|
Employer's Preference |
Risk Level to the Employer |
Employer Thinking |
|
Almost Family |
Virtually
Risk-Free |
We know exactly what we're getting |
| Somebody we already know: an
internal appointment is ideal, or someone already doing consultancy or
temp work for us. |
|
|
|
Known Quantity |
Very Low |
A Clear Track Record |
|
Maybe someone working for a competitor, someone whose
reputation we know, even if we haven't met the individual yet. |
|
This person has done well elsewhere and will do the
same for us. |
|
A Friend of a Friend |
Low |
Safe |
|
In other words, someone who is known and trusted by
someone we know and trust or someone who comes highly recommended by a
trusted colleague. |
|
We have a pretty good idea of what we will be getting.
Fred always recommends good people. |
|
Achiever |
Relatively Low |
Fairly Safe |
|
Someone who may be known to us at a distance and comes
with clear evidence of past success - ideally in terms of a portfolio of
work, a fistful of testimonials, excellent and highly specific projects
with their names all over them. |
|
Again, clear evidence of past achievement. We can
measure what we'll be getting for our money. |
|
Competence-based Recruitment |
Moderate Risk |
Less Risky |
|
We've accurately assessed what a successful post
holder must know and the skills required by the job and we are going to
test or interview to identify specific competencies. |
|
We're using a careful filter. We would still like to
know what they are like in terms of personality and team fit. |
|
Unsolicited application |
Moderately high |
Potentially low risk if it's the
right person |
|
This is much more than yet another CV sent out on a
"spray and pray" basis. A well-aimed direct application can sometimes
prompt an employer to do something about a new job or solving an old
problem. |
|
We are now talking to strangers but sometimes
it's nice to be surprised by the right people. We're more impressed by
those who know something about us already, particularly if we have a
problem right now. |
|
Attractive Agency Candidate |
Risk Increasing |
Agencies aren't always good at
finding out what a job actually requires |
|
OK, we'll talk to an employment agency or recruitment
consultant because they know where to resource people who have done well
in the past. |
|
But they can spot high achievers and assess strengths
and weaknesses in applicants. They can screen for us. They can sometimes
even headhunt. |
|
Response to Specific Advertising |
High |
Feels like a lottery. |
|
Who knows if we'll get the right people. And we run
the risk of buying advertising space without being sure of a result. |
|
It's going to be tough to filter out the ones who know
what they're doing. Who do we interview? |
|
Response to General Recruitment
Advertising |
Sky High |
Nobody reads our skill or
qualification requirements! |
|
Oh dear. Here we go - hundreds of hopefuls to be
filtered out. |
|
Nobody filters these people for us and they're all
desperate to get a job. |