I have to say I am quite disappointed at how we as a society are helping our grads get job ready. Not enough is being done and students are bombing out for simple things. Missing out on a great job is disappointing but when you are so young and vulnerable it is worse.
A great example we can learn from (now hear me out) is the of ‘job networks’. These services support those who are disadvantaged in some way. I have worked with many job networks to place people and I must say they don’t get the credit they deserve. They really do help get them ready and I’ve placed many a good candidate using this service. Shout out to those who I use! Some of the talent I gained have been excellent. But this service was set up due to our perception of those who have been unemployed or suffered in some way and this still needs to change (I’ll write on that later).
Just like grads though we are facing an epidemic. Young adults who have spent a lot of money to study and get a good career. We push them onto the street and expect them to find their way into the job market. The job market has changed significantly over the past 12 months and is is very complex.
The way organisations recruit has changed – some opting for experience over study. This is where we all can make a change.
Organisations – I challenge you to look inside your organisation to find candidates doing casual or a simple part time job. Are you looking inside first for talent? I do and have had much success not just from a graduate point of view but succession planning.
Graduates – I challenge you to look at the company you are in – speak to HR about when you will graduate and what you will be looking for. You’ll (hopefully) be surprised. It might be staring you in the face!
Universitys – I challenge you to get your careers team up with the times. Get them engaged in industry and looking forward not just in the ‘now’. I’m not saying by any means that you don’t do a good job but being institutionalised doesn’t help.
Some universitys I’ve worked with through past roles do it much better than others and it creates a point of different when engaging new students.
My fear, however is if we don’t do something NOW, we will have a well educated population with no work. What affect will this have on the economy – we’ll lose them overseas, they’ll get into jobs that don’t use their full capacity or worse – fall on the employment heap.
I will be preparing a ‘job ready’ presentation with a great university next week. I’m looking forward to using my knowledge to help students on the right path!
With such great movements towards equality in workplaces; I’ve always been curious about the hidden dynamics. By this I mean – what do companies really do (under the surface) to achieve equality and this authentic?
Larger organisations now have set targets to meet on diversity and most of it sits around gender. This is only one small part of diversity. Only the statistics and results are seen in the public eye. These are often seen in reporting or through and Talent Attraction Campaigns.
Little is known about how organisations achieve this. Behind the scenes are people in recruitment, talent management, leadership and HR who work tirelessly to ensure the organisation complies. How do they achieve this difficult task?
I’ve asked a number of colleagues who work in recruitment (particularly in the banking sector) and was horrified. One colleague said that for every three resume’s they presented to stakeholders, there must be at least one female represented (this is not what horrified me!). This horrified me! The focus was not on whether the female had the experience and qualifications for the role but was simply a ‘token’ candidate. This meant that the recruitment team could report accurately that they had put forward a female candidate to the role.
This has many levels of ‘wrongness’ . The poor female candidate goes for a job interview and is clearly not right for the role. How does this leave her feeling? What about the time she wasted, the time the recruitment team wasted and the interviewer! Simply so the organisation can report they have interviewed so many females for the role.
I too have been asked to apply for a senior role as the company only wanted a female. Not only was I under qualified but I didn’t want to take a role where an organisation thought that male and female ratios meant diversity.
I’ve also seen males less qualified and experienced get internal promotions over other more qualified females to meet the targets of a female dominated industry. I’ve also witnessed a female who was extremely under qualified get promoted into a senior role over a male (who was doing the role and very successfully).
Diversity is so much more than gender. If we are going to focus on gender as a way to quantify that we are ‘good’ organisations – this is alarming. Male or Female – we should not be put up as a statistic to prove we are equal. In fact I think looking simply at gender is inequality.
Some organisations do diversity really well and I know why. They don’t have to report on male/female ratios or prove anything. The simple mantra is ‘the right person for the job’. One such organisation a great mix of male/female/transgender/gay/bisexual/people with disabilities/marginalised people and much more.
Diversity of thought is the key and the ‘best person for the job’ regardless is real diversity.
