Supermarkets lead the way in new job opportunities
January 28, 2009
Supermarket giant Asda has announced that 7,000 jobs are to be created as part of plans to extend a number of existing outlets and the opening of several new stores. The supermarket sector is one which appears to have fought off the recession better than other industries such as retail and car manufacturing, and recently other supermarket chains have announced growth and new jobs to be created, including Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Morrisons.
Many of the new jobs at Asda will be aimed at people who have been unemployed for a long time, presumably as part of local employment partnerships in conjunction with the Job Centre. The chain is also intending work with Remploy, which is a government agency that provides:
“employment services and employment to people experiencing complex barriers to work” (www.remploy.co.uk)
Another company that has announced new jobs to be created is BSkyB, with 1,000 new vacancies to be made available due to the continuing growth in demand for services.
This is excellent news after weeks and weeks of announcements of redundancies in many industries including retailers such as M&S and car manufacturers such as Nissan. Recently Business Secretary Peter Mandelson announced a £2.5billion ‘lifeline’ package for the struggling car industry, a lot of which is to guarantee loans taken for lower carbon initiatives, and some of which is to provide funding for training and support for workers in the industry.
The jobs crisis is not just in the UK - the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has said that the global economic crisis could lead to the loss of 51million jobs worldwide this year, and the worst affected places will not be developed countries such as the UK but those who are still developing, such as countries in North Africa and the Middle East.
The security monster strikes again
January 27, 2009
Another day, another major loss of data for thousands, if not millions of people. One of the UK’s biggest recruitment and job search websites, Monster, has had a major breach of security after hackers have carried out what has been described as
“the biggest data theft in the UK since the details of 25 million child benefit claimants went missing last year” (BBC news).
4.5 million people in the UK use the site to directly find jobs or speculatively browse the market. Many users post their CV to the site just to keep their hand in the job market and are offered interviews and positions from recruiters and companies that search the CV database for candidates matching their needs.
The main danger from this breach is from potential ‘phishing attacks’ – this is where a user is sent an email ‘phishing’ for information, e.g. to confirm their username and password (the type of thing we are often warned about in relation to our bank accounts). Another possibility is emails that fool readers into installing malware (software that is designed to damage a computer) by clicking on links in emails.
The hackers have stolen phone number and emails, as well as usernames and passwords. Many people use the same passwords for more than one of their online accounts, so if you have a monster account it is a good idea to check what other sites you have used the same password for and change them.
Recruitment is taking on a different dimension
January 9, 2009
In the organisation I work for, we are lucky enough to still be growing even in the face of a national recession, and when the news brings stories of thousands of job cuts each day from the likes of Marks and Spencer and Nissan, we are still sourcing candidates for a number of positions on a daily basis. However as with the learning and development budgets as discussed in my last couple of articles, recruitment budgets have been squeezed so that per candidate, only half the budget that was available last year is available again now.
These changes mean that the method of recruiting candidates is taking on a different dimension, and this is also affected by the external labour market and the wider effects of the economic downturn. Just one year ago, the highly competitive labour market meant that it was very difficult to source candidates without the assistance of a recruitment consultant. Our online advertisements were lost in the massive databases on the likes of Monster and Total jobs, because recruiters seemed to have the monopoly over this medium with their larger budgets and multiple adverts which knocked our ads out of search lists. Most candidates in the market for this industry at that time searched for jobs through recruitment agencies, so we didn’t have much choice but to use them, which meant the costs for recruitment were astronomical.
Now, it is becoming easier to source candidates through alternative methods than the recruitment consultant, because there are so many more people in the labour market that are looking for work. Low cost and free websites (such as jobcentreplus) have proved quite successful in delivering good quality candidates. There are more people searching themselves for jobs instead of using recruitment consultants, this may be because fewer jobs are being given to agencies to source. This has been found by many of the major agencies, as:
“Hays said its UK business had collapsed by 22% in the three months to the end of the year. Michael Page said the Christmas quarter had brought a dive of 20% across its UK offices” (thisismoney.co.uk).
