Yet again you have driven home the global issues. If only all the professors giving HR "MBA/BSC" could read what you have been trying to educate the HR operation about.
Employer does not really develop the scope of position that is required,
HR suggests a title which fits their mental ability box,
HR as we know never read every line that applicant has included in the abbreviated not over the top 3 to 4 pages. It you sent 5 defiantly in the trash bin.
So, employer ends up with square peg in round hole wasting time money and not achieving the real answer to the problem.
Equally never consider on job training which would actually very easily develop the square peg for the position required and maybe develop in house advancement for some employee's to then bring in new blood at bottom not halfway up the ladder.
Old story if management has no vision, you get no growth. Now we cannot all be perfect but sometime management has to take a step back engage brain and act as a leader, a in a senior manager position to meet the corporate policy of growth, and expansion in a controlled but systematic methodology.
I am sure my points have only touched the surface, but the principles are there to consider, the failings and way to correct the failings.
Yep. Madness. We learned this best practice / SOP in Q1 on the job in London which for me was 07. If you didn't have that commitment you'd be be back on the phone to get it otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to work the job. It hasn't permeated recruitment education inIndonesia or much of SE Asia. It's all very yes sir, pls sir, can I have another role sir.
Ultimately candidates suffer. Clients think they're being smart but are missing out on best of the reality or worse, poisoning the well. It's all very subtle: they just don't realise since success fee search doesn't provide that transparency
Yet again you have driven home the global issues. If only all the professors giving HR "MBA/BSC" could read what you have been trying to educate the HR operation about.
Employer does not really develop the scope of position that is required,
HR suggests a title which fits their mental ability box,
HR as we know never read every line that applicant has included in the abbreviated not over the top 3 to 4 pages. It you sent 5 defiantly in the trash bin.
So, employer ends up with square peg in round hole wasting time money and not achieving the real answer to the problem.
Equally never consider on job training which would actually very easily develop the square peg for the position required and maybe develop in house advancement for some employee's to then bring in new blood at bottom not halfway up the ladder.
Old story if management has no vision, you get no growth. Now we cannot all be perfect but sometime management has to take a step back engage brain and act as a leader, a in a senior manager position to meet the corporate policy of growth, and expansion in a controlled but systematic methodology.
I am sure my points have only touched the surface, but the principles are there to consider, the failings and way to correct the failings.
Yep. Madness. We learned this best practice / SOP in Q1 on the job in London which for me was 07. If you didn't have that commitment you'd be be back on the phone to get it otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to work the job. It hasn't permeated recruitment education inIndonesia or much of SE Asia. It's all very yes sir, pls sir, can I have another role sir.
Ultimately candidates suffer. Clients think they're being smart but are missing out on best of the reality or worse, poisoning the well. It's all very subtle: they just don't realise since success fee search doesn't provide that transparency