Not quite a 'bogoff' but certainly great! If you prepay for a block of four coaching sessions in May you will get a fifth for free!
It's twelve months since I started this and so to celebrate I am offering new clients five sessions for the price of four. You can take them anytime in the next year but must sign up by the end of the month. Experience has shown that many people really benefit from the block of four and so it makes sense to offer a deal to entice more of you to commit.. come on you know you want to.................. contact me now on 01342 826735!
What can I help with?
My strap line is 'supporting your path, wherever you want to go'... it is your journey and you need to determine the path.. so don't come looking for me to tell you what you should do... but using coaching tools, or questionnaires or psychometrics we can identify goals and direction..
You may know what you want but not be sure how to get there, again using coaching techniques we can identify your barriers, your limitations and your doubts and develop strategies to overcome them. we can identify the ways you can achieve your goal. I can hold you to account and help you do the things you say you want to do but don't get around to. getting started can be the hardest part.
You may feel you don't quite get it right, in some areas I can mentor you to achieve your goals, applying for jobs, writing a CV, applying for judicial appointment, taking up training, LEADING A RICHER, FULLER LIFE. I have witnesses people making huge changes and achieving great success.. you can too.
many people come to coaching because it is a non-judgemental, confidential space, you won't be boring me, you won't be 'going on', you won't be embarrassing yourself.... it's a space and a structure, support and challenge.
These things are within your grasp.. call me NOW! and get a B4G0F!
Get paid more, promoted faster and feel more satisfied.......
Wednesday, 4 May 2011
Use Linked-In to enhance your job search
Your Linkedin profile is your shop window to recruiters and potential employers, and the first place which potential recruiters will look when they are considering contacting you. Here are our top six tips to make sure your Linkedin profile is found by the RIGHT people:
1. Consider your job seeking objectives
Like any social networking medium you need to firstly decide why and how you will use LinkedIn for your job search. Before you can use LinkedIn, you need to have decided on what role you are looking for. It is no good branding your LinkedIn profile for a role within a professional practice if you decide you want to go in-house.
2. No typos, spelling or grammatical errors please
You don’t need to tell us that on-line first impressions count just as much as face-to-face first impressions. It’s also even easier to make assumptions about someone or some group when working with them on-line rather than face-to-face. Make sure that your profile as well as being error-free is succinct and articulate. Ideally, spend as much time working on your LinkedIn profile as you would your CV.
3. Who do you want to be seen as?
Every time you appear on LinkedIn your headline or personal tag line goes with you. Make sure you brand your headline as what you want to be seen as by the on-line community, and especially potential recruiters. It is better to brand yourself for the job you want rather than the job you have. The reason? Recruiters will often search for a specific job title when looking for potential candidates.
4. Write your elevator pitch
The summary box in your profile needs to be your personal elevator pitch but targeted at the people you want to see it – i.e. recruiters. Your elevator pitch needs to be why you are different and the value you can bring to an organisation. Make sure you include some of the keywords which recruiters are likely to be searching for.
Use the second paragraph – specialties, to list your specialties as this is a good opportunity to add in keywords as recruiters search on this section.
5. Public Profile and URLs
Fight for the right to have your personal name in your LinkedIn profile URL, i.e. “http://linkedin.com/in/yourfullname.” As well as your LinkedIn URL you need to think about other websites that you want your profile to display. Do take the time to put the actual title of the link in rather than leaving them as ‘My company’ or ‘My website’. For example, instead of ‘My Company’ – I have written ‘The Efficiency Coach’. Do include links to any profiles you have on social media sites where you maintain a professional presence.
6. Connect up your social networking presence
It is very inefficient to manually update all of your social networking presences. Luckily, Linkedin can be used to connect up all of your social networking presences. The application Blog Typepad can pull in a RSS or atom feed from your blog(s) and twitter feed. If you write a wordpress blog, there is an wordpress application which lets you display your blog on your LinkedIn profile. (Although Blog Typepad will do the same thing for you)
1. Consider your job seeking objectives
Like any social networking medium you need to firstly decide why and how you will use LinkedIn for your job search. Before you can use LinkedIn, you need to have decided on what role you are looking for. It is no good branding your LinkedIn profile for a role within a professional practice if you decide you want to go in-house.
2. No typos, spelling or grammatical errors please
You don’t need to tell us that on-line first impressions count just as much as face-to-face first impressions. It’s also even easier to make assumptions about someone or some group when working with them on-line rather than face-to-face. Make sure that your profile as well as being error-free is succinct and articulate. Ideally, spend as much time working on your LinkedIn profile as you would your CV.
3. Who do you want to be seen as?
Every time you appear on LinkedIn your headline or personal tag line goes with you. Make sure you brand your headline as what you want to be seen as by the on-line community, and especially potential recruiters. It is better to brand yourself for the job you want rather than the job you have. The reason? Recruiters will often search for a specific job title when looking for potential candidates.
4. Write your elevator pitch
The summary box in your profile needs to be your personal elevator pitch but targeted at the people you want to see it – i.e. recruiters. Your elevator pitch needs to be why you are different and the value you can bring to an organisation. Make sure you include some of the keywords which recruiters are likely to be searching for.
Use the second paragraph – specialties, to list your specialties as this is a good opportunity to add in keywords as recruiters search on this section.
5. Public Profile and URLs
Fight for the right to have your personal name in your LinkedIn profile URL, i.e. “http://linkedin.com/in/yourfullname.” As well as your LinkedIn URL you need to think about other websites that you want your profile to display. Do take the time to put the actual title of the link in rather than leaving them as ‘My company’ or ‘My website’. For example, instead of ‘My Company’ – I have written ‘The Efficiency Coach’. Do include links to any profiles you have on social media sites where you maintain a professional presence.
6. Connect up your social networking presence
It is very inefficient to manually update all of your social networking presences. Luckily, Linkedin can be used to connect up all of your social networking presences. The application Blog Typepad can pull in a RSS or atom feed from your blog(s) and twitter feed. If you write a wordpress blog, there is an wordpress application which lets you display your blog on your LinkedIn profile. (Although Blog Typepad will do the same thing for you)
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Heavy weight comp and bens suggestions....could it work in public sector?
Remunerating for profitability
To ensure that wages and salaries are a profit-centre, not a cost-centre, for your business, it helps to tie them into profitability. Here are some ways you can do this:Factor in value when setting wage and salary levels
It is important to factor in the value of both the work and the individual's contribution when setting wage and salary levels. Begin by assessing the value of a particular job. Here, you must look at the work, not the person doing it, and ask how much value it adds to your business. Based on this assessment, you can set a wage or salary range for the job. Of course, you will also need to keep an eye on the labour market and be sure to set and maintain remuneration levels that are competitive.The next step is to decide where on the wage or salary range to position a particular individual, and when it is appropriate to offer additional incentives. Here, you are looking at the individual, not the job, and evaluating what value his or her performance adds to the business. You need to assess traditional criteria such as attendance, motivation, initiative, reliability, and safety, but the most important thing is to evaluate the individual's contribution to the profitability of the business and reward it accordingly.
Devise incentive schemes for both individuals and teams
If you introduce incentive schemes, make sure you design them to improve the performance of both individual employees and the business as a whole, not one at the expense of the other. Incentive schemes that focus exclusively on improving individual performance can sometimes undermine teamwork and thereby overall productivity. On the other hand, schemes that focus on improving firm-wide performance provide little incentive for above-average performers to go the extra mile. Not only does this deprive your business of their best efforts, it also increases the risk of your star employees feeling they are underperforming and therefore looking elsewhere for something more challenging.To get round this, consider offering an annual salary bonus to key employees who meet specific short-term goals, but with half the bonus awarded if the individual achieves his or her individual goals, and the other half if the firm as a whole meets its general goals. Businesses that have tried this approach report considerable improvements in productivity.
Thanks once again to Plummer Parsons
I am a really beautiful plant! no not lost it yet!
Thursday, 28 April 2011
'Sicknote Britain' yes or no?
According to one screaming tabloid headline today: "Blitz on benefits: 887,000 fiddlers exposed". Echoing stories in many of this morning's papers, the Daily Express says that three-quarters of Incapacity Benefit (IB) claimants are "workshy spongers feigning serious disability". Shocking, if true.
But it isn't true.
The red-top press has worked itself up into a lather of indignation and fury over statistics that are variously described as evidence of "Britain's sicknote culture", "greedy skivers" and "benefit cheats". So, let's examine the facts. The source for all this is the latest batch of data from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) on applications for Employment Support Allowance (ESA), a benefit introduced two-and-a-half years ago by the Labour government. Today's figures relate to the period between October 2008 and August 2010 - a time, for the most part of course, when Labour was in power.
The key point, though, it that these are new applicants - people applying to see if they might be eligible for additional financial support.
Some will be trying it on, knowing they are quite well enough to work but hoping to hoodwink the assessors into giving them sickness benefit. But I suspect many are simply individuals who don't want to miss out on a welfare payment to which they may be eligible. There is nothing 'dodgy' about seeing if you meet the criteria for something.
The DWP exhorts the public to ensure their full benefit entitlement. For instance, the department has regularly encouraged people to ensure they "don't miss out" on council tax benefit while the Mayor of London also has a scheme called "Know Your Rights".
So, it could be argued, that applicants for ESA are doing what they are told. Unsurprisingly, many people learn that under the tough new medical assessments, they do not qualify. Others, on realising that they have to undergo detailed checks, withdraw their application.
Are these people really workshy spongers? One can easily imagine someone who believes their depression or back pain has contributed to their unemployment and wanting to see if their condition entitles them to the slightly more generous payments under ESA than JSA (Jobseekers Allowance). That would seem to be common sense, not greed.
Some newspapers, though, appear to have misunderstood the point. The Daily Express, for instance, says the figures "suggest that more than £4billion of taxpayers' money is wrongly paid out" to scroungers. But, of course, nothing has been paid out to any of the applicants because they are not yet receiving the benefit. Extrapolating the data from new applicants to those already receiving IB risks comparing apples and oranges because those in receipt of IB have already been through an assessment.
The government has just begun rolling out its programme for re-assessing existing IB claimants amid controversy over the fairness and accuracy of the medical checks, but it would be a surprise if the proportion deemed "fit to work" was anything like the 39% of new applicants who have not been previously assessed.
To recap then: the figures reflect the results of a Labour welfare reform for new applicants to a relatively new benefit. This has nothing to do with a coalition "blitz on benefit cheats" or a "government crackdown on welfare scroungers", however much Ministers would like to spin the stats. I would also note that today's stories bear an uncanny resemblance to reports six months ago on the previous tranche of ESA data which said almost exactly the same thing.
Far from providing evidence of sicknote Britain, the figures could be seen as evidence of citizens following government advice to ensure they "don't miss out".
But it isn't true.
The key point, though, it that these are new applicants - people applying to see if they might be eligible for additional financial support.
Some will be trying it on, knowing they are quite well enough to work but hoping to hoodwink the assessors into giving them sickness benefit. But I suspect many are simply individuals who don't want to miss out on a welfare payment to which they may be eligible. There is nothing 'dodgy' about seeing if you meet the criteria for something.
The DWP exhorts the public to ensure their full benefit entitlement. For instance, the department has regularly encouraged people to ensure they "don't miss out" on council tax benefit while the Mayor of London also has a scheme called "Know Your Rights".
So, it could be argued, that applicants for ESA are doing what they are told. Unsurprisingly, many people learn that under the tough new medical assessments, they do not qualify. Others, on realising that they have to undergo detailed checks, withdraw their application.
Are these people really workshy spongers? One can easily imagine someone who believes their depression or back pain has contributed to their unemployment and wanting to see if their condition entitles them to the slightly more generous payments under ESA than JSA (Jobseekers Allowance). That would seem to be common sense, not greed.
The government has just begun rolling out its programme for re-assessing existing IB claimants amid controversy over the fairness and accuracy of the medical checks, but it would be a surprise if the proportion deemed "fit to work" was anything like the 39% of new applicants who have not been previously assessed.
To recap then: the figures reflect the results of a Labour welfare reform for new applicants to a relatively new benefit. This has nothing to do with a coalition "blitz on benefit cheats" or a "government crackdown on welfare scroungers", however much Ministers would like to spin the stats. I would also note that today's stories bear an uncanny resemblance to reports six months ago on the previous tranche of ESA data which said almost exactly the same thing.
Far from providing evidence of sicknote Britain, the figures could be seen as evidence of citizens following government advice to ensure they "don't miss out".
Saturday, 23 April 2011
Ave ET payment = £4k
The CBI has described the employment tribunal system as slow, legalistic and antagonistic in its submission to the Government's consultation on reforms to the way that workplace disputes are resolved.
As such, the CBI insisted, the current set up for dealing with employee grievances is failing both employers and workers.
The business group said it wants to see a major overhaul of the system aimed at making the process faster, fairer and less costly.
Specifically, weak or vexatious claims should be sieved from the system so that valid claims get a quicker hearing.
