HROToday

HRO TODAY Oct 2013

Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/207525

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 4 of 91

Conversely, if you inquire about joining a company with a poor reputation, you need to ask about joining organizations with good reputations. This is what the responses were to the question asking participants about what level of increase they would need to accept a job with a good reputation. As you can see from the chart, an offer up to 20 percent would garner 36 percent of the market. This same level of 20 percent increase only got a 12 percent positive response. Employed people are three times more likely to accept a reasonable offer coming from a company with a good reputation. Conversely, 31 percent of respondents would reject an offer from a bad reputation company while only 6 percent would decline an offer from a highly regarded company. Therefore, employed people are five times more likely to simply reject an offer if it comes from company with a bad reputation. What does this all mean to the HR department? Well, it is huge. If a company has a scandal and its reputation is damaged, the cost of recruiting will skyrocket in the years following the scandal. Due to having to source more candidates due to more declined offers, this would cost a large company millions of dollars. HR would have a hard time making its goals. In addition, retention of current employees will become an issue, especially if the market perception is that other companies have a better reputation. Your company becomes prime hunting ground. Finally, and, more importantly, payroll costs would rise dramatically as the cost of talent would be bid up by the premium needed to get candidates to accept. If a company has a 20 percent turnover, this effect would last five years or longer due to internal salary equity issues that would arise due to the cost of hiring external talent. This will cost a large company billions in payroll over the next few years. For HR, the defense of the company's reputation is the difference between meeting goals and failures. Every CEO looks to HR primarily for talent management. Deliver to the company the best and most talented and engaged workforce available within budgetary parameters. In the years following a scandal, this would be increasingly impossible. If you would like more information on this study, or the opportunity to see an expanded version with data broken down by gender and ethnicity, please contact the HRO Today offices at 215.606.9520 or e-mail me at Elliot.Clark@SharedXpertise.com. Elliot H. Clark, CEO OCTOBER 2013 | www.hrotoday.com [5]

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of HROToday - HRO TODAY Oct 2013