Employers take lead in refugee skills audit

first_imgEmployers take lead in refugee skills auditOn 10 Jul 2001 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. An increasing number of public bodies are starting to develop databases ofrefugee skills in order meet staff shortages. Glasgow City Council is carrying out a skills audit of refugees andasylum-seekers in the city to make their employment easier and moreappropriate. The council hopes to fill the city’s significant skills shortagesin teaching, medicine and construction. Project workers in the council’s asylum support team are interviewing the4,000 asylum-seekers residing in Glasgow. Numbers are predicted to reach 7,000by the end of 2001, with asylum-seekers being sent to Scotland from London aspart of the Government’s dispersal policy. Margaret McDonald, assistant manager of the asylum support team at the citycouncil, said, “We are looking to assess what skills asylum-seekers havewhen they arrive in Glasgow and what percentage of them can get work.” The ultimate aim is to match the skills of asylum-seekers to employers,explained McDonald. So far, only 150 have been granted leave to stay. Once the asylum-seekers are granted leave by the Home Office to stay inGlasgow, local authorities hope to retrain those with relevant qualificationsfor work in teaching and medicine. It is not the only refugee skills assessment being conducted. Earlier thisyear the National Organisation for Adult Learning conducted a refugee skillssurvey in Leicester and provided the city council and local employers with theresults. It found that 85 per cent had qualifications ranging from O-level todegree equivalent (News, 12 June). The British Medical Association and the Refugee Council are also workingtogether to create a joint database of refugee doctors in the UK that will showskills and availability for work (News, 26 June). www.ind.homeoffice.gov.ukBy Karen Higginbottom Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. last_img read more

