My friends are aware of this, of the different HR silos, recruitment is the least I liked because it takes so much time. Since I don’t have choice but do recruitment, I gained interesting insights in the process. and this is the purpose of this post. What I’m about to share can be controversial, but value adding if given consideration.

So much noise is generated by the “equal employment opportunity” thought movement,  but at least in my observation, not all jobs are created equal. Based on experience, I observed  that economic background can shape “behavioural competencies”. And this can be an advantage to one economic class and disadvantage to the other. Technical competencies is different because it can be acquired in formal education and/or corporate training. The economic background of a candidate don’t matter.

 

Recruitment

Participating companies interview college graduates as part of ASKSonnie’s career talk for the graduating batch of Don Bosco College

 

Likewise:   5 Types of Problem Employees

Here’s what I observed:

Candidates who graduated from an A-list university and/or grew from a well off family tends to be good on

  • Property management (i.e. hotel, resort, shopping mall management), because they knew what lifestyle living is.
  • Sales and marketing, because the absence of the pressure for a financial need developed the confidence to negotiate from a position of strength (ex. During salary negotiation, they know what they want and they can walk away from a job offer if their asking price is not met.  In contrast with a person who need a job, who is more flexible with the salary offer because what is important is to get a job).

As a general rule, you cannot give something that you don’t have. So business operations catering to the upscale market need key employees who belong to the same class, because they understand what they need and want.

 

On the other hand, those who worked to support their own studies, or a scholar, and those who came from not so well off families tend to be good in

  • People management,  because they can emphatize with ordinary folks, and they are in the best position to suggest  appropriate interventions and programs to keep employees engaged.
  • Inspiring people, because when this people succeed, they provide a template for success, and inspire young employees to work harder and level up.

I also observed that employees from this economic group stay longer in the company.

 

Economic background, however, has nothing to do with a person’s integrity. The A, B class is not more honest than the C, D class, Or vice-versa. I have handled administrative investigations and can conclude that both the well off and the not so well off are equally dishonest. The only difference is the access to company resources. Those who have access to more resources can steal more, while those who have limited access can only steal a little. And in recruitment, economic back ground should not be used as basis for evaluating the character of the person.

Likewise:   17th Learning EB: 16 Multiple Intelligences and Talent Management
Likewise:   Managing A Multi-Generational Workforce

Social class should not be the sole basis on recruitment. The hiring or non hiring of people is dependent on both the behavioural and technical competencies, and these should be taken into consideration when matching people for a job.

My personal learning should not be taken as the absolute truth but it will not harm you if you will take this into consideration.

 

Do you share my recruitment observation or you have something else in mind? Add value to the discussion and let us know in the comments section below.

 

 

Share
Share
This serves as the favicon of ASKSonnie

Receive 'value adding'

contents in your inbox!

Thanks for subscribing!