Video Interviewing: The Best New Tool In Your Recruitment Arsenal 

/in , /by

Just as snail-mail resumes were phased out by online application forms, so to has two-way video interviewing overtaken the humble phone call.

Recruitment technology now allows employers to easily review recorded video interviews of prospective candidates before they spend time and money inviting them to face-to-face meetings.

According to a survey by UK job board Monster, 82 per cent of hiring managers rate a candidate’s ability to hold eye contact as a telling nonverbal cue. Now with video interview technology, characteristics such as this can be revealed before a face-to-face meeting.

Recruitment marketing specialists Employment Office are leading the pack with this emerging recruitment technology, launching their video interviewing product last year in response to increased demand from customers.

“Employment Office is the first company to offer a two-way video platform where a live interview is conducted by a recruitment expert in a format that is both recordable and shareable.  Our approach is human and personal as opposed to a candidate talking into a webcam, answering stock-standard questions,”says Employment Office Managing Director Tudor Marsden-Huggins.

Although job interviews were once seen as the final frontier – a recruitment function that needed to be kept in-house – more businesses are now seeing the value in hiring a professional to conduct a preliminary interview on their behalf.

“Job interviews can be a tough thing to get right.  Without the necessary skills it can be hard to make a confident hiring decision.  By using a trained expert in an interactive interview, you can make an informed choice based on substantive candidate responses, while also having the visual capacity to assess non-verbal communication skills and professional presentation,”Marsden-Huggins said.

Conducting interviews via interactive video is also more efficient and cost effective.  It’s certainly easier and cheaper to arrange a video interview that can be shared with key decision makers anytime, as opposed to scheduling face-to-face meetings with busy people in several locations.

In an age of globalisation and virtualisation, having easy access to candidates beyond geographical barriers is important. Businesses need to think creatively to reach out to potential employees and in today’s recruitment landscape video interviewing is proving to be a valuable tool to add to your recruitment toolkit.

If you would like to receive more information on how video interviewing technology can help your business, contact Employment Office today on 07 3330 2555.

Interns and Employers: Who should foot the bill?

/in /by

The demand for internships has soared as students hoping to gain employment in competitive industries become more concerned about job opportunities after graduation.

In a global labour market that demands real-world experience, students and even some parents, are going to astonishing lengths to land the perfect post-grad job.

A surge in interns paying for the privilege of doing an internship, has taken place in Australia and overseas. In America, some parents are paying employers up to $10,000 for a guaranteed place on the student internship program.

Closer to home, employers are also seeing the potential to charge a fee for work experience, with one Australian law firm recently asking students to pay AUD$22,000 to intern at their organisation.  The Fair Work Ombudsman is currently investigating the validity of the program.

Paid-for-internships aren’t just emptying the pockets of parents wanting to give their child a leg-up into the workforce, they are also making it impossible for the children of less-affluent families to secure internship opportunities.

Managing Director of Employment Office, Tudor Marsden-Huggins, says mutually beneficial internship agreements shouldn’t see money exchanging hand on either side.

“Employers need to be impartial when selecting candidates for internships. Right now students feel like they need internships to secure that great graduate opportunity.  Some employers are exploiting this situation and creating internships you can pay for as a revenue-raiser.

“Selection of interns should be based on merit as opposed to bank balance and employers shouldn’t take advantage by hiring students who can pay for the privilege over others,” he says.

“Internships are a great way for young people or university graduates to secure experience in the corporate world. They’re offered a taste of their chosen field and  an idea of whether they’d like to pursue what they’ve been studying as a career. The employer also benefits by gaining an insight into the talent of the emerging workforce.

“It costs an organisation a great deal of resources to properly mentor an intern but in return the employer receives an additional resource and potential future employee. A win-win internship agreement like this is hard to attain when one party is paying the other for the opportunity to be there,” Marsden-Huggins says.

To ensure interns are treated fairly, organisations must nurture their interns – mentoring and observing them rather than exploiting them for free labour.

A new law recently passed in France looks to protect students from being exploited as cheap labour. The law states “mentoring” must be provided to an intern and the internship mentor cannot mentor more than three students at the same time.

Luxury French fashion houses have come under scrutiny in recent years for exploiting the desperate interns trying to gain experience in the competitive fashion industry.  Some have been accused of taking advantage of unpaid interns and using them for ‘slave labour’.

In Australia the lines are still blurred, the Fair Work Act states employers must pay employees a minimum wage, so it can be argued if your intern is performing work someone would otherwise be paid to do you may be non-compliant.

There are exceptions for vocational placements and voluntary not-for-profit work, but with a grey area for other free-office work, employers should understand their boundaries before the Fair Work Ombudsman enforces them for a hefty fine.

Should Australia adopt name-blind recruitment policies?

/in /by

name-blind recruitment

Should Australia adopt name-blind recruitment process?

Following recent terror attacks at home and abroad, key figures in the Muslim community are encouraging employers to give young Muslims a chance in the workplace.

Muslim candidates are claiming it’s become increasingly difficult to secure job interviews or progress through the job application process, with some suspecting an element of discrimination based on their Arabic sounding names.

It has been suggested it might be time for Australia to adopt ‘name-blind’ CVs, so hiring managers won’t be able to discount a Muslim candidate, or a candidate of any other ethnicity, on the basis of religion or cultural background.

In an address in Melbourne late last year, Australia Post CEO Ahmed Fahour, revealed the past 18 months had been particularly challenging for Australia’s Muslim community in the wake of increased activity from ISIS in the Middle East and following a number of terrorist attacks committed by Islamic extremists.

Fahour is now urging companies to support trainee schemes targeted specifically at young Muslims, to give them a leg up with employment and provide them with the foundation for a bright future.

Companies in the UK have already adopted a name-blind policy, with Prime Minister David Cameron pledging his support for a pilot program for employers to receive name-blind applications for graduate positions. Companies participating in the program include some of the UK’s biggest employers such as Deloitte, HSBC, the BBC and the NHS.

It is hoped the introduction of name-blind recruitment processes will help prevent unconscious bias and ensure that job offers are made on the basis of potential – not ethnicity, religion or gender.

The UK government hopes the change will prevent discrimination against those with ethnic-sounding names, based on stereotypes. So should Australia take the same hard line stance and introduce name-blind recruiting?

Employment Office Managing Director Tudor Marsden-Huggins says it’s a question of whether the existing state and federal legislation governing equal opportunity employment and anti-discrimination are functioning appropriately.

“The laws are in place to prevent any overt workplace discrimination on the basis of gender, ethnicity or religion, but as far as the recruitment process goes, it is very possible for the issue of name bias to fall through the cracks and not be under the same level of scrutiny as the interview stage,” he said.

And the data backs up claims that name-based discrimination, whether it’s unconscious or deliberate, is taking place in Australia.

In a 2010 study conducted by the Australian National University, economists sent out 4000 fake employment applications, which revealed the applicants with Anglo-Saxon names had significantly higher call-back rates. Applicants with Middle Eastern names had the lowest rates.

Marsden-Huggins says eliminating candidates based on their name is not only illegal and unethical, it can also result in wider ramifications for the organisation.

“Census data tells us one in four Australians are born overseas and over 40% of people have at least one overseas-born parent. If employers are eliminating applicants based on names they’re not only discriminating unfairly, but they are also closing themselves off from a wide pool of great candidates,” he said.

Marsden-Huggins says to avoid undue name bias, it is important to include tailored online screening questions before candidates reach the CV assessment stage.

“Using online e-recruitment software, it’s possible to ask candidates to submit answers to a series of tailored screening questions before they upload a personalised CV. This means a hiring manager can assess a candidate’s suitability based solely on their responses, without external factors such as name, ethnicity or gender playing a role.

“For now, Australian organisations have not implemented a name-blind recruitment process, but all employers should be mindful of their obligation not to discriminate based on name and the potential religious or ethnic backgrounds those names infer. You could not only be in contravention of the legislation, you could also be missing out on your next great hire based on a stereotype,” he said.

Recruiters become marketers: Why you need to build and engage your own talent pool

/in , /by

Recruiters Become Marketers

 Over 50 percent of employers have revealed it’s become increasingly difficult to find qualified candidates over the last five years.*  In order to appeal to modern day candidates, organisations need to act more like marketers to effectively attract and retain high-calibre candidates.

