Quietly Quitting
Over the past few weeks, a new term is making the rounds in various business news publications, and on social media: ‘Quiet Quitting’. At the risk of adding to the noise, the trend appears to be going global, and at the heart of it, it’s an issue worth addressing.
What is Quiet Quitting?
Put simply, ‘quiet quitting’ is when employees decide to put the minimum required effort into their jobs, no longer taking on additional work, or putting in more time and work in, if it’s not part of their job. Sort of like a non-unionised parallel to ‘work-to-rule’. The term appears to have been coined in a video on TikTok that went viral. According to people who comment on such things, it’s happening as a response to feelings of burnout, and to ‘hustle culture’. People, they say, are feeling as though their employers have expected too much of them for too long. They’ve put greater levels of responsibility for projects, timelines and dependencies than is warranted or fair. And employees are taking a stand (albeit a quiet one). They’re not leaving, nor are they vocally complaining, they’re simply not playing along anymore.
Why is it Happening?
If the assertion at the heart of the movement is burnout, let’s unpack that claim a bit.
Looking at the employer side of the equation first, there may in fact be some well-founded frustration. The recent pace of business - particularly in technology sectors - has been brisk, to say the least. And as any employer knows, talent has been difficult to come by. Projects don’t always stop, or even slow down, to accommodate. Employees, especially those who truly care about their work, keep giving their all. When people change jobs, the workload is often just divided among those left behind. All this considered, some companies have expected a great deal, in some cases perhaps too much, from their people.
There are two environmental factors at play, however, that have contributed to this sense of burnout. Factors that are entirely out of the control of employers.
The first is generational. It’s well-recognised that work-life balance means something different to younger generations than it did to Baby Boomers and Generation X. Younger employees, generally speaking, place their work at a different level of priority in the context of their lives overall. It’s not that they don’t care about their work, or that they’re not willing to work hard. They do, and they are. But if they don’t feel that this effort is in balance with their personal lives in the long term, they will make changes. And given the supply/demand state of the market for labour, they know they’re able to make that change.
The second factor is the reality of all our lives since the spring of 2020. We all know that life has been different, and therefore more difficult. The stress of life overall has weighed more heavily on everyone, making everything feel more difficult. Including our work. That burnout that people are feeling? It likely has just as much to do with everything outside work as within it.
What Should Employers Do?
The term ‘quiet quitting’ is getting a great deal of attention at the moment (in the same way as ‘Great Resignation’ did last year), which makes it seem like a bigger issue - or at least a more widespread one - than it really is. So for most employers, there’s no need to panic.
However, as a proactive measure, it’s worth taking a beat and considering whether your expectations of employees are realistic. As we noted in the blog on attrition and retention factors, unsustainable and unrealistic expectations are one of the attrition factors that cause employees to consider making a change. Are project milestones and deliverables dependent on people routinely working longer hours, or just generally harder, than the average employee should be expected to? If that’s the case, some changes might be in order to mitigate flight risk for employees.
More than workload alone, however, ‘quiet quitting’ is a failure of communication. By definition, it’s a result of not being willing (or feeling able) to communicate dissatisfaction in any other way. It’s an outcome of not feeling heard, feeling like no one’s listening. So make sure someone’s listening. Coach managers to check in with their staff. Make it okay for people to acknowledge feeling overloaded. Can a business always change that reality immediately, or even at all? Of course not. But when the lines of communication are open, you have the opportunity to explain why.
What Should Employees Do?
If you’re an employee thinking about ‘quiet quitting’, our advice - at the risk of being glib - is … don’t. Fashionable as it may be, this move isn’t one that will help you advance in your career. To the contrary, you may end up doing long-term damage to your growth and progression.
You don’t want to become known as an employee who only puts in the minimum required effort. Colleagues of those employees typically end up shouldering the additional weight that they drop, which doesn’t endear them to anyone. Supervisors and managers will notice, as well. At the very least, you could be putting a future positive reference in jeopardy. And at worst, you could be risking termination for cause. In future interviews, it would be very difficult to defend your decision to scale back your effort (as trendy as it may appear to be at the moment).
To be clear: this is not to say that you should be willing to put in unreasonable time or effort indefinitely. That’s not fair, nor is it sustainable. It’s just that there are better ways to deal with it. If you’re feeling this way, there are three things we recommend doing instead.
First, assume positive intent. Your manager can only help if they understand what’s going on, if they have good information on which to base their decisions. Cutting off communication is counterproductive.
Second, build your case. However possible, quantify what’s happening on the ground for you, and for your colleagues. Few managers will make course corrections based on feeling and intuition; a decision requires data. Perhaps most importantly, if things have changed markedly, compare and contrast the current reality against how things were before.
Third, communicate. Speak to your manager, sharing the case you’ve built. Ask for their help and support in solving the problem, and offer to be part of the solution.
Final Thoughts
‘Quiet quitting’ is a term that will be replaced in a few months by the next buzzword. In any trend, though, there’s a kernel of value to be found. That kernel, in this case, bears repeating: where ‘quiet quitting’ happens, it is more than anything else a failure of communication. Employers, and the employees they value, should take this cue to examine their expectations, quantify the gap between reasonable and unreasonable if and where it exists, and - above all else - communicate with each other.
Why They Leave, and Why They Stay
The flip side of the recruitment coin is retention. In addition to the obvious connection (the fewer people that leave, the fewer people that must be recruited and hired to replace them), a company with high employee retention also has greater success in recruiting. In our highly-connected world, word gets out about companies that are great places to work, and those companies have more success attracting the top talent they want.
That being the case, it’s helpful to understand the reasons why people choose to stay with some employers, and why people choose to leave others. Enter McKinsey & Company, with some fresh data. They recently surveyed over 13,000 people to understand the factors currently driving employee attrition and retention. Of those respondents, 7,500 people were employed and planning to stay with their company. Almost 5,000 were employed but were planning to leave. And another 1,100 or so were ‘active quitters’ - people who had left their most recent previous employer at some point between April 2021 and April 2022.
