Companies which rely on finding out just how good their new recruits are once they are in the job could be putting their finances and reputation at risk. This is the key message in a new guide produced by recruitment communications and candidate assessment experts, TMP Worldwide.In its latest White Paper ‘The Right Fit: Reducing the Risk of Recruitment’, TMP provides organisations with a guide to measuring the value of potential employees before they are in position.TMP Worldwide, Chief Executive, Andrew Wilkinson who launched the White paper at the HR Business Directors Summit held at the ICC in Birmingham on the 21st and 22nd January (http://www.hrevent.com/), says finding the ‘right fit’ means being clear about which behaviours lead to effective performance for your organisation. These need to be measured against the specific requirements of the job i.e. job competencies and should be linked to how organisations attract candidates via their employer brand.“Now, more than ever, expensive mistakes in recruiting the wrong people cannot afford to be made. Companies need to make sure they are attracting and retaining people who will add maximum value rather than just fill vacancies,” said Wilkinson.He suggests that the following four step approach will eradicate risky recruitment based on gut instinct.1. Understand the behaviours that lead to better performance which should be documented in an organisational competency model2. Attract the right people through defining and communicating an honest and compelling employer brand3. Create a ‘fit for purpose’ recruitment process4. Engage with candidates in their journey to becoming employees through a seamless on boarding programme.The White Paper takes business leader and recruiters through defining, creating and communicating an organisational competency model.According to TMP’s Wilkinson, Employer Brand is also key in establishing the differentiator that makes a company stand out from it competitors. “Having an effectively managed employer brand can improve engagement levels by up to 30% and increase the size of the labour pool by around 50%,” he said.When it comes to finding the ‘right fit’ Wilkinson recommends that companies start by identifying the behaviours and characteristics of high performing individuals to understand ‘what great looks like’. Once this is in place recruiters can use a number of tools from competency-based interviews, competency-sifting questionnaires and tailored assessment centre exercises to detect a candidate’s suitability for a role, says Wilkinson.Through the AMEC Nuclear case study within the White Paper, recruiters can see how TMP helped the company to create a competency framework which its HR and Capability Director says will differentiate AMEC Nuclear and drive the business forward.“Organisations will see immediate value and reduced recruitment risk from our ‘right fit’ approach which will identify the right people with the right behaviours for the company’s culture and vision,” concluded Wilkinson.‘The Right Fit: Reducing the Risk of Recruitment’ is available via email. Please contact Amy Johnson at amy.johnson@tmpw.co.uk
____________________________________
Finding the right fit with a new recruit is truly the "Holy Grail" in resourcing. Time and again we interview line managers who give every indication that an applicant would not be the right fit for the organisation they are joining. Subsequent research proves that indeed the longevity of the employee is short and the performance leaves a lot to be desired. The skills and abilities may be there, but further assessment is imperative when making the recruitment decision. At Powerchex we talk to referees and this helps us communicate to the resourcing team our observations on the fit of the applicant. It is quite often that an offer is retracted based on this criteria. Now that the labour market is a bit looser, I would recommend to companies to take the time and effort to establish the right fit when making their decision.
Friday 23 January 2009
Thursday 8 January 2009
Checking Suppliers is Good Corporate Governance
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has today fined Aon Limited (Aon Ltd) £5.25 million for failing to take reasonable care to establish and maintain effective systems and controls to counter the risks of bribery and corruption associated with making payments to overseas firms and individuals.
According to the report published today by the FSA, between 14 January 2005 and 30 September 2007, “Aon Ltd failed to properly assess the risks involved in its dealings with overseas firms and individuals who helped it win business and failed to implement effective controls to mitigate those risks. As a result of Aon Ltd’s weak control environment, the firm made various suspicious payments, amounting to approximately US$7 million, to a number of overseas firms and individuals. “
Margaret Cole, director of enforcement, said: “This is the largest financial crime related fine imposed by the FSA to date. It sends a clear message to the UK financial services industry that it is completely unacceptable for firms to conduct business overseas without having in place appropriate anti-bribery and corruption systems and controls.”
In April 2008 the FSA published its paper on Data Security where it states that firms should conduct due diligence on third party suppliers including ensuring third party suppliers’ vetting standards are adequate.
__________________________________________________
It is not unusual for companies with robust employee vetting programmes to neglect to apply the same standards to the third parties they deal with. This case and the size of the fine levied, clearly demonstrate the perils that this practice can entail.
