Skip navigation

Category Archives: job search

Leon Gettner
June 30, 2010

Lying about careers is common. Two years ago, I did a blog entry looking at how more people were now lying on the CVs, making up stories about their academic background and achievements.

But then, embellishing the truth a little might be part of human nature, something I examined here. That suggests there are plenty around who bend the truth about their career. How far do people go? When do white lies become a problem?

According to Forbes, the most common porkies on people’s CVs are about academic qualifications, playing with dates, inflating your previous salary, making up job titles you never had, lying about technical abilities, claiming language fluency, providing a fake address and inflating your academic performance.

Of course, there are many who say you shouldn’t do it. For example, this piece from The Wall Street Journal warns that honesty is the best policy and you’ll be found out anyway.

Similarly, academics from the Wharton Business School in the United States warn that it’s dangerous. “Embellishment is part of human nature, experts say, and almost everyone is guilty of it at one time or another. Left unchecked, however, exaggerations that seemed innocuous at first could result in serious, potentially career-ending consequences … In today’s work environment, where no one comes in for a job interview without being Googled first — and where small talk in the elevator or comments made at a staff meeting are just a Twitter post away from reaching a global audience — it’s easier than ever to get caught in an exaggeration”

But others take a more nuanced view. Kelly Magowan in the Six Figures blog asks, for example, whether it’s actually lying if we gild the lily a little to make the CV look more interesting. “A bit of embellishment and ‘white lying’ make it far more interesting for the reader and more likely to get you the job. Let’s face it – we all lie. Albeit, the frequency and degree to which we all lie may vary.”

Writing in the Financial Times, columnist Lucy Kellaway says embellishing the truth comes naturally for many. “Lying is surely caused as much by pragmatism as fear. In my experience, it can be jolly useful. And tests have shown that it doesn’t always catch up with you at al.” Kellaway says comoulsive truth tellers don’t last very long in any office. Sooner or later, they are forced out because no one can work with them. “Offices are glued together with lies. We pretend to like people we work with. We must pretend to be satisfied with our jobs. We must pretend to think our company is better than the competition. By accepting a place in any hierarchy, you are bending yourself out of shape.”

At the same time, you would have to say that that in today’s work environment where there is so much pressure to perform, the temptation to bend the truth has never been greater.

So what would you do if there is an inconvenient truth in your past? Do you gloss over it, make something up or come clean? What do you think about bending the truth on a CV? Is it ok, or unacceptable? Do you know of anyone who has? Or have you done it? What did you say?

Advertisements

By Michael Gowers

June 16, 2009 07:30am
MEET a young Gen-Xer with three university degrees who represents the new unemployed – over-qualified professionals.

LONG hours, sleepless nights, no appreciation or recognition and lousy pay. How many of you can relate to this?

I know I can – well, except for the lousy pay. I have all of the above except for the pay packet.

That is my reality in 2009 now that I am a fulltime unemployed professional jobseeker. And I have $3 to last me until the end of this week.

I reckon I am a pretty good candidate for work. Excluding the odd moments of capricious youth, I managed to knuckle down and get some good grades in school. I went to university.

Along with many of my friends, I never paid much mind to the idea that one day I might be unemployed. For my generation, who are used to a permanently strong economy, it was just never going to happen.

And, at first, it didn’t. After a good five years in the workforce, having progressed nicely through the ranks of management, I decided to do postgraduate studies at one of the more notable business schools in NSW – even obtaining a highly-valued (so I thought) MBA (Master of Business Administration).

It was the sort of high-flying qualification you’d expect would inoculate you against the dole queue.

But within the space of a year, I discovered that unemployment does not discriminate. My marketing job had ceased to exist.

So here I find myself with three wonderfully framed degrees that take pride of place on my wall, telling me all that I have achieved. I truly am lucky that I am able to look at them 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

And then there is the feeling of bewilderment when I look at the receipts for the eighty or so thousand dollars I have spent for all of my education when it is juxtaposed next to the fortnightly statement for my dole allowance.

Don’t get me wrong. Australia has a fantastic system that provides benefits and assistance to those in need. It is not, however, designed to cope with highly qualified individuals who have found themselves out of work.

For myself and the rest of the Generation Xers who grew up in a time where work was plentiful, this experience is one that crushes one’s sense of self-worth and leads to an every day battle to maintain hope and keep up the momentum of searching for work.

Add to this the fortnightly trip down to the local Centrelink offices, a place certainly not known for its jovial atmosphere, and you begin to understand how the 2009 job seeker feels.