Their findings are a valuable, data-rich source of insight into what it takes to hang onto your best employees, and to attract others like them.
Survey Says …
On the surface, some of the results bear out what most employers think of as retention factors. The top overall reason given for leaving a job was the lack of career development and advancement, with 41% of respondents naming that as the main reason they quit their last job. This won’t come as a surprise, particularly for companies in technology fields. Most employees in the knowledge sector look for opportunities to grow their skills, develop new ones, and to take on greater levels of responsibility. The second most common reason also likely tracks for most employers: inadequate total compensation was named by 36% of respondents as the reason they left. In the overheated candidates’ market of recent years, it’s sometimes seemed as though all it takes to dislodge an employee is a call from a recruiter with a higher offer elsewhere.
Going a bit deeper into the survey results, however, some of the results become a bit more surprising.
Digging Deeper
A significant number of employers are focused on creating a flexible workplace. Particularly through and in the wake of the pandemic, companies are offering hybrid or fully remote positions in some cases, and more flexible work schedules in others, in an effort to attract and retain talent. But only one out of four survey respondents cited a ‘lack of workplace flexibility’ as their primary reason for leaving their last job. This isn’t to suggest that creating a more flexible workplace isn’t worth pursuing; far from it. It suggests, however, that there are other factors that play a more significant part in the actual decision to leave.
Intriguing things happen, too, when you begin to look at the overlap that exists between some of the reasons given.
Nearly one third of respondents said that a ‘lack of meaningful work’ was the main reason they left their last job. However, for some people, that lack of meaning may stem from a lack of development and advancement opportunities. In other words, if you believe that you’ve plateaued and your career isn’t going anywhere, that can feel very much like a lack of meaning.
In a similar vein, 34% of people named ‘uncaring and uninspiring leaders’ as the reason they left their last job. A significant part of a leader’s job is to foster a sense of purpose and meaning in work. So, some of those 34% might also belong in the group looking for more meaning in their work.
There may be significant crossover between the 26% who said a lack of flexibility caused them to quit, and the 29% who feel that their employer’s expectations were unsustainable. Likewise, the 26% who felt a lack of support for health and well-being might also have been experiencing the effects of unsustainable expectations, unsupportive people, and uncaring leaders in their last jobs.
Push and Pull
The other thought-provoking breakdown in the survey results is the split between retention factors - those that cause employees to stay with their company - versus the attrition factors that make employees think about leaving. Each of the primary reasons mentioned above tend to fall on the side of ‘retention’ factors, while the related factors tend to increase the risk of attrition.
Meaningful work, for example, is a factor of retention. In other words, it is more often a reason why employees choose to stay with a company, rather than a lack thereof being the reason they would leave. However, the lack of development and advancement opportunities, and uncaring and uninspiring leaders, are factors more related to attrition.
Flexible work environments are a retention factor, whereas unsustainable expectations - one possible ‘dark side’ of the lack of flexibility - is an attrition risk. Support for health and wellbeing is a factor that supports retention, while unreasonable performance expectations, unsupportive colleagues, and uncaring and uninspiring leaders are all factors that can cause employees to look for the nearest exit.
Key Takeaways
Retention - a non-negotiable building block for successful recruitment - means putting focus on both the ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors: minimising those that can cause attrition, and promoting those that keep your best employees happy and engaged in their work. To prioritise, it can be useful to consider the insights drawn from Kinsey’s large dataset.
Here are the three most important elements we see in the data.
- Provide Meaningful Work (to the extent possible). Empower leaders - by title or otherwise - with the capacity to foster a sense of meaning in the work. However, don’t overlook the fact that to some people, meaning is defined in terms of continuous development and learning, and greater levels of accountability. Finally, if you’re not compensating your people accordingly for the work, you’re at greater risk of attrition (and you’ll find it very difficult to attract others).
- Offer Adequate Flexibility (to a reasonable degree). If you’re able to offer hybrid or remote options to your employees, it’s certainly worth considering. But hybrid and remote aren't the be-all-end-all. Just as importantly, ensure that the workload for your employees is manageable, and allows them to set appropriate boundaries between work and the rest of their lives.
- Support Employees’ Health and Well-being (as much as is reasonable). Healthcare support and other formal wellness programs may be part of this. As may be the balance mentioned above. Less formal but equally important is creating a culture in which leaders and staff alike feel free to talk openly about self care and managing well-being.
With dozens of new articles and news items every day promoting creative new ways to attract and retain employees, it can be overwhelming and dizzying to narrow focus on the things that will actually produce the results you want. We hope this summary of McKinsey’s data helps you do that.
The R Word
Throughout most of our collective recent memory, talent shortages have been the watchword. With the exception of a relatively mild – and perhaps surprisingly short-lived – slump in the early days of the pandemic, most companies have felt a pinch when it comes to finding and hiring the people they need.
While nobody (at least nobody we know) has a functional crystal ball, there are an increasing number of signs of a slowdown on the horizon. People are using the ‘R’ word – recession – more often.
Since the last major recession is now over ten years behind us, there are many people – job seekers, and those in recruitment – who haven’t lived and worked through a recession. For those of us who remember the last one, our memories have faded with time. That being the case, it’s worth a look at some of the things that might be expected if there are economic headwinds ahead, and what to do to mitigate their effect.
Layoffs May Happen
We’ll start with the hardest truth: if there is a recession, more employees might find themselves unexpectedly on the market as companies make the difficult decision to downsize staff.