We are also looking at exhibitions and shows that will take place throughout the year, particularly in the graduate area. This can be a low cost way of generating a large pool of candidates, but don’t forget to factor in costs such as any display equipment such as posters or stands, travel and transport costs, and any corporate gifts you may wish to give out such as pens, keyrings etc.
The difference in the way we are now recruiting has been quite dramatic and surprising, however I imagine that it is reflective of many organisations across the country that are recruiting at the moment. How has the changing job market affected the way you are recruiting candidates?
Unemployment statistics show bleak state of the economy
December 17, 2008
The Office for National Statistics has released new figures which show that in the three months to October this year, unemployment rose by 137,000 people. The total figure of 1.86million is the highest level of unemployment for 11 years. As the recession has hit many industries, the number of people claiming jobseekers allowance has steadily increased month on month for the last ten months. The rapidly increasing numbers of people out of work is said to be worrying financial experts, because the unemployment figure is normally a ‘lagging indicator’ in a recession as it takes a while for the effects of a downturn to make an impact on employment. However the fact that the effect seems to have been immediate causes concern for many people, as described by en economist at Deutsche Bank who said “to see so many job losses this early in the cycle is extremely worrying”.
I have noticed changes within my work as a result of the increasing numbers of people losing their employment. In my organisation we are fortunate enough to still be recruiting where others are having to make many redundancies, and in recent months the number of candidates we are gaining from online advertising on sites such as the job centre website has increased massively, when earlier in the year we were much more reliant on recruitment consultancies to find suitable candidates for our roles. Even for quite specialised roles we are seeing an increase in direct applications as there are so many more people competing for fewer jobs. Whilst this may be a good result for companies’ recruitment budgets, it shows a very sad state for the country and the millions of people now struggling to find work. And it seems that younger workers are suffering more than most, as according to The Prince’s Trust, two fifths of people who became unemployed in the last three months were under 25 years old.
The Government is looking to implement a training scheme for unemployed people, allocating £158million in funding to help people who have lost their job to re-train and hopefully find alternative career and employment options.
Does pressure overcome good practice?
October 6, 2008
I read an article in People Magazine recently that looked at the culture and people practices of Google, (Finders Keepers, 18th September), this year’s best place to work. Google is one of those holy grail places for job seekers in the industry, with its famous funky offices, free dinners, flexible working and a multitude of other employee perks. It’s also well known for its top class management practices, so for HR professionals looking to implement new ways of working in their own organisations, it’s a good place to start for ideas. But how much of what Google does is realistic in other companies?
The most startling aspect of the article, which was an interview with Lianne Hornsey, Director of people operations, was the number of interviews a candidate will go through before being engaged. Whilst the process has been reduced slightly in the last few years, it’s still common for most staff to have at least five interviews, and for more senior positions, many more than this. During this process the candidate will be interviewed by the line manager, potential colleagues and people they would be managing if relevant (360 degree interviewing), and if any person in the process has concerns about the candidate, they are not taken on. These processes sound really good and I’m sure Google have fewer problems down the line with retention, performance and capability as a result, but since the company receives 3,000 applications per day, Google has much more scope to carry out these systems than the average company. Google is such a huge brand and so well known as a great employer, I imagine there are no worries about competition in terms of other companies the candidate may be interviewing with, whereas when I am recruiting, I’m always made aware that ‘if I want this candidate I have to move quickly because they’re also seeing X competitor and won’t be on the market long’. I can imagine that many companies avoid long winded recruitment processes just because of the fear of losing good potential candidates. Add that to the internal pressure from managers to get people into post quickly because of work pressures, and it’s quite hard to put your foot down and say no, we’re doing it this way because we need to get the right people. Even when the company has been burned by poor performing employees that were recruited in haste, it’s hard to get the message home about taking your time over choosing future employees, because all the day to day pressures get in the way and cloud everyone’s vision. Sometimes you’re stuck between a rock and a hard place: get the wrong employee and you’re dealing with difficult issues and potential retention issues further down the line; fail to employ someone when there’s a heavy workload and you could deal with retention issues with the existing staff due to stress and pressure. Being prepared and good planning is obviously important but of course this doesn’t always happen.
