I'd like to start off this article by saying no one, or no process is ever perfect, but we should all be constantly evolving and trying to get the best from ourselves and those companies we work for. I am always available to talk over recruitment, as I have been delivering recruitment solutions since 1996 and have been a business owner for much of that time. I feel I see recruitment from all sides of the fence, be you an employer, and interviewer, an interviewee or a recruitment professional. Let's start this article off with this fact. According to a 2018 global survey from recruiter Robert Half, more than eight in ten HR decision-makers admitted they had made bad recruitment decisions, and 39 per cent of them realised it within two weeks of an individual starting work. Numerous studies have attempted to quantify how expensive such errors are and have put them at anything between £30,000 and £130,000 depending on the seniority of the individual involved. In Adam Cramers article "The real cost of a bad hire" he to highlights that a bad hire can be expensive. He says "traditional recruitment agencies can take up to 30% of the final salary of any incoming employee. If that employee is paid the national average, that’s more than £5,000, and it climbs quickly if the person in question is taking a senior role. But even this fails to tell the whole story. A report from the Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC) found that although more than a third of companies believe hiring mistakes cost their business nothing, a poor hire at mid-manager level with a salary of £42,000 can cost a business more than £132,000 due to the accumulation of costs relating to training, lost productivity and more." So we can all see and hopefully agree that making bad hiring decisions is something we want to avoid at all costs. With this in mind I am still staggered at how some businesses, mainly large companies want to pay as little as possible to recruiters that they want to help them. I completely understand companies wanting to get great value, but "if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys". Some larger businesses try to hire internal recruiters as they believe this lowers their costs, or keeps recruitment in one place and will reduce staff turnover. But does it? From my experience I'd say rarely is this a perfect solution, but if done right it can lead to improvements in staff retention through good quality interviewing and hiring. But if done wrong, lots of wasted time and money. Also often the internal recruiter has a protectionist disposition so want to use agencies as little as possible, rather that using their strengths and working as a team. Of course some poor hires we can attribute to bad luck or, in the UK particularly, the inevitable scarcity of talent in certain disciplines and sectors. In the sectors and professions that I supply, namely Planners, Project Controllers and Claims Consultants working within the construction and infrastructure sectors this is definitely the case. Most of our hiring decisions come down to our gut feeling, which most of the time is right, but this alone is almost always the wrong way to recruit. The question is whether we are ready to admit it. Here's a few tips to help secure more of the right talent for your business. Try to work with profession or sector recruitment specialists. Outsource the jobs that will take you or your recruitment team too long to source, or historically have been challenging. The job description Recycling job descriptions and person specifications or not having one at all Re-using the job description for your outgoing employee might be seen as a good way to save time, but cutting corners like this can definitely backfire. Roles change over time and the job description might be out-of-date, meaning that you’ll be hiring against an incorrect set of criteria. Recruiting is also a good time to review a role’s responsibilities – it may make more sense to reshuffle duties around the team, or to split up overstretched roles into more than one job. Vague and imprecise job descriptions also make shortlisting difficult, as you’ll get many more unsuitable applicants. CV screening Do not automatically reject overqualified candidates Look at the positives, rather than the negatives. The advantages of taking on someone with more experience and extra skills can often outweigh any possible downsides. It seems strange that more employers do not take advantage of being able to get more for less. Waiting for the “perfect candidate” The perfect candidate rarely exists. So know what is key criteria for you and weight those criteria, if the job seeker hits 7-8/10 and ticks all other boxes, secure them quickly before your competition does. In reality, perfect candidates are so rare that it is usually best to go for someone who meets all of the key requirements and can be trained in the “would-like-to-haves”. Training up a candidate builds loyalty and productivity, and they might have other qualities that could come in useful in the future. Leaving the role open risks drops in productivity and damaging morale as other employees struggle to cover the responsibilities. Interview preparation Ask the right interview questions Prepare properly for interviews. This means you get the questions you want to know answers for done, and not ending up just asking superficial questions about previous experience and not really probing a candidate to see how well they will do in the job. Not preparing detailed questions in advance also makes it much harder to establish a level playing field for multiple interviewees and avoid bias. The opportunity to sell your organisation Jobeekers have choice, you arenot their only choice. An employers may assume that anyone would be grateful to work for them and that they don’t need to ‘sell’ the role or organisation. In reality, there’s more competition than ever for the very best candidates and particularly in certain niche areas. And even if they don’t end up with the job, anyone interested enough to interview with you could be an excellent potential advocate or supporter for your organisation. The interview The right cultural fit It's important that any new member of staff fits in with the rest of their team. Their personality has to mesh with others. What is the right cultural fit for your business? Relying solely on an interview? Although the interview is one of the most effective tools in an employer’s kit, decisions on hiring should not be made purely on that basis. Look at supporting material, such as CV, emails, covering letters, references, personal recommendations and their web presence and social media profiles. Check references I reckon I'm asked by employers 1 in 40 to check references. Not taking the time to check references leaves you entirely reliant on the candidate’s view of themselves, which can be accidentally or deliberately distorted. Post-interview Mishandling rejections and not supplying feedback This is probably the most common mistake made, as employers find it hard to devote time to candidates who have not made it through the interview process. But, as well as simply being polite to take the time to give feedback to a rejected candidate, it can also benefit your recruitment process and employer brand. This article was by no means exhaustive, but I just wanted to reach out to employers and help. I'm always available to talk and help you so feel free to drop me a call or email, and if I can help you I will try my best. My thoughts are with you. #staysafe #remainpositive https://constructionfuturesuk.com/ Anyway, all the best, Bill Wynn, Director, T: 0203 887 1893 | 07342 334819, E: bill@constructionfuturesuk.com | 
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend