Recruiting a PA/Assistant
Discussion
Now, I am aware most PHers are powerfully built directors and as such have probably had PAs/Assistants for most of their working lives, however, I am in the middle of recruiting my first PA/Assistant so this is quite new to me. I say PA/Assistant as I am pretty self-sufficient on the whole, so don't need a full-time PA but do need someone who can do some specific lower-level parts of my role.
I have in the past recruited for specific positions within the teams I manage, but this is the first time I have recruited someone to do nothing but assist me and make my life easier.
I am still two weeks from the closing date, but so far have had a massive amount of interest. I've met quite a few of the more serious candidates who have taken the opportunity to meet me and have a tour of our premises. Although I've not yet short-listed, I was particularly keen on three people who have applied, but all have very different experience/background. I'm interested in the advice/recommendation of PHers.
Candidate 1 is very experienced in the sector I am recruiting for. She is late 50s/early 60s and has taken early retirement from a role not dissimilar, but on a lower level, to my own. She wants to do something less stressful/taxing. The major plus point is that she could step straight in and do the work with very minimal training/guidance as she is already familiar with all the specialist software, contacts in the industry and procedures to follow. However, I am concerned that managing someone who has done my role for the last 20 years may be difficult as she will likely be set in her way and could be unwilling to do things "my" way. We got on well, but she was quite bullish and direct.
Candidate 2 has very minimal experience in the role, but some experience of the sector. She's 20ish, very eager to please, does want to work in the sector and would be keen to progress. She seems full of drive, enthusiasm and ambition. She would be transferring from another linked organisation and I have had some dealings with her before, all of which were very positive. She is utterly lovely and I won't deny that she's easy on the eye too. Positives would be that it would be good to bring in "fresh blood" and someone who has a real motivation to succeed and progress, the negative is that she is less experienced than Candidate 1 or 3 and would require much more training/guidance for a few months.
Candidate 3 is late 30s, has previously held very senior FD roles in the past, considerably more qualified than I and since having her children, has decided to step back from senior roles and would like to work in my sector. It would be a massive drop in salary and responsibilities for her, which does slightly concern me. That said, whilst she has no sector experience, she's the type that I'm sure would fully understand the role in quite a short time frame. My concerns are mainly around the role fit for her and whether she'd get very bored in quite a short space of time. I'm less worried about the differential with qualifications or experience as with Candidate 1, as she does not have any sector experience. Positives are that she'd have the drive to do as much as possible in order to develop her career in my sector, as well as having the nous to hit the ground running albeit with some training/guidance for the first month or two. We got on very well together and she seemed very frank and down to earth and open and honest about her career to date and what she wanted to do in the future.
So, based on the above, which would be your preferred candidate?
I have in the past recruited for specific positions within the teams I manage, but this is the first time I have recruited someone to do nothing but assist me and make my life easier.
I am still two weeks from the closing date, but so far have had a massive amount of interest. I've met quite a few of the more serious candidates who have taken the opportunity to meet me and have a tour of our premises. Although I've not yet short-listed, I was particularly keen on three people who have applied, but all have very different experience/background. I'm interested in the advice/recommendation of PHers.
Candidate 1 is very experienced in the sector I am recruiting for. She is late 50s/early 60s and has taken early retirement from a role not dissimilar, but on a lower level, to my own. She wants to do something less stressful/taxing. The major plus point is that she could step straight in and do the work with very minimal training/guidance as she is already familiar with all the specialist software, contacts in the industry and procedures to follow. However, I am concerned that managing someone who has done my role for the last 20 years may be difficult as she will likely be set in her way and could be unwilling to do things "my" way. We got on well, but she was quite bullish and direct.
Candidate 2 has very minimal experience in the role, but some experience of the sector. She's 20ish, very eager to please, does want to work in the sector and would be keen to progress. She seems full of drive, enthusiasm and ambition. She would be transferring from another linked organisation and I have had some dealings with her before, all of which were very positive. She is utterly lovely and I won't deny that she's easy on the eye too. Positives would be that it would be good to bring in "fresh blood" and someone who has a real motivation to succeed and progress, the negative is that she is less experienced than Candidate 1 or 3 and would require much more training/guidance for a few months.
Candidate 3 is late 30s, has previously held very senior FD roles in the past, considerably more qualified than I and since having her children, has decided to step back from senior roles and would like to work in my sector. It would be a massive drop in salary and responsibilities for her, which does slightly concern me. That said, whilst she has no sector experience, she's the type that I'm sure would fully understand the role in quite a short time frame. My concerns are mainly around the role fit for her and whether she'd get very bored in quite a short space of time. I'm less worried about the differential with qualifications or experience as with Candidate 1, as she does not have any sector experience. Positives are that she'd have the drive to do as much as possible in order to develop her career in my sector, as well as having the nous to hit the ground running albeit with some training/guidance for the first month or two. We got on very well together and she seemed very frank and down to earth and open and honest about her career to date and what she wanted to do in the future.