Successful talent pools emerge from using engaging recruitment marketing techniques to involve candidates with a brand before a vacant position arises.

72 percent of employers state they first look to internal resources when a position opens up, however unless candidate pools are engaged and up-to-date, the resources become useless.

Effective talent pooling targets specific candidates and categorises them based on data available such as how engaged an applicant is with a website, social media, or an EDM campaign.

Employment Office partner SCOUT eRecruitment Software creates software allowing organisations to turn recruitment processes from reactive to proactive.

General Manager of SCOUT, Andrea Davey, says in the current recruitment sphere companies need to reduce their reliance on job board advertising.

“Building a talent pool is just scratching the surface. Organisations must then use the platform to regularly engage candidates with informative content about their organisation and what it’s like to work there, keeping top talent interested for when a suitable position becomes available,” she says.

In order to get a running start on filling a vacancy, organisations must adopt a marketing mindset and focus on quality, targeted content.

“It’s not enough to attract candidates to apply with your organisation then let them sit stagnant in your database with no engagement – employers need to nurture a talent pool with relevant and interesting information,” Davey says.

So how can you begin engaging your talent pool today? Understanding your target candidate is key. Knowing where they live online allows employers to strategically drip-feed information in snack-sized bites directly into a candidate’s digital world.

Remember, the information needs to be engaging and relevant or you’ll risk losing them. Candidates are more selective than ever so deploy content to help them upskill, re-apply, or learn about your culture to ensure you spark their interest.

Focusing on engaging and effectively managing a talent pool is the way forward for recruitment and it will bring about positive changes in your organisation’s recruitment process.

Contact SCOUT today to discuss how we can build and nurture your organisation’s talent pool. Please call the team on 07 3330 2595.

* CareerBuilder’s 2015 Candidate Behavior Study

Reverse Mentoring – Unorthodox or Invaluable?

/in , /by
Reverse Mentoring

Reverse Mentoring

Embracing a millennial-driven workplace is inevitable for employers, with the demographic set to make up 50% of the global workforce by 2020. The seasoned expertise of older generations shouldn’t be undervalued, but how can businesses best capitalise on the generational shift taking place?

Some businesses are discovering the answer in a new workplace trend – reverse mentoring. This emerging business initiative partners older executives, typically Baby Boomers and Generation X, with younger, more tech-savvy, Millennials.

Reverse mentoring flips old-fashioned corporate structures on their head and encourages high-level executives to turn to younger employees for assistance with rapidly-changing business technology.

ANZ Bank Chairman David Gonski uses reverse mentoring to upskill on social media technology, and has rolled-out formal reverse-mentoring schemes throughout the organisation for the past 18-months. So far, the program has linked 70 senior ANZ executives with younger social media ambassadors.

Andrew Lafontaine, senior director of human capital strategy and transformation at Oracle also supports reverse mentoring and says exposing Millennials to senior leadership teams gives them invaluable skills and insight.

“Reverse mentoring harnesses the talent of rising stars, and increases how connected the organisation is – by forming unlikely relationships and exposing employees to areas of the company outside their normal daily routine,” he says.

Both parties benefit as younger staff engage with C-level executives where they otherwise might not have the chance. It also exposes an older generation to colleagues who have grown up with technology, who use it socially and expect to use it extensively in the workplace.

So how should your organisation embrace reverse mentoring and keep up with the impending Millennial workforce?

Reverse mentoring has occurred organically in the past, but it’s not enough to rely on motivated Millennials and progressive executives to form their own relationships. Creating a structure around the process will help, but the change needs to come from the top to ensure management teams are onboard and invested in the initiative.

Encourage mentoring relationships to be formed across departmental lines so employees are not only picking up generational insights, but are also learning about other areas of the business and seeing how roles quite different from their own impact on the organisation.

Most of all, create a collaborative work environment, where the contributions of all employees are valued and recognised. To feel comfortable sharing their skills and expertise, no matter what generation they are from, employees need to feel their advice and insights are respected and will be properly considered by their mentoring partner.

Blurred lines: Social media and employees, where do you stand?

/in , /by

There are currently more than 14 million active social media users in Australia and with this figure on the rise, so are the instances of an individual’s online indiscretions affecting their professional lives and the reputation of their employer.

Social media dismissal cases are becoming increasingly common. A decision handed down by the Employment Appeals Tribunal in the UK last month upheld the dismissal of a British Waterways Board employee for inappropriate posts on Facebook.

The employee was dismissed for gross misconduct due to unsavoury and derogatory comments he posted on his personal Facebook page. Some comments revealed he had consumed alcohol while on a standby shift.  When on standby, employees of the British Waterways Board are prohibited from drinking alcohol.  The employee also made disparaging remarks on Facebook about his workplace and supervisors.

So, closer to home, what can we learn from this case and how does social media affect Australian organisations as employers?

Earlier this year, Australian logistics company Linfox was ordered to restore pay to an employee, whom it had sacked for making inappropriate comments about managers on Facebook. It was found the dismissal was harsh and unreasonable because the employer had not communicated its social media expectations to the worker.

Implementing a social media policy for employees is one tool to not only prevent unwanted social media posts from employees, but also to impose professional penalties when a worker acts outside of the communicated guidelines.

Further to communicating with employees it may be considered to ask employees to sign a social media policy agreement upon commencement with an organisation to minimise the risk of your company being misrepresented online.

Organisations may also consider training staff in the use of social media etiquette. Explaining the differences between private and public online comments and personal and professional social media expectations can prevent Facebook faux pas for both the individual and employer.

Managing Director of recruitment marketing specialists Employment Office, Tudor Marsden-Huggins, says the lines are becoming increasingly blurred between online and offline worlds and organisations must take action to ensure employees represent their company appropriately in all circumstances.

“Employers need to keep a handle on their image across all mediums, including social media.  Disparaging remarks about an organisation, particularly when they come from an employee can be incredibly damaging for a brand,” he said.

“We’re now in a landscape where employees are part of a very tech-savvy generation and are engaging with peers on multiple online platforms.  Employers need to be on the front foot and have clear policies in place to make employees think before they post.

“Each workplace must be considered on a case by case basis, but the key is education.  If employees are forewarned and educated about what is expected of them, the risks will be mitigated significantly,” Marsden-Huggins said.

Employer Branding: Time to sit up and take notice

/in , /by

It’s hard to believe just a few years ago, the concept of an employer brand was little more than another recruitment buzz word.  Fast forward to today, and employer branding is proving to be a real game-changer in terms of attracting and retaining top talent.

Employer branding is now a permanent fixture on the agenda for not only HR and recruitment specialists, but the C-Suite is also sitting up and taking notice.

LinkedIn’s 2015 Global Recruiting Trends Report has revealed over half of Global Talent Leaders see building their employer brand as a top priority this year.

A further 75% say their employer brand has a significant impact on their ability to hire great talent.

It’s no surprise employer branding has become a major concern for business leaders.  With shrinking talent pools and competitive labour markets occurring in industries across the globe, future-thinking organisations have been working on employer branding strategies for years.

Google is widely regarded as one of the world’s best workplaces and this year was ranked No. 1 for the sixth time on Fortune’s Great Places to Work list.  Google leverages their workplace perks and strong culture to create an employer brand that sets them apart as an employer of choice not only in their field, but in the broader jobs market.

Closer to home, Australian software giant Atlassian, famous for its unique management style  and commitment to rewarding and recognising employees was last year named Australia’s top employer in BRW’s Great Places to Work List.

Cultivating a strategic employer brand is integral in positioning your organisation as an employer of choice, and making your Employee Value Proposition (EVP) stand out among increasingly competitive employee benefits, working conditions and corporate culture.

A strong employer brand shapes the perceptions key candidate demographics have of your organisation and what it’s like to work there.  It communicates your offering in terms of opportunities for career progression, investment in training and education and on-the-job support.

Organisations with a strong employer brand and the EVP to go with it benefit from higher quality candidates drawn from a diverse talent pool, in addition to increased employee engagement and better retention.  Time and money spent on the recruitment process are also slashed, as top talent is more readily attracted to roles with an organisation with a great employer brand.

Employment Office works in partnership with our customers to develop compelling Employee Value Propositions and build strong employer brands. We are specialists in getting the inside message out about why your organisation is a great place to work.

Contact Employment Office today to discuss how we can help position you as an employer of choice for top talent.

Do working Mums make better employees?

