Thursday, September 29, 2011

A graduate’s first job – who benefits most?


Welcome to this week’sDiscuss HR, the HR blog written by members of Human Resources UK.

Well this week the grouphas been discussing HR like no other week. Today’s article comes hot on the heels of yesterday’s networking eventsin London and Bristol and will shortly be followed by tonight’s event inBirmingham. By the end of today over 100 of our members will have met! So,thank you to all of you who attended.

Today’s article is anexceptionally relevant piece due to the current state of the recruitmentmarket.  It is rare that a week goes bywithout further figures highlighting the poor state of the graduate recruitmentmarket.  Today experienced career coachand engagement specialist Paul Goring looks at who is the main beneficiary of agraduate job; the graduate or the employer? (Ed Scrivener)


A graduate’s first job –who benefits most?

So, the recession is badfor the graduate job market we hear; less jobs than ever before (AGR survey2010 says vacancies down by 25%), the average salary seems to have been stuckat £25,000 for a couple of years and the number of graduates competing for eachjob is rising all of the time.

Student debt is puttingincreasing pressure on salary expectations and job security concerns mean thateven where graduates are in work the majority constantly looking for the nextstep in their careers (70% in a recent US survey). We are constantly having ourheart strings tugged by the media and student bodies about how tough it is outthere for new graduates but perhaps we should take some time to ask thecritical question; what about the poor old employers? Admittedly being joblessand having high turnover and poor ROI are very different problems.

I have recruited in the UKand Europe for global financial services and FMCG businesses and graduaterecruitment remains, in my opinion, the toughest recruitment decision toconsistently get right. Why? Well, because in my view, UK graduate candidatesparticularly are still demonstrably undercooked in terms of their employabilityskills and their aspirations.   Also, training demands are typicallyGeneration Y and their global career mobility means picking and keeping theright candidate is getting tougher and tougher.

When recruiting a graduate,one has comparably the least amount of tangible evidence to go on, especiallywhere the essential work experience bit is missing. Plus, one often faces acandidate across the interview table / room who, more often than not, does notreally know what you want, or how to show you that they have it....

Hired 1,200 graduates recently
The large recruiters ofgraduate talent compete, as they always have done, for the top talent with suitablylarge budgets.  They have well grooved employer brand,attraction, selection and retention strategy and are prepared to lose candidatesalong the way to get the people their business needs. The big players know thatthere will be wastage along the way and that their ROI calculation is based onthe number that stay, move into senior roles and thrive. 

My concern is for thesmaller, less frequent, graduate recruiters. If you want to recruit say 1-5graduates a year, if you have a fixed small budget and you are not in The TimesTop 100 Graduate Employers, how do you start and how do you expect to retainyour talent and is it all worth it?

Making an impact with themost brand savvy generation that has ever lived is tough.  Some companies, through genius advertising(PrĂȘt a Manger a few years back) or quirky careers fair strategies, make theconnection but it is really tough to pre-empt and positively answer thequestion ‘who?’ when graduates see your vacancies. Perhaps the brand of theemployer is just as crucial as phone, shoes, clothes and car? 

The relationship betweenrecruiter (employer) and graduate employee has evolved at an alarming pace overthe past 10 years. Just as there is an ongoing desire to achieve the strongestA Level (Highers) results and Degree classification possible, it seems that thefight is now on to obtain employment with the most creditable blue chip companyor household brand company, as quickly as possible, since that seems to bewhere the superficial career kudos lies. The loyalty factor to the firstemployer is receding at a rate which must make the employers question theirexpenditure and look closely at their ROI.

Creating a talentpipe-line is, of course, completely necessary when any business looks at theirstaff demographics, age top heavy senior positions and lowering retirement ages.  But there is no point having a talentpipeline if the talent never reaches its destination or if the pipe-linesprings a leak – that can be an expensive business!

Asking the question ‘whydo we recruit graduates?’ is, I think, key. Taking first job graduates is abrave move.  Yes, you get raw talent and,increasingly, the pick of a very big pool of talent but what do you actually getlong-term from that strategic decision?

I worked for an SME in the90’s and in a conversation with one of the senior managers, in my recruitmentcapacity, I questioned the suitability of a graduate scheme of 12-14 graduatesa year for a company of our size (800/850 staff). His view was simple, pointingat one of the rising stars of the business who was walking across the office,he said, ‘if we have to select, recruit, train, develop and lose 13 of the 14graduates we take on over a two year cycle, if he is the one that we keep and hemakes it, then it is worth it.’

That example comparesneatly, for me, with the emphasis on the ‘what do we get’ review of graduaterecruitment that is now more prevalent especially with many businesses feelingthe pinch of the recession and where every penny being spent is scrutinisedendlessly. Businesses simply can no longer afford to bring in 15 to get onestar and, in fact, more have to realise some tangible return beyond aspeculative investment.

Given the combination of alow retention rate, high training costs, high career aspiration levels andsalary needs, the temptation must be to sit tight and recruit second jobbersonce they have more skills, career focus and sector stability?  But their income expectations will, of course,be higher, there will no doubt be agency costs and no guarantee that you willkeep them.  Every choice seems to be atough one. 

Ernie, the fastest recruiter in the west
I guess that we are allused to the budget review process that inevitably makes us question ourstrategies, results and whether the metrics we employ to measure successactually gives us more than a simple set of statistics.  We are, as recruiters, resourcers and HRprofessionals forced to reflect on the way that we do things and question ifthere is another way and, as a result, I think increasingly the graduate marketis becoming a different place. 

Perhaps the next keyquestion is what do we want / need to get from our graduates and what do theyexpect / need to get from us? I regularly lecture at my local University on theconcept of employability and graduate recruitment. One of the best ways to getto the crux of the issue quickly with the final year students who attend is towrite on the white board, ‘What do Employers Want’ and ‘What do We Want’ withreference to their careers and especially to their first graduate job, then askingthem to construct the two lists.

When, at the end of the session,the group realises, often with great surprise and concern, that few if any ofthe entries appear on both lists, they then know that we/they have a problem.  Perhaps some of us as graduate recruiters /employers should do the same exercise to hammer home the reality of the situation. If one party wants marriage and theother a short fling, someone will get hurt.

There used to be a realcache about having a graduate scheme and many employers in the 80’s and 90’sfenced off budget, invested in elaborate training programmes and involvedsenior management figures to help nurture the talent but it seems, from where Isit, that the market is now very much bipartite.

The elite employers andstudents continue with their courtship but the rest of the market are having tofocus much more on matching not just skills and potential but also price, askingthemselves ‘how much to train and retain’ and then crucially ‘is it worth it?’

About the author
Paul was the Recruitment Manager at EndsleighInsurance until 2007 when he moved to Paris for two years and became theexternal consultant on AXA Insurances' Global Talent Acquisition StrategyReview Team which led to extensive Generation Y, Employer Brand, candidateengagement and career event research across Europe. In 2009 Paul returned tothe UK and founded Consortio Recruitment Solutions Limited, which he is atpains to emphasise is not an agency! Primarily they are focused onhelping businesses find and keep talented people through process review,employer branding focus and management skills training. Consortio are alsoactive in the FE and HE market, helping improve student employabilityskills. Paul also heads up another business, The Brand Button, this is aworkshop & training based business focusing on personal, business andcareer development through personal branding. Paul is a member of theAssociation of Graduate Recruiters, the Institute of Recruitment Professionalsand is also qualified with the British Psychological Society to Level B int.

*****

DiscussHR is the blog for Human Resources UK, the leading LinkedIngroup for those involved with HR in the UK. Next week’s Discuss HR will be published on Thursday 6thOctober and will be written by Leadership Coach Dorothy Nesbitt.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Narcolepsy


It seems like its official. I cant find Red Ice Creation's live stuff on Youtube any longer. Around the year of '08 they started doing these live shows where guest would use visual aids. Jake Kotze did this specific one about all things JC. I can understand how it can get over looked on such a new forum and am sad that I can't review it now. I do however remember somethings about it. And there is the video above expressing J.ennifer C.onnelly's involvement with Mirror's and glass that he, Jake, did around the same time. Her name being JC is fitting with all of the Mirror scenes. One could chose to find the mirror hinting at our understanding of the external world. It's the only image that we get of what our consciousness emanates from. Sense that line of thinking leads to paradox, and a myriad of philosophical questions, the mirror has stood in as a simple symbol to rely the ideas. Story's like Dionysus and Narcissus are ancient examples of this with there exclusive use of reflection and infatuation. These are the topic's of almost every savior story and capitalized by Jennifer's initials, she is Jesus tangled in the material.

Check out g8ors.blogspot.com for more.


Narcissus perhaps comes from the word "Narke" and means "Sleep or numbness". In fact the root is the source of the word Narcotics as well. Above Richard Arrowsmith made a video of an artistic nature that explores these concepts again. Notice the use of mirror's and the re birth themes in The Hulk(with JC) and Avatar(by J.ames C.ameron). Once again savior story's all hold the secret to the meaning of "born again". I also like the accompanying "Dream" theme throughout Richard's video. Requiem for a Dream with Connelly explores the realm of Narcotics with the Dream Theme in the title itself. Interesting Kotze sourced this movie in his interview with Red Ice because here Connelly is seen at Conney Island on the pier, in the movie it is a symbol of the life taken away by the sleep walking world of drugs.Dark City with Connelly sees the same. In this movie, man, as a race, has been highjacked and is stuck in a labyrinth maze of city and dream scapes. The social commentary of the movie is blatant and of course Connelly is found as a goal at the end of a pier, once the bondage is broken... Once the dream is over.Connelly works at a theater in Dark City which promises the movie Book Of Dreams to come soon.D.avid B.owie tries to give Connelly her dreams within the Crystal Balls he tosses around in her earlier film Labyrinth. The Material world again paired with Dark Cities maze symbolism. Bowie appears to Connelly as a Man In Black. A theme that crosses her career in movies like The Day The Earth Stood Still, Beautiful Mind, and of course Dark City. The understanding that Dreams are at the heart of Bowie's intention doesn't deserve to be over looked and in fact he drugs her to sleep to fulfill these dreams and distract her into forgetfulness. She finds herself in a masquerade ball as we explore one of the scenes that Kotze used in his video on JC, for this particular scene ends with shattered glass.Bowie sweeps her off her feet and although this is a kid friendly movie the hint's of sexuality tight rope between subtle and subliminal. This can be associated to an initiation of sorts following secret society history and cults of Dionysus, of the mirror once again. Of course Connelly breaks the illusion and cracks the mirror but the hint of Dream is still present. A waking dream. In Requiem she is not so lucky. Identical scenario however. The individual who leads her to this initiation is one Keith David, of course he is known for showing us a reflection of our world and the ones that lie like dreams just side ways to it.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Know thyself


Welcome to this week’sDiscuss HR, the HR blog written by members of Human Resources UK.

There are many and diversedisciplines of HR, yet one aspect that is common in most is the requirement toidentify strengths and weaknesses in others in order to develop employees anddrive performance.  However, as is commonwith such practices it can be very difficult to turn the tables on yourself.  Today, Jill Hart-Sanderson explores a recent experiencewhich illustrated her strengths and led her to make a major decision. (Ed Scrivener)


Knowthyself

Finding your strengths
Whatis the secret to success? Now there’s something to ponder! What makes somepeople so successful at what they do, whilst others strive for something, butnever quite get there? Do you recognise your talents or are you concentratingon the things you are not good at, and need to improve?

Byswitching our efforts to our natural talents rather than focussing ourweaknesses we may just find the success we crave. By using skills, knowledgeand practice it is possible to improve, but when this is used in an area inwhich you have natural talent the improvement is much more dramatic. This canbe summed up in the following formula*:

talent (a natural way ofthinking, feeling or behaving)

 X 

investment (time spent practicing, developing yourskills, and building your knowledge base)

 = 

strength (the ability to consistently providenear-perfect performance)

Itcan be very difficult to look at yourself objectively and ask ‘what are mynatural talents’? In the quest to find this out for myself, I recently did theStrengthsFinder online assessment. There are countless assessments and testsout there, and no - I’m not working on commission, but I found the results impressive.By replying to some obscure questions I discovered my talents which included:

  • Lovingthe challenge of meeting new people and winning them over; derivingsatisfaction from breaking the ice and making a connection with another person 
  • Beingintrigued with the unique qualities of each person 
  • Havingthe ability to think about all the factors that might affect a situation 
  • Agift for figuring out how people who are different can work together productively
Allvery flattering, but I was amazed at the detail, and how much could beuncovered by asking the right questions. Armed with this information I’m nowable to look at my natural tendencies and understand what works for me and whatdoesn’t.

Is this what is meant by SWOT analysis?
Byfinding out others’ talents we’re also able to select the best people for thetask or understand the best way of working with them. It may just be that I’m ‘intrigued with the unique qualities of eachperson’, but I truly believe that by recognising that everyone is differentand by knowing and sharing our natural strengths we can improve the way wework.

Iwonder how many of us take the time to get to know ourselves or our colleagues.By knowing who we are and what is really important to us we can make choicesabout how we work, where we work and who we spend time with.

Interestingly,as a result of all my navel gazing I’ve even decided to leave full timeemployment and to focus on my natural talents to drive me to my personallong-term goals. Do you know your strengths? Do you know the strengths of yourteam and how to make the most of their natural talent? What are your thoughts?

*StrengthsFinder 2.0, Tom Rath


Aboutthe author
Jillloves working with the team at Rambutan helping people to think, lead andcommunicate brilliantly in order to achieve business, team and personalgoals.  Her previous management experience in both the public and privatesector means she has seen how great HR can make a real difference to individualmanagers and organisations as a whole.


*****

DiscussHR is the blog for Human Resources UK, the leading LinkedIngroup for those involved with HR in the UK. Next week’s Discuss HR will be published on Thursday 29th September and weare delighted to welcome our next guest writer, career coach Paul Goring.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

The Equality Elephant


Welcometo this week’s Discuss HR, the blog written by members of Human Resources UK.

AsI’ve written today’s article I shall make this week’s introduction brief toavoid droning on for too long!  When Istarted this blog I wanted it to reflect experience not theory and today Ireflect upon some of my darker experiences with employment legislation.


The Equality Elephant

You're just a figment of my imagination...
BeforeI start I just want to clarify a few points. For the bulk of my recruitment career I have recruited for HR professionals.  For the vast majority of assignments I havehandled the hiring manager has been another HR professional.  I like to behave as a recruitment partnerakin to an employee of the organisation, which tends to mean I have relativelyfrank conversations with my clients (thisisn’t a sales pitch!).  As a resultof this approach I have had numerous clients provide brutally honest feedbackon an applicant which are intended for my ears only.  Feedback, which if provided directly to theapplicant would be seen as unlawful (thanksto another Discuss HR writer I understand the difference to being unlawful and illegaland you can find a full definition below). Clearly these HR professionals know employment law, however, they feelthey are able to express their true feelings to me.  This feedback is often preceded with thewords “I know I can’t say this but...”The following are just a select few examples of comments I have received:

·        They’re too old
·        They’re not theyoung, rising star I want
·        I want a man
·        Is sheconsidering having children?
·        Her children willtake up too much time

Iam sure some of these will shock you, whilst others will come as nosurprise.  In all of these instances theclient is aware such comments cannot be fed back, so provide further detail.  But is this not just masking the truth?  So for all those times you’ve heard “you’re over-qualified” or “there were other candidates who were acloser match” is the truth that you’re too old and female?  Feedback is meant to be a learning process toallow you to develop how you present yourself. For this to be effective you need to know the true reasons behind yourrejection.  Would you rather know thatyou’re too old or receive a generic response?

Throughoutmy career such unlawful comments have been solely focused on either sexual orage discrimination.  Clearly a number oforganisations have a hiring agenda.  Theywant someone who has the energy of youth or is not going to create extra costwith maternity pay.  No organisation isgoing to openly admit this, yet if they are going to recruit with this in mind,would it not just be better for all parties if they could be open andhonest? 

Ifeven HR fails to comply, is it not time we relax age and sexual discriminationlegislation?  Whilst I draw my ownconclusions at the end, I am going to play Devil’s advocate and look at theargument to loosen the straps.

Will we see this on job adverts?
Anorganisation which covertly flaunts current legislation to find their idealemployee will see productivity decrease as they are required to pay lip serviceto those applications they do not want, yet have to welcome.  Furthermore, productivity would be affectedeven more if they are forced to hire the wrong type of person to fit theculture of the organisation.  In tougheconomic times organisations cannot afford to waste resources needlessly.  If they feel a 25 year old woman would be thebest fit for their business, should they not be allowed to hire such a person?