Google sets a really good example of how to recruit and manage people, and should be used as such, but you have to see these practices in the realistic context of the organisation you’re in. I guess the best lesson that can be learned is that brand is everything, and if you can get to the point where your candidates are coming to you because they are dying to work for the organisation rather than the other way round, you can implement a very different way of recruiting new employees.
Why the structured interview is better
September 18, 2008
If like me you’re carrying out a lot of recruitment and selection at the moment, then you may be involved in interviewing candidates, as this is probably still the most popular selection method in most organisations. We’re all well aware of the financial turmoil the UK (and other countries) are experiencing at the moment, so in organisations that are still recruiting rather than laying off staff, it’s even more critical to avoid a poor recruitment decision as this can turn out to be a very costly mistake.
Some interviews I have been involved in have turned out to be quite an informal discussion based around the CV or information the candidate has submitted, and I can see why some hiring managers wish to make the discussion more like a business related ‘chat’ than an interrogation, as this can often put the candidate at ease and make for a more open and honest discussion. However there are several reasons why this method fails to help interviewers make a good decision about the candidate:
- Talking about the candidate from the point of view of their history, i.e. around their CV, leaves the risk of discussing a lot of irrelevant information that may appear to be impressive, but bears little importance in relation to the job in hand.
- Of course, even parts of a candidate’s history that are not directly linked to the available role can still be relevant in terms of transferrable skills and situational experience, but it is possibly only the skilled interviewer that is able to make these connections without a direct linking question. And how many organisations out there can honestly say that it’s only staff that are trained and experienced in interviewing that carry out the process?
- Failing to work from a structure that is based on the job needs means that all the candidates that interview for the same role may not be assessed against the same criteria. How can you make a sound judgement about a group of people’s ability to negotiate if you have only covered this subject with half of them? A lack of structure means that your decisions could be made on areas that aren’t the most critical
It really makes sense that candidate selection should follow a clear, flowing process: analysis of the role that needs to be filled; creation of a comprehensive job description and person specification or set of competencies; then the building of the interview questions or other selection methods from these requirements. Clearly this is the ‘process’ that many hiring managers will follow almost subconsciously; they know the job and they ask questions to find out if the candidate can do it. But there’s no reason not to prepare for this process, and really think about it so that every aspect of the job and the role requirements are covered comprehensively. As for the actual style of the interview, it is possible to make the candidate feel relaxed and make the interview chatty or informal without having to sacrifice the structure that will help you make an informed choice. This is more of a skill for the interviewer to learn than a technique or process, and often comes with experience and confidence in conducting interviews.
… and another thing!
September 14, 2008
After my rant yesterday about dodgy recruitment agencies, I was thinking about the differences in experience I’ve had with recruiters working for my organisation and thought I would share a couple more anecdotes about things to look out for when using agencies.
Recently I’ve had cause to terminate quite a long established agreement with our main recruiter, after I had heard a stream of complaints about his poor practice in the last year and after losing a few employees because they hadn’t been managed properly in the process of finding a job. The problem is that many recruitment consultants are heavily targeted (and commissioned) on everything from new business generated to number of conversions (i.e. how many job offers were received against the number of candidates put forward), and this means that some of the more pressured ones end up giving a less than satisfactory service to both the candidate and employing company in order to force through recruits and hit their targets. The complaints I received recently were that the recruitment consultant had mis-sold the company and the job to the candidate and on another occasion had promised a salary review at a much earlier time than our organisation would ever offer. In both these occasions, the agency cannot be held completely responsible for both misunderstandings, as it is down to the company and employee to establish expectations and make the job role and company very clear. However one candidate, who ended up leaving quite soon after starting, said that he had not asked as many questions as he could have done in the interview because he felt the recruitment consultant had given a really clear picture of the role, and as this was his first role out of education he had not thought to check this out himself. He then found that the description had been completely wrong just to suit what he was looking for in a role. With the employee who was given an incorrect salary review date, his initial paperwork from the company made the correct date clear from the outset, but the fact that he had effectively been ‘convinced’ into the role with incorrect information reflected badly on my organisation and made for a poor start to the employment relationship.