/in /by

We all know mothers are great at multi-tasking, but how do they stack up in the productivity stakes compared to their childless colleagues?

A recent study released by the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis revealed that over the course of a 30 year career, mothers outperformed women without children at almost every stage of their working lives.

Interestingly, mothers with at least two kids were the most productive employees of all.

The study found mothers of babies and toddlers were 15-17% less productive than their childless colleagues, however despite this temporary dip, mothers were still more productive over the course of their careers.

Employment Office Managing Director Tudor Marsden-Huggins says it’s no surprise employers are starting to realise the value in hiring mothers.

“There has been a definite shift towards mothers becoming a highly regarded candidate demographic in the last few years.  Employers see how great working mothers are at getting work done well in a short space of time.  They are also very resourceful and know how to keep a cool head in a crisis.  Becoming a parent provides a wealth of life experience,” he said.

Domestically, a report prepared by Ernst and Young for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency found women in flexible roles (part-time, contract or casual), largely made up by mothers, are the most productive members of the Australian workforce.

Women in flexible roles only waste 11.1% of their working hours, compared to an average of 14.5% for the rest of the working population.

In an average year, these women effectively deliver an extra week and a half of productive work, simply by using their time more wisely.

Based on these figures, Australian and New Zealand businesses could save at least $1.4billion on wasted wages by employing more productive employees in flexible roles.

Marsden-Huggins says employers need to be adaptable if they want to position themselves as an employer of choice for working Mums, implementing flexible working hours or working from home options where possible.

“The relationship between a working mother and her employer is a two way street.  There will inevitably be days when a Mum needs to leave early to pick up a sick child or attend the school sports day.  But in the vast majority of cases, if an employer is flexible in their approach with not only working Mums, but parents in general, the benefits they receive in terms of employee loyalty, dedication and engagement far outweigh the investment in flexibility,” he said.

Is “Competitive Pay” Good Enough?

/in , /by

Compensation is one of the biggest factors a potential employee will look for in an open position. Contrary to popular belief, it’s not the only thing they’ll look for – telecommuting, great benefits, stock options, potential for growth, and more are all going to play a key role in their decision. But good compensation is what all employees are looking for.

Compensation tells an employee a lot about their place in your company. Since most companies aren’t sure how much they want to offer a new hire, they write “competitive pay” in the section on compensation, not realizing that their pay is not actually competitive.

The Problems With Poor Compensation

All companies want to decrease their expenses in order to increase their profits. But paying someone less than they deserve or expect can have pretty drastic consequences on your recruitment, including:

  • Turning Off the Best – Your absolute best talents may be expecting more money from their work. Employers that are either unwilling or unaware of how much their talent brings to the company are going to offer less than the best applicants deserve, and in many cases this will get them to turn down a job quickly. It may even cause YOU to want to avoid hiring THEM because you think their salary demands are too expensive, when in reality they are asking for their market price and you are undervaluing their contributions.
  • Pay Minus Perks – Other companies do offer competitive pay, but nothing else. For example, perhaps the average employee in the position earns $65,000, so they decide to hire $68,000 to be “competitive.” But if that company offers fewer benefits, fewer perks, or fewer reasons to work for their company, the reality is that $68,000 is too low, because other companies offer much more. A “Competitive Salary” has to take into account the other benefits you’re offering.
  • Likelihood of Seeking Competition – Recruitment doesn’t end after the hire, either. Employers that do not pay their employees a competitive wage are at risk for losing the employee once they find work elsewhere. Competitive pay keeps employees in the long term, and so an offer that’s good-but-not-great opens the door for another company to steal them away.

In some cases poor compensation is not your fault. For example, you may assume that you’re opening up a lower talent position in your company and asking for someone with a specific ability, and most people that have that ability are used to being in higher positions in companies and getting paid very well. The task itself may be simple, but the value associated with that task may be high, and you may not be aware of these compensation differences.

Nevertheless, learning how to offer truly competitive pay can make a big difference in your recruitment efforts, and it’s important that you examine how much you’re genuinely willing to offer and how much you can afford before trying to advertise to the top talent.

 

For you recruitment concerns and employment branding you may contact Employment Office Australia at info@employmentoffice.com or visit our website at www.employmentoffice.com.au.