Victoria Clark

No references on a CV are a red flag. False. When HR sees a CV without references, they should consider the following: 🔒 Confidentiality: The candidate might be currently employed and protecting their job security while exploring new opportunities. 🌍 International Norms: If a lawyer is returning from an overseas stint, many firms have policies preventing Partners from providing references—and they don’t want to risk their own job to provide one. 🤝 Respect for Privacy: Busy senior lawyers might not be happy about getting random calls, so some candidates are just being considerate and respectful of the Partners' privacy until the process is at a stage where it's progressing further. 💡 Challenging Exits: Life happens, and not every job ends with high fives and farewell parties. Sometimes, things get messy, and people prefer to leave that chapter closed. I've seen tons of CVs without references, and trust me, there's always a story behind it. References are SO important, but instead of jumping to conclusions, why don't we take a step back and try to understand the bigger picture.

93

28 Comments

Salary Expectations: Be flexible but don’t sell yourself short. As recruiters who know our market well, savvy senior HR professionals often ask for advice on what salary expectations they should have when looking for a new role. Here are a few insights I often share: • Base your expectations on market data, not emotion. Do your research and use tangible data points to inform your range. Confidence comes from knowing where you sit in the market. Speak to recruiters and peers or previous bosses to get their view. • Recognise that the old rules have changed. If you’re a seasoned professional (say 20–25 years’ experience or more), you’re probably used to your salary having increased every time you previously moved. That’s not always the case right now - there are fewer roles and plenty of competition - so having some flexibility will open more doors. • Base your expectations on the actual role at that moment in time. If the role is paying market rate, and assuming it is in a range that you can afford, try to keep your ego out of it. Whilst you may have earned more previously, that is likely not of any consequence for this new opportunity. • Flex where you can, but never on everything. If you can afford to be flexible, great, but don’t compromise on both the role and the salary. Being underpaid in a job that doesn’t make you happy is never a winning combination. To bring this to life, two real examples: 1: A candidate recently chose to enter a process that paid about $100K less than their previous salary. Their reasoning? With school and university fees no longer part of their expenses, their net position actually improved, and the new role was with an NFP that aligned with their values. 2: Another candidate, previously on $350K, accepted a $250K offer after losing their role through restructure. When I asked how they felt about the $100K pay cut, they smiled and said, “What pay cut? I’m taking a $250K pay rise. I’ve been earning nothing for the past 6 weeks!” So what are the takeaways here? Flexibility matters, but so does perspective and context. Salary is important, but it’s only part of the bigger picture of career satisfaction and feeling fulfilled at work.

94

6 Comments

Give context on your next General Counsel CV. Many CVs I have received recently lacked any details about the companies listed. A small tweak can make a huge impact. ➡️ Include a brief company overview under each role on your CV. Not every recruiter or hiring manager will know the size, scope, or industry of your current or past employers. Providing context highlights the relevance of your experience and makes your achievements stand out. What to include in a company overview? ✳️Is it a listed company, PE/VC-backed, or privately owned? ✳️Is it a UK-based or global organization? ✳️Does it operate in a regulated sector? ✳️Is it a large, established business or a fast-growing scale-up? ✳️Does it serve B2B or B2C markets? ✳️Who are its target customers? ✳️What’s the company’s size (revenue, headcount, or geographic reach)? Without this context, your CV might not immediately convey your suitability, even if your experience is spot-on. Examples of company overviews: ✳️A venture capital-backed B2B fintech startup with 150 employees, delivering payment solutions to small and medium-sized enterprises across Europe. ✳️A PE-backed SaaS platform that scaled from 100 to 500 employees across EMEA, North America and APAC, with 50% YOY revenue growth and exit valuation of $2billion. ✳️A publicly listed global B2C healthcare company with $5B in annual revenue, providing medical devices and services to hospitals and clinics worldwide. This simple addition can elevate your CV and help you stand out! #generalcounsel #inhouselegal #careertips

62

2 Comments

Sending candidates to roles without their consent? Still happening in 2025. It shouldn’t need saying, but here we are. No candidate should ever find out they’ve been “submitted” to a role they didn’t approve, or worse, don’t even know about. It damages trust, reputations, and the entire industry. I honestly thought this was a tactic buried with the UK recruitment industry of the 80s... clearly not. Consent isn’t optional. It’s the bare minimum.

