19-06-2012, 08:02 PM
It makes me so cross when I hear of experiences like this. I used to have it the other way round as an employer where these so called specialist recruitment agencies know nothing about the structure or requirements of they are recruiting into and kept getting people put forward for roles just because they had a licence with no thought for what work experience they had that was relevant to the role.
If a company wants someone, I think they should be specifying what you need to achieve in terms of qualifications in a reasonable period eg "have the underpinning knowledge to achieve a design assistant licence within nine months", just the same as they should be for internal succession. Perhaps the lack of this is an indication of the fact that most of the companies have little or no commitment to long term development of people. The logical conclusion of the sort of approach you are talking about for an external advert is that someone with that will find themselves stuck at that level because how likely is the company to commit to moving you up to the next if they are not committed to make the step from nothing to the first rung on the ladder.
I also cannot understand why companies find it so hard to divorce the two issues of the IRSE setting a standard and organisations wishing to adopt that standard as a qualifying requirement. No body seriously thinks that Edexcel should be running schools nor do they specify that an employer must ask for that qualification - they set the A levels and others chose to use them as a measure. Others provide the training to meet the standard. So it is with the licensing scheme and the IRSE.
The categories are the categories that the industry has asked for. A classic on this one is the design categories where the VIEW was that the original categories did not cover some of the specialisms, so specialist categories were created as a subset, but that was seen as a problem because there were "too many" categories, so it has reverted to three - at the request of the industry, not because those on the working group did not have anything better to do.
Peter
If a company wants someone, I think they should be specifying what you need to achieve in terms of qualifications in a reasonable period eg "have the underpinning knowledge to achieve a design assistant licence within nine months", just the same as they should be for internal succession. Perhaps the lack of this is an indication of the fact that most of the companies have little or no commitment to long term development of people. The logical conclusion of the sort of approach you are talking about for an external advert is that someone with that will find themselves stuck at that level because how likely is the company to commit to moving you up to the next if they are not committed to make the step from nothing to the first rung on the ladder.
I also cannot understand why companies find it so hard to divorce the two issues of the IRSE setting a standard and organisations wishing to adopt that standard as a qualifying requirement. No body seriously thinks that Edexcel should be running schools nor do they specify that an employer must ask for that qualification - they set the A levels and others chose to use them as a measure. Others provide the training to meet the standard. So it is with the licensing scheme and the IRSE.
The categories are the categories that the industry has asked for. A classic on this one is the design categories where the VIEW was that the original categories did not cover some of the specialisms, so specialist categories were created as a subset, but that was seen as a problem because there were "too many" categories, so it has reverted to three - at the request of the industry, not because those on the working group did not have anything better to do.
Peter