Hire Intelligence: Time for a recruitment re-think

Make no mistake: when it comes to recruitment, it’s been a tough couple of years. Headcount reductions, freezes on permanent hires, and a need to cut costs across the board in order to drive productivity have all had an adverse effect on staffing levels and retention. And now that the squeeze appears to be easing somewhat, a new problem has presented itself to companies looking to redress the balance and revitalise their IP.

According to the 2016 Hays Global Skills Index, certain industries — among them IT,
life sciences, financial services and engineering — are suffering a skills shortage that’s making it difficult to recruit, even now that restrictions on hiring are easing somewhat. Highly skilled professionals have become the unicorns of human resources: rumour has it they’re out there, but your chances of spotting one are very slim indeed.

The data, accumulated by Hays with the assistance of Oxford Economics, examines the labour markets across Europe, America and Asia. It takes into account factors such as wage pressure in high-skills industries and occupations, to give an overall index score. Among the fields rated is Talent Mismatch, examining a country’s ability to provide the recruitment needed to fill the roles available in these industries. 

"As it takes time to undertake the training necessary to work in these industries, it makes them more vulnerable to skill shortages since the number of people qualified to start work cannot be changed quickly," explains Nick Deligiannis, Managing Director of Hays in Australia and New Zealand. "This is creating a talent mismatch."

Countries in the report are graded out of 10, and in the Talent Mismatch field the Australian market has shown a jump to 4.5, up from 4.2 last year, and 4.1 in 2014. China is running at a similar level with 4.6, while Malaysia clocks a more worrying 6.1. Japan, however, registers an eye-watering 9.8.

Laws of attraction

So what’s the best way to address this for a company that’s craving these workers but finding them thin on the ground? Assuming you’re offering a package attractive enough to lure such talented individuals, and you still can’t find the ideal candidate, where do you go from there?

To begin with, it’s worth thinking about whether you’ve become too fixated on ‘the perfect candidate’. When the talent pool is more of a puddle, can you afford to wait for someone who ticks all the boxes, especially when you consider the costs involved?

"Depending on the skill level that you’re looking for, hiring time frames can be anything from a week up to three months," says Tania Sinibaldi, Chief Operating Officer of Staffing Services at Chandler Macleod. "The cost impact to that organisation would vary depending on whatever brief you have in front of you at any
given time. But it is large."

With such considerations, you want someone to hit the ground running; someone who won’t take existing staff from their core duties to train up the new hire. And that could well be your first stumbling block — if the skills aren’t out there, you probably need to invest in and nurture a lesser-skilled candidate, even if that does come at a short-term cost. Some would say you may need only to look inside your organisation.

"Ongoing upskilling and training is a necessity today in response to rapid technological change," says Peter Noblet, Senior Regional Director at Hays. "Given this, organisations could consider talking to individual employees and advancing interested employees’ skills in the direction of existing skills and knowledge gaps. It’s a win–win: employers fill a skill gap in their organisation while candidates are upskilled into a role in demand."

Win–win it may be, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that it’s all too easy to be swept up in the search for the perfect fit — so much so that you could find yourself passing over an applicant who’s worthy of your attention without even realising. Because, like it or not, we all operate from a framework of preconceived ideas, and whether it takes the shape of ‘subconscious bias’ or excessive focus, it’s making your search for skilled staff even harder than it already is.

According to Tania, it’s common to approach a hire with a set candidate in mind, and so unconsciously limit your options. "Sometimes it just takes a ‘stop/pause’ moment; it could be as simple as that," she says. "Acknowledge your biases, because it’s okay; you’re not a bad person. It’s the way we all operate."

For example, can an employer really complain about being on the wrong end of a skills shortage, and still pass over an applicant because they’re ‘overqualified’? Illogical and irrational as it may sound to ignore an applicant who has the very skills you’re looking for, chances are you know someone who has done — or still does — this on a regular basis. And it can be a similar story at the other end of the age spectrum, with applicants passed over on the basis of their youth. Sure, neither candidate may fit the bill perfectly, but in many cases a deep-seated aversion to them — one employers may not even acknowledge — can lead to their being left on the fringe.

"Most people wouldn’t make the decision to hire an overqualified applicant, for instance, for fear of having a more experienced person reporting to them," suggests Tania. "It may be a concern about their ability to keep up, but I think there’s a threat there as well. You may have just secured your own leadership position, and this person may already have had a wonderful lifetime of achievements. What most people are scared of is ‘They’re going to go for my job’."

Mind the gap

It’s an issue that resonates with mature job seekers who have the abilities and the desire to fill the skills gap but in many cases find themselves overlooked. A recent survey of Australian mature-age applicants undertaken by The Jobs Agenda found 25 per cent were of the opinion they’d been discriminated against for their age, and 320,000 respondents were inactive but desperate to work.

We all operate from a framework of preconceived ideas, and whether it takes the shape of ‘subconscious bias’ or excessive focus, it’s making your search for skilled staff even harder than it already is.

While it may be personal fear that hampers the uptake of the ‘overqualified’ applicant, it’s induced fear that’s giving younger applicants a rough ride, spawned by attitudes we pick up from the media. Certainly, millennials may not have the exact skill set you’re looking for, but in the absence of a hire who matches your criteria exactly, it’s no defeat to adapt your search and perhaps take on someone with youthful energy, someone you could train yourself.

But how often have you heard the opinion expressed that a millennial candidate will be ‘flighty’ or a bad investment? Why on earth would you go to all the trouble and expense of grooming one for a role when, like it or not,they’ll be off trekking around Tibet in three months’ time? 

Peter Noblet refutes that position. "Millennials are just as loyal as those from other generations. In a 2014 survey of ours of 1,000 Australians aged 18 to 30, almost three in four (73 per cent) expected to have six or fewer employers in their career. Forty-five per cent said job security was the key factor they want from their careers."

Indeed, by buying in to these commonly held misconceptions, employers could be creating the very conditions they’re seeking to avoid, driving these young workers to quit in short order. By adopting an attitude that millennials have no sticking power, employers may be holding off on giving them the challenges and responsibilities that could convince them to stay. "Millennials’ loyalty is there for the taking, provided employers give regular feedback to their staff and offer them the opportunity to work on projects of interest," says Peter. 

Tania agrees: "The reason millennials will leave is that they can’t see any career progression in the organisation. We stifle their ambition by showing them that all the positions are at the top, that we’ve got tenure of 10 years-plus. Well, that doesn’t excite them in any way, because how are they meant to get involved or be awarded one of those opportunities? When you look at exit surveys, most of them have left because they’ve said they’re not learning." 

These are but two examples, but it’s worth taking a step back and examining whether or not your hiring choices are influenced adversely by any other factors too. It could be that until you think about them objectively, you won’t even spot them. And even if you find you’re free of these blocks, you should be aware that the hiring policies of companies other than your own could be contributing to the drain in talent. Is there some way in which your own policy could lead by example?

When the idea propagates that companies are focused only on the ‘ideal candidate’, a skills shortage can become something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. After all, why would applicants go to the trouble of training to learn the skills you’re seeking, and so make themselves more desirable, if they believe they have no chance of even making it past the first hurdle — especially when training on their own initiative is an increasingly expensive proposition?

If a candidate doesn’t align with an organisation’s values and way it works, they’ll never be the right person for the job. – Peter Noblet

"They could be paralysed by fear," suggests Tania. "Thinking, ‘Why would I do that, because I’m probably going to be overlooked because there might be, say, an age bias?’ If employers show bias, the candidate is then probably stopping themselves from moving forward too."

The best way to address any lack of skilled candidates, she suggests, must be to re-examine your hiring criteria. Change the rules by softening your focus, analyse any unintentional blockages, and alter the result you’re aiming for. "Ultimately, the question you need to ask when hiring is not ‘Does this applicant have the specific skills I’m looking for?’ It’s ‘What skills can this applicant bring that I may not have acknowledged I need?’

"Whenever we’ve gone through skill shortages in particular areas, you have to recruit on attitude as opposed to them ticking every box in the selection criteria. So have a look at their transferable skills and personality that they can bring in terms of fitting into the environment that you are leading. Then the workplaces that we build have got the greatest strength."

"You may come across someone with exactly the right skills who could be the worst choice," adds Peter. "If a candidate doesn’t align with an organisation’s values and way it works, they’ll never be the right person for the job."

In the final analysis, the way to beat a skills shortage might be for employers to become more aware of the limitations they place on themselves. Because the talent pool is out there — you just need to change the way you fish it.