Any multi-store retailer would agree that having a competent district manager is critical to success. Tasked with overseeing the operations of all stores within a given district or area, a district manager needs to juggle several retail components, including staff development, compliance, sales, customer satisfaction, and more. Needless to say, the individual that you hire […]
via 6 Tips for Hiring a Retail District Manager — Retail Audit and Store Execution Blog
I’ve been working with a number of very qualified and capable clients who are struggling to either get into the workforce (grads, new to career candidates) along with very experienced candidates. It is all too easy for employers to look to a 457 candidate before considering other candidates that have translatable skills in the Australian workforce. We owe it to ourselves to help build Australia’s talent so that we can create and develop our own. Now I am definitely not saying that there is no place for 457 candidates (as there certainly is in a lot of some industries) and these industries should be the ones that we are not yet mature enough in. But what I’ve learned through working with candidates is that most of the skills they have are translatable. Whether they come from a different industry or simply need to up skill; we owe it to ourselves to develop from within first. The benefits are endless. Australian candidates are not confined to a 4 year Contract so this means they can develop in your business (not just do the job they were hired for). It also means that we keep these skills in Australia (not lose them to another country). For recruitment to transform, we must take charge of our role and become true long-term advisors to our organisations. We know our industry and what the market is like.
I am definitely not taking a black and white approach but just asking the question – should we look at translatable skills first? Food for thought
The study of Organisation Dynamics refers to the behaviour and culture of organisations as a ‘whole’ rather than that of the individual. The focus of the ‘group’ or ‘system’ dynamic is commonly referred to as the ‘culture’. When asked to describe the culture – it is often hard to do so. How do you describe the social fibre of an organisation when most of it is actually hidden under the surface. Culture is best described as the things each of us do unconsciously. For example – when a new person joins your organisation they are mostly in a state of confusion – why? – because they are trying to understand the ‘under the surface’ dynamics of the organisation. They must learn this before they can perform their job in the most socially appropriate way. What is acceptable behaviour in one organisation is totally unacceptable in another – I have seen this in many organisations.
The study of Organisation Dynamics seeks to understand some of the unconscious drivers and socially constructed systems that make up the system and subsequent sub systems of an organisation.
Bion (1967) laid a foundation to better understand organisations as social systems when he analysed and documented group behaviour. Bion was clear in his description of a group in that it must be formed to serve a purpose. Organisations too have a purpose and each division within an organisation has its own purpose or set of tasks that are linked to the overall purpose of the organisation (sometimes!).
I don’t want to get academic on you (because I’m definitely not!) , however anyone who has studied organisations might be familiar with Bion’s theory. This underpins the framework for organisational observation today. Bion’s central theory was that there are two parts to every group. These two parts formed the ‘work group’ and the ‘basic assumption group’. The ‘work group’ serves the purpose or task of the group and the ‘basic assumption group’ holds the unconscious fantasies or ‘assumptions’ of the group. Bion describes this group as the ‘invisible people sitting in two separate circles and talking’ .Margaret J Rioch 1970 p. 20). Inherently as individuals we hold both the ‘task’ and the ‘invisible’. Think about who you gravitate to or gossip with (yes you do). Sometimes the invisible side of us can be used in awful ways towards others – like colluding, alienating others and more. I’ve certainly seen this happen but people aren’t aware that they are doing it – it is unconscious (or sometimes unfortunately conscious).
There are three main groups that Bion (1961) uses to analyse the ‘Basic Assumption Group’ and these are Basic Assumption Dependency (Bad), Basic Assumption Fight/Flight (Baf) and Basic Assumption Pairing (Bap). The fundamental idea regarding ‘basic assumption groups’ is that they operate (unconsciously) ‘as if’ or assuming that something was true. For example, the Bad group operates as if they were a depending on another (in most cases the omnipotent leader) as their saviour – again, this is not a conscious choice.
All Basic Assumption groups operate at the most primitive level of humanity and it is this that is culture. So describe the culture of your organisation now? What is the real culture?