| [This event was moderated by Rick Wolfe of PostStone]
The Canadian marketing and advertising sector is experiencing an unprecedented
brain drain that will only intensify over time, and university graduates
show little interest in filling the growing talent void.
That’s the consensus opinion that emerged during an expert-panel
round table on recruitment -- "Talent Wars: Who Is Winning the Battle
for Marketing Talent and Why?" -- hosted Oct. 4 by the Toronto Chapter
of the American Marketing Association.
Timothy Snelgrove, one of four seasoned recruiters who made up the panel,
said much of the blame for the high rate of defections from the traditional
ad business is attributable to the burgeoning high-tech industry. Mr.
Snelgrove, a partner at Toronto’s Snelgrove & Associates, which
specializes in recruiting executives for dot-com startups, noted that
"80 per cent of high-tech executives come from outside high tech."
He said the sector’s ability to buy the best talent available has
cut a wide swath through old-economy marketing departments.
The high salaries offered by tech-oriented companies are obviously a
major inducement for people to change jobs, but it’s more than that.
High-tech firms have also been at the forefront of refashioning job descriptions
and work environments to meet the expectations of the less-traditional,
more-self-interested Gen-X set.
Panelist Stefan Danis, president and chief executive of Toronto-based
Mandrake Management Consultants, said old-economy marketers are just now
waking up to how much import young people put on such things as corporate
culture, mentoring, training programs and generally feeling appreciated
by their office superiors.
The latest rage in the United States is sabbaticals, Mr. Danis said. "That is
the number one request now by employees. After five years, they want to
take a year off."
Mr. Danis added that the Canadian ad industry’s struggle to attract
talent is part of a worldwide phenomenon in the field, brought on by a
boom economy coupled with a limited supply of workers. With economic expansion
expected to continue and the talent supply moving in the opposite direction,
the imbalance is destined to get worse, he said.
Panelist Sylvia MacArthur, president of Toronto’s Madison MacArthur
Inc., said it is astounding how undesirable advertising careers have suddenly
become in the eyes of graduating business students. To illustrate, she
told the story of an unnamed, tier-one packaged goods company that held
a recruiting drive at a major university last spring and made 25 employment
offers.
"Only four accepted. Generally, the complaint among students has
been that marketing companies hadn’t been recruiting enough. Now
they don’t seem to require it."
If clients have lost their lustre as employers in the view of university
recruits, agencies appear in danger of becoming invisible. The root of
the problem is salaries.
According to a recent Mandrake study, agencies, which are notorious for
underpaying juniors, offer an average starting salary of just $28,000.
Clients, meanwhile, offer a more respectable $47,000. But both pale next
to the $85,000 stipend for first-year workers offered by the large management
consultancies.
After the event, Mr. Danis said the migration of senior-level talent
to other fields and the shortage of qualified young people are creating
enormous headaches for company managers. But he said he worries that the
problems down the road will be even bigger.
"The business is losing its wisdom. By historical standards, already,
today’s senior executives are younger and less experienced."
Despite this, they’re making more than ever. According to Mr. Danis,
the president of a top-30 agency can expect to rake in $275,000 to $400,000
annually, plus a car and a bonus, while the president of a leading consumer
goods company can command from $280,000 to $350,000 a year, plus car,
bonus and, more importantly, stock options.
And they could soon be in a position to make even more, should a panel
prediction come true. Apparently, the balance of power in the workplace
has tipped so far in the direction of employees that the market is ripe
for employee free agency. Such a market would likely be limited to executives
who are the superstars in their specialties.
Under this system, the executive would sign with a personal agent, who
would manage the executive’s career and negotiate his or her employment
packages. For a fee, of course. |