The art of non-attachment – how would you rate your resilience?

Resilience is an important quality. Some people seem to possess it innately – trials and tribulations are “water off a ducks’ back.” Some people act out; they weep and wail and complain and it becomes evident that their resilience is low.


The older I get, the more I realise that resilience is at least partially a product of experience; we might start out with different levels of “innate” resilience, but our experiences over time can build and strengthen our resilience if we’re paying attention and learning as we go.


I recently turned 32. The past year has been a challenging one for me – a year ago I separated from my partner of nearly 9 years and moved to a new flat for the 8th time in 10 years. I also joined a busy start-up recruitment agency.


Recruitment is characterised by tight deadlines, high pressure, relentless competition, constant negotiation and frequent let-downs. In my opinion, resilience is the single most important quality to cultivate in order to succeed in this industry.


This year I discovered yoga, a practice that has helped me gain focus, peace and physical and emotional balance. One of the key principles of yoga is non-attachment, or, aparigraha. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna said;


“Let your concern be with action alone, and never with the fruits of action. Do not let the results of action be your motive, and do not be attached to inaction.”


What this means to me, is letting go of the desire to control outcomes, but rather to focus on the only thing I can control, my own actions. When something doesn’t go to plan, rather than blaming myself or others, all I can do is ask, “Did I act with honesty and integrity? Did I try my best?” If the answers to these questions are “yes,” then I can move forward knowing that I acted according to my values and with good intentions. I can try to learn from what didn’t work and repeat what did.


In recruitment, specifically, this means showing up every day with the intention of taking consistent action. Making that extra call, finding one more promising CV, booking one more meeting, and having confidence that the sum of these actions will yield results, even if the inevitable setbacks sometimes get in the way. Resilience is not about knowing all the answers or never feeling confused or stressed – it’s about taking action and moving forward. A target might be a single value that you’re striving for, but it’s reached one step at a time.

You may also like...

March 5, 2026
A conversation with Hayley Martin, Executive Search Practice Lead at Lotus People As Lotus People formally launches its Executive Search practice, we sat down with Hayley Martin to talk about what separates a great senior hire from a costly one, what mid-market businesses consistently get wrong, and why she chose to build this here . 
March 5, 2026
A natural next step for Lotus People - Lotus Executive Search , an organic evolution of work we've been doing for years, now delivered with the rigour, discretion, and partnership it deserves.  Leading this practice is Hayley Martin who brings over 20 years of executive search experience, including deep expertise in the not-for-profit sector, membership organisations, and corporate leadership appointments
By Michelle Barrett February 25, 2026
In the ever-evolving world of talent acquisition, reference checks remain a standard practice. However, I've recently asked my network a question: Is bringing two candidates to the reference check stage a fair and ethical practice? The overwhelming consensus from HR professionals, recruiters, and hiring managers is a resounding no . While companies might justify this approach to ensure they make the best hiring decision, the practice has significant drawbacks. The Candidate’s Perspective: False Hope and Strained Relationships For candidates, reference checks often represent the final hurdle before an offer. Being asked to provide references is a hopeful moment—only to discover later that they were simply a “backup” candidate. This leads to: False hope : The process feels misleading if references are strong, but the candidate still doesn’t secure the role due to a small deciding factor. Professional risk : Candidates hesitate to repeatedly ask the same referees for endorsements, fearing it may strain professional relationships or cast doubt on their credibility. Frustration and wasted time : Candidates invest considerable effort in securing references, only to walk away empty-handed. The Referee’s Burden: A Drain on Time and Goodwill Reference checks aren’t just a candidate inconvenience; they also affect referees—often senior professionals taking time out of their busy schedules. Many commenters noted: Referees have limited patience: If a former manager is repeatedly asked for references for the same person without a job offer, they may be reluctant to vouch for them in the future. - A one-sided burden : The hiring company benefits from this additional insight, but referees get little in return other than expecting a favour. The Hiring Manager’s Responsibility: Why This Practice Undermines Decision-Making Some employers argue that reference checks help finalise a tough decision between two equally qualified candidates. However, many experts push back against this rationale: Hiring decisions should be based on direct assessment, not external opinion : As one commenter put it, “You should never put the decision of who best to hire in the hands of someone you don’t know and doesn’t work for your business.” Reference checks are not selection tools : Traditionally, references are a due diligence step , not a deciding factor between multiple candidates. It’s an outdated practice : With many companies now limiting references to basic employment verification, the value of this process is already diminished. So, What’s the Alternative? If reference checks shouldn’t be used to choose between candidates, how should they be utilised?
More Posts