Reflecting on my first 6 months in recruitment – Fran Weber

Next week marks 6 months since I first started at Lotus People. I was lucky enough to stumble into recruitment through a referral from a friend and found myself in a fun, supportive and collaborative team. As a newcomer to this highly competitive, and somewhat cut-throat industry, I was unsure what to expect. My first few weeks were a little daunting with a lot to learn, however, I felt very grateful to be learning the in’s and out’s of recruitment from a team that truely cares about what they do.

 

The Lotus way places candidates at the forefront, understanding that without developing meaningful relationships with our candidates we wouldn’t be able to do what we do. I quickly realised that this, as well as the amazingly encouraging team Sinead had built, was not necessarily the norm. My colleague, Jess, recently wrote a blog about how Lotus truly appreciates our candidates and spoke of how this has been recognised in awards such as the Seek Awards where we came runners up for Candidate Engagement.

As a Candidate Manager, I have the opportunity to speak to candidates everyday and hear about their experiences in the job market. I was quickly educated by candidates on the fact that the interactions they have with Lotus are different; they appreciate feeling valued throughout the entire job seeking process with the testimonials we receive supporting this. I am proud to be a part of the Lotus team and feel so thankful to have found myself in this position! Just like my candidates, I feel very valued by Lotus and certainly feel I have found the right place to grow my recruitment career.

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