When Recruiters Give Companies a Bad Name

While the Human Resources (HR) Division is an integral part of any organization when it comes to handling personnel, the said section can also be detrimental to the overall outlook of the firm. People managing the placement of conscripts may have been straying from the vision that it must adhere to.

Many recruitment offices and agencies follow a strict platform to address the requisites of their respective companies. There is nothing wrong with this approach but the fact that these groups stick too much to a quite structured hiring process makes it difficult to find suitable candidates.

An odd question

During an interview activity, for instance, applicants are subjected to conventional questions that somewhat put them in a box. Although the manner of questioning is required to determine how good a fit these persons are, the level of flexibility in revealing their true nature is fairly restricted or controlled.

Queries like, “where do you see yourself five years from now?” may seem odd considering that the candidate is a fresh graduate. Usually, what is in the mind of these green horns will likely lean on getting a job as much as possible. If the recruiter wants to hire someone who intends to stay with the firm for a very long time, he might as well sign up a middle-aged person who wants more stability.

However, even an individual in his forties cannot be subjected to loyalty checks for an organization because plan changes over time. Perhaps what the personnel office may need to do is to seek an individual whose interests are aligned with what the firm’s vacancy.

It must be reiterated that any recruitment process is a hit-or-miss affair. There is no guarantee that a candidate will be with the firm for the long term. The interview approach, no matter how rigid, can be rigged from an applicant’s point of view. He can provide answers which will sound great to the ears of the recruiter.

Another odd query

Meanwhile, questions like, “tell me about yourself?” may seem like an introductory presentation during the first day of school. The truth is, inquiries like this reflects how ill-prepared an interviewer is. Applicants submit their resumes or curriculum vitae to be screened. The HR people must go through the details in order to determine beforehand if the candidate actually merits an interview.

Even if an interview only wants to verify what’s written on a submitted resume, there is still a need for questions that dig deeper through the details provided. Asking something about an applicant can be quite vague. It is better to clarify the line of inquiry based on certain perspectives.

Furthermore, a query that requires a candidate to say what his weaknesses are can be a red flag. Why would a person reveal his flaws in the first place when it can likely limit his chances of landing a job? Even if he is hired, when future problems arise in the future, the HR will probably go back to his weakness as a reason for letting him go at some point.

Hiring essential

The problem with most recruitment firms is the way they want applicants to see them. Interviewers want to project a sense of power over the individuals that they are conversing with. They seem to present a bravado which states that they hold the power of life and death over a specific resume.

Perhaps it is better if recruiters focus more on unraveling the true character or attitude of the conscripts. Skills can be taught but it is difficult to mold a person’s personality to be in tune with what the company truly needs for certain positions.