Marketing & PR, Digital and Technology Blogs

For whatever reason, you’ve handed in your notice and have been invited to attend an exit interview. It could be with your boss, it could be with HR, it could even be with both. Are you accepting the invitation or politely declining? Exit interviews are becoming more and more common across countless areas of business, with a recent LinkedIn discussion jumping into the debate and asking professionals in all industries whether an exit interview can ever be truly beneficial. The results from the discussion are varied and take in some interesting opinions and thoughts - and this blog is going to dive right into the heart of some of them. The Advantages It can be easy, in this kind of discussion, to forget that in many cases people are resigning on good terms and have very little in the way of negative comments to share about their role and their employer. In these instances, where an employee is progressing with their career or leaving a job because of a change in situation or location, an exit interview can present a multitude of opportunities to discuss what worked and what didn’t work in their role; with the outgoing individual able to share their thoughts in an unbiased way and perhaps give some advice for an incoming employee taking over their role. Then we have those who are leaving following some issues but are still able to hand over constructive feedback and ideas for the ongoing development of the team and business they are leaving - whether or not the business really wants to hear them or plans to take their thoughts on board. The long and short of it is that those instances where an exit interview is an advantage come when a lack of emotion is brought to the interview - and when the discussion is fuelled by unprovoked honesty and positivity. The Negatives Unfortunately, exit interviews do not always go that way - and in many cases can become an outlet for the leaving employees to share their woes and issues experienced during their time with a company. The question that remains is this: does it actually do the outgoing employee any favours to air their grievances, or would they be better keeping quiet? Again, it comes down to the delivery and progression of the interview from both parties. A lack of emotive discussion can create a constructive back and forth where both parties are able to discuss and work through any problems, in a way that could benefit both sides in the future. However, when emotion gets involved, or if the outgoing employee has particularly strong feelings about the way they were treated or the work of the organisation, then exit interviews can quickly go from constructive to dangerous, especially in the case of the leaving employee. Some of the problems that can face an employee who passionately airs their grievances in an exit interview include:  The employer withholding a reference. This can be damaging for future applications as it can raise questions with future employers about why the employee has no reference.  Damage to the employee’s professional reputation. No business wants to hire someone who has a problem with authority or is unable to get on with colleagues, and unfortunately a negative exit interview and reports of issues can follow you around - particularly if you stay within the same niche field or industry.  A lack of change. No matter how passionate the outgoing employee is about a certain issue they came across during their time, there is no guarantee that their words will create any chance, and so they might be putting their future career in jeopardy for no other reason than to unload and air their issues. Too Little Too Late? There is a definite argument for the simple idea that an exit interview is too little too late - for both sides. This leads us to question whether or not there is really any point to exit interviews, as there is nothing that the employer can do to make the employee stay at this late stage, and there is no action to be taken to fix the issues aired by the employee that they will actually benefit from. So, why do we have exit interviews at all? Different industries and different organisations have their own reasons - and for those leaving on a positive note it can be an opportunity to secure ongoing engagement and a long term working relationship that could benefit both parties in the future. But if the outgoing employee has little in the way of positive notes to share, the exit interview could well be considered a disaster waiting to happen. On the whole, the takeaway is this. If you have issues to raise, do so with the relevant team members and in confidence - but be careful what you say and who you say it to. If there’s a chance that speaking out could harm your reputation and future career opportunities and you are leaving anyway, there may in fact be no point in speaking out at this late stage. And in the words of one Team Leader and Strategist who partook in the LinkedIn discussion: “Employment is an exchange of skills and work for money. We wrap it in layers of emotive reasoning and social interaction but fundamentally it’s just business. Never forget that in any exit interview.