Read More

Sweeping change

first_img Comments are closed. Sweeping changeOn 1 Dec 2001 in Personnel Today Inthe middle of an economic downturn, today’s graduates are not just looking foran attractive salary as part of a job offer. Personal development is high ontheir wish list, as Bo Kremer-Jones discoversThereis little doubt that the economic downturn, which started in the US, has madeits way over the Atlantic and is now rippling across Europe. There isincreasing evidence of companies in the region introducing hiring freezes andinitiating other cost-cutting measures as they prepare for bad times ahead.However, despite the gloomy outlook, the so-called war for talent is by nomeans over.Asfirms once again struggle to do more with less, attracting and retaining theright people is becoming even more vital. How to do this effectively is one ofthe biggest challenges companies face. One weapon in their armour for battle isthe compensation and benefits they offer. However,this is by no means the only factor people take into account when consideringwhere they want to work – as a recent study by the Community of EuropeanManagement Schools has found in which pay ranked third in importance of whattoday’s graduates are looking for in an employer. The top two on their wishlist, according to the study, were “an employer that not only offersopportunities for personal development (95 per cent) but one that is innovative(92.5 per cent).” Theseresults hold true in central and Eastern Europe too. “A few years agopeople would jump for any amount of money, but this is changing as the marketmatures,” says an executive search director in the region. He continues,”There’s a shift in terms of what people want. Before it was compensationand pay, now it’s training and development. They are looking for careeropportunities.”However,offering good pay and other desirable perks can go a long way to being seen asan employer of choice and helps to hang on to much sought-after talent.Explains Mike Johnson, author of “How to become a Talent Magnet -GettingTalented People to Work for You (Financial Times/ Prentice Hall), “Notgetting a raise, getting a meagre bonus can both be time-to-go triggers. Inthese times of shortage, you can almost guarantee that you can get more moneyelsewhere, if that is all you want,” he adds. Andhe continues, “That is also, conversely, another reason people quit – newhires being brought into the company at much higher levels of compensation.This, sadly is almost inevitable as the market for scarce talent moves upwards.”Sowho are the companies in Europe getting it right? Research-based pharmaceuticalfirm Schering has introduced a new share ownership plan for all employees,which, it reports, is the perfect solution for rewarding company performance.Above all expectations, three-quarters of employees eligible for the schemeinvested in the plan. They clearly believe it’s an attractive benefit too.Marketresearch company ACNielsen has also found a great way to make sure managerskeep their employees happy. “Twenty-five per cent of the incentive bonusesof our senior people are based on how satisfied the employees are,”explains Richard Savage, head of HR for Europe, Africa and the Middle East.Sandwichchain Prˆt   Manger goes one better. “When you are promoted in thecompany, you receive a cash bonus, but you are not allowed to keep it – youhave to give it away to your staff.” Says founder Julian Metcalf,”people have gone out of their way to help you and you should givesomething back to them.” It is a great way to build company culture.Inthe UK, DERA – a former part of the UK’s Ministry of Defence – pays considerablybelow market rates. Retention is very high, however. The reason is that itgives people what they want, including the ability to work on excitingprojects, time off to speak at international conferences, encouragement to takelead roles on professional organisations all over the world and the creation ofa “fellowship” programme for long stays that allows for time off todo blue sky research (cutting edge research of their choice).Companiesin central and Eastern Europe face problems too in retaining key staff. It ismade particularly harder in the region as salaries are much lower than in theWest. A spokesman for Global compensation adviser Watson Wyatt laments,”Compensation practices are labour-market driven, with qualified managersand specialists in short supply, particularly in Russia. So top managementpositions are generally staffed by expatriates, especially in start-ups.”Yet,he adds, “There is still a wide differential when comparing local salariesin CEE with those in Western Europe, with local general managers paid 30 to 50per cent less than in the West. Equally, he continues, “There is a widediscrepancy in wages between multinationals and local companies.”Thisis especially true in Poland, says Watson Wyatt where, “multinationals’pay levels are about 25 per cent above local companies. However, the spokesmanadds, “Local employers are closely monitoring multinationals’ pay levels,both to compete for quality labour and to establish better salary benchmarksfor recruiting.”Recentresearch by Watson Wyatt has also found that, “The desire to retain keyemployees may be a driver in the increasing use of long-term incentives anddeferred compensation. The use of variable compensation appears to be becomingmore widespread, with more than 50 per cent of professionals now eligible. “Althoughthis is considerably less prevalent than in Western Europe, the numerous taxand other obstacles which employers face in implementing stock option plans andsimilar incentives largely account for this,” it notes.So,no matter where you are, pay and compensation are no simple matters these days.But, they are important if companies want to have its share of the best talent.Methodsof attractionWithall this talk about attracting and retaining talent, it is important for HRmanagers and others involved in the fight for high performers to know exactlywhat kind of compensation they should be offering, and to whom. According toMike Johnson, author of How to Become a Talent Magnet, there are three paycategories we need to concern ourselves with:–The mediocre– The, ooh, yes please!– The exceptional, wow-factor!Heexplains, “The Mediocre. This is 80 to 85 per cent of your workforce. Theyare unexceptional. You can hire lots of them.” In fact, Johnson believes”you could go to most of your competitors and swap over 80 per cent ofyour people with their people and it wouldn’t make any difference to your business.”These are the people that he says, “pull and pull the businessalong.” When it comes to pay, you give them the going rate. “If theydon’t like that they may get more somewhere else, but it won’t be much more andthey are with you for more than money,” Johnson adds.The,ooh, yes please! according to Johnson are “the 14 per cent who make yourbusiness what it is, and by judicious acquisition, will make it betterstill.” What you are going to do with this group when it comes to rewards,he says, “is pay what it takes, because, they’ll do the job you want andmore! If you don’t hire them,” he warns, “your competitor will, andthen where will you be?”Theexceptional, wow-factor! “These are rare birds indeed,” explainsJohnson. “They don’t come on to the market often and when they do there isusually a punch-up about who gets them. But, if you’ve got two or three aroundthey are going to make your business hum like never before. You want them, theymake you money and they save you money too. You don’t say, ‘here’s the salary’,you give them a bonus based on what they do.” Furtherinformationwww.europeaninternet.comwww.watsonwyatt.comwww.pwcglobal.comwww.wmmercer.comwww.fedee.com Related posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Articlelast_img read more

Read More

Mine workers could lose out in compensation bid

first_img Comments are closed. Thousands of sick former asbestos mine workers in South Africa could beforced to settle their compensation claim against a British firm for less thanhalf the figure a court might award. The 7,500 mine workers, who in 2000 won a landmark judgement allowing themto pursue their claim in Britain, were told the courts would award at least£50m ($72.6m) But their lawyers are pressing for settlement amid speculation that buildingmaterials firm Cape faces severe financial difficulties. They advise that a sumof £25m ($36.3m) would be more realistic if it becomes clear the company or itsinsurers cannot meet the higher figure. The mine workers allege that they were exposed to dangerous levels ofasbestos by the former subsidiary of Cape without being provided with theappropriate protection. The T&G union, which represents 500 Cape staff in the UK, backs theproposed settlement. www.tgwu.org.uk Mine workers could lose out in compensation bidOn 1 Dec 2001 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Read More

A company will only achieve greatness via the quality of its staff

first_imgA company will only achieve greatness via the quality of its staffOn 18 Dec 2001 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Firms will reach a level playing field with IT in future and it will be theway they manage their people that countsIt has been a roller-coaster year for business, with many feeling the impactof the economic slowdown post 11 September. Work-life balance, equal pay, e-HR, outsourcing, staff shortages and, morerecently, redundancies, have all been dominant themes. But is there any real difference as we approach the end of 2001 in thesefamiliar chestnuts? I suspect that there is, and that changes ahead will impact on peoplemanagement more fundamentally than ever before. Many of the world’s largest andsmartest firms are quietly using the opportunity of flat revenue and weakdemand to get on with implementing new technology to transform their businesses.When the economy turns many will be able to meet growth with infrastructurethat doesn’t increase costs in parallel. While this may be good news for themand bad news for their competitors, what will be the impact on people, and whatdoes it mean for those of us leading the HR function? I think it may actually put people management at the heart of businesses.Pretty soon this technology will become a commodity, there won’t be a businessthat doesn’t run an e-business software suite, sell over the Web and throughcall centres, that hasn’t implemented shared services or outsourced something.And they will all say that people are their greatest asset even though moremoney is spent on software, systems and consulting than on “headcount”. When everyone’s got the same technology, how do you differentiate? It’s likea game of snap where every card is matched by your opponent, except for one.The “people” card cannot be bought, copied or imitated at will.  The best companies willdifferentiate themselves through their people. They will have to be the besttrained, best skilled and best managed staff. It will be the people who beatthe competition, not better websites or computers. Companies that want to be the best will need to hire the best and make thebest out of them. So how will companies differentiate themselves to ensure theyare the employer of choice? Some believe in paying top dollar, while others feel that a cappuccino maker,a ping-pong table and the freedom to come to work looking scruffy will do thetrick. Maybe, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Instead it will be the things thatcompanies do that aren’t so easy to replicate. Employers will need asympathetic and flexible attitude towards work patterns and locations, offerflexible benefits, pay competitive salaries and share success with staff. But that’s just for starters and those things are actually pretty easy toreplicate if you’ve a pocketful of money and the desire to spend it quickly. Itis the things that aren’t so easy to replicate that will differentiate, likethe company’s culture, excellent career development, commitment to ongoinglearning, excellence in product development and quality management and customerservice. The importance of HR could change fast. Either the chief executive will needto be an outstanding manager of both people and businesses, or he or she willneed someone who can provide the insight and ideas they will need todifferentiate their business – and that person could be the HR director. Last week, I met the chief executive of a large and well-respected liquidconsumer goods company. His products are not that different from his archrivals and he intends to succeed through developing better people, givingbetter service to his customers and building better brands as a result. He used to be its head of HR and the company couldn’t think of anyone betterqualified to run their business. Maybe, it is a sign of things to come. By Vance Kearney a vice-president of HR for Europe, Middle East andAfrica at Oracle Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Read More

The big issues business cannot afford to ignore

first_imgThe big issues business cannot afford to ignoreOn 30 Apr 2002 in Personnel Today Itwasn’t so very long ago that many employers thought being a good corporatecitizen meant persuading a few middle managers to paint the local communityyouth centre. The employees would learn a bit, the community would be slightlybetter off and local customers might see the firm in a good light. Justhow far UK companies have come was demonstrated by last week’s annualconference of the Institute of Directors. With its membership base of mostlysmall and medium businesses, the IoD is known for fighting red tape andemployee-friendly regulations. The fact the institute dedicated this year’sconference to the topic of globalisation shows that the business community isfinally realising that corporate social responsibility is as much aboutcompetitiveness as it is about child labour or global warming.Itwas a brave decision. There were protesters outside the Albert Hall as theconference began and the inclusion of former US Secretary of State HenryKissinger as a speaker attracted flack from sections of the press. However,the IoD should be applauded for giving such issues a platform. The message fromIoD director general, George Cox, and outgoing IoD president Lord Young ofGraffham, was at times radical. LordYoung proposed it should be a criminal offence for companies to concealinformation about directors’ pay. And Cox acknowledged that market forces alonecould not be the sole driver for tackling huge international problems in whichmultinational companies play a major role. MalcolmBrinded, planning director of Shell International, called on companies toaddress corporate social responsibility in a spirit of enlightenedself-interest. And for anyone in HR who thinks they can leave such issuesto the board, Brinded pointed out that there are dividends, as well as threats,for HR in terms of recruitment and retention, innovation and anticipating newmarkets. HR ignores the big issues at its peril.By Noel O’Reilly Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Read More

Intranets: grasping the nettle

first_img Comments are closed. Intranets: grasping the nettleOn 9 Jul 2002 in Personnel Today A new study reveals companies are failing to use intranets as strategicknowledge management tools. HR can make the difference, says its author ChrisStampLess than a quarter of companies consider their intranet to be a keyknowledge management tool and IT still dominates the management of intranetswithin organisations, according to a survey by Prism Communications &Knowledge Management. Despite the fact that 90 per cent of companies that responded said theysupport knowledge management as a strategy, in many companies it seems thatintranets are largely seen as devices for sharing and managing information,rather than a central strategic tool. Called Intranets are more than ITÉ and sponsored by interactive consultancyEmperor Design, the survey was conducted to identify how businesses operatingfrom a large number of sites, or through a highly distributed workforce, useand manage intranets. Of the 72 Stock Exchange-listed companies which responded, 57 (79 per cent)had intranets, and six of the remaining 15 said they intended to establish one.Only four companies said they had no definite plans to do so. Left on the shelf? “The survey’s findings call into question the idea that intranets arekey knowledge management tools for corporations,” says Chris Stamp, thereport’s author. He is also director of Prism, which advises companies on howto address their corporate organisational and cultural issues through internalcommunications and knowledge management. “Too often intranets enjoy much initial board-level support, but thenafter being implemented, crucial management and cultural factors areforgotten,” he says. HR to take the lead The research shows that IT dominates the management of intranets, with 52out of 63 respondents saying IT was the functional area of the most seniorperson responsible for the intranet in their organisation. HR scored a lowlyeight out of 63 by comparison but is second to IT when it comes to beingresponsible for intranet content. However, Stamp believes that HR should be farmore proactive in forging the link between intranets and the company’sorganisational capability and be more than just responsible for putting uppolicy and procedure documents and internal job postings. Anti-knowledge management Some companies also target their intranets towards a narrower audience asopposed to the entire employee population and the majority of respondentsreport access levels below 50 per cent. “In some cases, this could be seen as being anti-knowledgemanagement,” says Stamp, who cites major corporates BP and Shell withconsultancies such as KPMG and Cap Gemini Ernst & Young as good examples ofthose who exploit the power of an intranet. “They’ve had to embrace knowledge sharing to maintain their uniqueselling point and capability. Here we see far more people-oriented activitiesgoing on, such as communities of practice.” A clear trend emerging from the report is that a great deal more emphasis isplaced on establishing an intranet in the first place than the ongoingmanagement of it. This is largely because once in place, intranet technologyrequires relatively little effort to maintain, whereas intranet content andusage require much more effort. Stamp acknowledges that some companies have been disillusioned with thepromise of technology in areas such as e-HR. “Too often companies don’tthink about the context of it. They don’t ask questions like: ‘who do we expectto use the intranet?’ He adds: “It is up to departments like HR and marketing to remove thebad press and take time and effort to demonstrate what an intranet cando.” Intranets are more than IT… can be ordered free from the Prism website www.prism.gb.netIntranet checklist– Institute proactive management by a dedicated intranetmanager who can focus on the sustainability and continuous improvement of theintranet– Give responsibility for the intranet to various departmentsacross the company rather than just IT or HR, to ensure it is relevant for allroles within the company– Allow access to the intranet to as many employees aspossible; promote the intranet so that employees are aware of it, and measureintranet usage– Be clear on how the intranet will support knowledgemanagement aims rather than merely act as a medium for transferring information Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Read More

