Inverse relationship! While speaking with several candidates and discussing the “risk to hire concept” with them it came to mind, that accomplishments could actually be measured in compensation negotiation.

There is an immutable law that I instinctively understand, but that I was missing to capitalize on. (Never end a sentence with a preposition) I was talking around it, but not at it. There is indeed, an inverse relation between “risk to hire” and compensation. The lower the perceived risk (risk mediation) to the Hiring Authority (HA) or HR person, the more latitude they will have in compensation inducements. Remember, the Hiring Authority “risks” not only making a mistake in hiring, but also more importantly the possibly of putting his/her job, reputation, and future in jeopardy.  It is easier to make no decision, rather than the wrong one. That is the reason why we are seeing an increase in # of interviews, # of people involved in the interviews, hiring “assessments” used again, as well as, a more stringent use of reference checking, and as I said before even checking references before the interview process.

 

One serious word of caution, although 43% of all resumes contain obfuscation, companies are becoming increasingly careful and responsible about checking professional and academic claims. Although, George O’Leary, former head football coach at Georgia Tech was finally hired again as a head coach, it was not at Notre Dame. As he was summarily dismissed almost immediately after being hired for alleged exaggerated claims both in undergraduate school and in graduate school.  His significant achievements as a head coach, although daunting, were dismissed because his exaggerations called to question his character. Your Tri-Folds must be based on the truth, not creation.

 

In our prior discussion on this website about “risk to hire,” I spoke of several things which help to eliminate that perception of risk for the HA.

 

Among those things are:

 

A.   Measurable accomplishments

B.   Actual responsibilities

C.   Consistency of effort

D.   Reliable accurate references

E.   Documented Compensation

 

All of which leads the Hiring Authorites to consider:

 

Anticipated accomplishments

 

It is these anticipated accomplishments that trigger the deal, get those extra $. Your credentials are or should be designed to provide immediate clues as to who you were, are, and most importantly will be. “Track record” is real; it does predict the future.

 

Rather than seeking to add to the compensation at the time of offer, or during the interview process, add to it long before the negations begin. Present who you were, are and will be. Present only measurable verifiable accomplishments. Let the others obfuscate; you present the truth. Prevarication will be caught. 

 

In 1990, my first “placement” as a recruiter fell apart when while doing the reference check. I discovered that my candidate did not have the Associate’s Degree he claimed. The offer was for $120,000 base, plus.  I called the candidate and asked three times, if there was anything on his resume that could not be confirmed, as I always did the reference checking personally for my client companies.  His answer was repeatedly no everything was fine. I already had the offer in hand; I then had a difficult decision to make. Do I ignore what was a seemingly insignificant detail from 20 years prior, or do I take my position of trust from my client seriously and bring “it” to their attention asking for guidance? I chose to ask for guidance and the HR said to extend the offer. The HA, my REAL client, said to decline to extend it. “Trust had been violated, what else had he not been told.”

 

I had to inform  my candidate that that although I had a written offer on my desk, my HA was withdrawing the offer. The candidate skirting the truth cost my client, my firm, and the candidate a great deal. The costs to the candidate and client are obvious, but the cost to me was not just money, it cost me a highly credentialed candidate, a HA who took this breach seriously and my “first” commission. Luckily it did not cost me influence with the company, my position as a recruiter, or my reputation. I have never forgotten that “placement” of Phil &&&& from SO. CA.  Luckily, I had two other placements in an 18-day period to offset that loss, but I never filled that position, nor would I ever represent that candidate again. 

 

Help me! Help you!

 

Buy their attention, their interview, their offer and the job, but with real facts. ACP

---

For more an extended discussion of RISK/REWARD of HIRE and Compensation use this link for the Personal Marketing Strategy Program for Transition Candidates©

---