Raj Kumar HansdahWhat do you expect? Why would not the candidates choose the best offer? During bad times, any company fires employees without a second thought, right? So why should not the employees look for what is better for them?
In case you really want your selected candidates to join, then either offer them what they want; else do not be so ambitious in choosing candidates. Lower down your specs and choose candidates accordingly.
Kust as you are running for the best candidates, these candidates are also looking for the best offers. Competition is a two-way street, do not forget this. While trying to be competitive yourself, you can not blame others for not being competitive. You choose BEST candidates, they choose BEST companies. Hope it makes sense to you.
From India, Delhi
Just a suggestion for this not sure, whether it works so share your feedback. As rightly said by Raj Kumar sir above, candidates have the rights to choose the best offer.
Is it possible for the recruiters to study and understand the below?
Why they join other employers?
Employer brand? Do we hold brands like Tata, Wipro, CTS and so on. There are candidates who joins the brands because it's their dream and known to all. They can proudly say am working in Tata and they are proud of it.
What will you offer that the brands doesn't offer to candidates? Better package, better environment, career growth, best policies. How will you convince the candidates? Firstly, is it not possible to measure the behavior of candidates to some extent?
Compensation: At least from Indian perspective, compensation plays a vital role. Most of IT employees have huge dreams of high standard life style and for that most of them are occupied with loans, so they look for better package. Also the news that other colleague joined in X company with 100% hike makes things worse. So, most of them run for money.
Not everyone fall under this category, but people of what age group do this? Over a time, there are candidates who prefer and focus on career growth and rather than just running for money. How will you identify this pattern?
Other real personal reasons: we can't do much about it.
Bit personal and engagement with candidates: Is it not ok, to call the candidates who are about to join at least on weekly basis and make 1 call just informal to check how the candidate feels.
Not directly, but slowly can check (trust we made the best offer and looking forward you to join on so and so and hope you are not looking for anywhere. Just to check the confidence of the candidate.
So, as HR folks we do have some challenges and we always should work on to identify the pain areas and what maximum we can do to improve it. A small percentage increase also great.
From India, Bengaluru
AnonymousThank you very much Thiyagu for your valuable inputs .
@ Raj - It seems you are showing how companies should behave and make candidates happy.
I intended for inputs..you said lower down your sepc and etc...
This is professional forum and you should maintain same professionalism.
From India, Pune
mita-hemantThere will always be candidates who seem very sincere but finally decide not to join without informing. Unfortunately this is a reality. You need to protect yourself - which is firstly keep in touch with the candidates regularly. Just a casual call once in a while to check how things are. In case he/she does not respond, you know there is something wrong.
Second thing is you need to keep backups. Especially for junior & mid level candidates so keep the interview process on and keep some candidates available as a backup so that if (as mentioned in point 1) some candidate looks doubtful, you don't have to go back to the beginning to start the whole sourcing process.
Thirdly, avoid candidates (unless the person is really really good) who have a 3 month notice period - in my experience they mostly don't join. Also look at the option of buying out notice period so that the max joining time they take is 30 days.
Hope this helps!
From India, Bangalore
If first on list does not join check with the next.
If companies can fire employees at their will, candidates can also pick and choose employers.
Justified or not, but it is the reality to be faced and as HR you must have plans ready to tackle employee shortages.
From India, Pune
consultmeIt is a hardcore reality and is the biggest nightmare at least in small and medium firms in IT industry.
There were experiments earlier by big and small IT firms but we can not project those as full solution.
- A company started 3 year training and integrated diploma for graduates in early 90's
- A pioneer in cloud technology selected 100s of +2 students and taught a very specific technology stalk and inducted
- A company offered all time high referral incentives for employees to bring good talent
However with my limited experience in junior and middle level guys in IT interviews, my take is here
1. The end to end hiring process require some more fine-tuning and careful planning. A Product Manager can not expect 3 BAs and 2 UX join the team in 4 weeks when your company can not afford a dedicated technical recruitment team.
2. Hiring can not be hijacked by one guy in the panel. The common objective of the hiring should be justified across the process.
3. Do not begin hiring without a fixed job profile (Some smart chiefs do hiring to please some angels) and it is quite unlikely to see a job analysis in many small and medium IT companies.
4. In one of my friends' company, a guy has turned up on shorts for a Pre-sales job for a ERP Manufacturing for MENA. As a recruiter, my friend after interview made notes to the panel regarding attitude - No proper attire. Also put remarks that the candidate is on his 4th job in 3rd year. Other than his branded BTech+MBA, he is a big fan of iPhone and Mac (He asked during interview itself whether company gives Mac Book to him or not). However the panel ignored the remarks and went ahead and hired. The guy has not joined and given a reason that his company decided to send him onsite. So we have to follow a common process and do not get carried away with inferiority (to home brand) and gut feel alone.
5. Who is responsible for the candidate not to join - HR
HR is accountable for the hiring policy, right?. Why they have allowed to put loop holes?.
HR Interview is a serious affair and today, how many HR guys will have the rights to reject a candidate if there is a genuine reason to do so. If HR is not there and CEO or another top manager is taking care of this function, then he is responsible for the whole mess.
6. If the selected guy is the right person, without any follow up he/she will turn up for joining. Otherwise, whatever you do, the candidate will tell hundreds of reasons not to join. This is my experience in IT industry.
7. The only sustainable solution is to offer the right candidate (if the offered guy is not joining means you have offered job to a wrong guy !!!). Get more insights from recruitment process, study the patterns, get more seasoned interviewers on the panel, focus on the attitude of the candidate, understand and evaluate human beings and their communication in all aspects. You may employ recording the interviews, study the social media profile and interests of the candidate, psychometric profile etc. There is no algorithm to come up with a proper fix - experiment, analyse, improve, experiement, finally fix it.
From India, Bangalore
manju-kambleI am totally agreed with the comment 5 of this post (name is missing). Well recently I have faced the same situation. Candidate notice period was 2 months. We agreed on same and decided his DOJ. In between I used to call him, department Manager was also in candidateís touch. In the calls also that candidate used to sound very positive. But at the DOJ unaccepted happen, he didnít join the organization.
As an HR we take all the necessary precautions but one thing I experienced so far is that, if candidate donít want to join, he will never join, and it is better to let that candidate go.
I will say this is simply unfortunate or unlucky situations which we HR face.
From India, Pune
Raj Kumar HansdahWith reference to the query and rejoinder from Anonymous; one should face the reality. If you have high specs then the offer should match. On one hand you are looking for high achievers, and on the other hand you are not willing to lower your specs. So you must accept the fact that such candidates too, know their worth. They will choose the best offer in market and why should they willingly agree to lower their CTC? Think over this. You are being driven by emotion, which again, is not professional.
You have the facts and data. Decide what you want and what you can do. In spite of there being scarcity of jobs, if your selected candidates are not joining; does it speak about them, or more about you and your offer?? do not just wish to hear what you are looking for, do a reality check.
From India, Delhi
G MadhukarI just thought to add my personal experience.
Before a year I had two offers from the company. One from a reputed brand in the market and another from not a very well established like another. so, certainly i decided to join the brand company on a higher package.
But the behavior of the representative from second company
was so caring ( Questions about settlement of yourself in the job, settlement of your family etc) forced me to join second company. Sometimes the representative feels that I have given better offer and a brand company, so the candidate will surely join us, but that is not everything. A professional also need that his contribution is warranted in the system of the company. If we can make him feel at the early stage of recruitment, I am sure candidate will not leave that.
There are many experiences that we must have heard but never acted upon.
Engagement after selection and before joining is the crucial period.
From India, Allahabad
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.