What is the hiring process like at Jones Lang LaSalle?

Good work environment and work life balance. Good pay.

No proper path . Technology planning and process are very scattered . Teams are not planned well and there are too many cooks in the kitchen. HR team and process are not very good with managing onboarding and other requirement.

The company has many genuine and supportive people. The use of AI technology is impressive, and the positive culture is evident. Charity and volunteering are encouraged, which I appreciate. I have a great direct manager, and there is strong support among lower-level employees.

Salary levels could be more competitive with industry standards. The frequent changes in hiring standards make the process challenging for both applicants and managers. While the company promotes its commitment to DEI, the requirement for a Bachelor's Degree in Business excludes many talented individuals who may not have followed a traditional education path. The company previously supported continuing education, but this support seems to be decreasing. It's surprising for a Fortune 500 company to be so cost-conscious in these areas. These factors are making me reconsider my long-term commitment to the organization.

The company offers an array of good benefits.

This company needs to be better at identifying talent and promoting internal career progression. To begin, many of the recruiters don’t know anything about the candidates they screen for positions, nor is there much effort geared towards inquiring. Additionally, they never know much about the role itself - They only know how to recite the job posting word-for-word, which is frustrating considering many of the sourcing descriptions have the same contents, but varying needs and differing accounts of what the job entails. It seems like an account is always under duress because of the malpractices of personnel. The reason being that JLL does not care to train employees sufficiently, JLL does not screen candidates well at all, and hiring managers and recruiters don’t learn from past mistakes. They continually deploy the same tactics in fulfilling positions, and it yields the same results. You want someone who is ready-made on paper because the thought of training is too much to fathom. With that said, you’re quick to hire people that check all the boxes, and once they’re in position, you find out (generally when said employee changes roles or leaves the company) that they’ve been doing things wrong for a while and that the account is a mess because that employee has been engaged in bad practices with contracting, compliance, onboarding, documenting and keeping track of miscellaneous information, etc. Once the account falls in less than favorable terms because of all of the deficiencies of the current or past hire, JLL does the same thing in looking for a ready-made employee that they don’t have to train and that they didn’t put much effort into screening, and the cycle literally repeats itself. Unless nepotism comes into play, JLL is more inclined to hire external employees to fill a role, rather than select from the current pool of internal employees and move someone up. Pay is a big factor in this, as well as my previous point - They want someone that is ready-made on paper, who upon hiring, is the exact opposite of that. Shifting gears, when concluding the recruitment process, JLL needs to do better. You could have an outstanding application for 1-2+ months, and only when you reach out for an update, you receive the automated email, “After thoughtful consideration, we have selected a candidate…” Updates along the way, or changing my application status from “Under review,” and closing out the application is far more appreciated than 2 months in the same exact status. It’s also inconsiderate when an application is received, and you sometimes don’t have the courtesy to send any update or automated email. The applicants have to check their records to see a role has been fulfilled or taken down since the recruiter or bots can’t be bothered to update anyone. Next topic: Leadership here is very questionable. I don’t know how some people are appointed to positions of leadership. Some people who should never lead, are in prime position to do so and they continually illustrate why they never should, why they can’t, or they abuse their power. Additionally, information is poorly disseminated down from leadership. A better job has to be done to ensure that your subordinates are knowledgeable of directives from the top and that proper explanation is given to ensure that tasks are carried out. Sometimes, things are sprung on hiring managers, managers in general, and employees because leadership failed to keep the proper parties in the loop as it pertains to information that is seemingly valuable. This in turn, makes managers look silly when things are happening around them or when questions can’t be answered and they seem lost. In close, there are a lot of things that JLL needs to do to be better. Some things I haven’t included as this review was becoming too extensive. If JLL cares to improve, listens to employee concerns, and actually review the surveys that are distributed to employees, a drastic change could take place.

Good pay opportunities to grow with-in company, training opportunities offered.