When you enter into a transaction with a business, you very rarely consider any communication beyond what’s necessary; nor do you put much thought into forming a working relationship off the back of that transaction or purchase. Once the job is done, boxes are ticked and both parties proceed on their own path. You might be asking what this has to do with recruitment. After all, short of paying for a job advert or vacancy listing, the recruitment process is far more complex than a standard transaction, right? Perhaps not. In fact, we would argue that the UK recruitment market is the most transactional recruitment market in the world, with clients continually choosing to share the load of their vacancies across as many recruiting agencies as possible in an effort to offload the work and get the job done quickly and efficiently. What this means is that vacancies are being filled by recruiters who don’t know the company well, who can’t vouch for the working environment or culture when the candidate asks, and who frankly feel undervalued by a client who simply won’t suck it up and commit to a productive partnership. It’s like a Tinder date gone very wrong, but they keep coming back for more. What does the transactional nature of recruitment mean for clients? If you went on a bad Tinder date and they made you feel like a transaction or just another person on their list of dates, you would probably tell all your friends and that other individual would gain a poor reputation among your networks. And recruitment partnerships work in much the same way - with clients increasingly gaining a poor reputation for making the following mistakes. For one thing, by not committing to a working partnership with one or two select recruiters, they operate only on the very surface of what can be achieved with a stable partnership. Vacancies are filled but recruiters are made to feel like they are being pitted against a wide selection of other agencies in the field, with the client simply going for the recruiter who works fastest and gets the quickest results. This is not the way to build up a reliable or productive recruitment process, and it’s certainly not the way to ensure that every position is filled by the optimum candidate. For another thing, these same clients are often driven by price - and will drop a recruiting partner at the click of a button if they can find a cheaper alternative somewhere else. As you will likely appreciate, appearing cheap is not an attractive trait. And then you come to the concept of time and wasted effort, which over time leads to a very poor experience for the recruiter and a very negative review for the client. As a recruiter, there is nothing worse than channelling resources, time, and effort into advertising a vacancy and going through applications, only to be pulled from the job by the client when they find another recruiter to have acted faster or on a lesser budget. And it doesn’t end there. The damage that the transactional market is doing to recruiters We’ve already covered the frustrations caused by clients who treat recruitment like a transaction rather than the potential for a growing partnership that benefits both parties. But the important thing to recognise is not the mere frustration that is caused by this behaviour, but rather the way in which a transactional recruitment process damages the reputation of the hiring company and thus stands in the way of recruiters wanting to work with them. By treating recruiting agencies like a carousel of potential hiring parties rather than building a fruitful partnership and understanding between the two, there lies a lack of the basic employment information that is increasingly demanded by the candidates themselves. While a productive working relationship and partnership between a client and recruitment agency leads to effective, cohesive, and productive placements, if the recruiter is only used because they are cheapest or quickest, they won’t have built that same repertoire and so won’t be able to answer the candidate questions on culture and working style. So, it is fair to assume that a transactional recruitment process leads to: A poor reputation on the part of the hiring client, showing them as non-committal and thus pushing recruiting agencies away An increasingly challenging working environment for those recruiters who do work with the client, as they are pitted against each other with some clients hiring up to 10 different agencies at a time Little cohesion between the recruiting agency and the end client, making placement much more difficult Why a Partnership is the best solution A recruiting partnership not only saves face and the reputation of both the client and the recruitment agency, but it also ensures that the best candidates are placed in the best roles every time. It guarantees a high level and efficient process for both parties, marks an adequate level of respect on both sides, and increases relations across the business industry. For clients operating across a couple of different industries or working types, partnership with a couple of long term recruiting partners will ensure that you have a finger in all the relevant So, the next time you come across a client looking to pick up your services as their recruitment solution, pitch the idea of a working and long term partnership. It will certainly save everyone some hassle.

The return to the office was always going to spark some conversation and controversy - and it seems that the main argument right now is around legality and the legal right of UK workers to work from home. At one point, it seemed as though a genuine legislation might be brought into force which gave workers the right to work from home, however all legal talk has now been scrapped in favour of guidelines and good, British, old-fashioned debate. In this blog we will consider both sides of the argument, tapping into the benefits and drawbacks of working from home both from an employee and an employer point of view. Where the debate came from For the past year or so, LinkedIn has been full of polls and opinion pieces shared by industry professionals around the world and across every area of business, asking for thoughts on the concept of working from home and whether people like it or not. While some revel in the freedom and the ability to spend more time with family and creating more of a work-life balance, others have been fighting the office fight for months. The latest debate has been sparked by the UK government who, on 17th June 2921, were reported by the Guardian as considering a legislation that allows workers to request working from home as part of their contract. This would mean that flexible working was a viable option for anyone who could logistically and safely work away from the office, though the talk around this becoming a legal right has already been scrapped in early conversations. But does the lack of a legal standpoint mean that employers can simply bypass and ignore the legislation? In short, the argument remains that businesses should have the final say over who can and cannot work from home - and that this can never become a legal case because every business works and operates in a different way. What works for one may not work for another, as discussed by the Confederation of British Industry who stated that “The default must remain that businesses control where work is done. While they will need to talk with workers about this, accommodate flexibility where they can and explain these decisions, it can’t be unduly onerous to do so […]”. The ‘right to request’ - what does it mean? The ‘right to request’ essentially gives employees and workers the right to request more workplace flexibility either as part of their contract or as we navigate the new world of work post-pandemic. Crucially, this request should be met with a thorough exploration of the possibility of the request being granted, with businesses accommodating flexibility wherever possible to safeguard workers’ rights. What LinkedIn is saying When you want to capture a wide-angle view on a certain issue or point of contention, turn to LinkedIn. The hub and social media platform chosen by professionals on every level and across every industry, LinkedIn has indeed risen to this debate to share its views, with professionals offering various viewpoints from different sides of the argument. For the most part, it seems that workers are happy to proceed on a case of flexibility rather than legality, with workplaces encouraging their workers to operate both within and outside of the office as suits both them and the company. Crucially, this leans on the idea of balance and creating a workplace which is understanding of individual needs. Another area of focus considered by many is how working from home will impact the workplace protection and right to safe working conditions - with businesses unable to hold the same amount of control over the working conditions of someone at home. This would change the way a lot of businesses operate in terms of their benefits and safety policies, again arguing for the idea of businesses being as flexible as possible but without a legal need to meet these requests. Other arguments which must be considered include the ability of employers to monitor progress and employee wellbeing from home, provide adequate support, and deliver the same results as might be seen when working within an office environment. The crux of the matter is that a decision cannot be reached to support a work-life balance if this means that the work being done loses productivity and efficiency - something that employers and business owners must assess in detail before reaching a decision on how their own organisation can proceed. The Takeaway Working from home and the home-working / office-working debate has been active for almost a year, with businesses more focussed than ever before on giving employees the flexibility they want in order to retain staff, while still ensuring that work is done properly and under the same level of productivity. For the most part, the concept of a working from legislation has been met with caution and a belief that individual businesses should be able to design their own working from home policies based on their operational style and the responsibilities of workers. Productivity and logistics must be factored into this kind of conversation, with workers and employers needing to work together to reach the kind of arrangement that suits both parties. 

