Calling all HR folk! How 'essential' is 'essential'

[BellaTheGymnast]

Looking at a job application form with 26 Essential Criteria on it. I reckon I don't have seven of them. Is it worth doing the form?

If it was only one or two I'd think it was worth a punt, but seven?

26?!?!! Thats madness! Are they job role specific?

Having 19 out of 26 is quite good. Go for it!

WIth 26 essential they're unlikely to get anyone who has all of them.

Well, essential usually means just that, so not meeting 7 would normally be a deal breaker.

But where there are 26, unless they are criteria that loads of people will fulfil, it might be worth a punt. If they get plenty fulfilling all the essentials, you won't get an interview, but if they've been unrealistic, you might.

Essential could mean to fulfil the job once you have got up to speed. Rather than before entering. I wouldn't expect (at the level I recruit) someone to be 100% before entering. Also, the best candidate when sifting the applications (scored by criteria) is not always the best after interview, when you might uncover other factors that make a basic grasp of Essential Thing #15 actually more impressive because it was used in conjunction with Desirable Factor #39...

Wow, unless some of those are eating and breathing would think it's worth a go with 19/26. I would be concerned about an organisation that thinks about jibsn this way though.....

Is it a local authority by any chance?!

Are you applying for a job where I work? I do work in HR, and our job descriptions are massive! I would go for it. 19 out of 26 is good going IMO.

The criteria are grouped, so whilst there are lots, some of them are variants of the same thing, IYSWIM. Feel dispirited with the job search to be honest, my skills and expertise are good, but in a very narrow field so I'm trying to deal with diversifying AND applying for jobs that would involve moving.

All a bit stressful! Thanks for your advice.

I read somewhere that men on average tend to apply for jobs where they meet around half the person spec, whereas women won't tend to apply unless they meet all of them.

Go for it! :)

Will also depend how well you score! Go for it, just make sure you put something down for each competency. For any you don't have just put that you are willing to do additional training.

Depends what it is tbh- if it's something like a nursing degree or QTS, I'd say don't bother!

When I advertise posts, if I've put essential, I mean it... but the last role I advertised attracted over 150 applicants.

Bertie I was going to say exactly that too. We must have read the same article!

Definitley apply - good luck!

No, I have the essential qualification, and in the right subject area, it's the experience and knowledge criteria where I'm falling short.

Feel a bit paralysed by the likelihood of moving, neither me nor DP earn enough to keep us, yet the chances of both of us finding work in the same place seems very slim! Aargh!

A lot of my clients insisted on huge lists of essential skills only to end up recruiting someone less experienced because they could grow with the role and therefore have a better chance at long term retention.

But this was banking/finance, could be different in your area.

I would still apply.

I work in the NHS and for any recruitment I've been involved in, those that don't meet all the essential criteria haven't been invited to interview.

On the flip side of this, we have to interview everyone who meet all the essential criteria. This means that you get to meet some, erm, "interesting" characters.....

You have to interview every candidate who meets essential criteria in the NHS?! How utterly bonkers and a complete waste of everyone's time and money!

Well, I applied! Will let you know the outcome...

I think it depends on a) how vital you think the requirement is to doing the job and b) how quickly you could pick it up/if there's anything else you've done that is similar. I also think it's worth thinking about whether there are realistically going to be people out there who do satisfy all the criteria.

For example if it's a job that wants a certain qualification and you don't have that qualification but do have a similar qualification or very relevant experience I think it's worth a go.

Is that a new thing Timothy? When I was involved in recruiting for the NHS if I had more than 6 candidates that met the essential criteria I would start sifting them by looking at the desirable requirements. Sometimes we could quite literally have hundreds that met the essential criteria.

i've seen jobs like this advertised and often what they are doing is following the law by advertising the job, but using such specific criteria can indicate that they already have someone in mind for the post, and the criteria can only be met by that person - if that makes sense?

Yes, I wondered exactly that.

Yes they probably have someone in mind, so set some obscure Essential Criteria to try to ensure no one else can apply. My DH was an HR manager and said this happens all the time.

I'd go for it as bertiebotts said men are more likely to do this, the job I am currently doing, I was between a rock and a hard place, I didn't even have the "essential qualification " but I had most of the essential criteria bar say 2 out of 8, I had no budget or management experience, but I figured I had to be in charge on the days/weeks my managers where out, and I was aware there was only a certain amount to spend and 22 years ago I did a business and finance diploma...like double entry book keeping is relivent?
I saw the advert 3 hours before the deadline, e-mailed and spelt out I did not have the essential qualification and I was in the USA so couldn't actually post the application back as instructed or even recieve it by post, could they e-mail it?
and I have been happily in post, they apparently forgot to write "or equilivilent" on the essential qualification! but I asked and applied, this has happened to me in my career on more than one occation.

On the NHS question.... I can only tell you what I know my old boss emailed me to tell me the lady who had replaced me when I moved abroad was leaving would I apply for my old job? now all applications have to go through the NHS website and your personal details are removed so the appointing manager has no idea your name or age or try and guess your race...which is actually a good thing, and the boxes on essential are literally ticked.
so I got an email from my old boss saying I thought you where applying? I cann't find you in the applications...easy to spot as my experience would be in that departement under old employers, told her I had applied, she then requested all applications, skyped me to say she had it and had forwarded to HR as a candidate.
phoned me on the week of interviews to ask if I had got a job as she knew I wasn't pinning all my hope on that one as I had been through a NHS interview recently and it is totally on points.said no I hadn't, I had had a rejection letter...to say the air turned blue is an understatement!
In the last 2 years I have been approached by my old manager and her replacement since she retired 3 times to apply for jobs, I haven't bothered because I know they have no input unless i get to interview and it is clear I won't as the qualification is more important than experience these days.
you might think I am bitter but I am not, it forced me to apply and take a mangement role which was out of my comfort zone but I love, once I get my qualification..one day I will be able due to my 12+ years of experience and to date 2 years management experience in a much smaller organisation...be the manager of my old department...but not for a while thanks.. I am responsible for 2000 people, my old job was 11000 with 1 other who was a manager so they where mostly my bag, and organisationally it is hitting the 30,000 mark, and I hate to think about the outside contracts numbers so no I am happy.

but give it a go they can only reject you..but you might be lucky