A new survey by Hiring Hub has found that, within the last 12 months, a staggering 91% of UK businesses “compromised” when it came to the calibre of a candidate, with one in three admitting the person they employed was “less than ideal” for the role.
Investment was cited as one of the reasons inappropriate appointments occur, with regards to the training and direction of new employees. 54% of those surveyed agreed that training budgets needed revising, and urgently. 35% identified that their line managers also needed more training and encouragement, so that they can be better equipped to support those joining their firm.
A report by HR review pinned the cost of a bad hire down to £30,000. Faced with an outlay as large as this, are training budgets really beyond reach? Not only does lower productivity threaten, if an employee isn’t the right fit for the job and struggles to cope, the financial ramifications of replacing them are matched by the amount of time also wasted.
Time was a prominent issue indeed in Hiring Hub’s survey. More than half the respondents complained that sifting through CVs and shortlisting candidates for interview sapped more hours than expected. Two-thirds admitted that more time is needed when it comes to the interview process, so that rash or poor hiring decisions can be reduced or avoided.
One possible reason for hiring the wrong candidate could be down to the ‘halo effect’. If an applicant has a strong CV, then subsequently makes the interviewer feel at ease and scores highly on a few issues at the interview, the employer can be lulled into a false sense of security. That they may score lower in some areas, if these are even probed at all, is overlooked or ignored if commonalities, shared interests or compatible natures crop up during the discussion. The hirer’s brain is subsequently tricked into thinking that the candidate’s other areas are “bound to be alright….we have a connection!” The halo effect’s premature judging can be very powerful, but very costly in the long run.
Hirers also need to be honest in their job adverts, if they’re to save themselves time and money. It’s no good being vague, or branding a job role as something it’s not. Other research suggests that for recruitment agencies, seeing candidates in person before putting them forward for a position is requisite. Says Spencer Lawrence, letting director at Paramount Properties: “A number of recruitment agencies don’t interview the applicants face-to-face. It’s like me trying to let a property or sell it without turning up to see it, and that doesn’t make any sense to me at all.”
So, who’s at fault when it comes to the wrong person hired – the employee or the hirer? The agencies or those holding the training budget’s purse-strings? At £30,000 a pop when things go wrong – and there’s a one in three chance it will, according to Hiring Hub’s survey - it’s certainly an issue worth further thought.
Fast Recruitment Websites is rapidly becoming the UK's leading low-cost recruitment website supplier. For a no obligation informal chat about your website design needs, contact us on 01302 288591 or info@fastrecruitmentwebsites.co.uk.