So, based on the above, which would be your preferred candidate?
Candidate 1. Those 'flaws' - as you see them - can be very useful, especially when it comes to making sure your calendar is organised. Even powerfully built directors sometimes need a stern reminding they have a meeting to attend which they might not want to, and an experienced PA will often know what is best.
You might also need that bullish approach to keep more demanding customers, colleagues or underlings away from your door when necessary.
You might also need that bullish approach to keep more demanding customers, colleagues or underlings away from your door when necessary.
Pints - Good point. I hadn't thought of it that way! I line manage a Office Manager who is very bullish and she's quite difficult to manage and I am/was wary of hiring someone similar, but I can see that it could be good for this role.
Edc - The latter, I cannot really justify a 2ic. It would mainly be sweeping the admin tasks, specific low-level and routine tasks, diary management and general PA duties.
Edc - The latter, I cannot really justify a 2ic. It would mainly be sweeping the admin tasks, specific low-level and routine tasks, diary management and general PA duties.
S798 said:
She's 20ish, very eager to please ... I won't deny that she's easy on the eye too.
What have I missed? In all seriousness, however, #2 would get my vote for the ambition. While it's likely she'd want to move on in some time, the other 2 have done your job from the sounds of things and despite their situations I'd be worried they would get bored and want to come back into what they used to do.
I'd go for 3 as well. A happy medium between the other two.
I don't think the 'lack of challenge' will be a factor as she'll already have thought about that. Believe me there comes a point in life where you're quite happy to trade lower salary for less stress.
However young children would be a slight red flag. What happens if she needs to take time off because one of these is ill? Are you happy if she leaves on the dot of 5 because she needs to collect her children from nursery?
I don't think the 'lack of challenge' will be a factor as she'll already have thought about that. Believe me there comes a point in life where you're quite happy to trade lower salary for less stress.
However young children would be a slight red flag. What happens if she needs to take time off because one of these is ill? Are you happy if she leaves on the dot of 5 because she needs to collect her children from nursery?
None of them. You are hiring for a PA but from your descriptions none of them have any PA experience or ambition to become a good PA.
#1 is looking for a stress free job
#2 is looking to progress in the industry
#3 is looking for a foothold in the industry
You want magic candidate #4 who is organised, efficient, and a good communicator. Maybe with some experience in a similar role, or a desire to become a professional PA. Quick, accurate typing skills and a good telephone manner are a must. Shorthand would be a bonus.
#1 is looking for a stress free job
#2 is looking to progress in the industry
#3 is looking for a foothold in the industry
You want magic candidate #4 who is organised, efficient, and a good communicator. Maybe with some experience in a similar role, or a desire to become a professional PA. Quick, accurate typing skills and a good telephone manner are a must. Shorthand would be a bonus.
stevenjhepburn said:
None of them. You are hiring for a PA but from your descriptions none of them have any PA experience or ambition to become a good PA.
#1 is looking for a stress free job
#2 is looking to progress in the industry
#3 is looking for a foothold in the industry
You want magic candidate #4 who is organised, efficient, and a good communicator. Maybe with some experience in a similar role, or a desire to become a professional PA. Quick, accurate typing skills and a good telephone manner are a must. Shorthand would be a bonus.
Less stressful is not the same as stress-free.#1 is looking for a stress free job
#2 is looking to progress in the industry
#3 is looking for a foothold in the industry
You want magic candidate #4 who is organised, efficient, and a good communicator. Maybe with some experience in a similar role, or a desire to become a professional PA. Quick, accurate typing skills and a good telephone manner are a must. Shorthand would be a bonus.
Shorthand.... Not many people use that nowadays.
Don't be overly concerned if it takes someone three months to learn the job. They might be with you for a while, so take time to train and allow them to learn.
Hire on potential, not on specific experience.
I don't any of these candidates is quite right, but If the role is clerical or administrative, then hire number 2.
Don't be overly concerned if it takes someone three months to learn the job. They might be with you for a while, so take time to train and allow them to learn.
Hire on potential, not on specific experience.
I don't any of these candidates is quite right, but If the role is clerical or administrative, then hire number 2.
Siscar said:
My order of preference would be 4, 2, 1, 3
4 because none of them are ideal
2 because she will be keen and have the energy to try
1 because she will be Ok at the job
3 because she will be a nightmare who will hate it when she tries it
Just to add - never expect someone to work well in a lower role to one they have had previously. They won't enjoy it, we've been there a few times with people wanting to do that and it's never worked. I'd rule out 1 and particularly rule out 3 for that reason.4 because none of them are ideal
2 because she will be keen and have the energy to try
1 because she will be Ok at the job
3 because she will be a nightmare who will hate it when she tries it
As for a young woman who is attractive, that's not a reason to not employ. It is strange though how other women react badly to them. I have a couple of very good women reporting to me, both very good looking, and both have had issues with other female managers essentially being jealous of them. Sad really.