Known throughout the industry as the ‘7 P’s’, these Golden Rules of marketing are identified as key tactics which can be used in any order of assembly in order to draw the target customer towards the end product – and ensure they don’t drop out along the way.     With a cross-channel strategy now forming one of the most fundamental parts of the marketing plan for any business or brand, marketing recruiters are more focussed than ever on searching for candidates who understand what the 7 P’s are and how they can be executed to their full extent in the modern market.     Without further ado, let’s take a closer look at what the 7 P’s are and how they come together to create an effective end-to-end plan for businesses across a multitude of industries.    Product As any marketing recruiter will be able to tell you, knowing a product isn’t just a case of reeling off its key features. Marketing a product means understanding how that product solves a problem and using that problem-solving advantage as the first and most crucial sticking point for the customer.    For candidates interested in the world of marketing, product is closely linked with research and development, with a successful marketing recruit getting to know the product through the perspective of the end customer. Once you see what they see, you are far better able to communicate with them about what the benefits of your product in their lives.     Price The pricing strategy is a huge part of the marketing process, considering how the total cost impacts the customer’s willingness to buy the product, and identifying value stacks and other techniques which can enhance the perceived value of the product in relation to its price.    It’s important to note that price doesn’t just refer to the end cost of the product for the customer – it also takes into account the production cost, profit margins, overheads, and even the payment methods associated with the business or brand. All of these are areas that fall on marketing to communicate.   Promotion Contrary to popular belief, this does not refer to the offers and discount promotions that businesses engage in – all of those areas fall under Price. Promotion is in fact all the promotional and advertising work you do to get the product out there and in front of its target audience – largely referring to the basics of marketing and the area of the sale most synonymous with marketing tactics.   If you’re interested in the field of marketing, promotional activities will be something you should be familiar with – with businesses and industries all employing their own methods as per the temperature of their audience.    Place Where are your customers? Where will they be when they decide they need your product? How will they access your product?   These are all questions which fall under the placement section of marketing, with marketing recruiters often being asked by clients to find candidates who think outside the box and can deliver innovative ideas that will help their products and services stand out from the competition.    Spoiler alert: It’s no longer enough to simply showcase a product at an event. Brands need to be increasingly different in their approach if they want to continue to generate interest and start conversations.    People Not the audience but the team. This is one of the most important elements in the marketing recruitment field because it refers directly to the people that we as recruiters bring on board to different businesses – creating the team that bring the product and its messages to life.    This has as much to do with branding as it has to do with the quality of a product, with customer service and experiences playing into the importance of the people behind the business.    Process Process carries on well from the people who make it all happen – referring directly to the ways in which they make various activities come to life. Processes can be anything from the interaction a customer has online, to their journey through the marketing sales funnel, all the way through to delivery of the product and their after-purchase experience.    Marketing, particularly in a cross-channel world, is all about creating seamless and joined up experiences where the same messages are spread across a multitude of touchpoints. In this case, it is the way that these messages tie in with the processes that ensures a high marketing presence.    Physical Evidence And finally, to Physical Evidence, which considers the role that marketing plays in bringing the physical experience of a brand or business to life. This could be a store or a poster, packaging, branding, or even a short video. All of these physical expressions of a brand or product can be a make or break for potential buyers, particularly when they are given better insight into the brand culture and the personalities behind the products.    There is a reason why more clients than ever are coming to marketing recruiters looking for candidates with experience in live stream, social and engaging content creation – because more and more customers are turning to brands who they can resonate with online and who go above and beyond to reach out and share their brand values.    The Takeaway If marketing is a field that you are interested in, the 7 P’s introduce a handful of the golden rules which create an overarching and seamless marketing strategy. While any one of these 7 P’s can become your speciality, as a marketing professional it pays to have an in depth understanding of how these areas work together and deliver a high quality and consistent level of messaging across the different channels and touchpoints experienced by the customer.    Remember, the more touchpoints your customer has to go through to reach the buy page, the more likely they are to drop out. Your job as a marketing professional is to continue to communicate the benefits of the product – so much so that they decide by the end that they cannot live without it.

Marketing recruitment is a minefield of opportunity, and with marketing expanding into so many areas and different skillsets, the number of roles out there waiting to be filled is at an all-time high. Particularly for those candidates who boast technology and digital know-how and experience, marketing can open up a load of career doors – and can place them in roles where their skills are not only desired but highly sought after.  So, for those with the skills required to go far in their career, where should they go? Are their talents best placed in a marketing agency working with a multitude of businesses and improving operations for a wider scale of projects, or is it better to channel all that knowledge and energy into boosting the business messaging and marketing of a single organisation? The advantages of working with a marketing agency Whenever a company or organisation reaches out to a marketing agency, the implication is that they know they need to up their game in order to continue to grow and expand. With marketing branching out into more areas than ever before, and with technology playing such a big part in the growth of digital marketing in particular, the opportunities for those working within these marketing agencies is huge – both in the scope of work they get to be involved in and complete, and in the variety of tools and processes they get the chance to work with.  Another great advantage of working with a marketing agency is the daily immersion within the world of marketing – which often means that as a marketer, you are exposed to the latest trends and the most exciting new projects on the market.  Surrounding yourself with other top level marketers, albeit with different skillsets and specialisms, means that you have the chance to learn and work surrounded by the best – which can present a real boost for candidates looking to further their development and growth in a certain industry or area of marketing.  Some other advantages heralded by marketing agency marketers include The constant exposure to networking, with colleagues often becoming future contacts and networking opportunities. A creative environment. Environment and work culture is becoming more and more important for candidates, with marketing agencies renowned for being some of the most fast-paced and creative workspaces out there.  If you thrive on working hard and working fast, a marketing agency is a place where you could thrive.  Of course, as with any job role, there are challenges that arise with working for an agency. For one thing, workloads can be inconsistent, and a candidate may find themselves placed on a series of less interesting projects while seeing those around them placed on exciting and innovative tasks. When you work for an agency, you have no control over the clients you end up working with – instead, you are brought in as an expert and become the product that a client business “buys”; placed on a series of client projects depending on your specific skillset and knowledge.  Why working within a single organisation can be better for some candidates For those who want to pursue a career in marketing but don’t get put onto an agency role, the alternative step is to land a role within the marketing team of a specific organisation or company. While this removes the diversity of work and variety of opportunities you get from surrounding yourself with likeminded people, what it does do is give you a single business or project which you can really get your teeth into and commit to completely.  Those who work in the marketing team of a distinct organisation tend to find that the single-business approach helps them focus and really immerse themselves in every corner of the business offering, making them able to deliver efficient and effective messages at the click of a button. All this comes because they have the chance to become an integral part of the business and get to know the target audience inside out.  Another reason why candidates often prefer to look for jobs in specific companies and organisations, is that they have tried working for agencies in the past and found it didn’t work out. This tends to relate closely with a broken down working culture between the agency and the candidate, but from a marketing recruitment angle can damage the candidates view of all marketing agencies relating to future job roles. Some other angles which lean towards marketing teams rather than agencies, include the ease of communication within a single organisational team, and the transition of messages between different touchpoints of the business. Both of these advantages touch on the huge importance of marketing in ensuring that every touchpoint of the business is working together, and from a marketer’s point of view it can be much easier to work from within the team itself in order to get the information they need when they need it, without going through various communication channels.  To turn the tables, while working in a team presents a specific goal and is ideal for those looking to get their teeth into something they can really build and grow over time, working within a marketing team does remove the variety of the role – with candidates typically leaving internal roles much quicker than if they had taken on a role at an agency. The Takeaway As a marketing recruitment agency, recruiting for in-house teams and agencies requires an understanding of the candidate’s priorities and work-life preferences, as well as a distinct exploration of the job role and work involved. Choosing between the two is a personal decision that should be led by the candidate, based on their goals as a marketing professional and where and how they see their career progressing. 

The art of Negotiation It takes a lot of guts to chase a pay rise, whether it means a simple chat with your Boss or something more formal like an internal meeting or a letter to HR. With that said, how do you know when it’s time to ask for a pay rise, and when it’s simply time to find a new job instead? And can the two ever merge together successfully?  Have you ever searched for a new job, or even filled in a full application and sent it off, in the heat of the moment because you’re irritated by something at work – or because you feel that your commitment isn’t being rewarded? The same is true for those who have asked for a pay rise and been told there isn’t the budget for it, or it’s not the right time – with more and more employees reaching for the “I’m leaving” tactic in the hopes that it might elicit a more open response to their pay rise request from an existing Boss.  The question we are posing is this: is it right to use a potential new job as leverage to ask for a pay rise, and can it ever really result in a successful continuation of an existing role without damaging internal relations? The act of using a new job to earn a pay rise – how does it work? The idea of using a new job as leverage to earn a pay rise, is built on the hope that when you go to hand in your notice or hint towards a new job, your existing Boss will do everything in their power to entice you to stay. There are many employees out there who boast excellent working relationships with their Boss, some even extending into friendships – but is the assurance ever strong enough to guarantee that the tactic will go down well?  In most cases, the grass is NOT always greener. Applying for a new job on a whim is rarely a step towards the freedom you crave, instead simply leading you sideways into a similar role where the same frustrations will arise a few months down the line when you realise that perhaps your old job wasn’t so bad after all.  Now, we’re not saying that using a new job for a pay rise is always a bad idea, but it rarely invites the open-armed and warm reception that employees dream about when they picture the conversation with their Boss or with HR.  What are the risks? One of the major risks that can result from using the threat of leaving as leverage for a pay rise is that it can create a new foundation of mistrust, whereby you get what you want financially but, in the meantime, can lose the trust and sometimes the respect of superiors and peers in the workplace.  Look at it this way. If a friend of yours threatened to cut you out unless you did something for them, would you still view them in the same way? Using a new job as leverage to earn a pay rise is essentially a threat which tells your Boss that you are willing to walk away from the role unless they agree to pay you more money. It shows a lack of loyalty and a distinct lack of respect for your Boss and their decisions. Far from showing initiative, in many cases this can ultimately be viewed as an aggressive move which creates a significant lack of respect in the future. This begs the further question, is it really worth continuing to work somewhere for a little extra money, once those damaged relationships are set in stone? And what if it goes wrong completely? The other key risk associated with this negotiation tactic is that it might get thrown back in your face, with your Boss suggesting that you do leave and head to that new role after all. You need to be prepared to walk away should your tactic backfire.   Is there a better way of negotiating? In short, yes – with the following ideas creating significantly better results than the simple act of using a new job as a way of threatening your workplace into giving you more money.  The first and most obvious action to take, especially if you have asked for a promotion or a pay rise and been told no, is to ask for feedback and ascertain if it’s budgetary and financial restrictions saying no, or if it’s more to do with your job role and performance. Find out what you can do to earn the pay rise you are asking for and showcase that you are willing to do the work in order to earn what you want – rather than simply trying to cut corners and get it through the threat of leaving.  Another option is to be open with your Boss or with an internal HR representative, sharing your frustrations and outlining why you feel that your current salary is not sufficiently rewarding you for your work and commitment to the business. It may be a case than an internal review can provide more insight into why a pay rise is not being awarded, and it can at least make you feel better with regards to taking action and standing up for yourself.  And then you have the solution which allows you to benefit from the best of both worlds; lining up a new job which you would be happy to step into, approaching your boss with a simple resignation rather than the implication that you would stay if there was more money on offer. This removes the careless and mindless emphasis on threat, and instead acts as a straight move which you would be happy to make – and if your Boss comes back with a counter-offer, then that’s something you can consider depending on what’s best for you.  

There are a number of perfectly good reasons why a definitive salary might not be included on a job advert, with some of the most common including: Salary could be dependent on experience and skillset of the chosen candidate The company are open to negotiation / haven’t yet decided on a salary The recruitment agency deem it to be too much of a distraction which prevents high quality candidates from applying But is this fair on candidates? If you’re worried about candidates being put off by the salary, is it because you’re underpaying your staff? And, to all the recruitment agencies out there – doesn’t the lack of salary advertising simply make initial conversations awkward between yourselves and potential candidates? Look at it this way. If you were a candidate applying for a job, the job advert without a salary might be enough to put you off, or it could lead to you withdrawing from the process as soon as the salary is communicated to you. Not only does this waste the time of the candidate, but also of the recruitment agency and the company who are doing the hiring. By not communicating the salary of a job role from the earliest touchpoint – the job advert – companies and recruitment agencies alike are inviting candidates to blindly enter their application with very little knowledge or awareness of the level of the job or whether it is within their salary expectations. As soon as salary becomes apparent, you have a high chance of a drop out rate from those who feel the salary is beneath them, as well as those who are clearly not qualified enough to take on the role. Because the fact is this – salary doesn’t just tell candidates how much money they can expect to be paid. It also provides an early indicator of the scope of the role, its responsibilities and demands, and the level of skill that the company are looking for. The benefits of keeping salary off the job advert Of course, there are benefits to removing the salary. One of the biggest benefits of keeping salary away from a job advert is it removes the distraction and stigma which is so often associated with financial figures. Candidates who believe they are above certain pay grades are likely to ignore job adverts all together if they are aware of a lower salary straight away, which can lead to them missing opportunities which might have been beneficial to them. On top of this, removing the salary means that other areas can be focussed on rather than overlooked – for example the flexibility of a company, their working environment and culture, and the opportunity for progression. As soon as you remove the numbers, people start to take notice of the other aspects and benefits to working with certain organisations and companies. Other benefits of removing the salary from a job advert include: For the company, it keeps other employees in the dark about pay grades and how much individual roles are being paid. Salary can be a huge pinch point when it comes to employee relations, with instances of colleagues rising against their employers when they see through a job advert that another role is being offered more money than they are on. Removing the salary takes away all of this risk. Keeping salary off a job advert also serves to keep competitors in the dark about your pay grades, ensuring that they can’t offer a small percentage more in an effort to steal the best candidates from you. Why we believe salary should always be communicated as early as possible While the benefits of removing the salary from a job advert are perfectly viable, the reasons for keeping the salary firmly pinned to an advert outweigh the arguments above – especially in the modern world where candidates value integrity and transparency above all else. As a candidate, there is nothing worse than applying for a job and then finding out that you would be taking a pay cut – or that you are not nearly skilled enough to compete against someone with more experience, especially with regards to the length and complexity of today’s application processes which can be long-winded and arduous. By adding the salary to a job advert, you immediately cut down on all that uncertainty, and ensure that the majority of applications you receive are from those of a suitable skill level and pay grade to be eligible for the role. Not only does this save the candidate’s time, but it also helps companies to keep their recruitment process streamlined, cutting down on the risk of high level candidates finding other jobs while you sift through the hundreds of unsuitable applications you might receive without the salary indication. There are also logistical arguments which make salary disclosure important, including the viability of a candidate being able to afford to commute to the office. Understanding salary isn’t just knowing how much money you will have in the bank at the end of the month – it’s also knowing how much of a cut or profit you will be making from a different commute and a different working experience. In short, including the salary on a job advert saves time, ensures that the overall standard of applications is in line with the expectations of the company, and provides candidates with the assurance that the job they are applying for is in line with their own aspirations and requirements. Reed.co.uk state that two in three jobseekers are more likely to apply to a job advert when the salary is clearly displayed – heralding the transparency of the company, followed by other benefits and areas of focus such as flexibility and progression opportunities. The takeaway? Salary is important – but so are other areas, and you should take care to communicate all the benefits of working with your company as part of the job advert. 

This article is one which discusses and presents two different arguments. Firstly, has the eight-hour workday run its course? Secondly, is there any weight behind the concept of a five-hour workday being more productive and better for employee retention? This two-pronged argument is one which has been around for a number of years, as more businesses and organisations seek to break the norm and implement their own ideologies when it comes to what constitutes a full working day, and what their employees can enjoy as workplace benefits. However, the move to working from home which came alongside the Covid-19 pandemic has pushed this particular issue to the forefront of people’s minds and has left us wondering whether the full 9-5 is really the best way to approach the workday. Uncovering what an 8-hour workday really looks like Picture for a moment a "standard" day in the office (something that may be more challenging for those who have been working from home for the past 12+ months!) A typical day in the office runs from 9-5 (ish), but does anyone really work for the full 8 hours? First you have to factor in an hour or so for lunch, plus a few coffee breaks. Perhaps a morning chat over the printer as you discuss the latest TV drama you watched the night before, or a mid-afternoon run to the shops to pick up a sweet treat to get you through the last couple of hours of work.  All in all, the likelihood is that your 8-hour workday is at least an hour – maybe even two – less than that, and that’s on a good day. Of course, it’s not procrastinating and distraction which can be damaging. Another major issue in the corporate work is the toxic increase in companies and organisations which are allowing their employees to work even longer hours, encouraging individuals to believe that only those who work overtime are capable of progressing, gaining promotions and pay rises. All of these factors join together to paint an eye-opening reality, where the 8 hour day isn’t really doing what it was designed to do. The advantages of the 5-hour workday The first thing to remember is that shifting to a 5-hour workday is not an overnight change, nor is it something that will be implemented smoothly and without stumbling blocks. Cutting the working day back by three hours completely transforms the way the day runs, with every member of your team needing to take responsibility for what it means for them and their own workload. For many companies who have implemented the 5-hour workday, they have witnessed overarching success – but before they got to that stage, they faced months and even years of trials and gradual changes to ensure that the move was productive and did not simply pile extra stress on their teams. Because that’s the number one issue that every company considering a shift in working hours must focus on – how will it make employees feel, and will cutting their workday simply mean that they have to do the same amount of work but in less time? Is this going to benefit them, or cause them to feel more stressed and under more pressure? Of course, once you get over the teething issues, the advantages are bountiful and endless. Some of the best include: Giving employees more freedom to arrange their work around their lives, implementing and making allowances for more of a work-life balance. It demonstrates a level of trust from the very top level of the company, that they believe in the ability and drive of their team It increases productivity, with less working hours encouraging employees to be more focussed across the entire (shorter) workday, and less open to distraction. It makes employees feel valued, listened to, and respected. It is a positive step towards becoming a modern, flexible company – and will help you to attract future recruits from future generations in the process. Does a 5-hour workday work across every industry? The answer is, in short, no. For many industries, standard roles such as customer service and admin roles need much more than five hours in a day to cover all customer and client enquiries, comments and queries. As such, the question must be rephrased and addressed in a different way – focussing on shift-work and job shares, rather than simply giving everyone in the office a five hour window in which to get their work done. The fact is, there is not a one-size-fits-all way of managing the modern working day or the modern employee’s needs, and so to some extent every industry and every business must create its own answer to the two main issues discussed in this article. This could be a core working hour schedule, with employees able to assign the remainder of their working hours outside of this core schedule around their own personal preferences and needs. It could be more of a flexible approach whereby an employee is free to set their own working hours. It could simply be cutting the core workday back and putting your trust in your team to know when they are able to leave, and when they may need to put in a little extra time to get the job done. We believe that a five hour workday presents its advantages, and that when managed smartly and efficiently it can increase the productivity and retention of employees across different levels and different job roles. Concepts such as job sharing, and shift work can be explored as a way of cutting back on working hours without impacting the way the job is done and will allow employees to feel rewarded while employers get the most from their motivated and committed team of employees. Could it be the new corporate win-win?  