Regardless of our background, how much we studied, how privileged we may have been, we are all the same at the Centrelink. We are just people looking for work. In the wonderfully sterile space at Centrelink, where walls are adorned only by the odd piece of butcher’s paper giving worldly advice such as “smile when you are on the phone” and “be polite”, you can find the ultimate job seeking tool – the computer.

In the facility that I attend, you can have up to 30 enthusiastic and hopeful jobseekers all vying for the half-dozen computers lined up against the wall. For those of us who haven’t quite yet had their soul destroyed by being unemployed for three months, a couple of weeks of scrambling for a computer like a shark in a feeding frenzy will take care of that for you.

Everyday I continue with my full-time job of looking for a job, a process that just keeps reminding me of our economic conditions. I am unable to get some jobs because I am now over-qualified and employers feel that I’d simply be taking a job just to have one and would leave as soon as the market picks up.

For other jobs, I am under-qualified. And the competition for all jobs is ferocious. Where some jobs previously had 50 to 100 applicants, they are now receiving up to 300 applicants. Preference tends to go towards those already employed.

The old adage that “it is easier to get a job when you have a job” has never rung more true to me.

To be the pessimist that I am now becoming, it doesn’t seem that things are going to get any better in the near future. Today I heard that the prediction for Australia is that we will have almost a million people in my position by 2010.

So, at least for the meantime, it appears that I will continue to enjoy sleepless nights, long hours with only a rejection letter to show for it and my battle to try again. I hope in the near future I will be able to take a rest and relax and go to work.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25643278-662,00.html

By Malcolm Farr

May 14, 2009 12:01am

THE Federal Government is bracing for thousands of unemployed people trying to switch from the dole to the higher-paying disability allowance as the nation’s jobless figures soar, The Daily Telegraph reports.

Close to one million people will be out of work within two years, putting enormous strain on welfare.

Budget forecasts warned that by 2011 there would be about 900,000 jobless – 8.5 per cent of a workforce of about 10 million.

Coal mining unions yesterday said a further 100,000 industry jobs would be at risk if the proposed emissions trading scheme went ahead in 2011.

Despite the growing numbers and the possibility some people would be out of work for years, the Government did not deliver a Budget increase to the dole, known as the Newstart Allowance.

The single Disability Support Pension is worth $106 a week more than the single dole and the Government has made it easier to apply for.

The Budget promised $7.4 million to “provide increased assistance to new entrants” with “enhanced information and support services”.

Welfare groups said the long-term unemployed – including 300,000 at present who already have been out of work for more than two years – would make medical claims to get on the disability payment.

This could add millions of dollars to the welfare bill.

In Parliament, Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey dismissed Government claims that the economic stimulus packages prevented the jobless rate going to 10 per cent.

“Isn’t it great we’ve only got 8.5 per cent unemployment? Isn’t it fantastic we’ve done so well. It could have been 10 per cent,” Mr Hockey said mockingly.

“It was 4 per cent 18 months ago and Labor is taking pride in one million being unemployed.”

And Labor’s western Sydney MP Julia Irwin, whose seat of Fowler recorded 11 per cent unemployment in January, agreed.

“I’m a bit disappointed as a Labor member that there wasn’t much in the Budget for the unemployed,” she said yesterday.

“I would have liked to have seen more in benefits for the unemployed. We’re looking at one million people over the next, probably, 12 months.”

Treasurer Wayne Swan rejected claims the Government had been harsh towards the unemployed and took a personal approach to the issue.

“I’ve spent my whole life in politics squarely focused on what we must do to ensure that all Australians have dignity in employment,” he told a National Press Club lunch.

Mr Swan said the Government had “fought for those who are retrenched or might become unemployed”, including allowances for additional training.

“There are people in my (Brisbane) community who have lost their jobs and the personal experiences that come with that impacts on family, impact on local communities and impact ultimately on the social and economic life of the nation,” he said.

“It’s something that goes to the very core of why I’m in politics.”

The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union said unemployment benefits should have been raised in line with the pension increase.

“There are going to be lots of regions that will have 10 per cent unemployment,” union economic adviser Nixon Apple said.

A coalition of welfare groups – including the Australian Council of Social Service, St Vincent de Paul and Salvation Army – called on the Government to raise welfare benefits.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25479097-5005941,00.html

Maybe it was just me, but I was amazed pre-GFC at how many employers were complaining about skill shortage and their struggles to find candidates, talking about their employer branding and employer of choice strategies, but who were still using the approaches and technologies they used when labour was plentiful…and not noticing the contradiction….

________________________________________________________________________
12 May 2009 8:17am

Corporate career sites should be customised to their target audience and manage candidates’ job expectations, according to technology and HR expert Gerry Crispin.

Too often, they fail to engage candidates in ways that influence their career decisions and only very rarely do they let candidates know what to expect during the recruitment process, he says.

Crispin told last week’s Australasian Talent Conference that career sites should:
be customised to your target audience – know who you want to hire and tailor your content and design to those people. To engage people, they should recognise “people like me”;

cross-link to other platforms – have a Facebook page, for example, that scrolls your hot jobs;

demonstrate a sense of urgency – have a chat room where potential candidates can ask live questions;

omit static information and diagrams of ‘career ladders’ – “it gives the wrong message”;

offer a user guide – “If you’re interested in doing this, go here, or if you just want more information about us, go here”;

increase the transparency of the application process – offer “clear data about how you hire people and what the process is”. Explain how frequently you have jobs open and what they are;

detail your community involvement – “what are you dealing with in terms of sustainability? People make decisions based on that”;

manage job expectations – “ask key questions of employees that get deep into core values of your company, such as how they excel in terms of performance, and how they innovate in terms of products”, and post videos of their answers. The messages on the site must be aligned with the reality or people won’t stay;

tie in self assessments – more employers are doing this, but the next step is to share the data with applicants. “Both the organisation and [the applicant] should know whether [they] should go forward; and

respect candidates – “acknowledge every action”. Disclose what comes next in the process; promise to protect applicants’ data; offer them status updates and explain why they weren’t selected.
“Most companies are not here yet,” Crispin says, “but you see pieces of it being built in the most competitive organisations”.

12 May 2009 6:15am

Extensive research into its target market, and some strategic alliances, have helped Pacific Brands turn around “appalling” mis-hire and time-to-fill rates, according to its GM of talent and organisational capability, Russell Kronenburg.

It was taking, on average, 181 days to hire design managers when innovative designers “had the potential, with one product, to deliver about $300,000 additional revenue in a day”, he told the Australasian Talent Conference last week.

At the time, two in five designers were leaving the company during their first year.

Pacific Brands opted to spend some time “confirming our understanding about what employees valued about us”, and what external people perceived about the company (and what might attract them), he said.

It found that part of its problem was the lack of a “fantastic relationship” with the design community, and that its competitive, corporate-style recruitment approach didn’t appeal to the best designers.

“Our strategies in the way we were talking to them were wrong. Our solutions were wrong.”

It responded by addressing four key areas:
internships and design projects – to give students “real world” experience. “To be honest, I don’t even care if they come and work for Pacific Brands, I don’t care if I can use their design (because it’s their IP). What I am really keen about is how they become a better designer so that at one point in time, if they ever come into our business, I know that they’ve had real world experience and they’re able to solve our needs and our consumers’ needs.”

Employee development – “it’s about how do I build technical capabilities for some of our more creative and innovative people? Often they love this world of creativity, but they hate constraints. They often don’t get a lot of development because no-one knows how to solve their development needs.”

Pacific Brands partnered with academic institutions around the world and Kronenburg says these are “an untapped source”;

Research – “how do we partner with people to advance research for the industry, from a consumers’ point of view, and possibly even how do we tap into it?” and

Recruitment – Pacific Brands opted not to use external recruiters to source designers because that wouldn’t achieve its aim of building relationships with the design community.

“I didn’t want to give that to an external recruiter because what we would miss out on is the relationship that we could build with people that may not necessarily want to come and work for us tomorrow [but might in the future].”

Long-term focus
Kronenburg says large employers must focus not only on their own talent needs but also those of the broader industries in which they operate.

Initially, he said, the strategies Pacific Brands employed were “about our needs” and the design community was “a bit concerned and sceptical. We found it didn’t unlock a lot of doors for individuals and the community”.

As a result, the company embarked on “other initiatives that were about long-term viability… In doing that, we’ve enabled ourselves to be in a different space”.

The initiatives included:
building (“really cheaply”) a LinkedIn forum called the International Fashion and Apparel Association. Kronenburg manages it and oversees who joins, but there are no constraints on the community. It has about 1400 members worldwide who ask each other questions. Although it wasn’t built as a recruiting portal, he said, “we have found some fantastic people from it”;

going to universities to help students with their interview skills and talk about their portfolios;

knowledge exchanges – giving designers the chance to be guest lecturers at overseas universities; and

industry design projects – winners get to work at Pacific Brands for a limited time, giving it “access to the best design talent in the marketplace”.

Kronenburg said that as a result of all the initiatives, “we’ve got access to a much bigger talent pool of designers than we ever had before.”

“We now have people graduating from universities around the world who would have never known about Pacific Brands previously who now know about us and want to come and work for us.”

http://www.recruiterdaily.com.au/nl06_news_selected.php?act=2&nav=1&selkey=39481&utm_source=daily+email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily+Email+Article+Link

The 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey
You are here: HigherEducation > Publications > The 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey
“The 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey: Graduates’ education and employment outcomes five years after completion of a bachelor degree at an Australian university“ reports the findings of the 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey. It contains information on the outcomes and pathways of bachelor graduates five years after graduation.

Abstract
The 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey was designed to gain information on employment outcomes five years after completing a bachelor degree, how these changed from graduates’ initial outcomes, the pathways taken and the factors that influence outcomes. 9,238 graduates from all Table A higher education providers (with one exception) as well as Bond University and the University of Notre Dame participated in the survey. The 2008 Graduate Pathways Survey was the first national study of its kind in Australia.

The Key findings were that:

Graduates can take a few years to establish their careers: the rate of participation in paid work among graduates rose from 84% to 91% between the first and fifth year following graduation;
At the national level, the median graduate salary rose from $38,000 to $60,000 in the first five years post-graduation – a 58% increase;
Graduate outcomes and pathways varied for different fields of education, with some graduates taking longer to settle into their careers; and
Graduates from disadvantaged backgrounds achieved outcomes on par with the general graduate population.

http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Publications/Pages/The2008GraduatePathwaysSurvey.aspx

LSAY 55: Varying pay-offs to post school education and training
Posted on 20 January 2009 at 09:16AM

MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate release Tuesday 20 January 2009

Varying pay-offs to post school education and training

Social background plays only a small role in accounting for differences in occupational status and earnings at age 24, indicating that education is enhancing social mobility, a recent Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) study found.

The study, released today, found that, in general, post-school education and training leads to higher status occupations and higher earnings, compared to not doing any further study or training.

However, not all forms of post-secondary education and training are equally beneficial. In terms of earnings, a bachelor degree had the largest impact, increasing earnings by about 31 per cent on average. Apprenticeships increased earnings by about 23 per cent, a TAFE diploma increased earnings by about 14 per cent, and a university diploma by about 17 per cent. Completing a traineeship increased earnings by about 8 per cent and a TAFE certificate by about 5 per cent.

Generally, young women had slightly higher levels of occupational status than did young men, but even during their early career weekly earnings were about 20 per cent less. Possible reasons for this include the higher proportions of young women in part-time work and gender differences in the types of jobs.

ACER chief executive, Professor Geoff Masters, said “Although the overall results are positive for education and training, some TAFE certificates are not delivering sustained increases in earnings. This is in part due to the types of jobs some vocational education is directed towards.”

“However, it may be that young people who had experienced difficulties in the labour market are pursuing TAFE certificate courses or that they are not always choosing appropriate courses.”

The young people were first surveyed in 1995 when they were in Year 9. More than 4200 remained in the study when they were last surveyed in 2005 at about 24 years old. By then, 77 per cent of the cohort was in full-time work. In all years, the incidence of full-time work was substantially higher among young men than among young women.

Further information and additional findings are available in the report, The Occupations and Earnings of Young Australians: The Role of Education and Training by Gary N. Marks. The study is research report number 55 in the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY), a program funded by the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) with support from state and territory governments.

Download full report from: http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/LSAY55.pdf

http://www.acer.edu.au/1/index.php/news-item/lsay55

April 28th, 2009

Reference checks used to matter a lot. Fifty years ago. When people only changed jobs twice in their life, and they didn’t know anyone outside of their company, it made sense that the second company called the first company.

Then, when it became clear that the first company could say one, tiny bad thing and then make this person unemployable (because they had only worked for one person their whole life), giving bad references basically became illegal.

So that pretty much put the kibosh on the usefulness of corporate references. Yet people still ask for them today. So here are some ways to get a good reference.

Get a ringer lined up ahead of time.

There is no rule that says you have to use your last employer as a reference. Explain to a prospective employer that you are giving the name of a person who knows you well and can speak to the issues this particular employer is interested in. Then give the name of a ringer. For almost a decade my favorite ringer was my boyfriend, who dated me and hired me and gave me glowing reviews even after he dumped me.

Give a company you hate as a reference, if you have to.

Let’s say you worked for a company for a year and it didn’t go well. Maybe your boss was incompetent. Maybe you hated the work. You can spin that in the interview – just talk about what you liked. There’s gotta be something you liked. And then, when it comes time for a reference check, you can give the phone number for human resources. As long as it’s a big company, HR will be trained to just confirm dates of employment and title. Nothing else, because they don’t want to get into legal trouble. And, if you want to make sure the company won’t say anything bad, hire a company like Allison & Taylor to find out.

Don’t work for a person who relies on reference checks. They’re lame.

Rebecca Thorman has one of the most interesting discussions about references that I’ve seen in a long time. First, she says that references are outdated because most good jobs require that you know someone to get in the door. And this goes back to the idea that a network matters a lot more than references. If you have someone referring you who knows the hiring manager then that’s all the reference you need.

Rebecca also points out, (in an impressive video) that rich people have never needed references. That makes sense to me: Rich kids have always had their parents’ friends in high-up places vouching for them. They have a built-in network. So today, social media democratizes networking, and it should, therefore, democratize the reference process. Get a referral for a job and you won’t need to go through reference checks either, no matter where you fall on the economic spectrum.

Replace reference checks with networking.

I think references are outdated. I think they are an old-school word for a network, and people who have strong networks and work for people with strong networks don’t bother with reference checks because they generally only hire people who come recommended by someone they know.

To understand how the uber-networked handle the reference check, take a look at the venture capital community. Their job is to know everyone, so they don’t miss a deal, and to know everyone’s weaknesses, so they can mitigate their risk. My favorite VC blog is by Fred Wilson, and today he talks about how he does face-to-face reference checks so that people are more forthcoming.

The first thing I think of is, Would that boyfriend have put himself through a face-to-face reference check for me? But the next thing I think is that no one would ask. You have to be hiring at a very high level to make this worth your time (Fred is hiring CEOs.)

In any case, this is a good example of how networking and references merge. And you don’t have to be in the VC community to see that if you are best off if you surround yourself with other people who see this merge coming as well.

http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/28/how-to-deal-with-reference-checks/#more-2475

Patrick Walters
The Australian
April 25, 2009 12:01am

Military boost … Australia faces a challenging and uncertain security outlook in Asia over the next two decades

KEVIN Rudd is set to announce Australia’s biggest military build-up since World War II, led by a multi-billion-dollar investment in maritime defence, including 100 new F-35 fighters, a doubling of the submarine fleet, and powerful new surface warships.

The new defence white paper will outline plans for a fundamental shake-up of Australia’s defence organisation to ensure that the nation can meet what the Prime Minister sees as a far more challenging and uncertain security outlook in Asia over the next two decades.

China’s steadily growing military might and the prospect of sharper strategic competition among Asia’s great powers are driving the maritime build-up, which will see new-generation submarines and warships equipped with cruise missiles, and a big new investment in anti-submarine warfare and electronic warfare platforms, including new naval helicopters.

The white paper will consider the emerging non-traditional threats to Australia, including cyber security, climate change and its associated risk of large uncontrolled people movements, The Australian reports.

Senior government sources say Mr Rudd has insisted that defence spending remain largely insulated from the Government’s budget difficulties, but the Defence Department will still have to find at least $15 billion of internal savings over the next decade to help pay for the $100 billion-plus long-term equipment plan.

Mr Rudd said yesterday the delivery of the white paper was proving “acutely challenging as we work to defend ourselves from the global economic storm”.

“It is the most difficult environment to frame the Australian budget in modern economic history. It is also the most difficult environment to frame our long-term defence planning in modern economic history as well,” he told the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce.

“Nevertheless the Government will not resile even in the difficult times from the requirement for long-term coherence of our defence planning for the long-term security of our nation. This is core business for government.

“That is why we have forged ahead in our preparation of the defence white paper because national security needs do not disappear because of the global recession. If anything, those needs become more acute.”

Funding pressures will mean the navy will not get a fourth air warfare destroyer, and the delivery of the first batch of the RAAF’s F-35 joint strike fighters will slip by at least one year to 2014-15.

The huge cost of paying for the next-generation defence force, due to be detailed in the white paper and the forthcoming 10-year defence capability plan, will have little impact on the defence budget over the the next four years.

Apart from the air warfare destroyers and the F-35 fighters, most of the planned defence purchases will not have to be paid for until well into the next decade and beyond.