According to the report published today by the FSA, between 14 January 2005 and 30 September 2007, “Aon Ltd failed to properly assess the risks involved in its dealings with overseas firms and individuals who helped it win business and failed to implement effective controls to mitigate those risks. As a result of Aon Ltd’s weak control environment, the firm made various suspicious payments, amounting to approximately US$7 million, to a number of overseas firms and individuals. “
Margaret Cole, director of enforcement, said: “This is the largest financial crime related fine imposed by the FSA to date. It sends a clear message to the UK financial services industry that it is completely unacceptable for firms to conduct business overseas without having in place appropriate anti-bribery and corruption systems and controls.”
In April 2008 the FSA published its paper on Data Security where it states that firms should conduct due diligence on third party suppliers including ensuring third party suppliers’ vetting standards are adequate.
__________________________________________________
It is not unusual for companies with robust employee vetting programmes to neglect to apply the same standards to the third parties they deal with. This case and the size of the fine levied, clearly demonstrate the perils that this practice can entail.
Jail time for applicants who lie on their CVs
NHS’s pre-employment screening practices come under scrutiny after director jailed for CV exaggerations. A senior director at the NHS has been jailed for exaggerating his qualifications during his job application.
In January 2007 Lee Whitehead was appointed director of planning and modernisation at Stoke-on-Trent Primary Care Trust (PCT) after falsely claiming that in addition to being a member of the British Psychological Society (BPS) he had a first class bachelors degree, a Master’s degree and a doctorate, when in fact he only held a second class BSc in Psychology and was not a member of the BPS.
6 months after bring appointed Mr Whitehead resigned his £78,000 a year job after suspicions were raised by a coworker and Mr Whitehead was unable to provide proof of his qualifications. Even though the post-holder was not required to hold either a Master's or a PhD, or be a member of the BPS, the court handed out a 12 week prison sentence after Mr Whitehead pleaded guilty to obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception and making a false instrument.
The lies were not discovered by pre-employment screening checks but by a suspicious coworker and Mr Whitehead had made the same claims on applications going back to June 2003. These included the Vale of Aylesbury PCT, where he had worked from April 2005 until he started employment with Stoke PCT.
______________________________________________
It is very surprising that the NHS has chosen to appoint a senior official without checking their qualifications. Mr Whitehead occupied a position of public trust in a Primary Care Trust and there is no excuse that his background wasn’t thoroughly investigated at the recruitment stage.
This is not the first time that the NHS has failed to spot fraudulent applicants for senior positions. In 2003, Neil Taylor produced a bogus degree certificate to land the position as head of the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust. The risks that the NHS takes when they skimp on the background investigation or when they start an applicant prior to the checks being completed can have very serious repercussions and it is a particularly risky approach when the qualifications are of a clinical nature. This can endanger patients' lives.
In January 2007 Lee Whitehead was appointed director of planning and modernisation at Stoke-on-Trent Primary Care Trust (PCT) after falsely claiming that in addition to being a member of the British Psychological Society (BPS) he had a first class bachelors degree, a Master’s degree and a doctorate, when in fact he only held a second class BSc in Psychology and was not a member of the BPS.
6 months after bring appointed Mr Whitehead resigned his £78,000 a year job after suspicions were raised by a coworker and Mr Whitehead was unable to provide proof of his qualifications. Even though the post-holder was not required to hold either a Master's or a PhD, or be a member of the BPS, the court handed out a 12 week prison sentence after Mr Whitehead pleaded guilty to obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception and making a false instrument.
The lies were not discovered by pre-employment screening checks but by a suspicious coworker and Mr Whitehead had made the same claims on applications going back to June 2003. These included the Vale of Aylesbury PCT, where he had worked from April 2005 until he started employment with Stoke PCT.
______________________________________________
It is very surprising that the NHS has chosen to appoint a senior official without checking their qualifications. Mr Whitehead occupied a position of public trust in a Primary Care Trust and there is no excuse that his background wasn’t thoroughly investigated at the recruitment stage.
This is not the first time that the NHS has failed to spot fraudulent applicants for senior positions. In 2003, Neil Taylor produced a bogus degree certificate to land the position as head of the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust. The risks that the NHS takes when they skimp on the background investigation or when they start an applicant prior to the checks being completed can have very serious repercussions and it is a particularly risky approach when the qualifications are of a clinical nature. This can endanger patients' lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
