Executive research the way it should be.

The Good The flexibility. My commute is about 20 feet. I can be at my desk when I want, in my tracksuit bottoms, with no make-up, all comfy. I regularly go for walks in the morning and afternoon, without a boss wondering where I am – all good for mental health, physical health, fresh air and gives my brain a chance to think. The Bad The flexibility required. The life of a home-based business owner is all about needing to be available when the client needs you or when candidates can talk. I’ve taken briefings at 7am on a Monday, candidate calls at 8am or 8pm and worked until I dropped. Thank goodness for M&S count on us meals! It can at times feel rather isolating but as I am communicating with people most of the day, this isn’t too much of an issue and is counteracted by being able to concentrate uninterrupted. Each client – and often each consultant within each client organisation – has a different way of working, particularly how information should be presented. One’s mind has to have a matrix of each client’s requirements and foibles. As a small business owner, I have always found it hard to turn work down – although I have got better at this over the years. Unintended interruptions – dogs, children, delivery men, the gas man …. the list goes on. The Ugly The timetabling! This is the bane of my life. The phrase “feast and famine” could have been designed for small businesses. There is rarely a nice easy middle ground of a good level of work. Paperwork paperwork paperwork. For the uninitiated, there is a LOT of administration needed to keep a research business operating successfully. The accounts paperwork (invoicing, expenses, VAT returns, paying HMRC) is matched by the requirement of record keeping, database management, client reports and our new best friend, GDPR. All in all, I am a firm believer that you can either work from home or you can’t. If you’re going to get distracted by daytime TV and the cricket, this is not for you. If you can go into your office and concentrate, it’s a good solution. For me, the positives outweigh the negatives and after over 20 years working from home, I’m pretty sure I could not ever go back to an office! Gillian Young, Director, Stainsby Associates Ltd

At Stainsby Associates Ltd, we have a significant amount of experience of both private and public sector recruitment. Here are my insights into the differences and similarities between the two. Confidentiality/openness For both sectors, there are a myriad of reasons why recruitment is occurring – from takeovers, retirement, restructure, business expansion through to the often imminent dismissal of the previous occupant. In the private sector, this often dictates the level of confidentiality which will be required by both the consultant and the researcher. During my career, I have worked on private sector projects ranging from full disclosure of the company and role, with a glossy 20 page brief on the organisation and role, right through to “we can’t tell the candidates the company, sector or location” and can only send candidates documentation when they have signed a non-disclosure agreement. The public sector, on the other hand, is a complete contrast. In a number of public sectors, there is a legal requirement to advertise any vacancy, often complete with salary banding, so openness is the byword. When contacting candidates, it can be rather refreshing to be able to say who I am working with. This does, however, require the researcher to be fully briefed, as in many cases (local government being a prime example), the candidates themselves are well informed of the structure and history of the client and the senior management. Contacting I am a great believer in calling candidates and talking directly to them to explain the role in depth. This works well in the private sector, where the culture is less overt in terms of potential job hunting. With some public sectors, however, particularly health and academia, candidates respond to emails better than calls and are perfectly used to responding openly using their work email. Timetabling There is generally more fluidity with timetabling in the private sector. Assignments can drag on sometimes for months, with that elusive “perfect” candidate still sought after that time. The public sector tends to be nice and organised. At the beginning of an assignment, everyone knows what the timetable is, in terms of closing date for applications to be received, through to final panel interview, often published alongside any advert. Decision maker Within the private sector, there is frequently one decision maker, often the Chief Executive or Managing Director, sometimes accompanied by a senior HR professional. Whilst this can sound straightforward, this can lead to an ill-advised appointment, based on personality (which is important) rather than the candidate being able to demonstrate all the skills and experience required. The public sector, on the other hand, often has a technical assessor alongside the interviewing consultant, right through to panel interviews, often comprising elected members (for local government), executive and non-executive directors. This is arguably more open and democratic, with clear reasons given to candidates as to why they are being progressed or rejected. However, so many individuals involved in a decision can lead to delays and the often political nature of appointments can mean that senior personnel have their own agenda which they are happy to push through. An appreciation of the differences between the two sectors is key to conducting successful search campaigns. Gillian Young, Director, Stainsby Associates Ltd