The value of an item is determined by how much money (or resource) it takes to acquire such an item. That is why a 24 karat gold necklace is more valuable than a gold plated necklace. Ironically in HR and recruitment, the value of a potential employee isn’t determined by high cost, but low cost. Let me explain.

A few years ago, a friend invited me to a Friday evening hangout at a local bar. I had a plate of pepper soup and 2 drinks. He took up the bills. The next Friday, he invited me again to another Friday evening hangout. While chatting he said he enjoys hanging out with me because my ‘company’ i wasn’t expensive, unlike some of his friends that will drink bottles of beer and order extra plates of pepper soup. He judged my value based on how inexpensive I was.

That is how recruiters think. Nowadays, the most qualified and inexpensive candidate gets the job. Really? How?

Requisite experience and training: Recruitment exercises, On-boarding and training new employee costs money, so HR naturally will wants the most qualified candidates requiring the least amount of training and ready to hit the ground running. Say there are two equally qualified candidates, and one happens to have knowledge of the updated version of a particular industry application, guess who HR will hire? The one that doesn’t require extra training - the inexpensive candidate.

Marital status: I remember attending an aptitude test and the examiner noticed a candidate with a wedding ring and asked if he was married. The candidate answered in the positive. The examiner nodded and carried on with the test. Within me i knew it wasn’t a good sign and it might affect his progress to the next stage. Turned out he didn’t make it to the interview stage. An unmarried candidate is inexpensive when you consider the cost of healthcare for a married employee and his family. That is why Nigerian banks love candidates not older than 26.

Salary: In a situation where remuneration is determined solely by negotiations, the most qualified and cheapest candidate (lowest negotiator) will get the job. That is why it is important to research salaries and be prepared to negotiate strategically.

Place of residence and distance traveled to work: It is common-place for recruiter to indicate preference for candidates residing in towns close to the workplace, especially when salaries are lower than industry average or the company’s staff bus has a specific route. In such a scenario, recruitment decisions will be based on the most qualified candidate who stays closest to the office or along that specific bus route. It sounds ludicrous, but it happens.

It is arguable that your value as a candidate is determined by how cheap you are to the recruiter at least in recent times. So it is important to be qualified, but also important to be strategically cheap.

Source:http://www.thejobseekerscreed.com/2016/12/how-valuable-are-you-to-recruiter.html

True talk OP!

The cheaper the labour, the better for recruiters. Which translates to more money in their pockets.

amicable09:
True talk OP!

The cheaper the labour, the better for recruiters. Which translates to more money in their pockets.

That's also why companies are outsourcing to Indians. It's not easy o!

nenergy:


That's also why companies are outsourcing to Indians. It's not easy o!

Exactly!

As much as I hate to say this but I must admit that these Indians work better than our Nigerian guys. And they exude diligence and cheerfulness.

Common plaiting of hair, I prefer to have a Ghanaian make my hair than a Nigerian.

amicable09:

Exactly!

As much as I hate to say this but I must admit that these Indians work better than our Nigerian guys. And they exude diligence and cheerfulness.

Common plaiting of hair, I prefer to have a Ghanaian make my hair than a Nigerian.

We really need to up our game by offering quality service with competitive cost. Imagine Glo, it should be #1 but poor quality is killing them.

lalasticlala

nenergy:

We really need to up our game by offering quality service with competitive cost. Imagine Glo, it should be #1 but poor quality is killing them.

That's it!
Poor quality no be small. I hope we all ante up our games before we have nothing left to be offered us.

Informative

H

guys check hw i will spend my money next year ; hw do u see it guys is it nt a good motive

All these are just signs that the companies are in recession. You have to be properly schooled and trained to be very qualified. The topic just shows that these companies want to eat their cake and have it.

...

True

The best don't come cheap and easy

Very

Good effort...

Relationship between an employer and employee is likened to the relationship between the West and a third world country like our beloved Nigeria. It's a case of predator vs leech. The former can never lose to the latter.

Only in rare circumstances will you be valuable to your employer, in most cases, your employer is more valuable to you.

nenergy:

We really need to up our game by offering quality service with competitive cost. Imagine Glo, it should be #1 but poor quality is killing them.

The truth is that as a people majority of us has fundamental ethical problem. An average Nigerian businessman/ enterprise do mistake deceit for ingenuity and conceitedness for smartness. A situation whereby one had rather pay for and expect unmerited favour from divine source (illusion) rather than to assemble the best of specialist to provide a top notch end products is appalling, to say the least. We value expediency over principle.

Honestly, I don't blame any generalist service provider in any sector of the economy that outsources any of its job to foreigners like the true industrious, efficient and effective Indians. Many a time, even in a well structured enterprise with disciplined personnel, to depend on the same internal personnel to get some certain works done is akin to inviting collapse of such venture.

amicable09:
True talk OP!

The cheaper the labour, the better for recruiters. Which translates to more money in their pockets.

By recruiters you mean HR or the boss himself?

Why would a candidate be so qualified and negotiate less? Lack of self-value? Or pressure to get a new job ( desperate)?



Think of value, not cost.

Good

eph12:
By recruiters you mean HR or the boss himself?

By recruiters I mean recruiters. That's a word in the dictionary right? So that's exactly what I mean.

amicable09:

By recruiters I mean recruiters.
That's a word in the dictionary right?
So that's exactly what I mean.

Just wondering how that means more money in their pockets when they're not in charge of finance.