50% of employees are bad hires

[Mustank]

Super performer

 

[laugh]

[Vid]

Super performer

 

I'll pay her 50% more to work for me

[Ngck]

Link

 

Singapore bosses think 50% of employees are 'bad hires': survey

 

While top talents are a measly 10-30%.

 

According to a survey by RecruitPlus, 99% of the 4,000 employers who answered felt that their organization carry certain percentage of bad hires, from 10% to a whopping 50%.

 

Conversely, only 64% of the same respondents felt that their companies have Super Performers, ranging from 10% to 30% of their workforce. This group of individuals usually comes from 1) referrals, 2) recruitment agencies & 3) job boards.

 

All respondents believe the Super Performers are capable of handling the job of 2 to 5 bad hires and will not mind paying them 10% to 30% more salary vis-

Edited February 20, 2013 by Ngck

[Maseratigood]

There's only limited vacancy to be boss pets.. In a dept of 10 people, only a handful, say 2 or 3, may go lunch/karoke with the boss. The rest who don't are consider bad hire.. So there about 50% or more..

Agreed

 

A reverses survey by employees on bosses should show some interesting results, I think

 

But employees won't have the money to do such a survey

 

So end of the day, people only have the bosses' survey to go by

[macrosszero]

All respondents believe the Super Performers are capable of handling the job of 2 to 5 bad hires and will not mind paying them 10% to 30% more salary vis-

[Maseratigood]

They interview civil service boss is it?

OT a bit :-

 

If a survey is conducted with bosses like mamasans, or papasans, the feedbacks are likely to be that their employees are self-motivated and work very hard, even after official hours.

[Joseph22]

Your colleague has people skills.

He can get things done (by others) despite being rather inept himself.

He also gets along well with superiors.

This type of talent is management material.

pui.. he is just fortunate, my current company got lot of ppl who are willing to do the extra mile for the project. if he were to be in my ex-company. for sure no one help him.

[Jamesc]

I think 99% of bosses are bad hires.

 

This is based on people telling me about their bosses.

 

So its quite amazing that only 50% of staff are considered

 

bad hires! This must be due more to luck than intelligence.

 

[Tarenn]

I'll pay her 50% more to work for me

 

You lose

 

I'll pay her 50% more to work for me, and another 50% more to work on me.

[Tigershark1976]

Link

 

Singapore bosses think 50% of employees are 'bad hires': survey

 

While top talents are a measly 10-30%.

 

According to a survey by RecruitPlus, 99% of the 4,000 employers who answered felt that their organization carry certain percentage of bad hires, from 10% to a whopping 50%.

 

Conversely, only 64% of the same respondents felt that their companies have Super Performers, ranging from 10% to 30% of their workforce. This group of individuals usually comes from 1) referrals, 2) recruitment agencies & 3) job boards.

 

All respondents believe the Super Performers are capable of handling the job of 2 to 5 bad hires and will not mind paying them 10% to 30% more salary vis-

[Jamesc]

50% are bad hires?

 

Thats because people don't know how to interview.

 

I think its better to just flip a coin to see if the candidate

 

gets the job. The odds are also 50%.

 

[Celicar]

The survey shows that companies can benefit more by having more Super Performers and lesser Bad Hires.

Can I get hired to make such statements too? It is so enlightening, I wouldn't have realised such benefit otherwise.

 

My first statement is for free - "My survey shows that people are able to buy more things if they have more money".

 

[Jamesc]

90% of employees think

 

its their colleagues that are

 

bad hires and not them.

 

[EdmundH]

I believe that everyone can be developed. It is just that aggravation for the superior. Do they want it? Or want fast and smooth to come. Or slowly teach and find ways to achieve peak. I tiko tiko.

Say industry is humanistic in history and tradition, you go apply bottom line and six sigma, things change.

How to manage this is a question that will stump the old man himself, genius that he is.

Humanity and efficiency do not always go hand in hand.

I want my million, I need to get my workers to get it for me.

I need to get century sprint in 6.8 seconds, I mod my car engine parts. The replaced parts can work, just not for me....

Bad hires? Rather not what you wanted, so label with resentment as I have to deal with lower efficacy.

My humanity or compassion can go to nea bin.

[1fast1]

Link

 

Singapore bosses think 50% of employees are 'bad hires': survey

 

Wow, stop the presses. . Like this is news, considering that, by definition, 50% of people will be below average (or more precisely, below the median). Wouldn't you consider anyone below average to be a "bad hire"? Well, maybe not, perhaps you're more forgiving - but this is already echoed by other employers who gave a figure of 10%, which means they would consider anyone in the top 90% (a significant majority) to be "not-bad hires".

 

Without a more precise definition of "bad hire", the exercise is meaningless and needlessly provocative.

 

While top talents are a measly 10-30%.

 

Another meaningless statistic, without a proper definition of "top talent". In any case, I would expect real talent to comprise no more than 5% in any vocation.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Turboflat4

[Gee]

I think 99% of bosses are bad hires.

 

This is based on people telling me about their bosses.

 

So its quite amazing that only 50% of staff are considered

 

bad hires! This must be due more to luck than intelligence.

 

 

.. so 50% bad hires made their way up to the 99% as bosses (to manage 30% top talents, another 50% bad hires, and 20% in between).

 

Edited February 21, 2013 by Gee

[Rncw]

50% are bad hires?

 

Thats because people don't know how to interview.

 

I think its better to just flip a coin to see if the candidate

 

gets the job. The odds are also 50%.

 

 

this i totally agree.....

 

the first part of shortlisting by the HR department is quite crucial as they must get the right candidates....then comes to the HOD to select the right people for the job....

[Dfx16]

Is it because many of them arent local ? India Indian? Mainland Chinese? Pinoy?

If boss itself cant communicate how much he expect from his employee, auto pilot?