By Tessa Bedford
Now is not the time for a career change in financial services: employers are demanding an exact match to the job description and are rejecting candidates who can’t hit the ground running.
This is a common sentiment among Australia’s financial services recruiters and was highlighted by the Ambition Market Trends & Salaries Report released this week.
Perfect fit
With tight hiring budgets and a large talent pool to draw from, HR managers are increasingly only accepting candidates who tick all the requisite boxes.
The briefs that employers give recruiters are becoming more explicit.
"The expectation of candidate calibre is through the roof," says Grant Movsowitz, director, T+O+M. "Banks are a lot less flexible, and in order to justify an external hire, candidates need to be demonstrably stronger than internal candidates and offer a unique skill set that does not already exist."
Most employers need a lot of convincing before they will even consider candidates without an exact skills match. Many are risk averse and reluctant to take a chance on someone looking for a career change. Tim Carroll, director, 325 Consulting, says this makes it difficult to manage the expectations of candidates who want to change sectors or job functions.
"It is a buyer’s market, and a very hard time to reinvent yourself," he adds.
The Ambition Report states that the emphasis on finding perfect candidates reduces the chances of new recruits not adapting quickly to the job. However, “it is a conservative approach and the risk is that it often also precludes employees with different skills and approaches that may be preferable”.
Recruitment inertia
But even if you are lucky enough to make it through to the first round, there are still hurdles ahead.
At a recent eFinancialCareers roundtable in Sydney, several HR professionals expressed frustration with internal delays in the recruitment process. "There is more scrutiny from head office and we are being asked to justify each hire at the final approval stage," said one attendee from a global investment bank. "It can take weeks to receive final sign-off from the top level overseas, causing frustration for all involved, including recruiters and, ultimately, the candidate."
The Ambition report found that: "This lack of decisiveness then spreads to employees who interpret a ponderous hiring process as a lack of intent. This creates a challenge in keeping employees engaged in the process and receptive to a move"
Carroll agrees: "Unfortunately if the hiring process loses momentum then there is also a danger of losing the candidate."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tessa Bedford is Kiwi and a Sydney-based editor of eFinancialCareers.com This story originally appeared at efinancialcareers.com.au and is used here with permission.
We have expanded our finance sector jobs listings and you can now find these here » for New Zealand, Australia, and Singapore.
5 Comments
Yep to al that. Just this week on the train I heard a final year (I assume) student say that the good jobs wanted 3 to 5 years and what there was looked awful.....I really felt like saying take the best of the worst and move in a year or 2....having a job in the field/sector you want is THE most important thing.
"go get qualified somewhere else, and then we'll look at you". For myself, when I hear that I know its not a company I want to work for....
regards
You are quite right mist 42nz ... it appals me how employers think that their 'risk adverse' behaviour is going to do them any good.
1. It is well known (in HR circles) that if you give a person opportunities and training then they are likely to be more loyal to you.
2. people start new jobs for the money, they leave because of the way they are treated
3. by employing people who 'exactly fit' their criteria they are not opening themselves to creative possibilies and potentially better (if not as good) solutions
4. Employment agencies and HR peopld should grow some courage and stand up to this thinking ... I know that some try, but for some reason they don't succeed.
5. my best guess at that reason is that we have either mediocre brains, or insecure people, or unimaginative people in 'management' in New Zealand.
HOW CAN WE STOP THIS??
I would really like to hear some answers and thoughts on this.
1) Yes, though you have to be paying fairly close to the going rate and conditions as well....within 5%...once its 10% or more...bye bye.
2) very true.
3) very true, but there is risk factor...Govn/public is adverse to risk while private will take you on if you are cheap enough to make the risk worth it, so to advance you have to hop in and out of both sectors IMHO.
4) Agencies are useless IMHO...internal HR seem better....which is why I think ive seen larger companies start to re-inhouse some HR functions now.....
5) Yes....a high flyer management friend of mine commented that the good managers had left NZ for the money and opportunities thats why kiwi managers are so well regarded overseas. They see our "cream" whats left is mostly the dregs IMHO......he came back to retire at 45 BTW and do alternativey type things.....
5b) Another fried of mine is a high flyer project manager, (simply the best Ive ever met).....due to the dregs and better $s he's just left for OZ....
How to stop this, honestly I dont think we can....Look up Geofrey West on TED talks and his piece on cities....its simply the population. So if you cant get the money dont try, look for other things. For me but its really a quality of life thing, I could have stayed in London or even gone to NYork on far better money....I didnt want that any more.
regards
IT has been like this for a decade or more....I always find the instance on a "perfect match wierd". Why would I move for the same job at the same money I want to improve both....and that's if Im a prefect match....If Im not they want to pay less...(Hello IRD) they have to be kidding.....
regards
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.