For anyone on the employer’s side of the table, this can be the most difficult business decision to make, and even more so to communicate to the affected employee. If you’re involved in the decision, this is a good time to get creative. There is some research suggesting that companies who find other ways to deal with downturns do better in the long run. If layoffs are necessary, however, it’s important to be as compassionate as possible. If there is a recession at all, it won’t last forever, and in time, companies will once again be fighting to hire the best. When the rebound comes, the companies who will win that fight will be those that did everything they could to avoid letting employees go, and where they couldn’t, treated those affected employees with respect and compassion. If this happens in your company, remember that in addition to more formal outplacement services, recruitment partners can be one resource to offer employees for support and assistance in a job search.
For employees, possibly the most important thing to remember is that being made redundant isn’t the end of a career. It’s only the end of one part of it. There are many cases, in fact, where people have looked back on a layoff as the best thing that happened to them. In these cases, it led to a new opportunity that took them further than they could ever have gone with the company who let them go. Of course, it’s very difficult to remember this (or at least feel it) at the moment. That’s why this is a great time to focus on the value you bring to your job and to your employer. Think about it, make notes to yourself about it, quantify it. Look back for emails praising your performance, and thanking you for jobs well done. This serves two purposes. First of all, it’s important to maintain confidence in uncertain times, and there’s no better way to do that than to remind yourself how good you actually are. And second, being able to understand and articulate your value is a good way to protect the job security you have now, and to compete for your next job if necessary.
More Candidates, More Competition
The flip side of the layoff coin, of course, is that in a recession, there are more candidates on the market looking for work. This has implications for both the job seeker and the employer.
For job seekers, there’s almost never an absence of competition. In a slowed labour market, however, the nature of that competition changes. There is the possibility of going up against a greater number of candidates, of course. But the other candidates might also have different experience (if more experienced people find themselves on the market), or have different compensation expectations than they’ve had in a more heated market. This is why taking time now to focus on your value as an employee is important. Recruiters can help with this – we’ll talk more about that in a moment.
For employers who have become accustomed to having few candidates for vacancies, a recession would bring a change to that, too. A downturn could mean a significant increase in the number of applicants, an increase that might not necessarily reflect an increase in the number of qualified applicants. While most companies see the value in working with recruitment firms in a tight market for talent, smart companies also see the benefits of continuing to work with recruiters in a slowdown. Recruiters can help manage the volume of applicants, allowing you to focus on other responsibilities, while also protecting your employer brand by keeping the lines of communication open with potential future candidates. One final note for employers: rightly or wrongly, in an overheated employment market, we can develop preconceived ideas about active versus passive candidates. Be aware that these biases may exist, and ensure your team is ready to assess active – perhaps unemployed – candidates in the same way as passive or recruited candidates.
What to Do Now
Whether you think of yourself more as a job seeker or an employer, the most important thing to do right now is ... keep calm. There are a great many moving pieces right now in the world, and it’s understandable that there’s some uncertainty and caution with respect to the economic future. But a recession can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Don’t let the headlines stop you from investing in yourself as an individual, and in your company’s future.
As employers, there are a few things you can do to ensure that you’re well-positioned for whatever is ahead. Over the past few years, to keep up with demand, you may have found yourself working with a larger number of recruitment firms. In the ways mentioned above, now is a great time to deepen relationships with a smaller number of those partners. Lean on them for the support they can offer you, and – if the pace slows – use that time to build a stronger foundation and partnership with them. Additionally, this may be the right time to take another look at your hiring processes, and iron out any wrinkles that could hold you back in the future. It’s tough to do that when the pace of hiring is what we’ve seen over the past few years. If the pace becomes more reasonable, it allows you to look at each stage in the process and streamline it so that it’s as efficient as it can be when we’re at full speed again.
If you’re reading this more from the perspective of an employee (or a possible job seeker), remember that even if there is a recession, job changes still happen. Companies still hire when the market slows, so don’t shut the doors to opportunity. On the contrary, this is a good time to keep your finger on the pulse of your network. If you’re on LinkedIn, update your profile and give it a polish, and – if time allows – dip your toe into relevant groups and discussions to stay visible. Touch base with recruiters who’ve been in contact with you over the past few years. Even if you’re not actively looking, let them know you’re open to staying in touch. This is also a time to ‘sharpen the saw’; to get your tools in shape before you need them. Take a fresh look at your resume, and make sure it represents you the way you want it to. Interviewing is a learned skill that improves with practice, and speculative or informational interviews are a great way to do that. The latter two are ways that recruiters in your network can be of help with – another good reason to keep those connections fresh.
Key Takeaways
Nobody knows for certain what the future holds – economic or otherwise. Yes, there has been some widely-publicized bad news (in some corners of the tech sector in particular), but the chatter about the possibility of broader recession may be premature.
So first, don’t panic. Don’t allow the daily headlines to pull your thinking too far in any one direction.
Then, in the meantime, bolster the foundations. As an employee, take time to understand your value proposition, make sure the ways you communicate that value are in tip-top shape, and keep your network strong and active. As an employer, think about the strategies you’d put in place to mitigate the effects of a possible slowdown, to ensure that if there is one, your employer brand emerges stronger than ever. The best part? Doing these things is beneficial, no matter the economic climate. So if the doomsayers are wrong – as they often are – you’ll still be in a stronger position than if you hadn’t done a thing.
5 Ways to Keep Your Recruitment Consultancy Working at their Best
Recruiting is difficult, we all know that. Naturally then, it can make a lot of sense for a company to engage outside assistance and support from a recruitment consultancy. These firms work hard to bring the best candidates forward for your open positions, helping you hire the talent you need.
There are several misconceptions out there about how to best work with these firms, though, so we’ve prepared this helpful article to dispel some of those misconceptions. Below are five ways you can make sure your recruitment consultancy is working at their best.