I also have examples of the opposite to this scenario. Having worked for a while with a small locally based agency, I have found the service much more reliable and honest. Whilst the size of the company may mean that sometimes they struggle to cope with the large volume of recruitment we throw at them, I think the main consultant we work with has really taken the time to understand the organisation and what is needed. Sometimes we discuss a candidate before they are put forward and during the conversation, the consultant will say ‘I’m not putting them forward because after what you’re just said, they’re not right for the job’, which is a refreshing change from the CV farming we see from some others – where they have simply looked on a jobsite and found CVs for people with the relevant skills, had a quick chat to them over the phone and sent them through for us to discover whether they’re right or not. I think that for the not insubstantial amounts companies pay for recruitment services, a more in depth pre-screening should be standard practice.
One thing we will now be doing is asking specific questions to candidates and newly recruited employees regarding their experience of the recruitment agency, including how they found the company (e.g. advertising, word of mouth or were contacted directly from the agency), how the role was explained, the pre-screening process and how they found the consultant (e.g. were they pushy, did they listen etc). This is something I am hoping will help us to keep finding quality candidates without the worry of how the company is being represented to them.
Watch out for those recruitment cowboys!
September 13, 2008
Moaning about dodgy recruitment consultants seems quite a regular feature on this site, but as this is a major part of my role in HR it’s something that I’m plagued with on a daily basis. Finding the recruiters that work well for me and then continue to do so in the face of difficult assignments or a little bit of pressure is not an easy task.
One thing that has really irritated me lately is the lengths to which recruitment agencies will go to find candidates, and I’ve experienced many trying to directly poach staff from my organisation recently. Now, I’m not naive, I know that there’s a lot of headhunting happening in the world of employment, and I know that employees everywhere are being approached by recruiters looking to fill lots of roles. This doesn’t bother me. What does bother me is when recruitment agents call the actual company to speak to employees that they have identified as potential candidates from company websites or the ever helpful networking sites such as linked in (whoever invented that, cheers very much, you’ve made my job just that little bit harder). To get through to these people the recruiter will pose as a potential client or customer, sneak past the receptionist with a well placed fib and a bit of schmoozing (our receptionist is very good but sometimes the caller is more canny) and once they’ve reached the target candidate, start to pitch various jobs offering the world and more. This, in my opinion, is underhand and very unprofessional, but I have experienced even worse than this:
I am quite fortunate in that many of my employees will inform me if they are being chased by a recruiter and what has been said, so you can imagine my delight when I was contacted by a consultant who ‘really wanted to work with me’, when I had only the day before been told that he was contacting my employees to offer them new opportunities. I have to say I really enjoyed cutting the cheeky blighter down over the phone, and he was most embarrassed. As you can imagine I haven’t received a further call.
Another quite amusing situation happened recently, although for those involved it wasn’t actually that funny. A colleague of mine sent me an email conversation that had taken place between him and a number of other people in similar positions in the region. This had occurred because a slow witted recruitment consultant had sent a group email offering retail vouchers for applications or candidate referrals out to all the potential candidates she could gain details for – many of which were their work email addresses – and she had failed to hide the addresses from all the other recipients. This led to many outraged responses from the people on the list, expressing their disgust at having their email addresses revealed to so many other people, and the fact that they had been portrayed to the industry as a job seeker when they were not looking for a new role. Some of my favourite comments were:
- ‘Pretty shocking behaviour, and doesn’t do the recruitment industry stigma any favours…’
- ‘what makes you think any potential job applicant wants to have their email address made public in this manner? Surely there is more tact in your industry. Please remove me from your books immediately’
- ‘I’d suggest removing everyone’s data from your mailing list as you’ll find nobody inclined to do business with you from now on.’