Working time opt-out makes UK more flexible workplace

first_imgRelated posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. Working time opt-out makes UK more flexible workplaceOn 12 Nov 2002 in Personnel Today EU plans to harmonise the working rules across all member states is bad newsfor the UK and companies must act to fight the changesThe Working Time Regulations, based on a 1993 EU directive, have alwaysgiven the UK a pseudo get-out clause. This stated that individual employees can agree with their employers thatthey will not be covered by the general restriction of a 48-hour maximumworking week. Uniquely among EU member states, the UK uses this individualopt-out provision in its national legislation. In accordance with provisions in the EU directive itself, the EU Commissionhas now decided to carry out a review of whether or not it is necessary toretain the individual opt-out in the directive. Being carried out by a group ofCambridge University academics – led by Professor Catherine Barnard – the teamhas been asked to produce a report by the end of this year, based on the use ofthe opt-out in the UK. There is a clear risk that the individual opt-out could now be lost – if therest of the EU doesn’t need it then why should the UK? The reality in the UK is that the individual opt-out brings significantbenefits to the UK’s flexible labour market, which would be lost if the opt-outwere to be removed. It is one of the few clear and certain provisions in theWorking Time Regulations that can be used to make the regulations moreappropriate for the UK. The individual opt-out is also a provision that both employer and employeescan understand and does not involve a bureaucratic structure for itsimplementation, or doubts about its applicability. In manufacturing, the individual opt-out is used by different people andcompanies for different reasons. All of them tend to reflect a wish to complywith the law, rather than the cavalier attitude of avoidance that may exist inother EU member states. For example, the opt-out is often used by serviceengineers who have to travel from place to place to repair or maintainequipment their employer has provided. It is also used by senior managers and employers to avoid the uncertaintyover a derogation (EU speak for an exception). It states that the working timerule does not apply to “managing executives or other persons withautonomous decision-taking powers”. It also avoids the burden of such managers keeping detailed records of allworking time spent at home and travelling. Should the opt-out be removed, it will almost certainly lead to extra costsfor companies and pressure on agreements for longer averaging of working hours.There would also be a need to examine existing working practices that mayinvolve inconvenient changes for both employers and employees. Currently, the UK Government has not expressed an opinion as to whether ornot it would oppose any EU proposal to remove the individual opt-out. However, given her views on the UK’s long hours culture, it may,unfortunately, be all to easy for the current Secretary of State for Trade andIndustry Patricia Hewitt to agree to its removal. At this stage, companies making use of the individual opt-out must continueto press the UK Government and the EU Commission on why it is still needed.However, being pragmatic, such companies also need to consider how they wouldhave to change their employment practices to accommodate its ending should we loseour unique position. Should we seek to gain agreement that the averaging period for the maximum48-hour working week should be 52 weeks rather than 13, for example? If the EU directive is to be changed, then the opportunity should be takento make the whole EU Working Time Directive simpler. While the commission will not make its views known until later next year, ifwe are to have influence, we need to make our views known now. By Peter Martin, Director of employment policy at the EngineeringEmployers Federationlast_img read more

Read More

Gifted thinking…

first_imgGifted thinking…On 10 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. Jonathan Haskell weighs up the pros and cons of selecting corporate giftsWhen it comes to gifts, what is considered highly desirable in one countrycan be boring, uninspired, or even offensive in another. A bottle of quality vodkamay please a Canadian worker, but may be standard and rather dull for a Russianemployee and downright offensive to a Middle Eastern staff member. And thoughthe latest designer electronic gadget may not impress a Japanese executive, itwould probably thrill a European one. LongService.com’s data analysis shows that corporate gift choices areimmensely varied across Europe. Belgium’s top three gifts, for example, arebinoculars, radios and champagne flutes, while Germany’s are juice extractors,cutlery and cocktail shakers, and Sweden favours cappuccino makers, decantersand CD players. Ultimately, gift choices always depend on the selections chosen by HRmanagers and the choices available to employees. But these examples show thateven staff in neighbouring countries have widely different preferences, andthey should be recognised and accommodated by reward programmes. Although some HR managers try to kid themselves that everyone wants anenamelled gold pen or classic crystal ware, the truth is that the world’s 6billion citizens are individuals – with individual tastes. This delicate issue often causes headaches for HR directors trying tointroduce and subsequently administer an international reward programme withminimal time, effort and expense. However, some simple solutions can beimplemented. The sensible way to create a reward scheme that meets the interests ofglobal employees, is by allowing them to select their own gifts. The three mostpopular gift selection options are online rewards, vouchers and brochures. Each system has its benefits and pitfalls, which must be considered bearingthe different international gift preferences in mind. They are: Vouchers – the pros and cons – These flexible rewards can be redeemed for chosen items – Employees know the monetary value of the gift and may be delighted, or mayequally take offence if the company is perceived to have been less thangenerous – If the voucher redeemable in a specialist retailer, (such as a musicstore) the gift options may be limited – The onus is on the employee to redeem the voucher. This is great if staffare shopaholics and the retail outlet is nearby, but difficult for shopaphobicshaving to visit an inconvenient location to find the item they want – Although vouchers are viewed by both HR managers and employees asconvenient, they may be regarded as unimaginative and lacking in thought andeffort – Some HR managers are reviewing their use of vouchers and considering morepersonal, innovative gifts as rewards Brochures – the pros and cons – They allow employees to choose their own gifts which have been selected bythe HR department, and are more relevant to the individual workforce – Agreeing gifts and producing the brochure can be expensive andtime-consuming – Staff cannot resist looking at the sections of the brochure that don’tapply to them (such as the staff receiving a gift for five years’ servicelooking at the gifts for 10 years’ service). They may be then disappointed withtheir own selection – Gifts run out of stock and the employee may be unable to receive they giftselected – If several gifts are no longer available, the company has the expense ofproducing a new updated brochure Online reward schemes – the pros and cons – These dispense with all the common problems of vouchers and brochures – Staff only choose the gifts made available to them – unaware of any otheremployee reward levels – Gift selection can be swiftly changed if stock runs out without cost ordelay – Programmes can be easily tailored for individual departments, countries orreligions so that relevant gifts are available – Online accessibility is available on a global basis (with real time datafeedback). International considerations However, evaluating the correct system for the company is not the onlyimportant issue when implementing a global reward programme. There are otherconsiderations which are often overlooked. Currency can be a real challenge for international gift schemes. Forexample, what if the global HR director decides that for two years’ service,all staff will receive a gift to the value of $250 (£159). In the US, Englandor Japan, that wouldn’t be enough for a night for two in a top hotel. But inTurkey, it would cover the hotel and the spending money too. And while $250 maybe appropriate for an employee of a wealthy country, it would be an extravagantsum in less affluent locations. Gift values should be rewarded as a percentage of income, rather than a flatcurrency rate. If all staff receive a gift that is 10 per cent of their pay,the relative value will be the same regardless of the country or currency.Companies operating international programmes such as Dialog and Sungard havesuccessfully implemented this measure. An extensive logistics network is essential for international rewardprogrammes, and HR managers should expect detailed explanations of systemsbefore signing up with providers of vouchers, brochures or online services. In the case of Dialog and Sungard, the key elements of their rewardprogrammes are flexibility, evaluation and delivery. Both companies recognisethe importance of assessing the programme and providing the opportunity tochange requirements at any time, as well as prompt delivery of gifts – usuallywithin days of selection. Dialog’s programme covers nearly 400 employees in Belgium, Denmark, France,Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland andthe UK. In a typical year, approximately between 100 and 150 employees willreceive a gift. HR directors must consider the pros and cons of each programmebefore making an assessment on which is best for them. Jonathan Haskell is managing director of www.LongService.com, a UK and Europeonline incentive, reward and motivation supplierEssential questions every HR manager should ask their online giftsupplier:– Do you have distribution systemsthat ensure rapid delivery of gifts?– What happens when a gift becomes unavailable?– If an employee is unhappy with a gift selection, whatprocesses are in place for complaints?– What kind of data will be available for evaluation andassessment?– What gifts are available? Are big brands included?– Can gifts be personalised or branded? Will this take extratime?– What is the contractual commitment?– Can the gift selection be tailored for internationalemployees?– What security and data protection systems are in place?– Can my company start on a trial basis?– Approximately how many hours per week will my HR departmentbe spending on administering the programme?– Can I change the gift selection whenever I choose?– What can be arranged for employees who do not have access toa computer? Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. last_img read more

Read More

Employer worries at recruitment market

first_img Comments are closed. Employer worries at recruitment marketOn 29 Apr 2003 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. Employers are becoming increasingly worried about the future, according tothis quarter’s figures from the Recruitment Confidence Index (RCI). The index has continued to fall and now stands at 113, compared with 119three months ago, suggesting a drop in recruitment activity. The RCI is a quarterly survey of public and private sector employers thatmeasures expected changes in recruitment activity and business conditions overthe following six months. Run by the Cranfield School of Management, and supported by the DailyTelegraph and Personnel Today, the latest figures – which also look atrecruitment methods, skills shortages, staff turnover and pay rates – revealemployers are concerned about business conditions and demand for their productsand services. The survey of 1,236 public and private sector employers shows confidence isfalling – a net figure of just 15 per cent say they are optimistic, comparedwith more than 70 per cent last summer. Commenting on the findings, Shaun Tyson, professor of HR at Cranfield Schoolof Management, said: “There is a definite feeling of pessimism about theeconomy, especially in the service sector, which had a reasonably buoyant 2002.”Recruitment confidence is declining relative to a very high peak 18months ago, immediately before the September 11 attacks on the World TradeCenter. This was a time when demand was far too high – especially in the SouthEast – and employers could not recruit people for love nor money.” The spring 2003 figures show that employers expect to reduce theirexpenditure on nearly all recruitment methods over the next six months. Spending on employment agencies and consultancies looks set to suffer a netdrop in revenue. Only commercial websites – still a relatively immaturerecruitment tool – are likely to see any growth. By Quentin Readewww.rcisurvey.netlast_img read more

Read More

Building executive search in-house? Six mistakes to avoid

first_imgBuilding executive search in-house? Six mistakes to avoidBy Tim Connolly on 15 Mar 2018 in Executive recruitment, Personnel Today, Recruitment & retention About Tim Connolly Tim Connolly is the founding Partner of ALC, a global human capital consultancy. Related posts:No related photos. More organisations are looking to source talent for senior roles in-house so they can build their employer brand and save money on headhunters. But it’s not always as simple as it seems, as Tim Connolly from human capital consultancy ALC explains.Executive searchRecruitment selection techniques Candidate attraction: executive searchWhen it comes to finding executive talent with rare skills sets, an increasing number of organisations have come to realise that it makes business sense to build their own internal search functions to source talent, and I explored this in my last Personnel Today article.Not only is this more economical in the long term than paying head hunters, but firms can also be sure that their own recruiters fully understand the brand, culture and goals of the organisation, something that is crucial when it comes to making strategic decisions about talent acquisition.However, not all organisations understand the complexities of creating teams equipped to conduct such important searches yet. Here are six of their most common mistakes.Trying to stretch existing departmentsSome firms entrust their existing, overworked, low to mid-level resourcing departments with executive search demands and expect the same level of service as an external headhunting firm.An under-resourced department with competing staffing priorities will be spread too thinly to really dedicate itself to thorough searching at the highest level, meaning prime candidates may be overlooked.Hiring inexperienced consultantsThey try to save money by hiring consultants without the requisite experience to conduct searches for leadership talent. This is a false economy, because top performing headhunters are researchers with niche experience and a network of connections at the very highest level to draw upon.Some organisations don’t appreciate just how thorough and effective first-rate researchers are in an in-house function. Relying on the skills of less experienced people who don’t have a track record of delivery at executive level risks limiting the success of the search.Not rewarding appropriatelyEx-search firm headhunters will have honed their skills in a high-performance environment, where it is the norm to be rewarded for each deal reached.Top performers will be sales-driven by nature: removing that element and giving them a standard flat-rate salary risks taking away their drive and can be a complete cultural misalignment.Organisations should seriously consider rewarding them per deal, much like they might do for their sales team, rather than trying to align them with the firm’s HR or finance functions.Not getting board-level buy-inThey don’t have a board-level stakeholder who enforces the use of the in-house executive search function. This can mean that hiring managers decide to ignore its existence and continue using external search firms, nullifying any benefit.To eliminate this, the function needs board endorsement in order to help it quickly establish itself and gain internal credibility.If hiring managers have complete faith in the quality of the in-house department, they will have no reason to conduct rogue external searches. In addition, its usage should be monitored in order to check compliance.Failing to immerse the team in the businessThey don’t give the in-house team enough access to the business for them to fully understand its culture, goals or long-term strategy.A distinct advantage of having an in-house function is that the recruiters can become fully immersed in the workplace for which they are headhunting.This insight means that they can then identify and hire the senior individuals who will be most effective. However, this only works if the recruiters are able to get a true feel for the place by having full access to operational departments and talking to personnel at all stages of seniority. Putting up barriers to this will mean they function less effectively.Not investing in the best technologyThey don’t invest in the right technology. In this age of artificial intelligence and data-led automation, top headhunters are using cutting edge tools, such as those provided by specialist search software companies, to help them work faster, more thoroughly and with greater efficiency.The wrong tools just slow a team down. Some organisations are asking their in-house search function to work with legacy systems that immediately hinders them. Firms should invest in a bespoke ATS, in close consultation with their specialist headhunters who will be using it.So, while more firms are realising the value of hiring internal subject matter experts to acquire talent at a more strategic level, not all organisations are fully aware of how to maximise their return on investment yet.Since human capital is integral to an organisation’s success, strategically procuring the right talent in the most efficient way is vital. No comments yet. Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply.Comment Name (required) Email (will not be published) (required) Website View all posts by Tim Connolly → Previous Article Next Articlelast_img read more

Read More