Keep Them on their Toes
If you really want your firm to be working their hardest, the keyword is competition. If you treat them as a partner to your business, there’s just too great a chance they’ll become lazy and complacent.
It’s important, then, to engage as many firms as possible for each vacancy. Sure, there’s a chance that they’ll trip over each other in their efforts, talking to some of the same candidates over and over again. That’s fine, it will remind them that they need to work a bit harder than the others. And in any case, it’s a very small price to pay for the possibility that one of them might find a candidate that the others don’t.
Speaking of finding candidates, don’t let up on your own recruitment efforts, either! Make sure your internal staff are turning over every stone in their own network in search of qualified candidates for those same vacancies. Sometimes, you can beat the recruiters at their own game – finding the right candidate before them so you don’t have to pay them anything. What a great way to save on your budget! And the recruiters? They’ll realise that they’ll just have to work a bit harder and faster next time.
Keep Them at a Distance
On a somewhat related note, it’s helpful to keep recruitment firms mindful of their place in the world, keeping them at arm’s length from your business. You don’t want to let them get too close, or they may start acting like a partner rather than a vendor.
One great way of creating this barrier is to ensure there’s never any direct communication between the recruiter and the hiring manager, or any of the other staff that the vacant position would interact with. No matter what anyone says, recruiters don’t really need to get a firsthand sense for personalities or management styles. That sort of thing isn’t helpful at all when assessing a candidate’s fit for a position. Similarly, there’s never a good reason to invite a recruiter to visit your workplace; anything they would need to know about the culture and environment, they can get from you or from your website.
Don’t Show Your Cards
Information, as the saying goes, is power. You certainly don’t want to give a recruiter too much power, so don’t give them too much information.
You can put this strategy in place right at the very beginning of a search assignment. Share the basics about the position with the recruiter, of course, but make sure to hold a few key pieces of information back. If you’ve got a bit of flexibility on the salary range, or if some of the candidate attributes are ‘nice-to-haves’ rather than ‘must-haves’, there’s really no need for them to know that. Maybe there’s a possibility for the new hire to be promoted fairly quickly because their manager is moving up, but that’ll just make for a great surprise when it happens. Oh, and don’t just withhold the positive things, either. If there have been some challenging dynamics on the team, perhaps some turnover, you’d certainly never want to let on about things like that.
Later in the hiring process, when candidates are being interviewed, you’ll almost certainly have recruiters asking for feedback on the candidates they’ve put forward. They’ll ask all sorts of questions: why you liked this one, and what specifically you didn’t like about that one. How pushy! All the recruiter needs to know is whether their candidate will be coming back for another interview or not. Anything else, frankly, is just nobody’s business but your own, and a distraction from their work.
Play Hard to Get
A recruiter should always understand and appreciate how busy you are, and one way to accomplish this is to make sure that it’s as difficult as possible to reach you. That’s getting tougher, in this hyper-connected world that makes it possible to contact you by phone, email, and even text messages. A good rule of thumb is to let at least one full business day pass before returning one of their messages; two days is even better. If the recruiter follows a message with another one before you’ve gotten back to them, you can feel free to start the count again. How else will they learn patience?
This becomes doubly important when it comes to scheduling interviews with candidates. Now, there are two people who must understand how busy your schedule is, so it becomes even more important to show how limited your availability is. If there’s an interview to be scheduled, for example, never provide more than one possible interview time for any given work week. Naturally, the more people involved in the interview, the more complex this process should become, but the calculation is simple. If there are two interviewers, there should only be one available time slot offered for any given two-week period. Three weeks for three interviewers, and so forth.
Make Them Work for It
Although we talk about recruitment as being complex and difficult, all recruitment consultants are really doing are finding people for you to interview and hire. That being the case, it’s understood – even expected! – that the process shouldn’t be an easy one.
A good first step is to make your hiring process as long and cumbersome as possible. Arrange for there to be as many interviews as you can. Six is a good number to start with, but in some cases, eight or even ten interviews isn’t out of the question. You’ll almost certainly have candidates drop out of the process, either because they’re not willing to interview that many times (the nerve!), or because they’ve accepted an offer from another company. Your recruitment consultant will understand that this is natural; it’s all part of the selection process.
Of course, interviews aren’t the only way to keep your recruiter and their candidates hopping. There are any number of tests and assessments that can be assigned at any stage of the hiring process, whether they’re directly related to the job, or only barely. It can be especially instructive to assign lengthy and challenging tests very early on, even before a first interview. If a candidate isn’t willing to participate, to devote a few hours to the hiring process before they’ve come in for an interview, how committed are they, really? This is a fantastic way of weeding out people who probably weren’t that interested anyway.
Naturally, according to the ‘don’t show your cards’ principle as outlined above, you won’t tell the recruiter ahead of time how many interviews you’re planning for, or what sorts of tests and assessments you’ll be assigning. They’ll find out when they need to know.
Of course, at some point in this process, you’ll reach the final stages with a candidate who would be a great fit for the job. Someone who has all the experience and skills you’re looking for, who would work well with the manager and the rest of the team, and whose salary expectations are a match. It’s very tempting at this point for hiring companies to become singularly focused on that one candidate and jump right to extending an offer. Don’t let this happen to you – you never know who else might be out there!
No matter how excellent the candidate you’re considering hiring, and no matter how many candidates your recruitment consultancy has presented, always ask to see just a few more. Your recruiter will appreciate your diligence, and will enjoy the challenge. And naturally, the candidate you could hire will wait for you to make a final decision. At least, they will if they really wanted to work for your company to begin with.
Final Thoughts
We hope you’ve enjoyed reading this bit of satirical fun, and that you’ve had a few smiles along the way. The advice above is, of course, everything that a company shouldn’t do when working with a recruitment consultancy. Maybe we missed a few, though. What’s your best piece of (bad) advice?
Recruiters and You: How To Make a Great Partnership Work!