99

20 Comments

UK recruiters, if you could move anywhere in the US where would you go to and why? 🤔🇺🇸 US Recruiters - any advice to offer? I always get asked this question and it's so difficult to answer as it is about personal choice and future goals. As someone who has spent nearly 20 years in Los Angeles I can say I don't think it is the easiest location for a recruiter - high cost of living, transient workforce, traffic/commute, heavy taxes and natural disasters. So what are the options? Tier 1 - Established Hubs (NYC, SF, LA, Boston, Miami): Fun, dynamic, lively with a cost of living to match. Challenge with these locations is you need to either arrive with money saved or get earning quickly! Likely need to commute. As an owner it is expensive and highly competitive to hire talent. Tier 2 - Growth Markets (Austin, Denver, Atlanta, Seattle): Expanding tech and business presence, particularly from coastal relocations. Better cost-to-compensation ratio, growing client bases, and less saturated markets. Maybe not as hip as some of the tier one locations but great long term. Tier 3 - Emerging Markets (Nashville, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Raleigh): Rising tech and business scenes, lower operating costs, and untapped opportunities. Smaller talent pools but increasing corporate investment and relocations. Share your thoughts or DM me if you want specifics about any of these markets. #UKrecruiters #InternationalRecruitment #RecruitmentLife #USAjobs

35

46 Comments

Senior Candidate Commentary The market remains tight and relatively slow, mainly due to low attrition and a fear of last one in, first one out. The use of phrases such as "job hugging" and "juniorisation" continue to be heard in the market. When I talk to senior candidates the phrase/comment that seems to come through is "it's such a weird market". Interviews happen, feedback seems initially positive, but then you just don't seem to hear back or you get a rejection when there wasn't a single negative word uttered in your interview. This isn't localised to one particular market, this is very much a global trend and I have spoken to candidates all over the world that have been looking for an extended period of time with similar struggles. To steal a phrase from the dating industry, "it's not you, it's the market". It is weird out there, companies aren't being tough enough in pushing high performance, leading to a real lack of attrition. Candidates can also take some of the blame for this, how many are now "cruising" or "job hugging", not giving it their all and content to stay in a role they aren't happy with but need it to survive or get by. On top of this, the shadow of AI looms. Companies are looking ever more closely at how they bring this in, hiring has partly slowed because they want to use AI to increase profitably and cut jobs that don't add revenue. If you are in a job, don't take it for granted and make sure your productivity remains high, stand out from your peers. If you are out of a job remain upbeat, keep connected, utilise your network as much as you possibly can and find people you trust to talk to. Markets always turn, some just take longer than others.

108

10 Comments

One of the hidden dynamics I see in global hiring: Two brilliant leaders with equal experience. The European candidate has depth for days. The American candidate walks in, lands a crisp point of view, and asks for the business. Guess who reads more “CEO-ready” in the room. This isn’t better or worse. It’s what each system rehearses. Europe trains mastery. Rotations, rigor, fluency in the levers. The U.S. trains conviction. Pitch early, defend your plan, carry a narrative long before you get the title. Boards feel conviction faster than they can verify craft, which is why the nod often goes stateside. If you grew up in Europe and want to travel better in U.S. rooms, start with your take, not your resume. Thirty seconds on what you would do, then show the guts. Translate your wins into price, mix, repeat, contribution. Name one thing you would stop funding this quarter. Ask for the job like a leader: here is what I will deliver by Q2 and what I need to do it. If you grew up in the U.S. and want to land well in Europe, slow the opener and show your plumbing. Decision rights. Evidence path. How you moved levers you didn’t fully own. Invite challenge. Treat debate as respect. Send the pre-read on time and make risks obvious. When I evaluate across continents, I ignore the label and look for the combo. Can you make numbers mean something in plain English. Can you make a hard trade-off without flinching. Can you switch dialects without changing who you are. European craft plus American conviction is the mix that travels. If you had to dial one up this quarter, which muscle gets the reps. #Leadership #ExecutiveSearch #FMCG #CPG #GlobalTeams #Careers #CEO

