According to industry estimates, more than 60 percent of hired candidates do not show up on the committed joining date, presenting a question mark on the employee loyalty.
Along with the global perception of being an IT nation, Indian professionals have also acquired an infamy for evading commitments. This is being manifested by many professionals who accept the job offer but just don’t show up at the date of joining. It is popularly known as `no-show’ behaviour. The industry estimates that about 60-65 per cent of prospective employees display the aberrant conduct at the time of joining.
This not only jeopardizes operations but also leads to delays in delivery schedules. Based on the candidate’s acceptance of an offer, companies plan project schedules, inform clients and set client expectations. When candidates do not turn up on an agreed date without informing, it obviously spells disasters.
The toll of ‘no-shows’
It also means dwindling of company resources in terms of time and money invested for hiring these candidates. It is fine if the candidate collects the offer and reverts with his/her decision to not join. But a silent ‘no-show’ hits the companies when they’re completely unprepared.”
Diluting the global image
The damage that such a practice could cause is not merely internal. This phenomenon is hurting the global Indian talents’ loyalty image. In US and Europe, when a candidate accepts an offer, it is considered a contract whereby they invariably come on board. Contrary to India, where candidates care less and faltering the committed date of joining is becoming a common trend. Clients are aware of this since they keep a track of entire teams dedicated to their projects. In today’s knowledge industry, the client takes key interest in interacting with the potential candidates before they are hired. ‘No-show’ cases make clients apprehensive about the reliability on the country’s talent pool and the company image.
Who shares the blame
A phenomenon common in the Rs 4-5 lakh salary category, is creeping fast into the senior bracket (Rs 15-20 lakh). But why is this happening? Well, both the industry and professionals are to equally share the blame. For the candidates, gap in demand-supply scenario enables them to ‘shop for multiple offers’. Since knowledge is in demand, the concept of lifetime sticking around is declining. Many candidates just want to see what their market value is given their skill sets. From the employer side, when candidates give in their papers, instead of letting them go they make ‘counter-offers’ with pay increase and promotion in an attempt to retain them.
No winner here
The irony, at the end of the day, is that no one is the winner here. Because IT is quite a close knit sector through the many headhunting agencies, reputation is the most valuable asset for a candidate. By backing out of a commitment to a prospective employer or previous employer, candidates not only tarnish their reputation but also get black-listed from ethical employers.
About employers, winning back employees with counter-offers can only serve as a short-term fix. Most employees who accept counteroffers leave within 6-12 months. Added to this, other employees might threaten to leave so as to gain similar raise.
Correcting the cleft
The solution is to strike just at the roots. One of the remedies could be to share such instances among like-minded companies so that there is caution when these candidates apply elsewhere.
Creation of a dependable ‘back-up system’ could be another answer. If a company needs one candidate, shortlist three and make an offer to the first one, keeping the rest as back ups.
A good idea would also be to show a long-term career to candidates during interviews, so they come back. Show him/her the possibility of working at multi-faceted projects
Further, internal training for critical skill building and external recruitment for common skills would help. Redundancy level at IT industry is rampant. Training employees on relevant skills in multiple areas would build up resources for companies, and employees would value the organisation’s investment on them.