feel the "right attitude" says it all. So Mervyn, I second your opinion that "Hire for Attitude, Train for Skills" , the inherent skills, abilities & qualities adds a different flavour to the table . …
that the approach or attitude defines the perception of professionalism.
I tend to divide general competence - be it technical, interpersonal, business or leadership - into three levels:
Based on this, as cooking shows tend to be the flavour of the month at the moment, a young chef with the right attitude can be developed into a true professional. But a lot of people get stuck at the operational level, due to their attitude and approach. How people deal and cope with change is fundamental to their own personal growth.
Moving to being recognised as a true expert is another story, as we have seen by watching celebrity chefs!
he day. It seems to me that as technology develops, we are making recruitment far more complicated and fragmented, almost 'hit and hope' like and at the same time seeing huge chunks of creativity being squeezed out of it in favour of the technological bells and whistles.I wouldn't be on the admin end of the poor employers/recruiters that are going to have to deal with the deluge of really mixed bag response they will get to every missive/job post,any more than I would want to be the totally baffled jobseeker who really doesn't have a clue where to start a genuine and fruitful job search anymore.…
if it was free I wouldn't be straining at the leash to advertise on such a flaky medium. Another stat I read earlier said 75% of activity on Twitter is generated by just 5% of its account holders and that there is "significant user abandonment" - now, bearing in mind it's meant to be flavour of the new decade, should we be hearing stuff like that? I have a feeling that sites like twitter are going to be in danger of over-hyping and under-performing, which in itself will drive people away. A bonafide recruitment medium? Not for a few years yet methinks - and that's only if they don;t start charging business users.…
, you can't brush me off that easily.
I didn't say that getting over stuff does not apply to me. It applies to everyone.
However, I don't think forgiveness is necessarily the best way to think about it - because it's not a well-defined term.
Why would I be nice to someone who hurt me or simply did something I don't like?
Even business terms like solution focus vs problem focus are more clear.
Also, forgiveness carries with it the flavour of an imposed moral obligation. And I don't think there is one.…
rge a favour by even having a job vacancy and don't understand the concept of having to present the company/department/job in a positive light to attract suitable candidates.
All of that then gets compounded when they demand someone doing the same job for another company because they don't want to train or mentor someone who in the mid-term would probably be much better because they have something to prove and this new job provides them with logical career advancement.
Instead what you get are too many companies hiring candidates who are making sideways moves for little more reason then it pays more or they perceive the new employer to be the new flavour of the month in brand terms.
More recruiters need to stand up to this bullshit and look their hiring managers in the eye and tell them why they're wrong.
quit rightly point out was way tolong BUT have a listen to it at http://www.jobsiteadvisor.com/) plus see my response to a debate BillBoorman started at his blog http://ow.ly/MybO.
So without repeating all that I have written and apologies to my "pal" Mr Albright but the Employer Brand is a live and well, it is real and is even more important today than ever before.
It is and must not be owned by Recruitment or Recruiter or in my opinion HR to use by usual quote " It is the DNA of a company" it is not a message (that might be part of a future strategy but is not The Strategy".
As Janet Davies said on my show "it's about the feel good factor" "it's not the hype" Sue Redden says "it's not the badging" "you don't buy Employer Branding by the yard".
I find that the EB is very challenging for 3rd party recruiters because and sorry to be rude but they deal in "Human Widgets". The candidate = a fee. I find that In-House recruiters use the EB to help them develop the organisationsEmployer Value Proposition and the the message.
So agree with Maren.
Sorry for the rant but as show says The Employment Brand is and requires board level buy in and HR are or should be part of that board". But a great final quote from Janet Davies " it must not become HR itus" or as Sue Redden says "flavour of the month".
To deny the Employer Brand denies the DNA of an organisation.
An old Brit.…