Aperfect example of this was an FMCG company I dealt with a number of yearsago.  Their packing was predominantly byhand rather mechanised.  Due to thenature of the product they required people who were “nimble fingered”.  The whole packing team were women.  Therefore, whenever they recruited they knewthey required another woman to add to the dynamic of the team, yet they werenever allowed to publicise this fact.  Itwould have been far more effective if the employer could have simply statedwhat they needed and it would have saved a number of men the time and effort ofapplying if they knew they should focus their efforts elsewhere, as they werenot part of the required demographic.

Allbusinesses are struggling in the current economic situation and no more thanSMEs.  Many simply cannot afford tostretch their costs any further.  Onenotable cost is the cost of maternity, which will soon affect both male andfemale employees.  Whilst the take up ofthe paternity leave clearly won’t be as high as maternity, it does mean abusiness is liable to cover the cost should either require leave.  Inflation is increasing and growth isslowing, would an SME not benefit hugely by only hiring those, be it men orwoman, who are not of an age to have children?

Therewould also be scope to loosen such legislation without increasingdiscrimination.  We all know and have metpeople whose “young at heart” outlook on life belies their true age.  An organisation could welcome applications fromall, but be able to reject on the basis that someone does not have the youthfuloutlook required.

Itis interesting that these shocking and even callous remarks I have receivedhave come from HR professionals.  Thisdoes show in general HR is focusing on the business and not compliance, even ifsuch examples are misguided (which isprobably the only positive to draw from it!).  It would certainly make my job so much easierif I knew exactly what a hiring manager wanted. Instead of an experienced HR Business Partner, they could tell me anexperienced Business Partner who is young enough to dedicate their time to workand not family. 

Lookingat this side of the argument, is it time we reduced or scrapped legislation?

BeforeI draw my conclusion, I will add an addendum of sorts.  This is my fourth re-write as it was apparentthat I was in danger of damaging my reputation in a Gerald Ratner moment.  The early reviews of the article resulted incomments which implied I condone and collude in such practices.  All of which was rather stern considering I neithercondoned nor colluded in these decisions, but simply expressed the truth of thesituation.  This has clearly touched avery sore point.

Mypersonal opinion on this matter is that I believe the vast bulk of employmentlegislation was introduced for very good reason to protect those that are in aposition to be discriminated against.  Myinitial conclusion for the first, second and third re-write was that thecurrent system works if we ignore the little lies expressed about being “too experienced”.  However, on my fourth (and hopefully last) re-write the reality of the situation hit me,the current system is clearly not working. Is it a case of educating these organisations in the benefits offlexible working that provides a viable alternative?  Unfortunately, I feel that is a ratheridealistic view.  The comments listedwere all made by HR professionals who surely must be in a position tounderstand the benefits of the alternatives, yet choose to ignore them infavour of what they feel would be best for their business.  I do not believe scrapping legislation is theanswer either, as I would strongly oppose any action that increaseddiscrimination.

Ifeel it is time we stopped denying the situation and sweeping these statementsunder the carpet.  The current system maypublically protect, but it certainly isn’t providing that protection frombehind closed doors.  It is also notworking for the employer and surely any such legislation must work for bothparties – so the simple question is what is the solution?


Illegalvs Unlawful
Illegal means against the law.  Anillegal act can land you in a criminal court, and with a conviction, a fine,and even a spell in prison.  An unlawful act is something that breachesthe rules that apply in a particular context.  If the matter is pursued incourt, it will be a 'civil' court, not a criminal one, and the consequence willusually be that you have to pay compensation to the person who was been'wronged' by you.
Definitionkindly provided by Irenicon


About the author
Ed is an HRrecruitment specialist and social media trainer.  He holds over 8 yearsindustry specific experience recruiting mainly for middle and senior HRmanagement positions. He stumbled upon social media a few years ago and hassince become passionate about the subject.  He now trains job seekers andindependent consultants in social media techniques. He is the Group Manager ofHuman Resources UK and Editor of Discuss HR and occasionally his humour willcreep into articles!

*****

Discuss HR is the blog for Human Resources UK, the leadingLinkedIn group for those involved with HR in the UK.  Next week’s Discuss HR will be published onThursday 21st September and will be written by Training Consultant Jill Hart-Sanderson