There is little doubt that the non-mining-based sectors of Australia are struggling, with many economic commentators suggesting they are virtually in recession (or at best showing limited growth). This is no more apparent than in financial services, as illustrated by the raft of recent job cuts at major banks. Rumours of future redundancies at investment banks are also testament to the weakness in this sector.

And of course, within funds management (where I work), this trend is also starting to garner pace. Our firm recently announced a review of its business, and of course job cuts followed. The managers chose to selectively cut various roles, with a view to spreading the workload, or indeed in my unit’s case, merging two roles into one.

Across the board, the business will be able to run leaner on staff and produce more profit, although for those of us still in our jobs, this simply means more hours at the desk (which isn’t so bad in this market – one would rather have a job than not I suspect).

In choosing who to make redundant, there is little doubt that remuneration was an important factor. Those earning inflated pre-GFC wages were targeted. Their replacements are being offered substantially less money, or are expected to have a much broader skills if earning in a similar wage. My own business unit elected to seek someone fitting the latter band. Yes, they’d be offered a good wage (given their experience), but they are more or less expected to have the skills that two people in our business had previously.

Finding a candidate for one particular role was incredibly difficult. Without going into too many details, the job covers multiple asset classes (which are fairly bespoke), with a heavy bent towards strategy, and requires a high level of accounting competency. Invariably, we found that most candidates were skewed to either side (albeit I believe this had much to do with the wage being targeted at younger candidates with 5 to 10 years’ experience).

It's all about attitude

I’ll be honest and admit that we were unable to find anyone with the right experience, and lent towards a candidate with stronger knowledge of the asset class (rather than an accountant by trade, for example) because it is easier to build financial knowledge than market knowledge. However, saying this, and noting that we realised early on that the perfect candidate simply didn't exist (particularly at the right price), the key factors in choosing someone were enthusiasm and work ethic.

It was made clear from the outset of the interview process that the workload would be significant. Given how few jobs are out there, the amount of responses we received would leave you staggered. Often it is clear straight away that despite having a super CV, the enthusiasm for the role and work expectations simply aren’t there.

In the end we chose a candidate who was simply desperate to get his foot in the door and would give the role 100 per cent commitment. Interestingly, he actually came outside the funds management arena, and saw this as a great opportunity to turn his career down a different path. There is little doubt there were potentially slightly better-suited candidates, but sometimes an appetite to learn carries more weight than CV content. And of course, the management got him at the price they wanted.

In a benign-growth environment, where cutting cost is critical, this may be where many companies are heading. With fewer jobs on offer, there are candidates who are willing to grab an opportunity at much more competitive wages, often taking on a wider-based role with extended working hours. No doubt this should serve as a wake-up call for the rest of us, ensuring that we focus on improving our own skills and qualifications, take on more business-as-usual work, and improve our overall productivity.

The Insider works in funds management in Australia. The views expressed are his own and not those of eFinancialCareers.