Mr Rudd and Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon are expected to release the long-awaited white paper as early as next week, with the more detailed 10-year defence capability plan due to published by mid-year.

The naval build-up will be led by a planned 12-strong submarine fleet expected to replace the Collins-class boats from 2025.

It will enable the RAN to deploy up to seven boats to protect Australia’s northern approaches, including key maritime straits running through the Indonesian archipelago, at times of high threat.

The white paper will outline the requirement for a new class of eight 7000-tonne warships equipped with ballistic missile defence systems similar to the three air warfare destroyers already on order that will eventually replace the Anzac frigates.

A new class of 1500-tonne corvette-size patrol boats able to take a helicopter is slated to replace the Armidale-class vessels from the mid-2020s.

22 April 2009 6:33pm

The recruitment industry might not have hit bottom yet, but there are still “glimmers of opportunity”, say recession-surviving executives.

First, the bad news: the signs that precede a recovery are not evident yet, says Aquent international CEO, Greg Savage.

The most the industry can hope for at the moment, he says, is that “we’re now bouncing along the bottom, but I’m not even a hundred per cent convinced of that… I don’t think any signs in Australia of a meaningful recovery have been seen yet.

“I think it’s really bad; I think it’s worse than 1991. Perm is a complete comp case; temp is still here but even that’s lower than I expected it to be. The best you could hope for is that… things will improve in the second half of the year. I don’t see any meaningful benchmarks that it’s about to turn, but I’d love to be wrong!”

Scott Recruitment Services MD Rosemary Scott, however, says there are some signs that things are picking up: “there’s some things happening in China that are fairly positive in regards to their requirements for aluminium… so that will help our mining industry”.

She and Olivier Recruitment’s Helen Olivier agree that there are “glimmers of opportunity in the market” but they stop short of declaring that the industry has hit the bottom just yet.

According to Norris and Partners director Lisa Norris, some recruitment companies appear to be on round nine of their redundancies while others are making their first cuts and “this would indicate we have a little way to go”.

The signs
If Australia’s employment market were on the upturn, “we would stop seeing people being laid off; we would stop seeing people’s hours being cut; we would start seeing an increase in advertising volumes on the websites and in the press. We would start to see better candidates being hired; we would start to see clients being prepared to pay full fees. And none of those things are happening,” Savage points out.

Scott says recruiters should monitor what the stock market is doing and what’s happening overseas, “because generally we tend to follow the trends happening in the UK and US. The US seems to be showing some signs [of recovery] so that’s positive.”

According to Lisa Norris, most recruiters know that one indicator to watch is when temp demand increases, because this usually follows “bloodletting” redundancies.

But, she says, “the indicators most recruitment leaders would use to gauge where we are on the ‘bell curve’ are not that clear this time”. In other recessions after redundancies were made there was a “period of pain” while the reduced team was expected to cover the workload, followed by a need for temps, but “the workforce cycle that previously has been a good indicator of potential market growth may not play a part in this recession”.

Scott says there are some recruitment companies taking advantage of the good talent available and gearing up for more buoyant times, but Norris expects many will be reluctant to take on new staff in the last quarter of the financial year, preferring instead to put as much money to their bottom line as they can.

Norris adds that the imminent announcement of the NSW Government C100 contract is likely to have the next big impact on the recruitment industry, with agencies that weren’t successful shedding their consultants into the market.

What to do
This is the time to build relationships with organisations, “because when those companies do want to recruit again, they will be coming to those people who they have relationships with”, Scott says.

Olivier agrees, saying: “The key is to manage people well. Whether you are a recruitment organisation, or a talent manager or account manager, you need to be managing relationships in all areas really well. I think that in the good times, people have a habit of not developing their candidate relationships, and I think the key to actually making a very promising living in the recruitment industry, is to look after people on all levels.”

She adds that to survive the downturn, all recruiters and organisations must be “prepared to change, and to be flexible, and not be limited by your own horizons, and work with people closely”.

And when the worst is over, “I don’t think you do anything different except a massive ‘thankyou’ to all of your supporters”.

How are you lifting spirits around you?
Olivier notes it’s vital to “bring the fun in during these tough times”.

She suggested that Recruiter Daily compile a list of what recruiters are doing to have fun in their workplaces, and we’re more than happy to do so. Send us an email by clicking here and we’ll publish the list next week.

http://www.recruiterdaily.com.au/nl06_news_selected.php?act=2&nav=1&selkey=39328