In this current market, the competition for the number of limited jobs is high and yet we see so many job advertisements that ask for the world from candidates. Employers expect the perfect candidate to fit every single criteria set in an advertisement. Their search is based on a wish list of essential versus desirable traits.
However, when looking closely at these advertisements it is clear to see that what they want is unrealistic. Many of the listed “essential” skills, on deeper reflection, are really only desirable. Yet we find these advertisements pointing out things that demand immediate useability and transferability.
Couple this with the price set to attract that perfect candidate and this is where the real danger begins. Let’s be honest with ourselves- If a candidate meets one hundred per cent of the advertisement’ s selection criteria that candidate is ALREADY over-qualified and under-paid before they begin. That person won’t stay, as they will either get bored quickly or they know that they deserve more money. Period.
Recruiters and employers are unrealistic when they pose questions about short and long term goals and candidates’ intentions to stay. The irrelevance is explicit, yet these types of questions will be asked and candidates will lie or say something non-offensive to stay on-side with interviewers.
I sincerely recognise and appreciate, as a recruiter or employer, it is important to seek safeguards to mitigate risks associated with choosing the wrong candidate. Most of the time, we seek to address these risks by choosing candidates who appear “safe.”
The definition of safe is all about choosing candidates who can present the most immediate guarantees- these candidates will need to immediately perform the required tasks to fill explicit gaps in the business. Such candidates may come from a similar industry; have the right perceived look, background and culture; and have qualifications that are immediately related to the job. It’s safe to assume these candidates can do the job, however, they represent the greater risk, as they are already over-qualified and over-experienced for the job.
I am advocating that decision-makers need to rethink their strategy for employing / recruiting candidates. I am asking decision-makers to consider candidates that are “imperfect”- meaning candidates who don’t have all the immediate required skills / experience; lack the required qualifications or have different qualifications; are from different backgrounds / cultures.
This is because, whilst employers want immediate help to fill a gap by recruiting a perceived specialist, what they would really prefer is an employee who intends to stay long term, so any investment in training / acclimatisation won’t be a waste of time and money.
In saying this, how can employers and recruiters identify appropriate imperfect candidates who still fit the criteria of job roles? Here is list of five categories that will prove to be a wise investment:
- The under-qualified candidate: This candidate has more reason to prove that they have what it takes to hold down the job. Their enthusiasm and focus are limitless. In saying this, there are certain things that will work in the employer’s favour- the opportunity to have a lower starting price; the guarantee of a longer probation period; the opportunity to set favourable performance targets. These things are excellent strategies to mitigate the risk for employers and to ensure their investment in this type of candidate makes an eventual return. These things will also offset any concerns about this type of candidate’s need to be trained “intensively.” Couple this with the fact that an employer can ask the candidate to also invest in their own future by paying for particular training by themselves before they start the job- a shared investment by both parties in the relationship.
- The overseas-qualified and experienced candidate: This candidate represents the best odds of an immediate return, because these candidates already have previous experience (sometimes a lot of it) to do the required job. Whilst some “locals” may deem these candidates as being over-qualified and over-experienced, the reality is, they need to learn how to assimilate within the local business environment and culture. This takes time. Furthermore, communication and interpersonal skills with many “migrant” candidates is very hit-and-miss, and so the risk can be high on the surface. However, where it is extremely favourable for employers is these candidates want to work hard for the business, require minimal technical training, and can also present cost savings in regards of wages and probation period. The key factor to consider is to ensure employers spend quality time in assimilating / acclimatising the candidate into the business’ culture and business operations. We cannot assume this new employee will just get along with other staff. More effort needs to be spent in inter-cultural relations on the operations level to ensure ALL staff also “buy-into” having someone different within the business. In return, an employer will find a ready-made employee who can technically perform the required duties, meaning more immediate contributions to goals / targets.
- The fresh graduate: This candidate in many ways is a blank-canvass, technically, but has immense enthusiasm and commitment to do things beyond what their position description says- they are the business world’s “workhorses.” They can be “shaped” and “trained” to execute tasks the way employers want. Many of these candidates are just starting their professional lives, so unlike older candidates, their career is the number one priority. The fact of the matter is, these candidates are ready to work the longest hours out of any group, just to get the necessary “hands-on” industry experience to put on their résumés in the immediate term (this group is ready-made for professional internships just to get industry experience). In regards to employing a fresh graduate, price wise, probation wise and incentive-wise, employers do need to be careful. They cannot just assume that these candidates will be loyal or will be happy working for a crappy wage, whilst working long hours. They are highly qualified dream-chasers, so if they can’t see explicit investment by employers in their futures or the associated benefits of being part of the business, then they will be the first to leave. Period. The aim for employers is to plug into the psyche of young people to best appreciate their motivations. Employment conditions, rewards and incentives matter, especially if they are explicit and tangible. Cause and effect is critical in regards to appealing to this type of candidate, whom in the long term represents a great bridge to the business’ future sustainability.
- The parent returning to work: Since the cost of living is skyrocketing, it is necessary for this type of candidate to work, just to afford their investment in their chosen lifestyle (being responsible for the welfare of children). The hypocrisy many employers and recruiters possess towards parents is extremely disconcerting. It’s almost like “do as I say and not what I do;” or “yes, I’m a parent, but I’m the boss too, so that is different!” Employers and recruiters all need a reality check. Once upon a time, before a candidate decided to become a parent, they most likely were a supremely talented business professional. Now they are ready to return and they have a focused hunger to succeed, based on a fear of not being great providers for their families. Their reasons for working cannot be denied and the fundamental truth is, they are excellent choices to consider for employment, because of the very fact they ARE parents. The types of pressures they’ve dealt with have given them the life experience to battle through “trench warfare.” They completely get what it means to have a job and the necessities and luxuries that are afforded by having a regular wage. If employers want loyalty, commitment and consistency in performance, look no further than hiring a parent returning to the workforce. Yes, you may need to be flexible with time arrangements and may have to invest in training to help them re-acclimatise to working with current systems and procedures, but the returns are immense. A parent has made a conscious choice to return to the workforce. They are committed to making that investment a success.
- The mature-aged jobseeker: Like a parent returning to the workforce, a mature aged jobseeker is faced with a reality of the skyrocketing costs of living. Many need to work, but at the same time possibly lack the up-to-date skills to fit into the daily operations of a contemporary business. This is where these types of candidates represent a “middle ground” between an under-qualified candidate and a parent returning to the workforce. Governments want employers to consider putting mature-aged jobseekers back into the workforce. The “incentives” handed out to employers can range from- assistance given to train them; assistance given to employ them; money given to recruit, train and maintain their employment. Recruiters can also share in the “recruitment” of mature-aged jobseekers, especially if they hold a health care / pension card. Whilst it might seem ‘tokenistic” to offer such incentives and assistance, it is necessary as many employers believe mature-aged jobseekers are not fast-enough or smart-enough to cope with the demands of today’s business. This is especially the case when many business managers today are “much younger.” In reality, they are the ones that lack the management skills to best-supervise and get the best out of these types of candidates. This is where employers need to realise there are services out there that can assist in not just supporting jobseekers, but also supporting employers in acquiring the necessary skills to be the best managers of people- young and old.
The reality is, these categories of imperfect candidates do have areas of improvement, which in the short term, requires the attention of employers to invest time and money into them. However, in the medium and long term, these same imperfect candidates will prove to be the better choices, because of their tangible reasons to work. Therefore, despite their shortcomings, imperfect candidates can prove to be a critical part of highly successful and winning teams, as there is a shared vision for sustainability and longevity.
