This third tipping point, in my experience, is at least 90% accurate. I have been reticent to mention it because it is gender-specific to men, but upon reflection, it is too important not to bring to your attention.

Without a doubt, within AE consulting space, the pending or new arrival of a child into the family is a major contributor to job search behavior. I say this is gender-specific, because we gals are not dummies….we are inclined to “stay put” for the FMLA benefits. **

I am neither a psychologist nor a scientist, but if I had to boil it down to biology, I’d guess that this is some type of latent “provider gene” in action, the modern-day equivalent to stepping up the hunt for food to feed a growing family. It might be the first child, it might be a successive child, but I can tell you when I find a candidate with a bun-in-the-family-oven, I know he’s got anxiety about advancing his career.

It’s not overt; He doesn’t recognize it as a factor at all. What is he thinking? If the family is considering becoming a traditional one-income household, his motivations are fairly obvious. However, this behavior occurs equally in families with two income–earners. Is he thinking braces, summer camp and college tuition so early?

I tell these blokes it’s a lousy time to be looking for a career move. So much of the world as they know it is about to change, why shake things up even more? But they don’t listen to me.

Male readers, look back on your own careers, and what lifetime events were in play when you made certain job changes. I guarantee you will be able to correlate a job change, seeking a promotion or other career milestone with the pending or recent arrival of at least one child.

The feedback is the same whenever I share this tidbit of information with managers: They didn’t even know it when it was happening to THEM; then, they begin to catalog life events of those recently hired and recently departed.  I smugly enjoy their epiphanies.

** Why the gents are not equally motivated by this perk is a whole other discussion that we can cover over a few glasses of wine, ladies.

I’ve tried it both ways, and my preference squarely rests on the side of working out the kinks before an offer is on the table. But does it work that way when a third party like myself is not involved? When I advocate this approach, am I asking for a marked departure from the usual offer process? How are negotiations handled in your consulting firm?

A written offer seems so final and official (it is) and perhaps this is why some firms prefer to make their offers on paper without a lot of discussion before hand. If yours is one of them, please explain (and you can do so anonymously) why it works for you. Is there some data “out there” which supports the notion that an individual is less likely to negotiate a written offer?

As a recruiter, I am trained to take care of the details before the offer arrives. Still so, it’s not always possible or preferable to do that. However, I’ve never had a first volley written offer accepted without some type of amendment. I tend to believe it’s naive for a firm to expect that a written offer will be accepted at face value. [Serious caveat: I am speaking of offers to experienced professionals, not entry level or junior level candidates].

What do you think?  If you’re in the candidate’s chair, how do you feel about this process?

However, there are a lot of individuals who are willing to look at a new opportunity. Why? The simple answer is “insurance.“ There are some really great people in our market who find themselves in a situation for which they have no recent benchmark: light backlog, delay of contract execution due to funding difficulties, watching peers lose their jobs, etc. These individuals are more receptive than ever to investigating opportunities, but that doesn’t mean when the dialogue culminates that they are willing to go anywhere.  

What is your firm doing to make sure they won’t?