There is a huge movement towards buying local. Trying to support local businesses and eating locally grown foods makes perfect sense. In our recruiting business we find that local candidates are universally preferred in hiring decisions. It’s understandable. You don’t have to worry about reimbursing relocation expenses. The candidate’s family is already in the community and there is no need to uproot kids from friends and schools. The advantages are clear. But I think too often very strong candidates are rejected simply because a relocation is involved. Yes, you need to spend a few dollars up front. But over the span of employment that’s a minor consideration. And there are ways to mitigate the risk if it doesn’t work out by requiring some type of reimbursement. People do relocate all the time for career opportunities. I’ve moved from Iowa to Florida, Florida to California, California to Virginia and Virginia to Iowa. Yes, I may be an extreme example but over 25 years it really hasn’t been a hardship. I’ve made great friends and enjoyed living in very different parts of the country. Too often credit unions won’t consider candidates outside of the geographic area. Every hiring decision has a risk component. Not hiring the very best candidate you can seems to me to be the greatest risk of all.

Know someone who would find this interesting? Share it now!Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on buffer
Share on email