This example just goes to show how careful you need to be when dealing with the recruitment industry. However there are many really professional recruiters out there and it’s important to see each provider on their individual merits, but you need to continually review the service you’re getting and also encourage your employees to highlight recruitment sharks to you if at all possible.
Skills shortages and pay rises in the IT sector
August 26, 2008
A shortage of technical graduates and off-shoring schemes for low level IT work are both to blame for skills shortages within the IT sector and rising salary expectations for mid to high level IT professionals, according to recruitment consultancies and Incomes Data Services (IDS), the HR research organisation. This situation is leading to a skills gap, where IT graduates cannot find their first position out of university because much of the entry level work is being outsourced to countries such as India or China, and therefore cannot gain the 1-3 years’ experience required for the roles that many organisations are struggling to fill. This has led to a reduction in IT graduate numbers – applicant numbers for technology degrees have fallen by 48% since 2001.
This is proving to be a big problem for technology related companies and IT departments, not only in sourcing good quality candidates, but also in retaining the mid-level staff, who have perhaps gained a couple of years experience with the company, and are now being enticed away by higher salaries elsewhere because their skills are so much in need. I have experienced difficulties in recruiting staff in this area with more than one year’s experience, yet I don’t have the same difficulties in recruiting new graduates. This isn’t too much of a problem as long as the company is able to provide the appropriate training and support to these staff, who may have never had a job before. All of the new graduates come with the necessary technical skills, but may need close supervision or strong direction in terms of company policy, client management or commercial awareness. Further down the line, it is necessary to be on the ball in terms of retention of these individuals that the company has put a lot of time, effort and money into, as there are so many positions out there and not enough people to fill them. I am constantly plagued by recruitment agencies that find out the names of key staff in my organisation, call them under the guise of a client, and then offer them interviews for jobs with sky high salaries that we cannot compete with. Fortunately most of the time the staff let me know when this happens so that I can contact the agency to complain, but I have lost some staff because of this problem. Understanding the needs and desires of existing staff to retain them is a continual effort, covering all aspects of the employment experience including salary and benefits, career progression, learning and development and general happiness/interest in the role. Here’s some more ideas on how to manage staff retention.
With the continuing decline in IT graduates and increasing pay requirements, companies need to be quite innovative in their approach to recruitment and retention in this area. If you have any advice or experience to share regarding this issue then please leave a comment.
You might need your GCSE’s after all!
August 13, 2008
When I was at school studying for my GCSE’s, I always thought that Science was a waste of time. When am I ever going to have to think about chemical bonds or the process of photosynthesis ever again in my life? Well, it seems that it is more important than I thought.
It seems that nearly 59% of firms have had difficulty in recruiting employees that have the necessary scientific skills. Jobs in the this industry are increasing and by 2014 it looks like there will be 2million jobs that require science skills.
In order for young people to take up careers in Science, the high achievers at school are being encouraged to do three separate GCSE’s in Biology, Physics and Chemistry rather than double or single awards.
The director from the Confederation of British Industry, Richard Lambert has said:
“We need to create an environment in schools that reflects the importance of science, and the value of studying it. We also need to send an unambiguous message to young people who are good at science that science as a career can be fascinating and worthwhile, and will reward you well.”
It isn’t just this industry that has problems finding people with the correct skill set, this is probably an issue in most firms, finding the right candidate isn’t as easy as it seems.
Have you had a problem with finding the right employee’s for a role? if you have, let me know.