Does my bum look big in this?
Appropriate transparency in recruitment
Ask potential candidates and applicants what they’d most benefit from when considering an application, and many will say ‘transparency’.
Transparency on pay, working arrangements, responsibilities, what the role actually is, what they can expect.
The basics.
Yet, the danger of over-transparency can create an existential threat to my relationship.
Fortunately for me, I was the one asking the question above, and now I know I need to cut down on mince pies.
For candidates, over-sharing causes their own pitfalls.
Back in 2020, I did quite a bit of recruitment for an omnichannel retail company near Manchester.
They were already facing multiple woes in their high street stores, even before the pandemic, and had set out on an e-commerce transformation programme.
To protect their future they invested heavily in digital, while shutting down two-thirds of their stores, which included writing off a significant amount of debt with their landlords - these were essentially given the choice of pennies on the pound or nothing at all, should the company go into administration.
Conversely, their e-commerce roles were legitimately an exciting opportunity to gain experience in technologies that hadn’t been done in UK retail before, allowing those employees to fast-track their careers.
I filled out their e-commerce team throughout lockdowns 1 and 2, and their e-commerce performance saved the company and hundreds of jobs.
While I’m someone who advocates transparency, throughout these hires there were elements I couldn’t divulge.
I had to keep the company name secret, to reduce reputational damage among the staff they had to let go. I couldn’t share salary in my advertising, in case an embattled marketing team didn’t see how supply and demand affect budgets.
And I couldn’t tell the candidates about the restructuring project elsewhere in the business, only how e-commerce was a fundamental part of its future.
Instead, I would talk more broadly about how challenges in the high street required them accessing their market in these new ways.
Would I have filled these roles, so straightforwardly, had those candidates had full insight into what was going on elsewhere in the company?
It’s not because I was cynical, or deliberately painted a false picture.
It’s because transparency has to be both appropriate and consider what needs to remain confidential.
While I maintain a warts and all approach to recruitment is the best way to attract the right people, it should be balanced with what information candidates need to know, what information is relevant to their career, and what information should be discretely managed.
In my career, I’ve recruited a number of vacancies that have a background context that isn’t shared - mergers and acquisitions, redundancies, insolvencies, or hiring managers who plan to leave.
Sometimes I know about these situations, sometimes not.
But the question is, what does a candidate need to know, in support of a decision that may change their future?
That’s not a straightforward question to answer.
Especially when there are advantages to transparency in building trust, and the push/pull of helping unsuitable candidates to step away, while suitable candidates are drawn forward.
There’s a flip side to this notion too, that of how we represent candidates to hiring processes.
What are the things that should remain unsaid of candidates?
Context that doesn’t relate to work, or does it?
Disability, pregnancy, divorce, a private addiction, a previous salary, their name (in a namist culture), their location (in a 31 miles from the office is too far culture).
Elements too that might be considered a lie by omission, were they uncovered, yet have no bearing at all on capability, such as why someone left their last role.
So it is that I see transparency as part of the skill of interpretation.
How we navigate the gap between employer and candidate to ensure information that is shared is relevant, suitable and sufficient.
Establishing what that right balance of transparency is, so that we can share clean and clear communication where everyone benefits.
What about you - how have you experienced transparency and its benefits? Has it ever backfired?
Thanks for reading.
Regards,
Greg