Talent and Economy

I have a slightly different take on this one;

I completely agree with the concern raised in your blog about accepting average talent, I don't think anyone should settle for 'average'. I also believe that in some industries and verticals, there is a general 'laissez faire' approach, and managers do settle for 'average' (retail comes to mind here).

That said, in my experience it is less to do with managers accepting average talent and more to do with them accepting a candidate that does not match all 115 skills and qualifications that they were hoping to find, and thus defining the hire as 'average'.

Over time, jobs in Canada (and North America in general) have become very specialized to the point where some organizations are actually looking for skills that can only be obtained if they were already working for that company.

When a hiring manager has to settle for a candidate that only has 83 of the skills, and not all 115; then that manager often defines the success of the hire as being average when in fact that individual could still be a stellar employee and with some training may even raise to the 115 in short order.

Our job as recruiters and talent scouts, is to work more closely with hiring managers to help build realistic postings and in doing so, help them identify trainable skills. I would suggest even go one step further and provide them with some expert advice around the degree of difficulty associated with development around a particular skill or competency. Help them make a smart hire with an immediate development plan (which can easily be built if you have a structured selection process).

That effort will go along way to helping manager's define the true success of a hire, and more importantly, realize that success because they are educated and equipped with an action plan.

Until the pendulum swings back to a more generalist-type job market (if it ever does), these kinds of assessments on the part of hiring managers are going to continue and in doing so, present a huge opportunity for recruiters to add value. I think back to some of the previous blogs that that have been written which speak to how recruiters are perceived, and the various species of recruiters; the comment that Rich is referring to suggests to me that that hiring manager (who I believe represents the majority) was probably not working with a talent partner that looks beyond the 'fill'.