Recently there was discussion on the similar subject. In addition to other members, I also have given my views. You may go through the following link to refer it:
For Prashant: - Job candidates resign from their present company on the strength of the offer letter. This letter gives them confidence. Stopping the issue of the offer letter could send negative signal to them on company being unprofessional and there will be "no shows" even more. To mitigate this menace of "no shows", the easy method is to issue offer letter but without mentioning the salary. In many companies, it is mentioned that "you are offered post of ________ in our company for the monthly/annual gross salary as agreed by you".
On the back side of the file copy of the offer letter, salary break up may be written so that candidate understands completely what will be the deductions and what will be his/her take-home salary. Signature of the candidate may be obtained for having "read and understood" the salary break up.
Why would any credible professional join a company when he does not have anything in writing. Nowadays, I find companies giving offers without salary details. I was talking to a senior HR professional in Mumbai and he told me that its giving room for the employee to tell his current employer that he has got an offer with a higher figure than what he actually has got. I guess giving offers and not appointment letters are a trend, more in IT and ITES sectors. In petrochemical, oil and gas sector, where I work, the candidate is very clear that he wants all the terms of appointment mentioned in the offer letter. Even then, we face a dropout of @20%. This is despite the fact that we have consciously built a brand equity for our organisation world wide as a model employer. We have won many international awards for best HR practices and we have been a employer brand to aspire for. Our manpower turnover is 2%, biut, the dropout ratio is @20%, despite our gratuity scheme providing for 1 month salary per year of service, retirement age of 60 with an annual extension every year till the age of 65, liberal bonuses, esops, international postings, paternity leave, company maintained chauffeur driven cars even at junior level people with 5 years experience, company housing, education support for kids till age of 21, trainng at Universities such as Stanford, Harvard and such prominent institutions, no bonds, asset building schemes etc
What we have realised is as to how comfortable an employee feels when he is interviewed about our professionalism and work ethics is what makes him take a positive decision. And most of it amounts to how we communicate during the interview process. Do we give them professional respect. Do we highlight the right things and do we do things to project that we are an ethical organisation.
We now have a target of reducing the drop out rate to 10%. We have taken a few steps that includes screening the corporate HR video prior to the interview, make him have lunch or tea or dinner in the canteen to see for himself the openness, ensure that the candidate is met on appointed time and never made to wait to be interviewed, no false promises. Upon selection, give him the appointment order with all the terms, corporate HR brochure, a set of our HR policy document, his entitlements, his rights and responsibilities, his job description, ethics policy document, communication booklet, the appraisal process document etc. All these project that HR is transparent and we are an ethical organisation And most of all a trust element is built that we have nothing yo hide. We have seen a drastic improvement in the hit rate. In the first 3 months, the drop out rate is nil. The candidate is totally overawed and desires to join at the earliest, because he is joining an ethical and professional organization,
I am sharing what we are doing in our organisation to improve the hit rate and its paying off.
Thanks for giving a detailed reply. You deserve great appreciation. Noteworthy fact is that you have quoted facts and figures from your organisation. Many practising managers or even HR Directors give their replies but without giving any details of their organisation.
I wish to get more such insightful replies.
All the best!
For other members: - What candidates think when they have multiple offer, to know it, please refer the following thread:
Please use the search box at the top of the page to find the other discussions, and suggestions made by other members.
This subject is perennial. We have a discussion, toss it around a bit, forget about it, and then it comes back the following week in a new post.
The problem is never going to go away, and strangely enough, no-one seems keen to find out why this is happening, or in finding ways to mitigate it.
Firstly, it's a given. Some applicants, for whatever reasons, will not take up an offered appointment. Every organisation will have that at least once in their lifetime.
Secondly, YOU NEED TO KEEP STATISTICS. The OP just says candidates. He/she gives us no numbers. How many candidates have not taken up positions? What are your statistics for the last week, month, quarter, year, and five years?
Almost everything in life is MEASURABLE. Start measuring.
If the numbers seem excessive, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, can you honestly say you have a problem.
If the OP is over dramatising this, and only a couple of people out of a large number have rejected jobs, then I'd say forget it, and move on.
But if your statistics are pointing to a serious problem, then it is time to deal with it. That will mean looking inside your organisation. I am sorry to have to tell you this, but it is NOT always the candidate's fault.
As I said, we have discussed this at length many times.
The most obvious reasons are (not in any particular order):
3. Career progression
4. Poor management
5. Excessive hours of work
6. Poor working environment
7. Lack of trust
8. Work location inconveniently located
9. Lack of or poor training
10 Poor reputation of the organisation
There will be many more reasons. I am often told by my Indian friends that many Indians only want to work for high level, well known companies for the prestige etc. Very short-sighted, but it won't change. Sadly, not everyone can work for IBM, Google, Microsoft etc. Everyone has to start somewhere and begin to build and craft their profile for moving up in the future.
Hence the reason to look inside your organisation. If you have nothing to offer a prospective candidate, then he will only see you as a stop-gap to something better.
Staff attrition is another subject posted endlessly here. It is allied to the same concerns. It is expensive for organisations, just as recruitment is.
And finally, as I have posted here dozens of times, the other factor in all this is your RECRUITMENT PROCESS. Get that wrong, and you are doomed to heartache for ever.
Appreciate the Post on the very on set.However I have a say regarding the topic,that last minute drop out to join after completing the process has been one of the genuine problems.Your stand and your company's procedure of hiring process is much appreciable, but other many companies or to say most of the companies do not have well set procedures and many prospective employees had bitter experiences with companies and so there comes the last minute dropout idea. Of course there may be many reasons for this but as you described if such procedure is there then no prospective employee will think of back out.
I am also of the opinion that if HR Practices in the industry are open and frank and due respect to professionalism be adhered then this issues will be minimized.And of course there are always two side of any problem/issue.Identifying right candidate and at the same time ensuring he joins in will require the firm and strong mutual agreement between the parties.While the agreement should cover most of the points that you mentioned and the SLAs in this respect.