Lotus People named Runner Up in the Candidate Engagement category at the Seek SARA awards 2019

From a start-up of two recruiters who wanted to ‘do things differently’, Lotus People has flourished into a well-respected and trusted agency in just four years. Built on values of sincerity, professionalism and a genuine care for quality service, the team of now twelve holds themselves and each other to these high standards each day. Candidate engagement and care is an aspect of our service we have been extremely proud of since day one. We understand that there are two sides to the coin in recruitment, and have always focused on providing the same level of care to our candidates as we do our clients.


This year Lotus People were named Runner Up in the Candidate Engagement category at the highly regarded Seek SARA recruitment awards. As a small, still relatively new agency on the market we are so proud of this achievement. Whilst Lotus wouldn’t have even been nominated if it weren’t for the incredible team living and breathing the Lotus values every day, a lot of planning and process implementation goes on in the background to maintain and improve on these high levels of candidate engagement.


Writing the awards submission for the Candidate Engagement category has been a fantastic opportunity to reflect on our candidate engagement processes and identify areas where we can grow and improve. Working with Recruitment Insider, a third-party review platform has allowed us to gather invaluable data and feedback from our candidates on their experience with Lotus. A common praise among testimonials has been the consistency and frequency to which candidates are updated by their consultants. With this feedback in mind, Lotus recently implemented an AI technology that provides candidates with even more touch points with Lotus. As any person job hunting would know, a lot can change in a day, so we believe the more contact we have with our candidates, the better equipped we are to provide them with the best possible, personalised service.


Lotus’ innovative approach to candidate engagement has of course been spearheaded by our incredible leader Sinead.


Sinead’s genuine love and care for the Lotus team and our candidates and clients can be seen in every decision she makes.


From an employee perspective, Sinead has created an environment where her team genuinely enjoys coming into work each day. Recruitment isn’t an easy gig, and it takes a special kind of leader to inspire, support and be a true friend to their team. For these reasons we are extremely proud to see Sinead nominated as a finalist for Recruitment Leader of the Year award. This is a highly competitive category and to be nominated is a stellar achievement.



The 2019 Seek awards were the third SARAs Lotus has attended as finalists. The awards are a wonderful way to celebrate the hard work and dedication of the team and we are already looking forward to next year!

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