Siscar said:
Siscar said:
My order of preference would be 4, 2, 1, 3
4 because none of them are ideal
2 because she will be keen and have the energy to try
1 because she will be Ok at the job
3 because she will be a nightmare who will hate it when she tries it
Just to add - never expect someone to work well in a lower role to one they have had previously. They won't enjoy it, we've been there a few times with people wanting to do that and it's never worked. I'd rule out 1 and particularly rule out 3 for that reason.4 because none of them are ideal
2 because she will be keen and have the energy to try
1 because she will be Ok at the job
3 because she will be a nightmare who will hate it when she tries it
As for a young woman who is attractive, that's not a reason to not employ. It is strange though how other women react badly to them. I have a couple of very good women reporting to me, both very good looking, and both have had issues with other female managers essentially being jealous of them. Sad really.
Gents (and Ladies)
Thank you for your wisdom thus far. I am certainly going to keep the recruitment going for the duration - another two weeks, so I may well get that elusive Number 4.
I'm glad that the responses so far are mixed. It makes me feel less bad about being indecisive. We so far have the following votes from PH:
Candidate 1 = 3 votes
Candidate 2 = 5 votes
Candidate 3 = 2 votes
Candidate 4 = 3 votes
I should have made it more clear but the position is not purely PA, and certainly not a traditional PA role. In fact, that is the lesser side of the job. I want someone to do my admin - which includes handing some simple but important data/performing specific tasks on software packages right through to basic filing as well as not being too above managing my diary, filtering my calls or simply popping out to grab my lunch if I have a day of wall to wall meetings. That said, for the right candidate, I can offer some more complex work and provide a certain level of progression.
A lot of it will come down to personality fit too. This is why, despite the lack of experience, I am quite keen on Candidate 2. She is also the most enthusiastic by far. I'm also keen to introduce some young blood into my admin team, as it is exclusively 50+ women at the moment. She also sought me out and took the trouble to spend an hour or so with me going through the JD.
Will wait and see!
Thank you for your wisdom thus far. I am certainly going to keep the recruitment going for the duration - another two weeks, so I may well get that elusive Number 4.
I'm glad that the responses so far are mixed. It makes me feel less bad about being indecisive. We so far have the following votes from PH:
Candidate 1 = 3 votes
Candidate 2 = 5 votes
Candidate 3 = 2 votes
Candidate 4 = 3 votes
I should have made it more clear but the position is not purely PA, and certainly not a traditional PA role. In fact, that is the lesser side of the job. I want someone to do my admin - which includes handing some simple but important data/performing specific tasks on software packages right through to basic filing as well as not being too above managing my diary, filtering my calls or simply popping out to grab my lunch if I have a day of wall to wall meetings. That said, for the right candidate, I can offer some more complex work and provide a certain level of progression.
A lot of it will come down to personality fit too. This is why, despite the lack of experience, I am quite keen on Candidate 2. She is also the most enthusiastic by far. I'm also keen to introduce some young blood into my admin team, as it is exclusively 50+ women at the moment. She also sought me out and took the trouble to spend an hour or so with me going through the JD.
Will wait and see!
Now you have added further information I would be even more against candidates 1 and 3. Can you see those being happy to just fetch you lunch? A duty similar to that as being the office tea-making b
h.
My personality could not work with number 1. I like to see people develop and be keen to take on a challenge; my perception of number 1 would be that she would show obvious displeasure at being given a task she didn't like, or would eventually start to correct you (as you suggested).
Number 2- I can imagine the sort, and have managed similar in the past. I get a huge sense of reward setting a new challenge for someone, coaching them on how to do it and then see them proudly tell me that it's done. The enthusiasm will rub off on you and others around her too.
Number 3- I see no appeal. Joint last place.
If number 1 and 3 were the only applicants I would possibly not appoint.
h.My personality could not work with number 1. I like to see people develop and be keen to take on a challenge; my perception of number 1 would be that she would show obvious displeasure at being given a task she didn't like, or would eventually start to correct you (as you suggested).
Number 2- I can imagine the sort, and have managed similar in the past. I get a huge sense of reward setting a new challenge for someone, coaching them on how to do it and then see them proudly tell me that it's done. The enthusiasm will rub off on you and others around her too.
Number 3- I see no appeal. Joint last place.
If number 1 and 3 were the only applicants I would possibly not appoint.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff