build rapport. If the process is going to involve multiple interviews, they agree with the employer about the agenda for each one – e.g. which competencies are to be investigated- so that the candidate is prepared and nobody wastes time with duplicated interviews.
2) The best recruiters coach candidates to describe their measurable accomplishments, and back these up with third party references. They probe weaknesses, but advise candidates to present them positively; “I recently attended a course to improve...” or “one of the areas I’d like to develop in is...”
3) They advise candidates that the assessment process does not begin and end over the desk. Support staff are often asked for feedback, and you may be visible in the car park! It goes without saying that candidates should be aware of their online profiles and clean up anything unsuitable.
4) We are terminally awkward about discussing salary. A recruiter worth his/her salt should have already discussed and conveyed to the client what package would be acceptable. Nevertheless, candidates may need help if the subject arises. A response such as “I’m currently on X and I’d like to improve on that, taking into account the whole package” should suffice. A wild bid as a starter point for negotiation can lead to mistrust and rejection.
5) Recruiters should advise candidates to build a decent sized list of questions (in writing) which are appropriate to the role. These could include, for example, most urgent priorities for the postholder, company initiatives and structure. The predictable “What are the prospects?” suggests you think the role is a short term option, and possibly beneath you. Linked to this, candidates should consider carefully their answer to the hackneyed question ‘Where do you see yourself in five years’ time?’ Candidates should avoid glib responses such as ‘In your chair’ and instead express their objectives in terms of what they would like to be contributing.
6) Candidates can differentiate themselves with a positive close, always asking if there are any concerns or further information which would help in the decision-making process. Confirming the decision-making timeline and process, expressing interest and sending a brief ‘thank you’ e-mail the next day can help.
Finally, the best recruiters push in advance of the interview for detailed, observation-based feedback from clients. They are not fobbed off with “Didn’t seem very ambitious” but instead ask “What did he do or say to make you think that?” With this information they can coach the candidate, improve his/her prospects and often find contradictory evidence to keep their candidate in the running. Because in the current climate, the expert support and advice of a seasoned recruiter will make all the difference.
Agree what core areas are being assessed at each interview
Coach candidates to describe strengths and development areas persuasively
Remind them that the interview is only one source of information available to the employer
Prepare the predictable questions
Insist on observed feedback from clients
The article below first appeared in March 2009
Recruitment: A Profession?
The former chairmen and chief executives of banks who appeared before the Treasury Select Committee in early 2009 were all surprised to be asked whether they had any banking qualifications. Many would argue that as their roles were strategic rather than operational there was no need for them to hold professional qualifications – although many would agree that a boss – no matter how experienced – can have his/her eyes opened by undertaking some more formal learning.
Without formal qualifications, it should have been a matter of priority for Sir James Crosby to listen carefully to the advice of his Head of Risk that his bank, HBOS, was ‘going too fast’.
It is not too far a stretch to draw some parallels to the recruitment industry. But to what extent do clients and candidates consider professional qualifications when selecting a recruitment partner?
There is no doubt that awareness of professional qualifications for the industry has risen dramatically. The REC in particular has played an important role in educating employers and government about the benefits of using recruiters who hold such a qualification, and more tenders and preferred supplier agreements request this information than ever before. In an overcrowded marketplace professional qualification can be commercially advantageous: it helps to differentiate your offering.
Of course the real difference lies in how the recruiter uses his/her learning. I have observed, however unscientifically, that the confidence that comes with a recognised and accredited qualification means that recruiters are more likely to challenge assumptions, manage expectations and educate clients for successful outcomes. They achieve greater credibility and trust with HR, and with management in some - though not all - industries. They are able to provide evidence and rationale for their recommendations.
No professional qualification will remain credible for long without some requirement for continuing professional development (CPD). Constantly updating knowledge of the law, relevant market rates and skills requirements is essential for commercial success and the avoidance of risk.
To what extent does this apply at the executive search end of the market? A recent US survey by Executive Search Information Services* identified the top five reasons for selecting search and selection professionals as:
· Industry/function expertise
· Track record with the client
· Recent relevant assignments
· Demonstrates understanding of the role
· Ability to represent the company well.
So it would appear that, at least until now, evidence of good process, market understanding and lawfulness have been assumed from these.
However the same research also highlighted a trend among the sample group to bring recruitment for senior staff in-house, with the effects that failed searches were reduced by 50% and completion times reduced by one third. If you cannot provide evidence of expertise, times may get tough.
In times of straightened economic circumstances, employers are showing increased circumspection about who they choose to work with, and an enhanced distaste for risk. A professional qualification will have appeared an irrelevance to many recruiters until now - but some people said that about bankers, too.