87

19 Comments

I’ve had a lot of messages since my post on how to sharpen your CV at Exec level (I will get back to everyone, I promise!) — so I thought it might be helpful to share some thoughts on what happens next: when you land the interview Executive Interviews in 2025: What to Ditch & What to Do Instead 🎯 At C-Suite and senior leadership level, interviews are less about your experience and more about your thinking. It’s not just “Can you do the job?” - it’s “Can we trust you to lead this business?” What to leave out: ❌ Rehearsed answers - Exec interviews are conversations, not performances - they will see through this ❌ CV walk-throughs - They’ve read it. Now they want the story behind it - you need to bring your cv to life ❌ Buzzwords without substance - “Transformational” means nothing without context ❌ Playing it safe - You’ll be asked about failure, risk, and tough decisions - the business needs to know you can make the right call under pressure! ❌ Lack of commercial insight - You’re expected to understand their sector, market, model, and challenges - know your numbers!! It still surprises me how many don't. Its not just CFO's that need to know this! What to include instead: ✅ Strategic insight - What trends are shaping their space? What would you do in the first 90 days? ✅ Leadership narrative - What’s your philosophy? How do you build and lead high-performing teams? ✅ Decision-making depth - Talk through how you’ve handled ambiguity, risk, and change ✅ Sharp questions - About growth, governance, succession, and culture ✅ Be ready for scenario-based questions – “How would you handle X?” is code for “Can we trust you with this?” ✅ Peer-level presence - You’re not just being interviewed. You’re being assessed as a future partner. 📌 Pro tip: The best exec interviews feel like a boardroom conversation. Prepare to engage as a peer, not just a candidate. If you’re stepping into the exec interview space and want to sharpen your approach — drop me a message. Always happy to help. #ExecutiveInterview #CLevelLeadership #CareerAdvice #JobSearch2025 #LeadershipHiring Parkinson | Lee Executive Search Adam Dickson Helenna Bell Sarah-Lee Neesam Lee Bhandal Carl Walker

37

3 Comments

One thing I wish candidates did more of in Europe? Sending thank you notes after interviews. It doesn’t need to be anything over the top — just a short message thanking the interviewer for their time, reaffirming your interest in the role, and maybe referencing something you discussed. It won’t guarantee you the job, but you’d be surprised how often it makes a difference. Hiring managers are human — they remember the candidates who show genuine interest, professionalism, and a bit of courtesy. Especially when it comes down to a final decision between two equally strong profiles. In North America, this is almost standard practice. In Europe? Much less so. So if you're heading into interviews soon: follow up. Say thanks. Show you're engaged. Don't rely on your recruiter to do it for you! It takes five minutes — and it might just give you the edge.

24

11 Comments

The numbers tell the story. Ampa - Legal & Professional Services - 18 months: 📊 314 direct hires delivered 📉 Agency spend: 94% reduction (down to 6%) ⚡ Time-to-hire: 37% faster (8.5 weeks → 5.4 weeks) ⭐ Hiring Manager satisfaction: 4.7/5 📈 Candidate NPS: 74 But here's the metric that matters most: 100% of internal TA capacity freed up for strategic initiatives. When you optimise process, implement the right tech stack, and deliver consistent quality at scale, the ROI speaks for itself. Assessment centres for bulk hiring. Skills testing integration. One-way video interviews. New ATS implementation. Every efficiency gain compounds. Great work to all on our AMPA partnership - David Kirkham, Lauren Bass, Megan Fane, Michael van Niekerk #legal #legalrecruitment #talentstrategy

29

1 Comment

When experiencing rapid growth, the business case for RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing) is almost a dumb-not-to proposition: on-demand recruiters joining as an extension of your team on short notice, flexibility to scale up/down and turn on/off as hiring fluctuates, that's cost-effective compared to agencies, access to technology, etc, to name a few. During periods of uncertainty, like we have today, the use cases for RPO tend to revolve more around flexibility. Many Talent Acquisition Departments had to go through layoffs over the past 2 years and are running very lean. Here are some scenarios that we've been supporting customers with during this time period: - Adding temporary support during Q1 hiring budgets being set and an initial hiring frenzy - Adding fractional support (20hrs/week) for a handful of extra roles - Recruiting team is strong in one area but the team needs support in another area. (IE strong operations recruiters but influx of technical hiring needs) - Unplanned Recruiter turnover: Recruiter quits, fired, etc - Planned Maternity/Paternity Leave - Not wanting to add fixed overhead/full-time recruiters due to build-up/layoff cycles of the past 4 years and find a partner to keep things augmented - Larger organizations needing an external 'floater' team to be allocated as back-up to various departments, worksite locations, or even countries. These are some of the ways dynamic TA/HR Leaders are getting work done including leveraging a unique partner. 2025 is looking brighter, no doubt, but there are many risks to our market that are leaving business leaders in a position that prioritizes flexibility and needing to look at unique ways to operate their TA function. #rpo #chiefpeopleofficer #talentacquisition #chro

89

1 Comment

I’m currently supporting an organisation on a contingent basis, and their internal team mentioned that another agency is sending 10-15 CVs a week across just 3 roles. For transparency - DanOps has sent 7 CVs total across those same roles. At first glance, it looked like the other agency was “working harder”… but when you break it down, this is where being a true market specialist pays off. Principal Cloud Engineer - DanOps → 2 CVs → 100% 1st stage, 1 straight to final (no 2nd needed), 1 offer, 1 placement - Other agency → Sent 28 CVs (they had the role 5 weeks earlier), only 3 first stages, 1 second, 0 finals Head of SRE - DanOps → 2 CVs within 12 hours of receiving the brief → 100% requested for interview - Other agency → 16 CVs over 6 weeks, just 2 first stage requests Senior SRE - DanOps → 3 CVs → 100% 1st stage success - Other agency → 42 CVs in 5 weeks, 15 interviews booked… all dropped after failing to back up their CVs in interview On the surface, it looked like they were “smashing it” with volume. But volume isn’t value, it’s just noise. Worse still, they even sent CVs without speaking to the candidate about the role… which should honestly be outlawed in recruitment. When you live and breathe your market, quality isn’t a target - it's a standard. ✅ Quality of introduction ✅ Time saved on irrelevant interviews ✅ ££ saved in wasted process and feedback cycles That's why DanOps doesn’t do busy work. Don’t be fooled by fake busy.

27

2 Comments

My post from a few hours ago on “Not raising salary at interview” definitely sparked debate (and my first taste of online trolling 😅). To clarify: I was talking about situations where a RECRUITER is managing the process (see below from my original post) "A good recruiter will have already aligned expectations on both sides, so you don’t need to lead with the salary conversation. My advice: focus on showing interest in the role, the team, and the company first". 👉 A good recruiter aligns salary expectations on both sides before you ever reach interview. 👉 If the numbers don’t work, you shouldn’t be put forward. 👉 That means interview time should be about fit, culture, and capability — not pay. If you’re applying directly, it’s a different story - it will need to be addressed early so as not to waste time. If you are asked directly about salary at any stage, definitely answer directly and honestly. Apologies if my earlier post caused confusion — but it was interesting that it opened up such an important conversation.