Hiring process takes more than two weeks.

Benefits for employees and growing portfolio

Please be aware this is a startup-style environment. Employees are often expected to work independently on the property management side with very limited support. There is little hands-on guidance, and training resources are minimal. Roles are oversold during the interview process, and proper onboarding, tools, or staffing are not consistently provided. Hiring timelines are slow, and team members may be let go quickly for performance issues without adequate training or ramp-up time.

Great people and strong structure

Interview process was very long

The Indian guy and Indian girl who works in handling the recruitment and staff benefit are totally useless

Their higher management listens but since they are not able to handle the ground staff that is located at various locations.

Very irresponsible with Hiring Process such as not providing enough information on Job Descriptions or expectations by employer(boss) . I had a bad chemistry with my boss, so my experience at JLL was no good.

You get to learn facility management and complicated ad-hoc tasks you can hardly experience in other companies (industry)

Everyone was great and the overall process was very smooth

Some technical things were not communicated clearly

The company offers an array of good benefits.

This company needs to be better at identifying talent and promoting internal career progression. To begin, many of the recruiters don’t know anything about the candidates they screen for positions, nor is there much effort geared towards inquiring. Additionally, they never know much about the role itself - They only know how to recite the job posting word-for-word, which is frustrating considering many of the sourcing descriptions have the same contents, but varying needs and differing accounts of what the job entails. It seems like an account is always under duress because of the malpractices of personnel. The reason being that JLL does not care to train employees sufficiently, JLL does not screen candidates well at all, and hiring managers and recruiters don’t learn from past mistakes. They continually deploy the same tactics in fulfilling positions, and it yields the same results. You want someone who is ready-made on paper because the thought of training is too much to fathom. With that said, you’re quick to hire people that check all the boxes, and once they’re in position, you find out (generally when said employee changes roles or leaves the company) that they’ve been doing things wrong for a while and that the account is a mess because that employee has been engaged in bad practices with contracting, compliance, onboarding, documenting and keeping track of miscellaneous information, etc. Once the account falls in less than favorable terms because of all of the deficiencies of the current or past hire, JLL does the same thing in looking for a ready-made employee that they don’t have to train and that they didn’t put much effort into screening, and the cycle literally repeats itself. Unless nepotism comes into play, JLL is more inclined to hire external employees to fill a role, rather than select from the current pool of internal employees and move someone up. Pay is a big factor in this, as well as my previous point - They want someone that is ready-made on paper, who upon hiring, is the exact opposite of that. Shifting gears, when concluding the recruitment process, JLL needs to do better. You could have an outstanding application for 1-2+ months, and only when you reach out for an update, you receive the automated email, “After thoughtful consideration, we have selected a candidate…” Updates along the way, or changing my application status from “Under review,” and closing out the application is far more appreciated than 2 months in the same exact status. It’s also inconsiderate when an application is received, and you sometimes don’t have the courtesy to send any update or automated email. The applicants have to check their records to see a role has been fulfilled or taken down since the recruiter or bots can’t be bothered to update anyone. Next topic: Leadership here is very questionable. I don’t know how some people are appointed to positions of leadership. Some people who should never lead, are in prime position to do so and they continually illustrate why they never should, why they can’t, or they abuse their power. Additionally, information is poorly disseminated down from leadership. A better job has to be done to ensure that your subordinates are knowledgeable of directives from the top and that proper explanation is given to ensure that tasks are carried out. Sometimes, things are sprung on hiring managers, managers in general, and employees because leadership failed to keep the proper parties in the loop as it pertains to information that is seemingly valuable. This in turn, makes managers look silly when things are happening around them or when questions can’t be answered and they seem lost. In close, there are a lot of things that JLL needs to do to be better. Some things I haven’t included as this review was becoming too extensive. If JLL cares to improve, listens to employee concerns, and actually review the surveys that are distributed to employees, a drastic change could take place.