My beef with recruitment

Very-Angry-Man-ShutterstockI’ve posted previously about how recruitment is like dating here. Well after getting a new job to me it felt more like a dancing partner who can’t dance, but leads anyway.

Some things I wish recruiters did differently in job postings.

1. Dependant on experience. Really? Don’t we all know this means dependant on what you get paid for your current job.

2. Competitive pay. If it’s that competitive tell us what it is and we will definitely want to apply. Otherwise this means we can pay you less than the previous guy or any of our competitors.

3. This successful company……. why can’t we know what company it is? Would we be embarrassed by the company? Should we not apply?

4. Recipe list of skills. I’ve seen some crazy demands for jobs. One included a training manager who needed to be proficient in photoshop, indesign and video editing. Maybe you want too much from this role? Maybe you should rethink the job description?

5. Sector specific experience. Is your sector that blisteringly complicated that no one else can pick it up in a couple of weeks? Or are you that fast paced that unless someone can already do the job they can’t apply?

6. Specific software usage. Ok so I have mainly seen this in HR. If I haven’t used a particular software I will be atrocious at the job. Really? Of course, you were born being able to use a software that hadn’t been created yet and I couldn’t possibly learn it. But maybe we all take as long to learn things as you…..

7. Entry level role – must have experience. How on earth do people get experience for entry level roles without doing an entry level role?

So these aren’t the most constructive comments but maybe if some of these beefs disappeared maybe we wouldn’t have as big a talent deficit.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

4 thoughts on “My beef with recruitment

  1. jim says:

    Very good points. However, I always assumed that point number three was due to recruitment companies not wanting to reveal their client, lest an applicant applies directly to the company and thus taking business away from the recruiter?

    • shredhr says:

      Jim you are absolutely right with the reason. It’s still annoying for candidates though. If an agency is working on behalf of an organisation they should prove their value to the candidate in supporting them to land a role, not just being a middle man. Then they wouldn’t need to hide the organisation in the first place

      • jim says:

        Very true indeed. Completely agreed. I’d be very interested to read about your thoughts on recruitment agencies as a whole!

      • shredhr says:

        It may come up in a future post. I tend to write whatever comes up day to day. Although it is tempting to give it a go. Thanks for your comments, it’s really appreciated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: