Pure Resourcing Limited’s Post

It's all too common; you're scrolling through job listings and there it is again: "competitive salary". It's a phrase that's sparked some debate among professionals. I saw a fellow recruiter's post this weekend voicing their frustration. They're not alone in feeling that it can appear a bit of a cop out. If a client has a clear budget, surely they know what they're prepared to pay, right? So, shouldn't that figure be upfront in the job advert? To a certain extent, I concur. Transparency is key and can save time for all parties involved. When the salary for a role is set in stone, it makes perfect sense to lay out that number clearly. But, let's delve into the other side of the coin. "Competitive salary" does have its place. Sometimes, a client might be open to stretching their purse strings for an exceptional candidate. By settling on a specific number, there's a risk of steering away potential high-calibre applicants. They may see the stated salary and think they're beyond the bracket, so they don't bother applying. Negotiation is an essential aspect of recruitment. By being a bit more flexible with the term "competitive salary", we're keeping the door open. We're inviting a dialogue about what each party brings to the table. So while I value transparency, I also value the art of negotiation and the possibilities that can unfold when a client meets a candidate who is the perfect fit, but perhaps at a higher price point than initially expected. Ultimately, it's about striking a balance. Using the term "competitive salary" should be more deliberate than routine. It's not always a cop out; it can be a strategic move. And for recruiters, it's our understanding of market rates and client expectations that allows us to navigate these nuances effectively. What are you thoughts? #Recruitment #SalaryTransparency #HiringStrategies Kam Jassal Ian Reseigh Laura Turner @Paiger Graham Turner Pure Resourcing Limited

  • click me

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics