You're only as good as your last contract?

[SteelyDan]

I know when im receiving CV's from candidates, those with the more well known clients (or certainly clients I know and have worked with) are more inclined to make my shortlist.

Why's that then? Seems a bit narrow minded to me.

[Barley]

Why's that then? Seems a bit narrow minded to me.

Why do you think its narrow minded? I didn't say it was the only factor or major weighting characteristic.

In my view it enables me to understand that certain applicants are used to working in a certain environment, what's expected and they will know the kind of governance, methodology and processes similar companies work with.

If im interviewing for a banking role why wouldn't I weight someone who'd previously contracted at say Nationwide, Barclays and Deloitte above someone who'd worked at XYZ software company, non UK bank and obscure Asian bank?

If you can suggest other ways to filter down 150 CVs to identify candidates to interview im all ears.

[stek]

Why do you think its narrow minded? I didn't say it was the only factor or major weighting characteristic.

In my view it enables me to understand that certain applicants are used to working in a certain environment, what's expected and they will know the kind of governance, methodology and processes similar companies work with.

If im interviewing for a banking role why wouldn't I weight someone who'd previously contracted at say Nationwide, Barclays and Deloitte above someone who'd worked at XYZ software company, non UK bank and obscure Asian bank?

If you can suggest other ways to filter down 150 CVs to identify candidates to interview im all ears.

Is it because you come across as a bit of a bell end?

Happy New Year!!

[Barley]

and posting a vicarious insult at 2.19 in the morning makes you such a legend?

[tractor]

...

Why do you think its narrow minded? I didn't say it was the only factor or major weighting characteristic.

In my view it enables me to understand that certain applicants are used to working in a certain environment, what's expected and they will know the kind of governance, methodology and processes similar companies work with.

If im interviewing for a banking role why wouldn't I weight someone who'd previously contracted at say Nationwide, Barclays and Deloitte above someone who'd worked at XYZ software company, non UK bank and obscure Asian bank?

If you can suggest other ways to filter down 150 CVs to identify candidates to interview im all ears.

• Don't use ten agents.
• Tell two agents to send you their best 3
• If say, SOX is what you are looking for why wouldn't someone with SOX experience with a software house be interesting to you? As Cojak said, industry experience is what is relevant. Also that obscure bank may be a big player locally. It may even outperform some of the numpties we keep bailing out here!!!

Cheesus - 150 cvs? Are you mad?

and posting a vicarious insult at 2.19 in the morning makes you such a legend?

It is mid morning and Stek does sorta have a point. Poeple easily see through you complaining about something that you actively practice yourself.

[Bluenose]

Just wondering about your respective opinions re the impact that the names of previous clients have when applying for contracts.

Ive tended to work for the big banks on large programme's, Lloyds, RBS, Santander etc.

My last contract was with a small building society, ive got a contract offer with another small financial services company now, neither are household names and the latest offer is a really small company I suspect 99% of people wont have heard of.

My hesitation is that a future client instead of seeing my previous roles as X at RBS, Lloyds etc will see my latest two roles at fairly non descript organisations.

How important do you think the previous client names are with agents & clients? I know when im receiving CV's from candidates, those with the more well known clients (or certainly clients I know and have worked with) are more inclined to make my shortlist.

I guess im concerned that to many non descript roles could water down what has been a pretty strong client list.

From experience, End clients won't care and probably appreciate a little flexibility in your past working environments. Just working in large banks is not an ideal background. That said, Junior recruitment drone doing the cv filtering won't read past the first line describing your last role. Even Experienced recruitment consultants have a hard time reading two paragraphs down.

Flip a coin time with your cv applications.

When placed in this situation My best results have come from working with resourcers from consulting firms as they tend to know their stuff better and are more willing to look at your background. It's more in their interest to create a working and lasting relationship with you.

Just on the topic of working background I have found it highly unusual and in some ways ironic that recruitment Consultants continue to spout the same old tripe about using working background as the main metric for Cv filtering technology consultants at banks. There was a shift which happened around 2008 which means this is no longer valid.

Internal consultancies to major banks do not Weight candidates based on working background as the main factor for determining resourcing for transformation and support programmes. This goes across the board, from the big four all the way down to the Indian outsourcers. You can never have worked in a particular vertical before and still get placed by a consultancy in that vertical, the rules don't apply there, so why do recruitment consultants inflict this onto the rest of the industry?

I see this as one of the root causes for the lack of technology innovation in companies and its driven by recruitment consultants not knowing their subject matter and simply assuming that because you have worked in the same big bank before (for example), you are more sellable than someone who has, without even considering other aspects of the candidates background or abilities. Not worked at X company before? Bin the Cv.