I’ve been working on the compliance side of pupillage recruitment recently and it seems to me as an objective bystander that there are two camps with very different values.
(I should stress that these are my views and not those of the organisations with which I’m working.)
The first camp is the organisations who are seeking fresh talent who they believe will fit or can be moulded into their existing model of organisation.
The second camp is those organisations who value previous experience and individuals who have adapted their skills in their own way and will become self-sufficient self-employed entities utilising the support systems of the organisation to maximise their own businesses.
This reminded me of the difference in the music industry between the talent/reality show stars who are moulded and backed by promoters and the music stars/groups who finally “make it” – usually after years of hard graft.
What’s that got to do with compliance I hear you ask. Well, thinking specifically of the Equality and Diversity rules:
- As we’ve seen from the talent/reality show experience, it takes adding diversity to the judging panel and audience participation over time to ensure diversity and inclusion (think of the make-up of bands/talent such as Westlife and Take That)
- Conversely, the experienced group do tend to be naturally more diverse.
To be fair to the first camp, there is value in consistency so long as the organisation can prove it is adaptable enough to ensure application of developing regulatory objectives and client demands.
For the second camp, they need to ensure that they offer a clear culture of collaboration and a good variety of tools for the self-sufficient self-employed entities to use for both business development and compliance.
As always, thoughts and comments welcome.