When an organization makes an offer of employment to a candidate, they’re signifying their commitment to that candidate. In essence, the company is saying, “Out of all the people we interviewed, you’re the one we want to work for us.”
With that in mind, wouldn’t it be nice if the candidate accepted that offer and came to work at the company?
It would, but that’s not always how it happens. In fact, sometimes the candidate rejects the offer, and it could be for any number of reasons.
However, it doesn’t have to be that way. There are two crucial considerations of making an offer to a candidate, and if employers are able to adhere to these two considerations, their chances for hiring success increase dramatically.
Those two considerations are as follows:
#1—An offer should not be made without 100% assurance it will be accepted.
Company officials sometimes make an offer without knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that the candidate will accept it. This isn’t a situation where you want to “get close” with an offer or you want to give the candidate “something to think about” in the hopes they accept it. It should be a formality; their acceptance should be understood and expected.
Candidates typically know whether or not they’re going to accept an offer before that offer is even made. The offer itself is not what convinces the candidate to accept it. What they’ve experienced up to that point is what convinces them to accept it. Since the candidate has already made their decision, it should be easier to ascertain what they will do.
If you’re working with an executive recruiter to fill the position, that recruiter should be communicating with the candidate, setting expectations and asking the right questions. Their involvement should allow you to know that the candidate will accept the offer when it’s extended.
#2—If a recruiter is part of the process, the recruiter should make the formal offer.
Company officials sometimes make the mistake of thinking that if the offer comes directly from them, that will somehow increase the chances it will be accepted. I can tell you from years of experience that this is not the case. In fact, I can think of many instances in which the candidate did NOT accept the offer in part because the company did not allow the recruiter to make it.
The situation is very similar to the buying and selling of a house. In that case, a real estate agent would be negotiating the deal. Likewise, when a candidate and an employer are negotiating a compensation package, things can get emotional. The recruiter is a more neutral party and can take some of the emotion out of the situation.
The candidate is expecting the recruiter to extend the offer. They’re the person they’ve been communicating with the most throughout the process. Consequently, allowing the recruiter to make the offer is the best option.
There are a number of reasons why the recruiter should make the offer of employment to the candidate, and these reasons are benefits for both parties. We’ve addressed those reasons before in the blog post “Why a Recruiter Should Make the Offer of Employment.”
Any organization that keeps these two considerations in mind greatly increases the chances of top candidates accepting their offer of employment . . . and NOT the offer of one of their competitors.
We help support careers in one of two ways: 1. By helping to find the right opportunity when the time is right, and 2. By helping to recruit top talent for the critical needs of organizations. If this is something you would like to explore further, please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.