41

24 Comments

When I first started out in recruitment (in 2004) we used to go to the newsagents on a Thursday and buy the 𝗻𝗲𝘄𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿 to see which local companies were hiring. People had to send a cover letter and CV, either via email or 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁 – 𝘕𝘰𝘸 𝘐’𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘺𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘭𝘥..! Online job ads only received around 30-50 applications, and 𝙖𝙡𝙡 of them were relevant, locally based candidates. Nowadays, with a few clicks, you can apply for jobs 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥. However, this ease has created a significant challenge for both job seekers and recruiters. The 𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗲𝗿 𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘂𝗺𝗲 of applications for a single role has skyrocketed – often reaching into the thousands. A significant percentage of these applications are from applicants who haven't read the job requirements or assessed their genuine fit for the position. For recruiters, this means being inundated with applications that are irrelevant. Sifting through hundreds, if not thousands, of unqualified CVs is a monumental task (even when using filtering tools) that drains resources and precious time, ultimately delaying the hiring process for suitable candidates. It's like finding a needle in a haystack, but the haystack keeps getting bigger. As for the relevant job seekers, this environment can be incredibly 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴. Imagine pouring your effort into a tailored application, only to see that the role already has 2000+ applicants. It's easy to feel defeated and wonder if your application will even be seen, leading to 𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙛𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙜𝙪𝙚 and a sense of hopelessness for genuinely qualified individuals. Many start to give up applying altogether, feeling their efforts are a 𝙬𝙖𝙨𝙩𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙚. Many of our senior candidates especially have 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝘂𝗽 applying to jobs on LinkedIn – they prefer to use a recruiter to get them straight to the top of the pile. This means some companies who only recruit via advertising are 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙤𝙣 𝙩𝙤𝙥 𝙩𝙖𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙩. So, what's the solution? Perhaps recruiters add an extra, more difficult layer to the application process? For example if a job seeker had to answer a series of technical questions to prove they could do the job, would it weed out the timewasters, or put everybody off altogether? The goal should be to make the hiring process more efficient and effective for everyone involved, ensuring that the ease of applying doesn't come at the cost of genuine connections and successful placements.

58

5 Comments

The latest Hays Salary Guide reveals a concerning trend in the UK. Only 29% of UK employers actively encourage staff to use AI tools, and just 37% offer any form of AI training.   This puts the UK at a clear disadvantage. In the US, nearly 60% of organisations are already encouraging AI adoption among their workforce, highlighting a growing gap in readiness and ambition.   As The Times reports, British businesses are falling behind their global peers with many remaining hesitant on investing in AI infrastructure and skills, due to cost and uncertainty. But without urgent action, employers risk losing out on productivity gains, innovation, and top talent to more forward-thinking competitors.   I’m proud to see our Salary Guide data featured in The Times, helping to spotlight both the scale of the challenge and the opportunity. Link to the article in the comments.

245

31 Comments

Does track record matter in the USA? There are a lot of differences between the UK and US recruitment markets, how you win business is one of them. For me going over there and speaking to my candidates and their experiences, one of the standout differences was how transactional their client expectations are in the US. In the UK, relationships and reputation often come first. In the US, you have to DELIVER to SELL. I recently spoke with Mark Whitby on The Resilient Recruiter Podcast about how recruiters can successfully adapt to the US market — especially if you're scaling internationally or planning to make your first hire across the pond. 🎧 Listen to the full conversation here: https://lnkd.in/eMvwqY2W #hiring #staffing #recruitment #USAmarket #delivery

39

1 Comment

Following my last post about “recruiters as influencers,” I could not hold myself back on this: The most fundamental principle in recruitment is confidentiality. Without it, trust is lost. Just recently, a candidate of mine shared their experience with a recruiter who (disgustingly) disclosed their job search to their current employer. That breach could have cost them their reputation, employer-employee trust, and even their current livelihood. This behavior is unacceptable, unethical, and completely out of line with what our profession stands for. As recruiters, we are trusted with professionals’ careers and livelihood and should not take this lightly. Day-by-day, I am flabbergasted by the level of indiscretion in this profession and am ALL for its regulation. If you cannot protect a candidate’s confidentiality, you should not be in this field. Full stop.

21

1 Comment