What’s the point? As there is a significant movement in the jobs market at the moment, one of Henry Nicholas’s webinars last year that focused on LinkedIn profile optimization seems more relevant now than at any point during the recent lockdowns. With over 675 million users globally it really is the place to be for all professionals. It’s worth noting that we are not LinkedIn experts, or marketers, but as recruiters we are able to show you how to appear at the top of our searches and hone your personal brand to find your dream job. We are sifting hundreds of CVs and user profiles each day and only call the best candidates. A poorly put to together LinkedIn profile might be the difference between us shortlisting you, or not. As a business, over a quarter of our placements over the last 12 months have come from LinkedIn. You can also use it as a tool to tap into industry news and current affairs and stay credible in your space. How should I do it? We outline in some detail the steps to build and grow your personal brand in our webinar slides and video.  CV working in harmony with your LinkedIn profile LinkedIn has its own inbuilt set of rules and it is your chance to tell your career story in an interesting and engaging way. Definitely don’t copy and paste your CV onto LinkedIn! As we’ve talked about previously you should always tailor your CV for each job application you make, you should also keep an eye on your profile to ensure that it’s always up to date and gives that extra colour, but you’ll only ever have one profile. To join the dots, you need to keep an eye on your activity to keep the content you’re liking, sharing and creating relevant to you and your career. It’s the opportunity for you to really become a thought leader in your space. On your CV the information is more or less taken at face value until the hiring manager looks at your LinkedIn profile or meets you at interview. The recommendations and endorsements with LinkedIn back up these CV claims and bring them to life and linking the more formal tone of at CV with the conversational approach in your LinkedIn is a winning tactic. Which is seen first? This really depends on how you choose to apply for a job. We accept applications direct from LinkedIn with your profile, but we also advertise across a range of online job boards where, (more often than not) you’ll be asked to upload your CV which will come direct to us in the first instance. We would then always want to connect with you on LinkedIn. Alternatively, if we have pro-actively searched for you on LinkedIn and contacted you to see if you are interested in a brief we have, we will see your LinkedIn profile first. The Open to Opportunities function can help guide us here. We would then start a conversation with you and request a CV. To make things simple, both your LinkedIn profile and CV will be carefully reviewed at some stage during the application process. As you can see, it really isn’t a case of your LinkedIn profile versus your CV. Your CV is still the main means of applying for jobs and should serve the purpose of giving the recruiter a factual and chronological snapshot of your skills and experience, but it should be complemented by a strong, professional and active LinkedIn profile – one which brings all the claims you have on your CV to life and showcases everything you have to offer as a person and as a professional. Get in contact to speak with one of the team about how we can help you.

You’ve got a new job offer You finally decide to start looking for a new job. You go through a lengthy search process, you’re presented with an enticing career opportunity, and get an offer you’re fully prepared to accept. Congratulations! You may feel that it’s all downhill from there but in many cases that is the wrong assumption! First you have to extricate yourself from your current organisation and that is rarely straightforward. When you tell your current employer you’re planning to leave, they surprise you with a counteroffer. And you’re left with a question you thought you had already answered: Should you stay, or should you go? It feels great doesn’t it? You’re a valuable asset that two companies are essentially fighting over. In my 23 years recruitment experience I’ve had more than a few calls from people agonising over this very question. And the answer? It’s not that simple. What you must think through is your current employer’s motivations for asking you to stay and why you wanted to leave in the first place. Why do companies make counteroffers? Some employers it must be said never make counteroffers and you will know if you work for one of these. For the majority in my experience, it’s a fairly common practice. Consider what happens when you resign: Organisations run lean today, it is unlikely that the gap left by your departure can be easily managed in the short term. Morale is likely to suffer among your team and/or closest co-workers who suddenly have an increased workload.   Senior management will notice, and your resignation may be perceived as an unfavourable reflection on your manager Your absence may jeopardise the progress of a big project, lead to increased workloads for colleagues who remain behind, and even mess up holiday schedules! The organisation needs to start recruiting, it is expensive. A report from Oxford Economics found that it costs more than £30,000 on average to replace an employee when taking into account job advertising costs, hiring temps if necessary, and the loss of productivity while getting a new recruit up to speed. A cheaper solution for your manager and /or the organisation (these two are usually but not always aligned!) is to make you a counteroffer. The organisation starts to think about buying itself some time, perhaps to finish that big project, reorganise other team members, or search for a suitable replacement for you. Here comes the counteroffer…. In today’s lean organisations the chances of a clean exit with smiles, expressions of regret and best wishes are increasingly rare no matter how well you get