Whether you’re in the market for a job (actively or otherwise), or a company hoping to hire great people, working with a recruiter can be an important piece of the puzzle. In one of my recent blogs, I talked about how to select a good partner if you’re a company looking for assistance with your recruiting. But what happens then?
Just as with any other professional, the way in which you work with a recruiter can lead to either a great experience … or one that’s not so great. Below, you’ll find some tips for working effectively with recruiters, to help make the experience as good as it can be. And yes, this may seem self-serving, but a great working relationship really is mutually beneficial. Whether working with me or one of my industry colleagues, I want you to have the best experience possible.
A Partnership Approach
A great working relationship starts with a mindset of partnership. Partners look for ways to make each other's lives easier. I try to do that, for my clients and also for the candidates I represent. And of course, I appreciate it when they do the same for me.
For job seekers, this means simple things like making sure your resume is easy for me to organise and send to clients. Save documents in common file types, like .doc and .pdf, and include your name in the filename. Be as accommodating as you can when it comes to scheduling interviews. I know you’re busy, but coordinating multiple calendars is a tricky part of my work, and I promise I’m not trying to make it difficult for you. Following up with me for updates is okay, but not too often. Remember that you’re one of many people I’m trying to keep up to date. I promise that if I have news for you, I’ll get in touch. One last thing: when you’re in the business of people, as I am, connections - referrals to people looking for a new challenge, or looking for new employees - are always appreciated.
If you’re an employer working with a recruiter, you may have found that we ask a lot of very detailed questions. This helps us define the role, giving us the best chance of a successful outcome. So be patient with our questions, and as detailed as you can with your answers. More information is always better than less. Similarly, be open to feedback I might offer. My work in the marketplace gives me a broad perspective, a perspective that allows me to offer insights and information on things like compensation ranges, and labour market trends. I’ll close by saying that there are some people out there - no one reading this, I’m sure - that behave as if they’re competing with recruiters. Working with your recruiter, rather than against them, will produce a much better result.
Communication and Responsiveness
Things can move very quickly in the middle of a hiring process, especially when it comes to interviews and offers (and especially given today’s market conditions). My work puts me square in the midst of that flurry of activity, doing my best to juggle schedules and information between any number of people. Whether you’re hiring or being hired, open lines of communication and quick responses help me to help you.
Be as available as you can - by phone, email, or text - and respond as quickly as you can when you’re not available. Whether we’re nailing down a time and place for an interview, clarifying an important piece of information, or getting an extra question answered, being as responsive as possible will make all our lives easier.
Transparency and Honesty
When I’m representing you as a candidate, the more I know, the better I can help you. Your compensation range, for example: what are you hoping for, and what is your bottom line? Are there things just as important - or more so - than salary? Perhaps there’s something in your work history that you’re concerned about. Don’t hide it; tell me and we can talk through how to handle it. If you’ve gone to an interview I’ve set up, be honest and open with me about how it went, and about your interest level. If something changes midstream - meaning that you may not take a position we’ve been talking about - please don’t keep it from me. I’d prefer to get bad news earlier, rather than a surprise later.
This kind of transparency is just as important on the client side; again, the more I know, the better I can help. If a candidate I’ve presented isn’t the right fit, it’s not going to hurt my feelings to hear that, it’s going to help me be clearer about the kind of candidate who would be. Letting me know who’s in and out of the running promptly lets me pass that on to the candidates. Being the bearer of bad news isn’t fun, but it’s a big part of my role, and it protects your employer brand - and mine, too. Things often change during a hiring process - people change, expectations change, delays happen. When and if these kinds of changes happen, the sooner I know, the sooner I can adapt and provide the best support to you.
Come to the table as a partner, be as responsive as you can, and as open and transparent as possible. I’ll do the same, of course, and - to paraphrase Casablanca’s Rick - this could be the beginning of a beautiful working relationship.
Choosing the Right Partner
Choosing the right recruitment agency to work with is a critical business decision. Now more so than ever. Recruiting is more difficult now than it has been, in recent memory at least. You need the right talent on your team, and that starts with the right partner helping you to identify and attract them. But it’s more than just that. The firm you choose are your ‘ambassadors’ - they’re the ones carrying your employer brand to the talent you’re hoping to hire. The wrong choice in a partner can do real harm.
The recruiting industry is a competitive and crowded one. With so many options, how can you be sure you’re choosing the right one? Below, you’ll find five key points to consider, and some ways to determine whether the firm you’re considering is a fit.
Structure
There are several ways in which recruitment firms differ structurally from each other. Some - especially executive search firms - work on a retained basis. Many firms work on a strictly contingent basis. Others are a hybrid, charging a portion of the fee upfront, and the balance on a successful placement. Naturally, any fee paid upfront implies exclusivity on the search assignment, but some firms still look for an exclusive relationship even on a contingency basis. Consider all the various options that exist, and weigh the pros and cons of each approach. On some points (particularly the question of whether a portion of the fee can be paid upfront), it may be important to make the decision first, because that decision may narrow your field of options.
Reach
One of the most important factors in a recruitment firm’s ability to provide the results you’re looking for is their reach. Reach, in this case, might have several meanings. One type of reach is the firm’s candidate pool. Do they specialise in a particular kind of field or capability, going deep into a relatively narrow candidate pool that has a common skill set or industry? Or do they cast a broader net, providing access to a broad spectrum of candidates from diverse backgrounds? Geography is also an important consideration, especially these days. If your organisation needs people working on site, then clearly a knowledge of talent local to that area is an important factor. But with remote and hybrid work arrangements becoming increasingly common, a geographic concentration may be less important to you - perhaps not important at all.
Services
Before engaging a firm, you should expect to have a very clear understanding of the service that you’ll receive through the project. Does the firm primarily focus on inbound recruiting, searching their database of existing candidates, and posting jobs on their website and other platforms to attract others? If so, where do they post and what results have they seen from those outreach efforts? Does the firm also conduct outbound recruiting, and more aggressive sourcing of candidates? If so, where do they source, and how do they approach potential candidates? How do they vet and shortlist candidates? Assuming they interview candidates, ask about their interview techniques - the questions they ask, and how they determine fit. When it comes time to select a final candidate and make an offer, what support does the firm offer to you at that stage? All of these are fair questions to ask, and the answers will help you determine whether the firms you’re considering offer the scope of service you’re looking for. On a related note, the varying service levels provided by different firms also correlate to the price variation you may see in the market. If cost is a consideration, you might be able to save some money by working with a firm that doesn’t provide a full slate of services. Alternatively, if you’re able to invest more, you can generally expect a very comprehensive service that takes much of the work off your plate.
Quality
As with any service (in contrast with a product), it’s sometimes difficult to get a read on quality before working with a provider. There are a few objective ways to approach this, though. Review service agreements and contracts carefully. Make sure that these match what you’ve been told verbally. Pay particularly close attention to guarantees that can protect your investment if a placement doesn’t work out. References are another helpful indicator. A firm should be able to provide several references that can speak to the service they’ve received.
There are also some subjective ways to evaluate a prospective service. In particular, ask about messaging. The way a recruiter describes your company may form a candidate’s first impression. How would they describe your company? What do they see as the unique value proposition you offer potential candidates? If a highly desirable candidate is on the fence, how would they approach the need to ‘sell’ them?
Relationships
The final consideration is arguably the most important. Business is all about relationships. The relationship you have with the person supporting your recruitment efforts is one of the most important.
The quality of communication in this relationship, especially, will determine how successful the outcome is. At the outset of any project, there should be open and honest communication. You should feel able to be completely open about factors that might affect the search - challenges, for example, that the successful candidate will face when they start in their new position. Similarly, the recruiter should be able to be honest with you about issues they anticipate - for instance, offering guidance on whether the compensation package is competitive given the current market. If your relationship with a prospective recruiter doesn’t provide for that level of openness and honesty, you may want to reconsider. As you embark on any recruitment project, there will be successes , and there will also be challenges (hopefully more of the former than the latter). A healthy and constructive working relationship will carry you through all of that, and provide the best chance of a successful outcome.
We’re proud to work with the clients we have, because we know they’ve taken the time to evaluate the service we provide, to make sure we’re a good fit for each other. In turn, we’ve been able to develop great working relationships with them; collaborative relationships that allow us to be successful in supporting their talent acquisition efforts.
Testing, testing .. 1, 2, 3: Are assessments a useful addition to the recruiting process?
Candidate assessment tools have been used for many years by recruiting firms and hiring companies alike to – in theory – introduce some scientific objectivity to the otherwise highly subjective process of determining whether someone would be a good fit for a job and for the team or company. Their promise is an appealing one, to be sure. Who wouldn’t want a ‘crystal ball’ to take away the guesswork? One that could predict whether a prospective hire will work well with the rest of the team, whether they have a leadership style that will fit well into the organisation, and whether they’re likely to be a high performer in the long run?
So, are they worth it? The right assessment, used correctly, certainly can be.
Let’s start with technical assessments; they’re a clearer choice. If there are specific technical skills that a candidate requires to be successful in a position, a well-designed technical assessment can help assess those skills. Naturally, this shouldn’t be done instead of the appropriate questioning during an interview, but rather in addition to it. The caveat with technical assessments is to determine whether they’re really necessary for that specific case or not. They shouldn’t be done just for the sake of doing them; neither should they all be the same. Ideally, a technical assessment should be customised to each specific position (rather than a standard assessment for each new hire), and should test only skills that are necessary for that position.
The question of whether to use personality and soft skill assessments is more complicated. As with any product or service, there are good assessment tools and bad, and some are better for some situations than others. The science behind these assessments has evolved over the years, and the tools available now are far more robust than those available even a decade ago. If you do plan to incorporate them into your hiring process, there are a lot to choose from, and it makes sense to shop around and ensure that the product you select is the best for your specific circumstances.
The other question – an equally important one – is how a company puts these products to use.
No assessment tool can, or should, ever replace human decision making in the hiring process. No software algorithm can reliably predict an uncertain future. Aren’t people liable to make mistakes, though? Sure, of course. Humans are fallible. But so is technology. A software program is no more or less error prone than people who are using solid interview techniques, plus good judgement and reasoning skills, in a well-structured hiring process. Putting the human and technological elements to work together can be highly effective.
People are most likely to make errors resulting from subjectivity. Simply put, we tend to want to hire people that we like. If someone is friendly and engaging, and builds rapport quickly, we tend to see them through rose-coloured glasses. We exaggerate points in favour of their candidacy, and overlook things we shouldn’t. A robust selection process mitigates this bias by using well-designed questioning techniques, applied consistently, to get as close as possible to comparing ‘apples to apples’ when shortlisting and selecting final candidates. Incorporating assessments into the process can counter that human subjectivity further, giving us the reason and the opportunity to examine some of the decisions we’re making.
Along the same lines, assessments can help mitigate some of these biases for organisations that make DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) a priority in hiring. The objectivity of assessments - good ones, used well - can help to level the playing field, and advance candidates who don’t necessarily fit a particular mould.
As with many things in life and work, timing is everything. There’s a trend towards companies incorporating assessments in the very early stages of the hiring process. Some even require a candidate to complete an assessment in order to apply. This is wrong, because it’s actually counterproductive. Companies who do this see it as a filtering step - one that weeds candidates out, shortening the list to be considered. They’re right, but the candidates being filtered out, in most cases, are the wrong ones. A good candidate is a professional who knows the value of their time, and they want to be treated with respect in the hiring process. The vast majority of these candidates will abandon an application process that includes a required assessment.
Where these tools really shine is when they’re put to use in the latter stages of the hiring process. Here, they can unearth useful, objective, and data-driven insights that may not have surfaced in the interviews. Generally, no assessment report should be an immediate and automatic deal-breaker, immediately ruling a candidate out. Instead, they should point towards additional probing questions that can be asked in final interviews. These questions will be unique to each candidate, and the answers can help hiring decision-makers make better – and still human – decisions.
(It should be acknowledged that in an increasingly litigious labour law environment, it can be helpful in some cases to have the objectivity that these assessments provide, in order to defend hiring decisions when necessary. That said, the assessments should still complement, rather than replace, the decision-making of the people involved.)
One final note on the reports that are generated from assessments like these. Smart organisations use them long after the day an employee first starts working with them. The insights and information the best of these programs provide can help you align your new hire with the right team, the support they need, and the kind of leadership that will result in the highest level of performance and job satisfaction possible.
Algorithms will never take the human touch out of human resources, nor should they. Whether you already use a tool to assess candidates, or are thinking about starting, we’re happy to work with you to ensure that a well-structured hiring process complements – and makes the most of – the insights and information you receive.
From the Trenches: When Cheap is the Costliest Option of All
For any product or service that one can buy, there are several levels of cost and quality to choose from. In our lives outside work, we’re generally not surprised to get what we pay for. We don’t expect luxury car quality, options, and durability, for example, from an entry-level vehicle. In the world of business, however, it’s fairly common to choose the lowest bid. Is that always the smart choice?
We’ll come back to that question, but with your indulgence, there are a few stories from just the last few months that I’d like to share with you.
The first concerns a fairly common situation for us: a ‘needle in a haystack’ assignment, in which the client was looking for a candidate with several skills and experiences that are quite rare. The difference in this case is that when they came to us, the client had already been trying to recruit for this position for upwards of two months, working with a different firm. The new hire they were looking for wouldn’t be just an additional resource, they would be a central figure in several lines of business. That being the case, in those two months, the company had pushed back two critical projects and completely shelved a third. This ongoing situation had already cost the company significant revenue, so when we began discussions, the need was urgent to say the least.
We jumped into action right away, and I’m very happy to report that - with some very creative sourcing and fortuitous timing - we were fairly quickly able to identify two candidates that had the capabilities and experience we were looking for. Both progressed through the interviews, and one accepted the company’s offer at the beginning of March. (At the culmination of the search, the client had still never received a single qualified candidate from the first firm.)
The second instance concerns a different company, a relatively new client for us. This company had been working with another recruiting firm for a year or two, and had hired a handful of candidates through them. Overall, they were fairly happy with the service. At least, they had been, until one day when a senior member of their engineering staff submitted her resignation. She mentioned in passing that she had been connected with the opportunity through that recruitment firm; the same one they’d been using to hire candidates.
To be fair, there was never a written agreement in place preventing the firm from representing candidates from the client company. That said, the company felt that it was a breach of ethics for them to have approached their former staff person. We agree, and based on what we’ve heard, it’s unlikely the company will be working with that recruitment firm again anytime soon.
The last of the three stories is a bit more complicated. The company in this case has been a client of ours since the start of Excelsis. Someone in the company had thought it a good idea to broaden their supplier network - an absolutely fair decision, and we certainly don’t have an issue with competition. Ultimately, they hired a candidate from another firm. That candidate, however, didn’t stay. Only a month after starting in the job, they were recruited away to a different company. The firm had offered a guarantee, and our client went back to them, looking for them to provide a replacement as per the terms of that guarantee.
That was nearly three months ago. In several conversations with the client, they’ve been understandably frustrated. To be fair, a recruitment is never easy, but - in their view - the original firm’s heart just doesn’t seem to be in it. Our client feels somewhat ‘trapped’: they need the position filled, but feel locked in to filling it with the candidate they’re promised under the guarantee.
Working with the client, we came up with a solution to mitigate their risk. There was a vacancy coming up in a team adjacent to the one with the open position. We developed a position description that - should the other firm be successful in the replacement - would allow a new hire to fit well into the position that was coming up. If the replacement took much longer, however, candidates we identified could also be considered for that original role. At this point, we still don’t know for certain which role the successful candidate will ultimately fill. The candidates we’ve identified are in their final stages of the interview process for the new position, and the original one - the job for which a replacement is owed - still hasn’t been filled.
A Few Wins: Success Stories from the Trenches
We’ve said this here before, and we’ll say it again: the current labour market is a very complex one. If you’re involved in recruiting and hiring people, you know this is the case. We’re in the market every single day, and we wanted to share some stories from our recent work that illustrate just how challenging the market for talent is right now.
In the first instance, our client was seeking a highly specialised set of skills and experience. In our consultation with the client, they warned us that there were very few people within a reasonable geographic distance - even beyond - that had the experience they were looking for. We’re not afraid of a challenge, and we’re accustomed to projects requiring highly targeted sourcing, but this project took that to a new level.
We embarked on the search, and - to make a long story somewhat shorter - we were successful in identifying several candidates who qualified for consideration. The job wasn’t done, however. Finding qualified candidates was only half the battle; we then had to secure their interest. In several cases, this simply wasn’t possible. One excellent candidate, for example, lived too far to commute and for family reasons couldn’t consider relocating. The candidate who was ultimately hired, in fact, turned us down the first time we spoke. She was very happy in her current job, and in fact was soon to be promoted. It took three separate conversations with her, nurturing and building a relationship over time, to encourage her to consider the role and agree to interview. The key was understanding that, even more than a promotion, she really wanted the kind of learning opportunities that our client offered. She’s been in her new role for a little over a month, and because of her performance to date, she’s already been approved for a course she was hoping to take.
