e Board. While what I'm about to write is easier said than done, companies need to hire better - and dare I say smarter - people for their boards. Giving away the farm in a contract may not be one of the best business practices seen to date - lol.
FASB "regulates" finance; perhaps its time for those strategic business partners out there to flex their strategic business partner muscle and establish an ERASE - Employee Relations Accounting Standards Entity (had to change the B, I just had to).
Re:buybacks...possibly. Part of FASB would be to specify the framework for buyback scenarios. Buybacks take place because the short term implications on the stock price are typically positive, allowing management to see the most immediate results to their compensation. And any dividend cut reflects poorly on management. So a BB allows management to pass cash to the shareholders without raising dividends - everyone leaves happy. Bottom-line: FASB could address this if they wanted to and develop standards. If they wanted to... More about buybacks here.
Again, great points Josh. Anyone else interested?…
Added by Steve Levy at 11:16am on November 5, 2008
rities and is indeed primarily designed for internal comparison and use, typically in the remuneration arena.
Undertaking a recruitment (successfully) requires an approach suited to that particular purpose. While a JD may well be 'grist for the mill' when we recruit for a client, we typically put it aside while we conduct a thorough briefing with the line manager to whom the role reports (and the HR person, who usually acts as a project manager).
I found your brief story about your 5 drafts with your COO re the BDM position a great example of what should happen, but so often doesn't with all levels of recruitment, including senior ones.
Which for me leads to the question, why is it that so many senior managers, some the higher they get in their roles, want to spend less and less time involved in a quality recruitment briefing process, when the people they are hiring to report to them will potentially have great influence on the role they go into and the organisation as a whole? Is that what we train them to expect on their way up, is it hubris, or just poor quality recruitment intervention and expertise, both or either from outside or inside the host organisation?…
Added by Jim Bailey at 9:29pm on September 3, 2009
lined initial offer. Plus, the sooner they can lockdown acceptances for this level of hire of job offer the quicker they can accommodate start dates and relocation coordination.
For more senior candidates employers typically give some leeway if the request for time to consider the offer is within reason (a week max). Plus, a candidate is technically a free agent until they report to work. I’ve experienced declines from previously accepted offers with the reason being they received a better offer from a competitor. Employers are not happy with that outcome, but they learn to make adjustments when it occurs.
Finally, pressing for a start date does not hurt an employer’s image, particularly in these tough economic times. As I mentioned earlier, most employers will give a reasonable amount of time for a decision, but delaying that decision can spark concerns that there may be a problem with the offer, or that the candidate may be leaning toward declining—possibly because they may have another offer coming. If you put that idea in an employer’s mind I’ve actually seen offers being withdrawn because there was hesitation by a candidate.
reat RPO operations out there doing excellent work for their clients. They serve a real need in recruiting with companies that have an ever changing recruiting need. RPOs can typically ramp up faster and more efficiently that the customer themselves can and they can maintain a strong level of talent. There are certainly companies out there doing everything and anything and calling it RPO but a true RPO firm that augments their clients recruitment efforts can and typically is highly effective tool for HR departments. Additionally, contrary to your post RPOs are heavily scrutinized on their performance. We have a platform just for RPO firms and customer specific SLA reporting is by far the most requested thing from customers ongoing because of that scrutiny.
I don't see the industry going anywhere but up. In fact, it is arguably the fastest growing area of 3rd party recruitment.
COO BrightMove Recruiting Software…
ill certainly argue that filling any position has an inherent pecuniary focus). Tortious interference is much more difficult to prove and typically ends up in an "agreement."
I wonder where this thread will go today?…