on with your manager. Most often your resignation move will be met with a version of “We’ll be back to you in a day or two” followed by (sometimes) several days of silence before you are wheeled back in front of your manager to be presented with a counteroffer i.e. an attempt by your current employer to persuade you to stay. What does a counteroffer sound like? For the above-mentioned reasons your company wants to attract you to stay, a counteroffer will usually come cloaked in flattery. It may sound something like this: “But you know we’re right in the middle of a big project! And you’re much too valuable to the team to lose at this moment.” “We didn’t want to tell you until next quarter, but we were just about to give you a raise/promotion to show you how much we appreciate your work. Why don’t we make it effective immediately instead of having you wait any longer?” “Why, we had no idea you were unhappy with anything here. Let’s discuss this further before you make some rash decision. Whatever it is, we can work it out.” “You know we have great plans for you here! I’m confident we can do as much for you in the longer term as this other organisation and you don’t need to take the risk.” Counteroffers can be tempting and ego-inflating. You may detect an underlying threat that by not accepting the counteroffer, you’ll be throwing away your entire career, future, life etc. To some extent this is playing to your natural fear of the unknown. Moving employers always carries an element of risk. It’s natural to have anxiety about leaving a comfortable position “where everyone knows your name”. You’re familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the company. It’s the devil you do know. Don’t let fear of the unknown cloud your judgment? Revisit the considerations that have led you to resign in the first place. Ask yourself whether the new position is a positive step toward advancing your career. Will it be better for you than your current position? If the answer is yes, then proceed with pursuing the position. Familiarity will follow! Why do people accept counteroffers? It is incredibly tempting to accept a counteroffer for a number of reasons: You don’t have to move and settle into a new company a new culture and new team You don’t have to make new friends. You’ll be getting more money, to do essentially the same job. It comes down to effort. It takes a lot of effort to move jobs and that upheaval can be really stressful! If we can stick with what we know, then why not? That’s why so many people do accept that counteroffer – and to be fair, it’s a pretty good reason. Why you shouldn’t Accepting a counteroffer can seem appealing if it means a higher salary at your current organisation, but be aware that 70-80% of people who accept a counteroffer either leave or are let go within a year. Why counteroffers don’t work for you It’s true in my experience that accepting a counteroffer very rarely works for the candidate. There are several reasons for this: Erosion of Trust. No matter what the organisation says, there is a risk that you become a “marked” employee, organisations have long memories and may not forget your lapse in loyalty, no matter how brief it may have been. Most likely, your basic reason(s) for wanting to leave will eventually resurface. There is a myriad of reasons why you may have considered a change, perhaps something in particular bothered you about your current position, or maybe you were presented with an irresistible opportunity. Agreeing to stay is unlikely to have changed these. In any case, changes made as a result of a counteroffer may appease you in the short term, but rarely last for the long run. You may be earning more money, but your environment will be just the same! Your interests and career will always be secondary to the organisation’s profit or survival. Reconsider the flattery that makes up a counteroffer - Is it really about you?? If your counteroffer involves an increase in money, consider the source of the raise. Is this just your next raise, granted early? In that case, will the counteroffer simply prolong your review cycle? Remember that all organisations have budgets which include strict salary guidelines. Take a step back. If you are still unsure about whether you should accept the counteroffer, discuss it with your mentor or with some other trusted counsellor who can help you work through its full ramifications, especially for your reputation. If you’re perfectly clear about your reasons for leaving, especially the positive reasons, you should be able to resist counteroffers, authentic or otherwise, that are ultimately not in your best interests. How do I decline a counteroffer? You should always be polite and professional to avoid burning bridges. After all, your current employer might feel particularly spurned if they’ve gone out of their way to convince you to stay. You never know when you might work together again, or if they know your future manager, so ensure they feel appreciated and that you can leave on good terms. Thank your manager sincerely for the counteroffer and say, “I really appreciate your offer, but I’ve already committed to a new role and I can’t go back on my word. I know my leaving may put you at a disadvantage, so I have prepared a thorough handover and am willing to help you with the hiring process for my replacement.” Above all else, make sure to thank them and your team for the lessons that you learned while you were at the organisation.  Summary There is no one best approach but there are typical consequences of making one choice over another. My best recommendation is to consider all the angles and make a decision you can live with, but I would avoid the trap of the counteroffer. The bottom line to all this is don’t make a game of it. Ask yourself what really drove you to go through the effort of the recruitment process. Do you want a new challenge? A kinder manager? More meaningful work? A shorter commute? Unless a counteroffer sincerely addresses the reasons why you wanted to leave, it’s best to decline.