The second situation is a study in contrast with the first. Is it possible to have too many candidates? Our client was seeking a supervisor who had a fairly common managerial skill set … with one exception. They required someone who came from a very particular kind of work environment. We can’t get much more specific without identifying the company, but suffice it to say that the candidate required proficiency with a certain kind of technology. Without it, the learning curve would simply have been too steep.
The phrase ‘needle in a haystack’ doesn’t quite cover our work on this project. Our team reviewed potential candidates numbering into the thousands, diving deep into our existing network and aggressively sourcing to find a selection of candidates who had the technical experience our client was looking for. The story has a happy ending: our client’s offer was accepted last week, and their newest employee is excited to start. Our client is thrilled too; they know just how much time we saved their team.
The final story we’ll relate here began with a recruitment assignment that was relatively straightforward. It was at the end where the story took a turn that could have left our client in a pinch. At the end of the interview process, their chosen candidate was the only one that they truly wanted to hire. You can imagine their alarm, then, when that candidate was made a very generous counter-offer by their current employer. It wasn’t too surprising; he had been with the company for nearly ten years, had accumulated a lot of highly valued corporate memory, and was a key player on several teams. Naturally, they didn’t want to lose him.
We weren’t surprised. That’s why we had spoken with him about the prospect of a counter-offer, long before it happened, just as we do with all our shortlisted candidates. We had talked through the pros and cons of accepting such an offer. Even still, the offer he received was generous enough that it caused him a moment of indecision. We revisited our earlier discussion with him, however, and we’re happy to report that within the day he signed our (very relieved!) client’s offer.
It’s a strange time to be in the trenches. Recruiting and hiring has never been easy, but we’d wager that it’s never been as difficult and complex as it is right now. We know a lot of you are facing these same kinds of challenges. Stay strong, and get in touch if we can be of help.
Talent Magnet: Retaining the Best
When recruitment is your business, as it is ours, there’s one question that’s central to every conversation we have with our clients: How can we attract the very best candidates for every position?
Our work gives us uniquely valuable insight into this question. Speaking with people every day about changing jobs, we hear why some want to leave their current employer, or why others choose to stay. We also hear what they’re looking for in their next company and job; the things that will attract and keep them performing at their best.
All this leads to one fundamental conclusion: attracting top talent begins with retaining the best.
It makes sense to approach this from the inside out: if a company can’t retain great employees, it won’t be able to recruit great employees either. This was always true, but it’s even more so now. Between social media generally, and employer-rating sites (like Glassdoor) specifically, word gets around more quickly and broadly than ever. This is great for transparency, but it puts more pressure on employers to make sure that the experience they offer their employees is a good one.
When considering this question, it’s tempting to jump to ‘culture’. It’s true that corporate culture is part of the equation, but it’s a bit of a red herring for several reasons. First, it’s subjective: what constitutes a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ culture varies from employee to employee. Secondly, because culture is something that management can influence, but not control or create. Culture develops organically within an organisation as a result of day-to-day actions and decisions. Below are the five most controllable elements that influence culture, and can create a great employee experience that retains - and attracts - top performing employees.
Compensation
Compensation and benefits are fundamental to employee satisfaction. This is the main reason most employees work in the first place. Not every company can match the highest salaries in the market, and the good news is that no company needs to. Money isn’t usually the primary factor an employee considers when choosing to take a new job. To successfully recruit great employees, companies just have to be competitive. Above the median range for comparable positions, and offering decent benefits. These benefits can have monetary value like healthcare coverage or training stipends. Increasingly, non-monetary benefits like flex time and the ability to work from home are equally valuable to many employees (and accessible even to organisations with limited budgets).
Communication
One hallmark of companies that attract and retain the best employees is the quality of communication throughout the organisation. Highly engaged employees want to know that they can speak openly about opportunities and challenges they see around them, and they want to know they’ll be heard. Top performers also generally seek out more information about their own performance. Annual performance reviews may still be a necessary formality, but great companies - and the managers in them - know that ongoing dialogue is necessary to keep their best employees fully engaged.
Trust and Respect
These attributes are flip sides of the same coin. The best employees choose employers who trust them to do their work, and who show respect for them. Micromanagement is the fastest way to undermine trust and respect. Instead, great companies foster an environment in which performance is measured by clear expectations and results, and employees are trusted – and held accountable – to deliver those results. Great companies also show respect for results through frequent recognition. Bonuses and other perks can be part of the picture, but more often it comes down to simple acknowledgement. Whether verbally or in writing, public or one-to-one, a sincere ‘excellent work, thank you’ carries immense value for employees.
Opportunity to Perform
Getting the right people ‘on the bus’ is half of the job. The other half is making sure those people are in the right seats. Top performing employees seek out roles where they have the chance to do their best work every day, and to get even better over time. Great companies provide them with this opportunity. They consider the skills and strengths of their current and prospective employees, and they take advantage of opportunities to allow them to stretch the boundaries of their role and responsibilities. In doing so, they provide the opportunity for their employees to learn, grow, and develop their knowledge and abilities further.
Connection to Mission
No matter the level of organisation they’re at, great employees aren’t generally satisfied with being a ‘cog in the machine’. They want to know how their work connects to the bigger picture. Great companies, and the managers within them, make this connection clear to their people. They’re always looking for opportunities to show how each person’s daily tasks contribute to the mission and purpose of the organisation, helping to move it forward and achieve its goals.
If you’re not already doing so, it pays to keep your fingers on the pulse of employee satisfaction and engagement. This can be done through well-designed surveys (the Gallup Q12, for example), and also by monitoring what people are saying about your organisation – on Glassdoor, if nowhere else. Looking at sources of information like this can provide helpful direction about ways in which you can take your employee experience from good to great, and retain your very best.