Employees should be made aware of what they could achieve by taking an employer to tribunal in order to avoid unrealistic expectations. The average compensation paid out at tribunals is just £4,000, a long way from the hundreds of thousands that make the headlines in high profile sex discriminations cases.
There should also be a charge of a fee for lodging a claim so that only sensible complaints are brought forward. Such fees should be proportionate and refundable in those cases where the claim is upheld.
Another of the CBI's recommendations is that settlements should be encouraged at an early stage. In other words, a formal system for making offers to settle should be put in place.
Although compromise agreements, where an employer and employee negotiate a deal by mutual consent without going to tribunal, are fair, the CBI argued that the legal process surrounding them has become too complicated and expensive.
Lastly, the CBI said that the tribunals themselves must be made more efficient and consistent. One way of doing this would be to introduce tribunal league tables detailing how different regions and judges perform against set standards.
Katja Hall, the CBI's chief policy director, said: "It's always regrettable when the relationship between employer and employee breaks down to the point where a tribunal claim is made. But when this happens, both sides deserve a system that is consistent, quick and keeps legal costs to a minimum. Instead, we are saddled with a tribunal system that is expensive, stressful and time-consuming for all parties.
"Surely it's in everyone's interests for cases with merit to be heard quickly and settled, while weak claims are swiftly identified and weeded out. We'd like to see more workplace disputes being resolved before they reach tribunal."
Ms Hall added: "The tribunals system has gradually become a barrier to justice. Even where a successful outcome is likely, firms try to avoid the heavy costs and long delays. A programme of common sense reforms is long overdue. We need to see a transparent, fairer system built around the interests of legitimate claimants and responsible firms."
Thanks to Plummer Parsons for the copy.
As such, the CBI insisted, the current set up for dealing with employee grievances is failing both employers and workers.
The business group said it wants to see a major overhaul of the system aimed at making the process faster, fairer and less costly.
Specifically, weak or vexatious claims should be sieved from the system so that valid claims get a quicker hearing.
Employees should be made aware of what they could achieve by taking an employer to tribunal in order to avoid unrealistic expectations. The average compensation paid out at tribunals is just £4,000, a long way from the hundreds of thousands that make the headlines in high profile sex discriminations cases.
There should also be a charge of a fee for lodging a claim so that only sensible complaints are brought forward. Such fees should be proportionate and refundable in those cases where the claim is upheld.
Another of the CBI's recommendations is that settlements should be encouraged at an early stage. In other words, a formal system for making offers to settle should be put in place.
Although compromise agreements, where an employer and employee negotiate a deal by mutual consent without going to tribunal, are fair, the CBI argued that the legal process surrounding them has become too complicated and expensive.
Lastly, the CBI said that the tribunals themselves must be made more efficient and consistent. One way of doing this would be to introduce tribunal league tables detailing how different regions and judges perform against set standards.
Katja Hall, the CBI's chief policy director, said: "It's always regrettable when the relationship between employer and employee breaks down to the point where a tribunal claim is made. But when this happens, both sides deserve a system that is consistent, quick and keeps legal costs to a minimum. Instead, we are saddled with a tribunal system that is expensive, stressful and time-consuming for all parties.
"Surely it's in everyone's interests for cases with merit to be heard quickly and settled, while weak claims are swiftly identified and weeded out. We'd like to see more workplace disputes being resolved before they reach tribunal."
Ms Hall added: "The tribunals system has gradually become a barrier to justice. Even where a successful outcome is likely, firms try to avoid the heavy costs and long delays. A programme of common sense reforms is long overdue. We need to see a transparent, fairer system built around the interests of legitimate claimants and responsible firms."
Thanks to Plummer Parsons for the copy.
Thursday, 21 April 2011
good and new news for Easter
43% of public-sector employers prepared to recruit this year
A recent survey suggests that, despite the deep cuts to public finances, more than two in five public-sector employers believe it won't be necessary to reduce their permanent headcount this year, and would indeed take on further staff if the workload justified it.The poll, conducted by accountancy and finance recruitment specialist Hewitson Walker, also found that 86% of public-sector employers believe that savings can be made by reducing the number of external consultants used.
Although none of the respondents were looking to introduce RPO/managed recruitment models this year (probably as levels of recruitment would be unlikely to warrant programmes on such a scale), one in seven (14%) did suggest that it would be necessary to drive further cost efficiencies through a review or the introduction of a preferred suppliers' list.
Thanks Ri5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)